Self-Expanding Metallic Stents Versus Surgical Intervention as Palliative Therapy for Obstructive Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis

Palliative procedures for advanced obstructive colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Advanced obstructive colorectal cancer (AOCC) presents surgical challenges. Consideration must be given to alleviating symptoms and also quality of life and survival time. This study compared prognostic efficacies of palliative self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) and surgery to provide insights into AOCC treatment.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies that met inclusion criteria. Using a meta-analysis approach, postoperative complications, survival rates, and other prognostic indicators were compared between patients treated with SEMSs and those treated surgically. Network meta-analysis was performed to compare prognoses between SEMS, primary tumor resection (PTR), and stoma/bypass (S/B).

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were selected (1754 patients). The odds ratio (OR) of SEMS for clinical success compared with surgery was 0.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15, 0.65). The ORs for early and late complications were 0.34 (95% CI 0.19, 0.59) and 2.30 (95% CI 1.22, 4.36), respectively. The ORs for 30-day mortality and stoma formation were 0.65 (95% CI 0.42, 1.01) and 0.11 (95% CI 0.05, 0.22), respectively. Standardized mean difference in hospital stay was - 2.08 (95% CI - 3.56, 0.59). The hazard ratio for overall survival was 1.24 (95% CI 1.08, 1.42). Network meta-analysis revealed that SEMS had the lowest incidence of early complications and rate of stoma formation and the shortest hospital stay. PTR ranked first in clinical success rate and had the lowest late-complication rate. The S/B group exhibited the lowest 30-day mortality rate.

CONCLUSION

Among palliative treatments for AOCC, SEMSs had lower early complication, stoma formation, and 30-day mortality rates and shorter hospital stays. Surgery had higher clinical success and overall survival rates and lower incidence of late complications. Patient condition/preferences should be considered when selecting AOCC treatment.

Long-Term Outcomes of Self-Expandable Metallic Stents as a Bridge to Surgery for Obstructive and Symptomatic Primary Tumors of Stage IV Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity-Score Analysis

Background: Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) was introduced for the treatment of obstructive colorectal cancer (CRC) a few decades ago. However, its long-term outcomes remain controversial, especially for stage IV CRC. The aim of this study was to clarify the outcomes of SEMS as a "bridge to surgery" (BTS) for obstructive and symptomatic primary tumors in stage IV CRC by one-to-one propensity-score matching. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single center from January 2007 to December 2017. Patients with obstructive and symptomatic primary tumors of stage IV CRC underwent primary resection (PR) or placement of a SEMS as a BTS. They were divided into SEMS and PR groups, and their short- and long-term outcomes were compared. Results: In total, 52 patients were reviewed (SEMS group, 21; PR group, 31). Sixteen patients in both groups were matched using propensity scores. Patients in the SEMS group more frequently underwent laparoscopic surgery than those in the PR group (75% versus 19%, P = .004). The two groups showed no significant differences in perioperative and pathological outcomes. The 5-year overall survival was not significantly different between groups (29% versus 20%, P = .53). Conclusions: As a BTS, the use of SEMS for obstructive and symptomatic primary tumors in CRC stage IV can be a comparable option to PR in terms of short- and long-term outcomes, and would be less invasive with respect to surgical procedures.

Stage IV Colorectal Cancer at Initial Presentation versus Progression during and after Treatment, Differences in Management: Management Differences for Initial Presentation versus Progression of Disease after Initial Treatment

Stage IV colorectal cancer is a prevalent disease and understanding the appropriate treatment options is important. Medical oncologic treatment remains the mainstay of treatment in cases where curative resection is not possible. Surgical intervention is indicated if the primary tumor and associated metastases are amenable to curative resection or if obstructive, bleeding, or perforative complications arise from the tumor. New endoscopic techniques can provide palliation and benefit for patients who cannot undergo surgery and may speed time to chemotherapy initiation. Recently, immunotherapy has shown promise at managing, controlling, and regressing advanced disease, in some cases converting it to curative with resection. For patients that progress while on treatment, continued medical therapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Further research into the benefits of asymptomatic primary tumor resection without curative intent needs to be performed. Colorectal cancer, and more specifically metastatic colorectal cancer, continues to have improved 1- and 5-year survival rates and likely will continue to do so over the coming months and years.

Malignant Acute Colonic Obstruction: Multidisciplinary Approach for Endoscopic Management

Patients presenting with acute colonic obstruction are usually evaluated in the emergency department and multiple specialties are involved in the patients' management. Pre-treatment evaluation is essential in order to establish the correct endoscopic indication for stent implantation. Contrast-enhanced imaging could allow the exclusion of benign causes of colonic obstruction and evaluation of the length of malignant stricture. Endoscopic stenting is the gold standard of treatment for palliative indications whereas there are still concerns about its use as a bridge to surgery. Different meta-analyses showed that stenting as a bridge to surgery improves short-term surgical outcomes but has no role in improving long-term outcomes. Multidisciplinary evaluation is also essential in patients that may be started on or are currently receiving antiangiogenic agents because endoscopic stenting may increase the risk of perforation. Evidence in the literature is weak and based on retrospective data. Here we report on how to correctly evaluate a patient with acute colonic malignant obstruction in collaboration with other essential specialists including a radiologist, surgeon and oncologist, and how to optimize the technique of endoscopic stenting.

Application of metal stent implantation with endoscope and X-ray fluoroscopy combined laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left hemicolon cancer obstruction

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to conduct a case-control study of endoscopic and fluoroscopic metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open Hartmann's procedure in treating acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Additionally, the study aims to discuss the application value of endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction.

