Stent or surgery for incurable obstructive colorectal cancer: an individualized decision

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.

Decision Making Near End of Life: A Qualitative Exploration of the Lived Experiences of Jordanian Healthcare Providers

BACKGROUND

Discussions related to a patient's prognosis and interventions near end of life are challenging and stressful for healthcare providers. Many reported experiencing emotional distress and discomfort during the decision-making process.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to describe the lived experience of nurses and physicians who participate in decision making near the end of a patient's life.

METHODS

A descriptive, phenomenological approach was used with a purposive sample of 7 nurses and 6 physicians from 2 palliative and end-of-life care institutions in Jordan. Data derived from focus group discussions conducted online via the ZOOM video communication application, and analysis followed Colaizzi's qualitative methodology.

RESULTS

Three major themes emerged from the healthcare providers' experiences. Initially, the participants described how they "strive toward optimal decision-making near end of life," "the overwhelming experience of decision making near end of life," and finally, their struggle in sharing details about the end of life when patients ask and whether to tell or not to tell them as "the time for hard talk."

CONCLUSIONS

The healthcare providers' experiences revealed several issues of decision making near a patient's end of life, such as a lack of appropriate training and administrative support, emotional distress, fear of legal liability, and the burden of a hard talk with patients. These findings necessitate institutional support of setting appropriate policies and guidelines, staff counseling, and healthcare provider support.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Institutions providing palliative and end-of-life care can use this study's findings to support their staff by setting appropriate practice guidelines and providing staff training and counseling.

Comparison of colonic stenting and stoma creation as palliative treatment for incurable malignant colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is a favorable therapeutic option for patients with incurable malignant colonic obstruction (MCO). However, their long-term efficacy and safety compared with those of stoma creation have not been well investigated. This study aimed to compare these long-term outcomes between these two techniques in patients with incurable MCO.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort included patients with incurable MCO with SEMS insertion (n = 105) and stoma creation (n = 97) between January 2009 and December 2019. The primary outcomes were patency after the procedure and 1-year re-intervention rates.

RESULTS

The patency of the SEMS group was lower than that of the stoma group (88.9 vs 93.2% at 6 months, 84.1 vs 90.5% at 12 months, and 65.8 vs 90.5% at 18 months; log-rank test, P = 0.024), but 1-year re-intervention rates were not different between the groups (10 vs 8%, P = 0.558). The median patency durations were 190 days for SEMS insertion and 231 days for stoma creation. Majority (84%) of SEMS patients did not require any re-intervention until death. The early complication rate did not differ between the groups (P = 0.377), but SEMS insertion had fewer late minor complications than stoma creation (5 vs 22%, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

SEMS insertion is a safe and effective treatment for patients with incurable MCO. Although SEMS insertion had a lower patency than stoma creation, especially after 1 year, the 1-year re-intervention rates were not different, and SEMS durability was sufficient in most patients.

Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery or a Palliative Treatment

Endoscopic stenting of the colorectum has emerged as a viable alternative to surgical interventions in a selected group of patients. The main indication for stenting is bowel obstruction. As such stenting can be used to palliate patients with metastatic disease or bridge patients to surgical intervention. The main advantages of stenting in the emergency setting include lower morbidity and mortality, lower incidence of stoma formation, shorter hospitalization, and better quality of life. For patients with unresectable disease and short life expectancy, stenting can be considered. However, for patients with longer life expectancy, the potential long-term complications of a metal stent such as erosion, migration, or obstruction have engendered debate whether such patients are better served by operative intervention. Stenting as a bridge to surgery is an alternative to surgery in patients who are high risk for emergency surgery but concerns remain regarding its impact on oncologic outcome in potentially curable patients.

Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for acute obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective study

Purpose: Acute obstructive colorectal cancer is a common emergency that requires decompression immediately. The aim of the study was to compare short-term and long-term results of acute obstructive colorectal cancer treated by the self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) versus emergency surgery.

Patients and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 78 patients who were diagnosed as acute obstructive colorectal cancer that underwent elective surgery after stent insertion (stent group, N=37) or emergency surgery (emergency group, N=41) from January 2013 to October 2016. The Kaplan–Meier method was conducted to calculate overall survival. Univariate analyses were performed using the Mann–Whitney U analysis, Pearson’s chi-square test, and Fisher’s exact test. In addition, continuous variables were compared using the Student’s t-test.