METHODS

From June 2011 to December 2019, 23 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent metal stent implantation combined with laparoscopic surgery under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy in Wenzhou Central Hospital were collected, and 20 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent traditional emergency open Hartmann's surgery during the same period were selected as a control group. All patients were diagnosed with left colon obstruction by plain abdominal film and/or CT before the operation and colon adenocarcinoma by colonoscopic biopsy and/or postoperative pathology. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative anal exhaust time, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

This study showed a significant difference in the therapeutic effect between the two groups. Compared with the traditional Hartmann's operation group, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis in endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with the laparoscopic operation group was significantly higher than that in the Hartmann's operation group (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of postoperative complications and hospital stay were significantly lower in the observation group than in the Hartmann's group (P < 0.05). Further subgroup analysis of the overall postoperative complication rate of the two groups showed that the traditional Hartmann's operation group was more likely to have an incomplete intestinal obstruction (P < 0.05). This study also showed no significant differences between the two groups in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, and postoperative anal exhaust time (all P > 0.05). This study also found no significant differences between the two groups in overall survival rates or recurrence-free survival rates (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The comparison of the therapeutic effects of the two groups verified the feasibility of endoscopy combined with X-ray fluoroscopy metal stent placement in combination with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Compared with the traditional emergency open Hartmann's procedure, metal stent implantation under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy combined with laparoscopic surgery is more minimally invasive, safe, and effective. It avoids the traditional second or even third surgical trauma to effectively improve the quality of life of patients, so that patients can recover quickly after surgery.

Self-expanding metal stents versus decompression tubes as a bridge to surgery for patients with obstruction caused by colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) and decompression tubes (DT) as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) treatment may avoid emergency operations for patients with colorectal cancer-caused obstructions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the two approaches.

METHODS

We systematically retrieved literature from January 1, 2000, to May 30, 2023, from the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang Data, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies of SEMS versus DT as BTS in colorectal cancer obstruction were selected. Risks of bias were assessed for RCTs and cohort studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2 and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions. Certainty of evidence was determined using the Graded Recommendation Assessment. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used to analyze measurement data.

RESULTS

We included eight RCTs and eighteen cohort studies involving 2,061 patients (SEMS, 1,044; DT, 1,017). Pooled RCT and cohort data indicated the SEMS group had a significantly higher clinical success rate than the DT group (OR = 1.99, 95% CI 1.04, 3.81, P = 0.04), but no significant difference regarding technical success (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.56, 2.96, P = 0.55). SEMS had a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays (MD = - 4.47, 95% CI - 6.26, - 2.69, P < 0.00001), a lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain (OR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.05, 0.50, P = 0.002), intraoperative bleeding (MD = - 37.67, 95% CI - 62.73, - 12.60, P = 0.003), stoma creation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.23, 0.73, P = 0.002) and long-term tumor recurrence rate than DT (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 0.99, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

SEMS and DT are both safe as BTS to avoid emergency surgery for patients with colorectal cancer obstruction. SEMS is preferable because of higher clinical success rates, lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain, intraoperative bleeding, stoma creation, and long-term tumor recurrence, as well as a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays. Trial registration CRD42022365951 .

Best Practices in Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colonic Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is an area of endoscopy that has witnessed noteworthy advancements over the last decade, resulting in evolving clinical practices among gastroenterologists around the world. Indications for endoscopic stenting have progressively expanded, becoming a frequent part of the management algorithm for various benign and malignant conditions of the gastrointestinal tract, from esophagus to rectum. In addition to expanded indications, continuous technological enhancements and development of novel endoscopic stents have resulted in an increased success of these approaches and, in some cases, allowed new applications. This review aimed to summarize best practices in esophageal, gastroduodenal, and colonic stenting.

Changing patterns of multidisciplinary team treatment, early mortality, and survival in colorectal cancer

Background

This study reports early mortality and survival from colorectal cancer in relation to the pattern of treatments delivered by the multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting at a high-volume institution in England over 14 years.

Methods

All patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer and discussed during MDT meetings from 2003 to 2016 at a single institution were reviewed. Three time intervals (2003–2007, 2008–2012, and 2013–2016) were compared regarding initial surgical management (resection, local excision, non-resection surgery, and no surgery), initial oncological therapy, 90-day mortality, and crude 2-year survival for the whole cohort. Sub-analyses were performed according to age greater or less than 80 years.

Results

The MDT managed 4617 patients over 14 years (1496 in the first interval and 1389 in the last). Over this time, there was a reduction in emergency resections from 15.5 per cent to 9.0 per cent (P < 0.0001); use of oncological therapies increased from 34.6 per cent to 41.6 per cent (P < 0.0001). The 90-day mortality after diagnosis of colorectal cancer dropped from 14.8 per cent to 10.7 per cent (P < 0.001) and 2-year survival improved from 58.6 per cent to 65 per cent (P < 0.001). Among patients aged 80 years or older (425 and 446, in the first and last intervals respectively) there was, in addition, a progressive increase in ‘no surgery’ rate from 33.6 per cent to 50.2 per cent (P < 0.0001) and a reduction in elective resections from 42.4 per cent to 33.9 per cent (P = 0.010). The 90-day mortality after elective resection fell from 10.0 per cent (18 of 180) to 3.3 per cent (5 of 151; P = 0.013).

Conclusions

Survival from colorectal cancer improved significantly over 14 years. Among patients aged ≥80 years, major changes in the type of treatment delivered were associated with a decrease in postoperative mortality.

Clinical outcomes of palliative self-expandable metal stent placement in right- and left-sided malignant colon obstruction: A Honam Association for the Study of Intestinal Disease (HASID) multicenter study

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is commonly used for palliation of left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO). However, right-sided MCO is usually treated surgically. Recent studies that compared palliative SEMS insertion and emergency surgery in right-sided MCOs have reported conflicting results. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of palliative SEMS placement in left-sided MCOs and right-sided MCOs and to investigate the predictive factors for clinical success and risk factors for complications. Data from 469 patients who underwent palliative SEMS placement for MCO at 6 hospitals in the Honam province of South Korea between 2009 and 2018 were reviewed. Among them, 69 patients with right-sided MCO and 400 patients with left-sided MCO who underwent SEMS placement for palliative purposes were enrolled. Clinical success, overall survival, complications, and predictive factors for clinical success and risk factors for complications were included as the main outcome measures. The clinical success rates were 97.1% (65/67) in right-sided MCO patients and 88.2% (353/400) in left-sided MCO patients. Complications including stent migration, tumor ingrowth, outgrowth, perforation, bacteremia/fever, and bleeding occurred in 10.1% (7/69) of right-sided MCO patients and 19.9% (79/400) of left-sided MCO patients. The mean overall survival of right-sided MCO was 28.02 months and 18.23 months for left-sided MCO. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, T3 stage tumors and the use of uncovered stents were significant factors for the clinical success of SEMS. The use of covered stents and performance status score of 0 to 2 were independent significant risk factors for complications. Palliative SEMS placement in right-sided MCO showed better clinical success rates than left-sided MCO. The use of uncovered stents is recommended for higher clinical success rates and lower complication rates.

Recent Updates in Gastrointestinal Stent Placement from the Esophagus to the Colon: A Radiological Perspective

Fluoroscopic-guided stent placement has become an advantageous treatment option for diverse gastrointestinal disorders. In addition to palliative stent placement in patients with inoperable cancers, stenting has gradually expanded to other conditions, including as a bridge to surgery, as well as in patients' benign lesions and anastomotic strictures or leaks. This narrative review describes the indications, efficacy and safety of stent placement from the esophagus to the colon, including current recommendations, recent updates, and novel stents.

Predictive factors of early outcome after palliative surgery for colorectal carcinoma

Objectives

A significant number of patients with colorectal cancer are presented with various conditions requiring surgery in an oncologically palliative setting. We performed this study to identify risk factors for early outcome after surgery to facilitate the decision-making process for therapy in a palliative disease.

Methods

We performed a retrospective chart review of 142 patients who underwent palliative surgery due to locally advanced, complicated, or advanced metastatic colorectal carcinoma between January 2010 and April 2018 at the "Elbland" Medical Center Riesa. We performed a logistic regression analysis of 43 factors to identify independent predictors for complications and mortality.

Results

Surgery included resections with primary anastomosis (n=31; 21.8%) or discontinuous resections with colostomy (n=38; 26.8%), internal bypasses (n=27; 19.0%) and stoma formation only (n=46; 32.4%). The median length of hospitalization was 12 days (2-53 days), in-hospital morbidity was 50.0% and the mortality rate was 18.3%. Independent risk factors of in-hospital morbidity were age (HR: 1.5, p=0.046) and various comorbidities of the patients [obesity (HR: 1.8, p=0.036), renal failure (HR: 1.6, p=0.040), diabetes (HR: 1.6, p=0.032), alcohol abuse (HR: 1.3, p=0.023)] as well as lung metastases (HR: 1.6, p=0.041). Arteriosclerosis (HR: 1.4; p=0.045) and arterial hypertension (HR: 1.4, p=0.042) were independent risk factors for medical complications in multivariate analysis. None of the analyzed factors predicted the surgical morbidity after the palliative procedures. Emergency surgery (HR: 10.2, p=0.019), intestinal obstruction (HR: 9.2, p=0.006) and ascites (HR: 5.0, p=0.034) were multivariate significant parameters of in-hospital mortality.

Conclusions

Palliatively treated patients with colorectal cancer undergoing surgery show high rates of morbidity and mortality after surgery. In this retrospective chart review, independent risk factors for morbidity and in-hospital mortality were identified that are similar to patients in curative care. An adequate selection of patients before palliative operation should lead to a better outcome after surgery. Especially in patients with intestinal obstruction and ascites scheduled for emergency surgery, every effort should be made to convey these patients to elective surgery by interventional therapy, such as a stent or minimally invasive stoma formation.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Optimal Management of the Malignant Alimentary Tract Obstruction: Expert Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The purpose of this expert review is to describe the current methodologies available to manage malignant alimentary tract obstructions as well the evidence behind the various methods (including their efficacy and safety), indications, and appropriate timing of interventions.

METHODS

This is not a formal systematic review but is based on a review of the literature to provide best practice advice statements. No formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendation is carried out. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: For all patients with alimentary tract obstruction, the decision about specific interventions should be made in a multidisciplinary setting including oncologists, surgeons, and endoscopists and take into account the characteristics of the obstruction, patient's expectations, prognosis, expected subsequent therapies, and functional status. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: For patients who present with esophageal obstruction from esophageal cancer and who are potential candidates for resection or chemoradiation, clinicians should not routinely insert a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) without multidisciplinary review because of high rates of stent migration, higher morbidity and mortality, and potentially lower R0 (microscopically negative margins) resection rates. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: For patients who present with esophageal obstruction from esophageal cancer who are potential candidates for resection and who have concerns of malnutrition, clinicians may consider the use of enteral feeding tubes (via nasogastric or percutaneous route). Clinicians should be aware of the potential risk of abdominal wall tumor seeding as well as making subsequent gastric conduit formation difficult with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: For patients who present with esophageal obstruction from esophageal cancer who are not candidates for resection, clinicians should consider either SEMS insertion or brachytherapy as sole therapy or in combination. Clinicians should not consider the use of laser therapy or photodynamic therapy because of the lack of evidence of better outcomes and superior alternatives. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: For patients with malignant esophageal obstruction who are undergoing SEMS placement, clinicians should use a fully covered or partially covered SEMS and not an uncovered SEMS, with consideration of a stent-anchoring/fixation method. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: For patients with gastric outlet obstruction who have a life expectancy greater than 2 months, have good functional status, and who are surgically fit, surgical gastrojejunostomy should be considered. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: For patients with gastric outlet obstruction who are undergoing surgical gastrojejunostomy, a laparoscopic approach is favored over an open approach because of lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: For patients with gastric outlet obstruction who are not candidates for gastrojejunostomy (surgical or endoscopic ultrasound-guided), clinicians should consider the insertion of an enteral stent. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Enteral stents should not be used in patients with multiple luminal obstructions or severely impaired gastric motility because of the limited benefit in these scenarios. Clinicians can consider placement of a venting gastrostomy in these patients. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Depending on the experience of the endoscopist, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy is an acceptable alternative to surgical gastrojejunostomy and enteral stent placement. Clinicians should be aware that there are currently no dedicated Food and Drug Administration-approved devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: For patients with malignant colonic obstruction who are candidates for resection, insertion of SEMS is a reasonable choice as a "bridge to surgery" to allow for one-stage, elective resection. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: For patients with malignant colonic obstruction who are not candidates for resection, either SEMS placement or a diverting colostomy are reasonable choices depending on the patient's goals and functional status. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: SEMS is a reasonable option for patients with proximal (or right-sided) malignant obstructions, both as a "bridge to surgery" and in the palliative setting. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: SEMS placement is a reasonable alternative for patients with extracolonic malignancy who are not candidates for surgery, although their placement is more technically challenging, clinical success rates are more variable, and complications (including stent migration) are more frequent.