Results: The baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. The stent group had increased preoperative serum albumin level and decreased ASA risk score. In addition, operation time, diet time, harvested lymph nodes and total stoma creation of the stent group were better than that of the emergency group. The complications and mortality during hospitalization were not significantly different between the two groups. The overall survival was not significantly different while the quality of life of survival patients in the stent group was better than that of the emergency group.

Conclusion: For acute obstructive colorectal cancer, a stent as a BTS seems to be a safe and feasible alternative option for emergency surgery in the management of acute obstructive colorectal cancer.

Urgent Management of Obstructing Colorectal Cancer: Divert, Stent, or Resect?

Despite the availability of effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies, up to 10% of CRC patients present with obstructive symptoms as the first sign of disease. For patients with acute or subacute malignant obstruction that requires urgent intervention, treatment options include endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery, one-stage surgical resection and anastomosis, or diverting ostomy which may or may not be followed by later tumor resection and stoma closure. However, to date, there is no consensus guideline for the optimal approach to manage malignant colorectal obstruction. This article aims to illustrate clinical scenarios in palliative, curative, and potentially curative settings, and delineate the key factors to be considered when making an individualized decision in order to determine the optimal treatment.

Tertiary stent-in-stent for obstructing colorectal cancer: A case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are frequently used in the setting of palliation for occluding, inoperable colorectal cancer (CRC). Among possible complications of SEMS positioning, re-obstruction is the most frequent. Its management is controversial, potentially involving secondary stent-in-stent placement, which has been poorly investigated. Moreover, the issue of secondary stent-in-stent re-obstruction and of more-than-two colonic stenting has never been assessed. We describe a case of tertiary SEMS-in-SEMS placement, and also discuss our practice based on available literature.

CASE SUMMARY

A 66-year-old male with occluding and metastatic CRC was initially treated by positioning of a SEMS, which had to be revised 6 mo later when a symptomatic intra-stent tumor ingrowth was treated by a SEMS-in-SEMS. We hereby describe an additional episode of intestinal occlusion due to recurrence of intra-stent tumor ingrowth. This patient, despite several negative prognostic factors (splenic flexure location of the tumor, carcinomatosis with ascites, subsequent chemotherapy that included bevacizumab and two previously positioned stents (1 SEMS and 1 SEMS-in-SEMS)) underwent successful management through the placement of a tertiary SEMS-in-SEMS, with immediate clinical benefit and no procedure-related adverse events after 150 d of post-procedural follow-up. This endoscopic management has permitted 27 mo of partial control of a metastatic disease without the need for chemotherapy discontinuation and, ultimately, a good quality of life until death.

CONCLUSION

Tertiary SEMS-in-SEMS is technically feasible, and appears to be a safe and effective option in the case of recurrent SEMS obstruction.

Evidence-based Clinical Management of Acute Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

Acute malignant colorectal obstruction (AMCO) is an emergency associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). Emergency surgery is standard therapy for AMCO, and 1-stage surgery without colostomy is preferable, but it is occasionally difficult in the emergency setting. A self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) enables noninvasive colonic decompression and subsequent 1-stage surgery, which has been widely applied for CRC with AMCO. However, recent accumulation of high-quality evidence has highlighted some problems and the limited efficacy of SEMS for AMCO. In palliative settings, SEMS placement reduces hospital stay and short-term complication rates, whereas it increases the frequency of long-term complications, such as delayed perforation. SEMS placement does not seem compatible with recent standard chemotherapy including bevacizumab. As a bridge to surgery, while SEMS placement provides a lower clinical success rate than emergency surgery, it can facilitate primary anastomosis without stoma. However, evidence regarding long-term survival outcomes with SEMS in both palliative and bridge to surgery settings is lacking. The efficacy of transanal colorectal tube placement, another endoscopic treatment, has been reported, but its clinical evidence level is low due to the limited number of studies. This review article comprehensively summarizes the current knowledge about surgical and endoscopic management of CRC with AMCO.

Value of endoscopic intestinal stent placement in treatment of colorectal cancer complicated with intestinal obstruction

AIM: To evaluate the safety, efficacy and value of endoscopic intestinal stent placement in the treatment of colorectal cancer complicated with acute intestinal obstruction.