Treatment outcome of laparoscopic surgery after self-expandable metallic stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

We assessed the technical and oncological safety of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) insertion followed by laparoscopic colorectal surgery as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

A retrospective, single-center study analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS insertion followed by laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients with stage II/III/IV obstructive CRC from 2012 to 2020 at Cancer Institute Hospital.

RESULTS

In 66 patients, including 28 stage IV patients, the clinical success rates of SEMS insertion were 97%. In laparoscopic surgery, primary anastomosis was performed in 61 patients (92%), and open conversion was required in 2 patients (3%). Postoperative complications were seen in 9 patients (13%); however, there was no anastomotic leakage or mortality. Curative resection was achieved in all 38 stage II/III patients and 15 of 28 (54%) stage IV patients. Stage IV patients had a longer operation time and greater blood loss than stage II/III patients; however, the open conversion and postoperative complication rates were similar between the groups. In stage II/III patients, 3-year disease-free survival and 3-year overall survival [OS] were 87.1 and 89.5%, respectively. The median OS of stage IV patients was 34.9 months, and stage IV patients who underwent R0 resection showed a significantly better OS (P = 0.0011) than those with R2 resection.

CONCLUSION

SEMS insertion followed by laparoscopic surgery is a feasible treatment strategy that achieves a high-primary anastomosis rate without severe postoperative complication in not only stage II/III but also stage IV obstructive CRC patients.

Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older patients, current guidelines do not incorporate optimal treatment recommendations for the elderly and address only partially the associated specific challenges encountered in this population. This results in a wide variation and disparity in delivering a standard of care to this subset of patients. As the burden of rectal cancer in the elderly population continues to increase, it is crucial to assess whether current recommendations on treatment strategies for the general population can be adopted for the older adults, with the same beneficial oncological and functional outcomes. This multidisciplinary experts' consensus aims to refine current rectal cancer-specific guidelines for the elderly population in order to help to maximize rectal cancer therapeutic strategies while minimizing adverse impacts on functional outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

METHODS

The discussion among the steering group of clinical experts and methodologists from the societies' expert panel involved clinicians practicing in general surgery, colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, gastroenterologists, radiologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, and endoscopists. Research topics and questions were formulated, revised, and unanimously approved by all experts in two subsequent modified Delphi rounds in December 2020-January 2021. The steering committee was divided into nine teams following the main research field of members. Each conducted their literature search and drafted statements and recommendations on their research question. Literature search has been updated up to 2020 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. A modified Delphi methodology was implemented to reach agreement among the experts on all statements and recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 SICG-SIFIPAC-SICE-WSES consensus for the multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer aims to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: epidemiology, pre-intervention strategies, diagnosis and staging, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgery, watch and wait strategy, adjuvant chemotherapy, synchronous liver metastases, and emergency presentation of rectal cancer.

Controversies of colonic stenting in obstructive left colorectal cancer: a critical analysis with meta-analysis and meta-regression

PURPOSE

After almost three decades since the first description of colonic stents, the controversies of its safe application continue to impede the readiness of adoption by clinicians for malignant left bowel obstruction. This review seeks to address some of the controversial aspects of stenting and its impact on surgical and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CNKI were searched for articles employing SEMS for left colonic obstruction. Outcomes analyzed include success rates, complications, and long-term survival. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated.

RESULTS

36 studies were included with 2002 patients across seven randomized controlled trials and 29 observational studies. High technical (92%) and clinical (82%) success rates, and low rates of complications, including perforation (5%), were found. Those with > 8% perforation rates had poorer technical success rates than those with ≤ 8%, but there were no significant differences in 90-day in-hospital mortality and three and 5-year overall and disease-free survival. A significant increase was found in technical (RR = 1.094; CI, 1.041-1.149; p < 0.001) and clinical (RR = 1.158; CI, 1.064-1.259; p = 0.001) success rates when the duration between stenting and surgery was ≥ 2 weeks compared to < 2 weeks, but there were no significant differences in perforation rates, 90-day in-hospital mortality, and long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic stenting is safe and effective with high success rates and low complication rates. However, outcomes of higher perforation rates and optimal timing from stent till surgery remain unclear, with only a few studies reporting on these outcomes, leaving areas for future research.