METHODS: A total of 263 patients with colorectal cancer complicated with intestinal obstruction treated at our hospital from January 2010 to December 2014 were included. Stenting treatment was performed under endoscopy and (or) X-ray. The rate of success, the incidence of postoperative complications, the rate of symptom remission, the rate of surgical excision and other indicators were evaluated.

RESULTS: Stent implantation was successful in 258 (98.1%) cases. The rates of adverse events were: perforation, 1.1% (3 cases); hemorrhage, 3.8% (10 cases); fever, 4.6% (12 cases), and others such as stent dislocation and migration, 3.0% (8 cases). The rates of symptom remission were: abdominal pain, 97.3% (256 cases); abdominal distension, 97.3% (258 cases); and anal dysfunction, 98.1% (258 cases). The rates of surgical resection were: 60 cases for palliative treatment, 198 cases for surgical resection 5-13 d after stent implantation after intestinal preparation, and 143 cases for removal of the tumor by one-stage operation.

CONCLUSION: The symptoms of intestinal obstruction can be relieved by endoscopic intestinal stenting. Emergency endoscopic stenting can be used as a bridge treatment before operation, and it can turn emergency operation to elective surgery, turn two-stage operation to one-stage operation, reduce the difficulty and risk of operation for clinicians, reduce the incidence of postoperative complications, relieve pain, and improve survival quality.

Long-term outcomes of palliation for unresectable colorectal cancer obstruction in patients with good performance status: endoscopic stent versus surgery

BACKGROUND

In patients with unresectable colorectal cancer (CRC) obstruction, choosing whether to perform self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) or palliative surgery is challenging, especially in those with good performance status. We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of SEMS with those of palliative surgery in patients with unresectable CRC obstruction.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised 114 patients with unresectable CRC obstruction who underwent SEMS placement (n = 73) or palliative surgery (n = 41). The main outcome measurements were success rate, adverse events, patency, and survival duration.

RESULTS

Early clinical success rates did not differ between SEMS and surgery. However, the rate of late adverse events was significantly higher in the SEMS group (27.4 vs. 9.8 %; P = .005). Patency duration was shorter after SEMS than after surgery (163 vs. 349 days; P < .001), even after additional intervention (202 vs. 349 days; P < .001). The median survival was significantly shorter after SEMS than after surgery (209 vs. 349 days; P = .005). Survival differed between treatments in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1 (P = .016) but not in those with ECOG 2 or 3 (P = .487), and this was confirmed by multivariate analysis, which showed that surgery was a significant favorable predictor of survival for patients with ECOG 0 or 1 (hazard ratio .442; 95 % confidence interval .234-.835; P = .016).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery may be preferable to SEMS for the palliation of unresectable CRC obstruction in patients with good performance status, especially ECOG 0 or 1.

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

BACKGROUND

Although self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are useful tools for relieving large bowel obstructions in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), their efficacy in a palliative setting has not been validated. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the feasibility of SEMS as a palliation for unresectable CRC patients with bowel obstructions and to determine their contribution to the prognosis of CRC, compared with surgical intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search of the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases. We selected all controlled trials that compared SEMS with surgical interventions as palliative treatments in unresectable obstructive CRC patients. The primary outcome was early complications, and the secondary outcomes were mortality, other morbidities, and long-term survival rates.

RESULTS

Ten studies met our inclusion criteria. SEMS significantly reduced the risk of early complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.58%; P<0.01), mortality (OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.15%-0.64%; P<0.01), and stoma creation (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.12-0.28%; P<0.01). Although SEMS placement was significantly associated with a higher risk of perforation of the large bowel (OR 5.25 95% CI 2.00-13.78%; P<0.01) and late complications (OR 1.94; 95% CI 0.90-4.19%; P=0.03), it also contributed significantly to better long-term survival (hazard ratio 0.46; 95% CI 0.31-0.68%; P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with surgical intervention, SEMS could provide feasible palliation for patients with bowel obstructions and unresectable CRC, because of their acceptable morbidity rates and better patient prognoses.

Stents for colorectal obstruction: Past, present, and future

Since the development of uncovered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in the 1990s, endoscopic stents have evolved dramatically. Application of new materials and new designs has expanded the indications for enteral SEMS. At present, enteral stents are considered the first-line modality for palliative care, and numerous types of enteral stents are under development for extended clinical usage, beyond a merely palliative purpose. Herein, we will discuss the current status and the future development of lower enteral stents.

Surgery for the resolution of symptoms in malignant bowel obstruction in advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancer

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2000. Intestinal obstruction commonly occurs in progressive advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancers. Management of these patients is difficult due to the patients' deteriorating mobility and function (performance status), the lack of further chemotherapeutic options, and the high mortality and morbidity associated with palliative surgery. There are marked variations in clinical practice concerning surgery in these patients between different countries, gynaecological oncology units and general hospitals, as well as referral patterns from oncologists under whom these patients are often admitted.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of surgery for intestinal obstruction due to advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases for the original review in 2000 and again for this update in June 2015: CENTRAL (2015, Issue 6); MEDLINE (OVID June week 1 2015); and EMBASE (OVID week 24, 2015).We also searched relevant journals, bibliographic databases, conference proceedings, reference lists, grey literature and the world wide web for the original review in 2000; we also used personal contact. This searching of other resources yielded very few additional studies. The Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Review Group no longer routinely handsearch journals. For these reasons, we did not repeat the searching of other resources for the June 2015 update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

As the review concentrates on the 'best evidence' available for the role of surgery in malignant bowel obstruction in known advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancer we kept the inclusion criteria broad (including both prospective and retrospective studies) so as to include all studies relevant to the question. We sought published trials reporting on the effects of surgery for resolving symptoms in malignant bowel obstruction for adult patients with known advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used data extraction forms to collect data from the studies included in the review. Two review authors extracted the data independently to reduce error. Owing to concerns about the risk of bias we decided not to conduct a meta-analysis of data and we have presented a narrative description of the study results. We planned to resolve disagreements by discussion with the third review author.

MAIN RESULTS

In total we have identified 43 studies examining 4265 participants. The original review included 938 patients from 25 studies. The updated search identified an additional 18 studies with a combined total of 3327 participants between 1997 and June 2015. The results of these studies did not change the conclusions of the original review.No firm conclusions can be drawn from the many retrospective case series so the role of surgery in malignant bowel obstruction remains controversial. Clinical resolution varies from 26.7% to over 68%, though it is often unclear how this is defined. Despite being an inadequate proxy for symptom resolution or quality of life, the ability to feed orally was a popular outcome measure, with success rates ranging from 30% to 100%. Rates of re-obstruction varied, ranging from 0% to 63%, though time to re-obstruction was often not included. Postoperative morbidity and mortality also varied widely, although again the definition of both of these surgical outcomes differed between many of the papers. There were no data available for quality of life. The reporting of adverse effects was variable and this has been described where available. Where discussed, surgical procedures varied considerably and outcomes were not reported by specific intervention. Using the 'Risk of bias' assessment tool, most included studies were at high risk of bias for most domains.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The role of surgery in malignant bowel obstruction needs careful evaluation, using validated outcome measures of symptom control and quality of life scores. Further information could include re-obstruction rates together with the morbidity associated with the various surgical procedures.Currently, bowel obstruction is managed empirically and there are marked variations in clinical practice by different units. In order to compare outcomes in malignant bowel obstruction, there needs to be a greater degree of standardisation of management.Since the last version of this review none of the new included studies have provided additional information to change the conclusions.

Role of self-expanding metal stents in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To assess the safety and efficacy of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) for malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS: Data regarding technical success, clinical success, and procedure related complications were collected from included studies. DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used to generate the overall outcome. Thirty international studies with a total of 2058 patients with malignant colorectal obstruction were included.

RESULTS: The technical and clinical success rates for SEMS placement were 94% (95%CI: 92-96) and 91% (95%CI: 88-93), respectively. Overall complication rate for SEMS was 23% (95%CI: 18-29). Stent migration 8% (95%CI: 6-10) and stent obstruction 8% (95%CI: 6-11) were the most common complications, followed by perforation 5% (95%CI: 4%-7%). Surgical or endoscopic re-interventions were needed in 14% (95%CI: 10-18) of patients. Endoscopic repeat stent placement was required in 8% (95%CI: 6-10), while surgical intervention was needed in 6% (95%CI: 4-8).