Colonic Stenting in the Emergency Setting

Nowadays, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most frequent cancer, and about a third of patients with CRC presents themselves with symptoms of large bowel obstruction. Historically, surgical resection was the treatment of choice for colonic obstruction, but this kind of approach is burdened by a high risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality. In recent times, the use of a colonic stent has been proposed to overcome the obstruction and transform an emergency surgical case into an elective one to avoid emergency surgery complications. Endoscopic stenting is the first-line treatment option in the palliative management of colonic obstruction, and there is sufficient scientific evidence to support this approach. However, endoscopic stent used as a bridge to surgery is not yet widely adopted because the concern was raised about the long-term survival and cancer safety of this approach. The recent scientific evidence has shown that this approach improves the short-term outcomes, such as postoperative complications and the stoma rate, without differences in long-term outcomes compared to emergency surgery. Therefore, the European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy in 2020 has reconsidered stenting as a bridge to surgery as a valid alternative to emergency surgery.

Comparison of the prognosis of four different treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

There is controversy regarding the efficacy of different treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction. This study investigated the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of several treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction.

Methods

We searched for articles published in PubMed, Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, and Cochrane Library between January 1, 2000, and July 1, 2020. We screened out the literature comparing different treatment strategies. Evaluate the primary and secondary outcomes of different treatment strategies. The network meta-analysis summarizes the hazard ratio, odds ratio, mean difference, and its 95% confidence interval.

Results

The network meta-analysis involved 48 articles, including 8 (randomized controlled trials) RCTs and 40 non-RCTs. Primary outcomes: the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the CS-BTS strategy and the DS-BTS strategy were significantly better than those of the ES strategy, and the 5-year OS of the DS-BTS strategy was significantly better than that of CS-BTS. The long-term survival of TCT-BTS was not significantly different from those of CS-BTS and ES. Secondary outcomes: compared with emergency resection (ER) strategies, colonic stent-bridge to surgery (CS-BTS) and transanal colorectal tube-bridge to surgery (TCT-BTS) strategies can significantly increase the primary anastomosis rate, CS-BTS and decompressing stoma-bridge to surgery (DS-BTS) strategies can significantly reduce mortality, and CS-BTS strategies can significantly reduce the permanent stoma rate. The hospital stay of DS-BTS is significantly longer than that of other strategies. There was no significant difference in the anastomotic leakage levels of several treatment strategies.

Conclusion

Comprehensive literature research, we find that CS-BTS and DS-BTS strategies can bring better 5-year OS and DFS than ER. DS-BTS strategies have a better 5-year OS than CS-BTS strategies. Without considering the hospital stays, DS-BTS strategy is the best choice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-021-00355-2.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

Systemic Chemotherapy is a Promising Treatment Option for Patients with Colonic Stents: A Review

Approximately 10% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) develop malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO) at diagnosis. Furthermore, for 35% of patients with MLBO, curative primary tumor resection is unfeasible because of locally advanced disease and comorbidities. The practice of placing a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) has dramatically increased as an effective palliative treatment. Recent advances in systemic chemotherapy for metastatic CRC have significantly contributed to prolonging patients' prognosis and expanding the indications. However, the safety and efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in patients with SEMS have not been established. This review outlines the current status of this relatively new therapeutic strategy and future perspectives. Some reports on this topic have demonstrated that 1) systemic chemotherapy and the addition of molecular targeted agents contribute to prolonged survival in patients with SEMS; 2) delayed SEMS-related complications are a major concern, and this requires strict patient monitoring; however, primary tumor control by chemotherapy might result in decreased complications, especially regarding re-obstruction; and 3) using bevacizumab could be a risk factor for SEMS-related perforation, which may be lethal. Although this relatively new approach for unresectable stage IV obstructive CRC requires a well-planned clinical trial, this therapy could be promising for patients who are unideal candidates for emergency surgery and require immediate systemic chemotherapy.

Short- and long-term outcomes after colonic self-expandable metal stent placement for malignant large-bowel obstruction as a bridge to surgery focus on the feasibility of the laparoscopic approach: a retrospective, single center study

Purpose

Malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO) is a highly urgent condition in colorectal cancer with high complication rates. Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement in MLBO is a new decompression treatment in Japan. Preoperative stent placement (bridge to surgery: BTS) avoids emergency surgery, but oncological influences of stent placement and post-BTS surgical approach remain unclear. We examined short- and long-term results of surgery for MLBO after SEMS placement in our hospital.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 75 patients with MLBO who underwent resection after SEMS placement at our hospital from June 2013 to December 2018. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were evaluated by comparison with the surgical approach.

Results

Tumor location was significantly higher in the left-side colon and rectum (n = 59, 78.7%) than right-side colon (n = 16, 21.3%). Technical and clinical success rates for SEMS placement were 97.3% and 96.0%, respectively. Laparoscopic surgery was performed in 54 patients (69.0%), and one-stage anastomosis was performed in 73 (97.3%). Postoperative complications were similar in the open surgery (open) group (n = 5, 23.8%) and laparoscopic surgery (lap) group (n = 7, 13.0%), with no severe complications requiring reoperation. Three-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates were not significantly different in the lap vs open group (67.5% vs 66.4%; 82.2% vs 62.5%).

Conclusion

Preoperative stent treatment avoids stoma construction but allows anastomosis. One-time surgery was performed safely contributing to minimally invasive treatment and acceptable short- and long-term results.

Stenting versus surgery in obstructed malignant colorectal cancer-a review of short and long-term results

Obstructed colorectal cancers (CRCs) continue to be challenging to manage. Apart from surgical resection, the use of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) has become increasingly popular. SEMS could potentially allow for the conversion of an emergency operation into a semi-elective procedure, allow for the optimization of the patient's physiology, avoid the requirement for a stoma, as well as allow for a minimally-invasive approach to be adopted. This review article therefore highlights the evidence available in the literature pertaining to the use of SEMS in obstructed CRCs.