CONCLUSION: SEMS are effective when used as palliation or bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction with high technical and clinical success. About 14% of patients require repeat endoscopic or surgical intervention for stent failure or to manage stent related complications.

Stoma placement in obstructive rectal cancer prior to neo-adjuvant treatment and definitive surgery: A practical guideline

INTRODUCTION

Mechanical bowel obstruction in rectal cancer is a common problem, requiring stoma placement to decompress the colon and permit neo-adjuvant treatment. The majority of patients operated on in our hospital are referred; after stoma placement at the referring centre without overseeing final type of surgery. Stoma malpositioning and its effects on rectal cancer care are described.

METHODS

All patients who underwent surgery for locally advanced or locally recurrent rectal cancer between 2000 and 2013 in our tertiary referral centre were reviewed and included if they received a stoma before curative surgery. Patients with recurrent rectal cancer were only included if the stomas from the primary surgery had been restored. The main outcome measures are stoma malpositioning, postoperative and stoma-related complications.

RESULTS

A total of 726 patients were included; of these, 156 patients (21%) had a stoma before curative surgery. In the majority of patients, acute or pending large bowel obstruction was the main indication for emergent stoma creation; some of the patients had tumour-related fistulae. In 53 patients (34%), the stoma required revision during definitive surgery. No significant differences were found regarding postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

One-third of the previously placed emergency stomas were considered to be located inappropriately and required revision. We were able to avoid increased complication rates in patients with a malpositioned stoma, however unnecessary surgery for an inappropriately placed stoma should be avoided to decrease patient inconvenience and risks. An algorithm is proposed for the placement of a suitable stoma.

Palliative self-expandable metal stents for acute malignant colorectal obstruction: clinical outcomes and risk factors for complications

OBJECTIVE

Self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) have been used as palliative treatment or bridge to surgery for obstructions caused by colorectal cancer (CRC). We assessed the long-term outcomes of palliative SEMSs and evaluated the risk factors influencing complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and seventy-five patients underwent SEMS placement for acute malignant colorectal obstruction. Of the 72 patients who underwent palliative treatment for primary CRC, 30 patients received chemotherapy (CT) for primary cancer (CT group) and 42 underwent best supportive treatment (BST) without CT (BST group).

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in late migration between the CT group and the BST group (20.0% in CT group, 2.4% in BST group, p = 0.018). Response to CT influenced the rate of late obstruction (0% in disease control, 35.7% in disease progression, p = 0.014). However, late obstruction was not associated with stent properties, such as diameter or type (≤22 mm vs. >22 mm, 13.5% vs. 14.3%, p = 1.00; uncovered stent vs. covered stent, 15.5% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.675) and migration (≤22 mm vs. >22 mm, 16.2% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.108; uncovered stent vs. covered stent, 8.6% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.615) in palliative SEMS.

CONCLUSION

The administration of CT increases the rate of stent migration, and disease control by CT can reduce the risk of obstruction by maintaining the luminal patency of palliative SEMSs.

[Metastasized colonic cancer. When are there no indications for primary resection?]

The determination of an optimal treatment protocol for colonic cancer with synchronous incurable metastases remains a challenge, especially if the primary tumor is asymptomatic. Available data on whether resection of the primary tumor means a benefit or a danger to the patient are limited and inhomogeneous. A survival benefit could be shown only in retrospective studies with a bias against primary chemotherapy. The important question of the quality of life (QOL) remains completely unanswered in this respect. There are numerous groups and guidelines in favor of a primary palliative chemotherapy for these patients, possibly intensified by antibodies. The results of the currently ongoing randomized multicenter SYNCHRONUS study will deliver objective data facilitating the decision-making process with respect to the indications for resection of the primary tumor or primary chemotherapy.

Perforation in colorectal stenting: a meta-analysis and a search for risk factors

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that there is a substantial risk of perforation after colorectal stent placement.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for perforation from colonic stenting.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of 86 studies published between 2005 and 2011.

SETTING

Multicenter review.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent colorectal stent placement.