Cost-effectiveness of palliative emergent surgery versus endoscopic stenting for acute malignant colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic stenting has demonstrated value over emergent surgery as a palliative intervention for patients with acute large bowel obstruction due to advanced colorectal cancer. However, concerns regarding high reintervention rates and the risk of perforation have brought into question its cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

A decision tree analysis was performed to analyze costs and survival in patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer who present with acute large bowel obstruction. The model was designed with two treatment arms: self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement and emergent surgery. Costs were derived from medicare reimbursement rates (US$), while effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The model was tested for validation using one-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Endoscopic stenting resulted in an average cost of $43,798.06 and 0.68 QALYs. Emergent surgery cost $5865.30 more, while only yielding 0.58 QALYs. This resulted in an ICER of - $58,653.00, indicating that SEMS placement is the dominant strategy. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated that emergent surgery would require an improved survival rate in comparison to endoscopic stenting to become the favored treatment modality. In 100,000 probabilistic simulations, endoscopic stenting was favored 96.3% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute colonic obstruction in the presence of unresectable or metastatic disease, endoscopic stenting is a more cost-effective palliative intervention than emergent surgery. This recommendation would favor surgery over SEMS placement with improved surgical survival, or if the majority of patients undergoing stenting required reintervention.

Comprehensive tumor profiling reveals unique molecular differences between peritoneal metastases and primary colorectal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Peritoneal metastases (PM) from primary colorectal cancer (pCRC) are associated with poor outcomes; however, molecular differences are not well defined.

METHODS

We compared unpaired tumor profiles of patients with pCRC and PM from Caris Life Sciences. Testing included next-generation sequencing of 592 genes, microsatellite instability (MSI) and tumor mutational burden (TMB). Mutations were test-defined as pathogenic (PATH).

RESULTS

Six hundred seventeen pCRC and 348 PM patients had similar gender (55% male) and age (median 59). PATHs were similar between PM and pCRC in KRAS, BRAF, SMAD2, SMAD4, and PTEN. pCRC PATHs were increased in APC (76% vs 48%, P < .01), ARID1A (29% vs 12%, P < .05), TP53 (72% vs 53%, P < .01), PIK3CA (22% vs 15%, P < .05), and FBXW7 (13% vs 7%, P < .01) compared with PM. Mucinous PM had more PATHs in GNAS (19% vs 8%, P = .032) while nonmucinous PM had more PATHs in BRAF (13% vs 8%, P = .027). Right-sided PM had decreased PATHs in APC (39% vs 68%, P < .0001), ARID1A (7% vs 38%, P < .004), and TP53 (48% vs 65%, P = .033) while there were no difference for left-sided PM. Nine percent of pCRC and 6% of PM were MSI-high (P = NS). There was no difference in TMB-high, TMB-intermediate, or TMB-low between PM and pCRC.

CONCLUSIONS

PM have similar rates of KRAS mutation with increased PATHs in GNAS (mucinous) and BRAF (nonmucinous) compared to pCRC. No differences in MSI or TMB were identified between PM and pCRC tumors. These findings inform future study into the molecular profile of PM.

Endoscopic stenting in colorectal cancer

Acute malignant large bowel obstruction presents as one of the few emergencies of colorectal cancer (CRC). Management of this condition can either be by (I) upfront surgery or (II) the use of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to elective surgery. For patients with metastasis, the use of SEMS is reported to enable earlier commencement of chemotherapy. Although the use of SEMS in patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction looks promising, it is plagued by its own set of complications and divided opinion over its long-term outcomes. Conflicting data are present, and definitive indication requires further evaluation and debate. This article will describe the typical presentation of patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction. An introduction to the SEMS insertion procedural steps will be undertaken. Following which the article aims to review the safety profile of SEMS and the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS in both the curative and palliative setting.

Efficacy of intestinal obstruction stent combined with laparoscopic surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer

There is still controversy on the surgical treatment of obstructive colorectal cancer worldwide. No accurate research has been reported to propose which method is the most suitable for patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. Therefore, comparison of efficacy of intestinal stent and trans-anal ileus catheter combined with laparoscopic surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy respectively in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer was carried out to provide reference and guidance for the selection of surgical schemes for patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. In total 89 patients with obstructive colorectal cancer treated in the Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Wenzhou Medical University, from February 2016 to March 2017 were selected for retrospective analysis. Forty-nine cases treated with intestinal metal stent implantation combined with laparoscopic surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were the stent group. The other 40 cases treated with trans-anal ileus catheter combined with laparoscopic surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were the catheter group. The intestinal preparation time, surgical duration, intraoperative blood loss, open surgery rate, postoperative exhaust time and adverse reaction rate were compared between the two groups. All the patients were followed up with reexamination at 1 year in hospital to record the local recurrence rate and tumor implantation rate of incision. The intestinal preparation time in the stent group was shorter than that in the catheter group (P<0.001). The surgical duration in the stent group was longer than that in the catheter group (P<0.001). The intraoperative blood loss in the stent group was higher than that in the catheter group (P<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in open surgery rate, postoperative exhaust time, adverse reaction rate, local recurrence rate or incision tumor implantation rate between the two groups (all P>0.05). Therefore, intestinal metal stent implantation can effectively relieve intestinal obstruction, while trans-anal ileus catheter has higher safety in laparoscopic surgery. Their combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and laparoscopic surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer has high value and clinical effect. The best treatment plan should be selected according to the patient's condition.

Bowel obstruction: a narrative review for all physicians

Small and large bowel obstructions are responsible for approximately 15% of hospital admissions for acute abdominal pain in the USA and ~ 20% of cases needing acute surgical care. Starting from the analysis of a common clinical problem, we want to guide primary care physicians in the initial management of a patient presenting with acute abdominal pain associated with intestinal obstruction.