INTERVENTION

Colorectal stent placement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The occurrence of perforation with subgroup analyses for stent design, stricture etiology, stricture dilation, and concomitant chemotherapy, including the use of bevacizumab.

RESULTS

A total of 4086 patients underwent colorectal stent placement; perforation occurred in 207. Meta-analysis revealed an overall perforation rate of 7.4%. Of the 9 most frequently used stent types, the WallFlex, the Comvi, and the Niti-S D-type had a higher perforation rate (>10%). A lower perforation rate (<5%) was found for the Hanarostent and the Niti-S covered stent. Stenting benign strictures was associated with a significantly increased perforation rate of 18.4% compared with 7.5% for malignant strictures. Dilation did not increase the risk of perforation: 8.5% versus 8.5% without dilation. The subgroup of post-stent placement dilation had a significantly increased perforation risk of 20.4%. With a perforation rate of 12.5%, bevacizumab-based therapy was identified as a risk factor for perforation, whereas the risk for chemotherapy without bevacizumab was 7.0% and not increased compared with the group without concomitant therapies during stent therapy (9.0%).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity; a considerable proportion of data is unavailable for subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The perforation rate of colonic stenting is 7.4%. Stent design, benign etiology, and bevacizumab were identified as risk factors for perforation. Intraprocedural stricture dilation and concomitant chemotherapy were not associated with an increased risk of perforation.

Complications and survival in patients undergoing colonic stenting for malignant obstruction

AIM: To investigate whether predicting patients that might be at a higher risk for complications might serve to improve the selection of patients undergoing colonic stenting.

METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent an attempted self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion for malignant colonic obstruction between November 2006 and March 2013. All patients were either referred for preoperative colonic decompression with the intent of a single surgical procedure, or for palliation of the malignant colorectal obstruction for unresectable cancer. Fisher’s test or χ² test was performed on categorical variables, and the t test for continuous variables. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to examine the association between independent variables and the presence of complications from SEMS insertion.

RESULTS: SEMS insertion was attempted in 73 patients. Males comprised 55.71% and the mean age was 67.41 ± 12.41 years. Of these, 65.15% underwent subsequent surgery, while 34.85% received SEMS as palliation for advanced disease. Extracolonic tumors were only 4.76%. The majority of patients had stage IV disease (63.83%), while the remainder had stage III (36.17%). SEMS were successfully inserted in 93.85% (95%CI: 87.85%-99.85%). Perforations occurred in 4.10%, SEMS migration in 8.21%, and stent re-occlusion from ingrowth occurred in 2.74% of patients. The mean duration of follow up for the patients was 13.52 ± 17.48 mo (range 0-73 mo). None of the variables: age, sex, time between the onset of symptoms to SEMS insertion, time between SEMS insertion and surgery, length of the stenosis, location of the stenosis, albumin level, or receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, could predict the development of complications from either SEMS insertion nor prolonged survival.

CONCLUSION: None of the variables could predict the development of complications or survival. Further studies are required to identify patients who would benefit the most from SEMS.

Palliative treatment for incurable malignant colorectal obstructions: A meta-analysis

AIM: To perform a meta-analysis of palliative stent placement vs palliative surgical decompression for management of incurable malignant colorectal obstructions.

METHODS: The databases of Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from their inception to July 2012 for studies (prospective, retrospective, randomized controlled trials, and case-control trials) designed as comparative analyses of patients with incurable malignant colorectal obstructions treated by self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) or palliative surgery. No language restrictions were imposed. The main outcome measures were hospital stay, intensive care unit admission, clinical success rate, 30-d mortality, stoma formation, complications, and overall survival time. The data extraction was conducted by two investigators working independently and using a standardized form. The Mantel-Haenszel χ² method was used to estimate the pooled risk ratios with 95%CI under a fixed-effects model; when statistical heterogeneity existed in the pooled data (as evaluated by Q test and I² statistics, where P < 0.10 and I² < 25% indicated heterogeneity), a random-effects model was used.

RESULTS: Thirteen relevant articles, representing 837 patients (SEMS group, n = 404; surgery group, n = 433), were selected for analysis. Compared to the surgery group, the SEMS group showed lower clinical success (99.8% vs 93.1%, P = 0.0009) but shorter durations of hospital stay (18.84 d vs 9.55 d, P < 0.00001) and time to initiation of chemotherapy (33.36 d vs 15.53 d, P < 0.00001), and lower rate of stoma formation (54.0% vs 12.7%, P < 0.00001). Additionally, the SEMS group experienced a significantly lower rate of 30-d mortality (4.2% vs 10.5%, P = 0.01). Stent-related complications were not uncommon and included perforation (10.1%), migration (9.2%), and occlusion (18.3%). Surgery-related complications were slightly less common and included wound infection (5.0%) and anastomotic leak (4.7%). The rate of total complications was similar between these two groups (SEMS: 34.0% vs surgery: 38.1%, P = 0.60), but the surgery-related complications occurred earlier than stent-related complications (rate of early complications: 33.7% vs 13.7%, P = 0.03; rate of late complications: 32.3% vs 12.7%, P < 0.0001). The overall survival time of SEMS- and surgery-treated patients was not significantly different (7.64 mo vs 7.88 mo).

CONCLUSION: SEMS is less effective than surgery for palliation of incurable malignant colorectal obstructions, but is associated with a shorter time to chemotherapy and lower 30-d mortality.

Evidence-based recommendations on colorectal stenting: a report from the stent study group of the korean society of gastrointestinal endoscopy

Recently, placement of self-expandable metallic stents has been used for the treatment of colorectal obstruction. As domestic awareness of colorectal cancer has increased, the number of colorectal stenting procedures performed has also increased. We aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for colorectal stenting to aid gastroenterologists in making informed decisions regarding the management of patients who present with colorectal obstruction. The working group consisted of eight gastroenterologists who actively practice and conduct research in the field of colorectal stenting and are the members of the Stent Study Group of the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, KoreaMed, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant articles published between January 2001 and June 2012. Based on the modified Delphi process, 10 recommendation statements regarding indications, usefulness, methodology and complications of colorectal stenting, and alternative treatments for malignant colorectal obstruction were determined. The contents will be widely distributed, and periodically revised to reflect the latest knowledge. These evidence-based recommendations for colorectal stenting will provide gastroenterologists and patients with appropriate and balanced information, and will improve the quality of care.

A prospective evaluation of short-term and long-term results from colonic stenting for palliation or as a bridge to elective operation versus immediate surgery for large-bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to elective surgery or definitive palliation versus emergency operation to treat colorectal obstruction is debated. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients with colorectal obstruction treated using different strategies.

METHODS

Subjects admitted to the authors' department with colorectal obstruction (n = 134) were studied prospectively. They underwent endoscopic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery (SEMS group: n = 49) or for definitive palliation (n = 34). A total of 51 patients underwent immediate surgery without stenting (NO-SEMS). Treatment was decided by the senior on-call surgeon.

RESULTS

Placement of SEMS was technically successful in 95.3 % and clinically successful in 98.7 % of cases. The short-term complications in the SEMS group were perforation (n = 1, 1.2 %), migration (n = 4, 4.9 %), occlusion (n = 4, 4.9 %), colon bleeding (n = 3, 3.7 %), and abdominal pain (n = 6, 7.4 %). The postoperative complication rate was 32.7 % in the SEMS group versus 60.8 % in the NO-SEMS group (P = 0.005), with a significant reduction in wound infections (26.5 vs 54.9 %; P = 0.004), abdominal abscess (14.3 vs 39.2 %; P = 0.006), respiratory morbidity (10.2 vs 37.3 %; P = 0.002), and intensive care treatment (10.2 vs 33.3 %; P = 0.007). The median postoperative hospital stay was 10 versus 15 days (P = 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate in both groups was 2 %. Long-term follow-up evaluation showed less incisional hernia (6.3 vs 22.0 %; P = 0.04) and definitive stoma formation (6.3 vs 26.0 %; P = 0.01) in the SEMS group than in the NO-SEMS group, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed a benefit for the SEMS group (log-rank test, 0.004). The long-term SEMS-related complication rate for the palliative patients was 43.8 %. The hospital readmission rate for SEMS complications was 34.4 %. Overall clinical success was 81.2 %.

CONCLUSIONS

In case of colorectal obstruction, endoscopic colon stenting as a bridge to elective operation should be considered as the treatment of choice for resectable patients given the significant advantages for short- and long-term outcomes. Palliative stenting is effective but associated with a high rate of long-term complications.