Acute abdominal obstruction: Colon stent or emergency surgery? An evidence-based review

According to the American Cancer Society and Colorectal Cancer Statistics 2017, colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death in the world in 2018. Previous studies demonstrated that 8%-29% of patients with primary CRC present malignant colonic obstruction (MCO). In the past, emergency surgery has been the primary treatment for MCO, although morbidity and surgical mortality rates are higher in these settings than in elective procedures. In the 1990s, self-expanding metal stents appeared and was a watershed in the treatment of patients in gastrointestinal surgical emergencies. The studies led to high expectations because the use of stents could prevent surgical intervention, such as colostomy, leading to lower morbidity and mortality, possibly resulting in higher quality of life. This review was designed to provide present evidence of the indication, technique, outcomes, benefits, and risks of these treatments in acute MCO through the analysis of previously published studies and current guidelines.

Stent experiences in emergency conditions in acute mechanical intestinal obstruction caused by colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Stent treatment can be applied to avoid surgery in surgically risky patients or to turn a high-risk emergency operation into a lower-risk elective operation and save time.

AIM

In this study, the techniques, clinical efficacy, safety and complications of endoscopic stents applied in emergency conditions were evaluated in patients with acute mechanical intestinal obstruction (AMIO) due to colorectal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 2013 and 2015, 23 patients with an average age of 69.5 ±13.5 years who presented with AMIO and anastomosis stenosis secondarily to cancer to the emergency department were subjected to stent treatment under emergency conditions.

RESULTS

Thirteen (56.5%) patients were diagnosed with colon cancer, 5 (21.7%) with rectal cancer, and 5 (21.7%) with stenosis in the previous anastomosis line. Fourteen (60.9%) patients were diagnosed with stage 4 cancer, 7 (30.4%) with stage 3 cancer and 2 (8.7%) with stage 2 cancer. The stents were applied to the sigmoid colon in 10 (43.5%) patients, to the recto-sigmoid area in 9 (39.1%) patients and to the rectum area in 4 (17.4%) patients. While 14 (60.9%) patients had local or locally advanced disease, 9 (39.1%) patients had metastases in different parts of their bodies, particularly in their livers.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrates that stents offer a favorable therapeutic alternative to emergency surgery and are associated with promising short-term outcomes as well as an acceptable safety profile for AMIO.

Factors related to difficult self-expandable metallic stent placement for malignant colonic obstruction: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter study across Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Colorectal cancer patients often present with large bowel obstruction. Elective placement of a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) can relieve obstruction, but can be challenging. Previous studies have compared cases by outcomes only, but the present study investigated successful cases only to identify factors related to prolonged and difficult SEMS placement in patients with malignant colonic obstruction.

METHODS

A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter clinical trial conducted between March 2012 and October 2013 at 46 facilities across Japan (UMIN000007953) was carried out; 511 patients who required SEMS placement for acute colorectal obstruction or symptomatic stricture secondary to malignant neoplasm were enrolled. Technical success rates and procedure times were recorded. Clinical and interventional parameters were investigated for their potential effect on procedure time by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Technical success rate of SEMS placement was 98%. Median procedure time was 30 (range, 4-170) min. In 27% of patients, procedure time exceeded 45 min, indicating technically difficult placement. Multivariate analyses showed significant associations between technically difficult placement and a ColoRectal Obstruction Scoring System (CROSS) score of 0 before SEMS placement (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < 0.05), tumor site in the right colon (OR, 2.5; P < 0.0001), stricture length ≥5 cm (OR, 2.2; P < 0.001), peritoneal carcinomatosis (OR, 1.7; P < 0.05), and multiple SEMS placement (OR, 8.0; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians must anticipate technical challenges in cases with peritoneal carcinomatosis, a CROSS score of 0, or expansive strictures; such cases require experienced clinicians to carry out SEMS placement.

2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation

ᅟ

Obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer represent challenging matters in terms of diagnosis, life-saving strategies, obstruction resolution and oncologic challenge. The aims of the current paper are to update the previous WSES guidelines for the management of large bowel perforation and obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) and to develop new guidelines on obstructive right colon carcinoma (ORCC).

Methods

The literature was extensively queried for focused publication until December 2017. Precise analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group formed by a pool of experts: the statements and literature review were presented, discussed and voted at the Consensus Conference of the 4th Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) held in Campinas in May 2017.

Results

CT scan is the best imaging technique to evaluate large bowel obstruction and perforation. For OLCC, self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), when available, offers interesting advantages as compared to emergency surgery; however, the positioning of SEMS for surgically treatable causes carries some long-term oncologic disadvantages, which are still under analysis. In the context of emergency surgery, resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) is preferable to Hartmann’s procedure, whenever the characteristics of the patient and the surgeon are permissive. Right-sided loop colostomy is preferable in rectal cancer, when preoperative therapies are predicted.

With regards to the treatment of ORCC, right colectomy represents the procedure of choice; alternatives, such as internal bypass and loop ileostomy, are of limited value.

Clinical scenarios in the case of perforation might be dramatic, especially in case of free faecal peritonitis. The importance of an appropriate balance between life-saving surgical procedures and respect of oncologic caveats must be stressed. In selected cases, a damage control approach may be required.

Medical treatments including appropriate fluid resuscitation, early antibiotic treatment and management of co-existing medical conditions according to international guidelines must be delivered to all patients at presentation.

Conclusions

The current guidelines offer an extensive overview of available evidence and a qualitative consensus regarding management of large bowel obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer.

Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Malignant colonic obstruction (MCO) due to CRC occurs in 8 % to 29 % of patients.The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing colonic SEMS versus emergency surgery (ES) for MCO in palliative patients. This was the first systematic review that included only randomized controlled trials in the palliative setting.

METHODS

A literature search was performed according to the PRISMA method using online databases with no restriction regarding idiom or year of publication. Data were extracted by two authors according to a predefined data extraction form. Primary outcomes were: mean survival, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. Stoma formation, length of stay on intensive care unit (ICU), technical success and clinical success were recorded for secondary outcomes. Technical success (TS) was defined as successful stent placement across the stricture and its deployment. Clinical success (CS) was defined as adequate bowel decompression within 48 h of stent insertion without need for re-intervention.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from four RCT studies totaling 125 patients. The 30-day mortality was 6.3 % for SEMS-treated patients and 6.4 % for ES-treated patients, with no difference between groups (RD: - 0.00, 95 % CI [-0.10, 0.10], I 2 : 0 %). Mean survival was 279 days for SEMS and 244 days for ES, with no significant difference between groups (RD: 20.14, 95 % CI: [-42.92, 83.21], I 2 : 44 %). Clinical success was 96 % in the ES group and 86.1 % in the SEMS group (RD: - 0.13, 95 % CI [-0.23, - 0.02], I 2 : 51 %). Permanent stoma rate was 84 % in the ES group and 14.3 % in the SEMS group (RR: 0.19, 95 % CI: [0.11, 0.33], I 2 : 28 %). Length of hospital stay was shorter in SEMS group (RD: - 5.16, 95 % CI: [-6.71, - 3.61], I 2 : 56 %). There was no significant difference between groups regarding adverse events (RD 0.18, 95 % CI: [-0.19, 0.54;]) neither regarding ICU stay. (RD: - 0.01, 95 % CI: [-0.08, 0.05], I 2 : 7 %). The most common stent-related complication was perforation (42.8 % of all AE).

CONCLUSION

Mortality, mean survival, length of stay in the ICU and early complications of both methods were similar. SEMS may be an alternative to surgery with the advantage of early hospital discharge and lower risk of permanent stoma.

Outcomes and complications of self-expanding metal stent placement for malignant colonic obstruction in a single-center study

Introduction

Approximately 20% of cases of colorectal cancer are accompanied by acute colonic obstruction. While emergency colonic surgery is associated with high mortality and morbidity rates, placement of a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) has been suggested as an alternative method. The SEMS placement can serve as either a definitive treatment in palliative cases or a bridge to surgery.

Aim

To summarize the experience of our center in the treatment of malignant colonic obstruction using SEMS placement.

Material and methods

A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent a SEMS placement for colorectal stricture in the study period. The procedures were performed under fluoroscopic guidance with colonoscopic assistance, and uncovered stents were used in all patients.

Results

The study population consisted of 28 patients treated with SEMS placement due to malignant colonic obstruction. The majority of procedures were performed with palliative intent. The overall technical success rate was 96.5%, and clinical success was achieved in all of the successfully placed SEMSs. One fatal complication due to colonic perforation occurred. In the bridge-to-surgery group, all patients experienced tumor resection with no stoma creation.

Conclusions

The SEMS placement is an optimal treatment in the vast majority of acute colonic obstruction cases. Due to the possibility of potentially fatal complications, SEMS procedures should be performed by proficient endoscopists.

Mucoadhesive Chitosan-Pectinate Nanoparticles for the Delivery of Curcumin to the Colon

In the present study, we report the properties of a mucoadhesive chitosan-pectinate nanoparticulate formulation able to retain its integrity in the milieu of the upper gastrointestinal tract and subsequently, mucoadhere and release curcumin in colon conditions. Using this system, we aimed to deliver curcumin to the colon for the possible management of colorectal cancer. The delivery system comprised of a chitosan-pectinate composite nanopolymeric with a z-average of 206.0 nm (±6.6 nm) and zeta potential of +32.8 mV (±0.5 mV) and encapsulation efficiency of 64%. The nanoparticles mucoadhesiveness was higher at alkaline pH compared to acidic pH. Furthermore, more than 80% release of curcumin was achieved in pectinase-enriched medium (pH 6.4) as opposed to negligible release in acidic and enzyme-restricted media at pH 6.8. SEM images of the nanoparticles after exposure to the various media indicate a retained matrix in acid media as opposed to a distorted/fragmented matrix in pectinase-enriched medium. The data strongly indicates that the system has the potential to be applied as a colon-targeted mucoadhesive curcumin delivery system for the possible treatment of colon cancer.

Endoscopic colostomy with percutaneous colopexy: an animal feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Indications for colostomy in colorectal diseases are obstruction of the large bowel, such as in cancer, diverticular disease in the acute phase, post-radiotherapy enteritis, complex perirectal fistulas, anorectal trauma and severe anal incontinence. Some critically ill patients cannot tolerate an exploratory laparotomy, and laparoscopic assisted colostomy also requires general anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of performing colostomy assisted by colonoscopy and percutaneous colopexy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five pigs underwent endoscopic assisted colostomy with percutaneous colopexy. Animals were evaluated in post-operative days 1, 2, 5 and 7 for feeding acceptance and colostomy characteristics. On day 7 full colonoscopy was performed on animals followed by exploratory laparotomy.

RESULTS

Average procedure time was 27 minutes (21-54 min). Postoperative mobility and feeding of animals were immediate after anesthesia recovery. Position of the colostomy, edges color, appearance of periostomal area, as well as its function was satisfactory in four animals. Retraction of colostomy was present in one pig. The colonoscopy and laparotomy control on the seventh day were considered as normal. A bladder perforation that was successfully repaired through the colostomy incision occurred in one pig. The main limitation of this study is its experimental nature.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic assisted colostomy with percutaneous colopexy proves to be a safe and effective method with low morbidity for performing colostomy in experimental animals, with possible clinical application in humans.