The learning curve for colorectal stent insertion for the treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction

Background/Aims

We aimed to assess the effectiveness of self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) insertion by evaluating the learning curve in relation to the experience of an endoscopist.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of 120 SEMS insertion procedures performed by one endoscopist in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction. We compared the technical and clinical success rates, complication rates, and duration of the procedures by quartiles.

Results

The mean age of the patients (76 men and 44 women) was 64.6 years. The overall technical success rate was 95.0% (114/120), and the clinical success rate was 90.0% (108/120). The median procedure duration was 16.2 minutes (range, 3.4 to 96.5 minutes). From the first to the last quartile, the technical success rates were 90.0%, 96.7%, 96.7%, and 96.7% (p=0.263), and the clinical success rates were 90.0%, 90.0%, 96.7%, and 83.3% (p=0.588), respectively. Procedure-related complications were observed in 28 patients (23.3%). The complication rates for SEMS insertion when patients were divided by quartiles were 26.7%, 23.3%, 10.0%, and 33.3% (p=0.184), respectively. Moreover, the number of stents per procedure was 1.13, 1.03, 1.00, and 1.00 (p=0.029), respectively. The median duration of SEMS insertion decreased significantly, 20.9 to 14.8 minutes after the first 30 procedures (p=0.005).

Conclusions

An experienced endoscopist was able to perform the SEMS insertion procedure easily and effectively after performing 30 SEMS insertions.

Clinical outcomes and risk factors for technical and clinical failures of self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction

BACKGROUND

Although self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion is widely used for relief of malignant colorectal obstructions, the immediate technical and clinical failure rates of SEMSs and the associated risk factors remain largely unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To identify rates and factors predictive of technical and clinical failure of SEMSs when their use is attempted for the decompression of malignant colorectal obstruction.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

A tertiary-care academic medical center in South Korea.

PATIENTS

This study involved a total of 412 patients with malignant colorectal obstruction in whom SEMS insertion was attempted.

INTERVENTION

Placement of colonic SEMSs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Technical success and immediate and long-term clinical success rates.

RESULTS

Technical and clinical failures were found in 36 of 276 patients (13.0%) and 39 of 240 patients (16.3%) in the palliative group, respectively, and in 3 of 136 patients (2.2%) and 7 of 133 patients (5.3%) in the preoperative group, respectively. Factors associated with technical failure were extracolonic origin of tumor, the presence of carcinomatosis, and a proximal obstruction site. Factors associated with long-term clinical failure in the palliative group were combined dilation procedure, no additional chemotherapy, and extracolonic origin of the tumor. In the preoperative group, only older patients had both higher technical failure and clinical failure rates.

LIMITATIONS

This was a single-institution, retrospective analysis.

CONCLUSION

Although colorectal SEMS placement is generally safe and effective, it is associated with clinically important technical and clinical failure rates. The identification of risk factors for the failure of colorectal SEMSs found in this study might help physicians decide between surgical decompression and endoscopic stenting in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.

Treatment of benign colorectal strictures by temporary stenting with self-expanding stents

BACKGROUND

The application of stents in benign colorectal strictures is considered controversial. The aim of the present study was to assess effectiveness and complications associated with colorectal stent placement in benign colorectal disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fourteen patients with benign colorectal strictures who had undergone previous surgery (colorectal anastomotic stenosis, 13; neosphincter scar stenosis, one) were treated with covered self-expanding metal stent or plastic stent. Placement of the stent was performed with combined endoscopy and contrast enhanced fluoroscopy.

RESULTS

Self-expanding stents were successful implanted in all 14 patients without acute procedure-related complications. All patients experienced immediate decompression after stent placement with expansion and patency of the stent. Relief of bowel obstruction for at least 12 months was achieved in seven of 14 patients (50%). Anastomotic fistula healed in four of six patients (67%). Despite the initial success of stenting, re-operations had to be performed in two of seven patients because of late recurrence of the stricture after a mean follow-up of 37 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Temporary insertion of self-expanding stents is a safe procedure that may be effective in selected cases of benign colorectal stricture. However, repeat surgery will be necessary in a considerable number of patients due to primary or secondary failure of stenting.