Endoscopic stenting versus surgical colostomy for the management of malignant colonic obstruction: comparison of hospital costs and clinical outcomes

Palliative stenting for malignant colorectal stenosis in the elderly

Objectives

Self‐expandable metal stents are widely used for the treatment of malignant colorectal stenosis (MCS). In elderly individuals with MCS, self‐expandable metal stents are often used as a palliative treatment, but prophylactic stent placement is not recommended. We investigated the efficacy and safety of self‐expandable metal stents for the elderly in a palliative setting, specifically in a prophylactic setting.

Methods

Elderly patients with MCS who received a palliative stent (the stent group) or palliative stoma (the stoma group) were retrospectively enrolled between April 2017 and June 2022, and the prognosis and complication rates were assessed. Additionally, patients in the stent group were divided into symptomatic and asymptomatic subgroups, and prognosis, stent patency, and complication rates were evaluated.

Results

During the study period, 31 patients with a mean age of 85.4 years and 12 patients with a mean age of 82.0 years were enrolled in the stent and stoma groups, respectively. While overall survival and complication rates were comparable, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the stent group. Of the 31 patients in the stent group, 16 asymptomatic patients received prophylactic stenting, which was not associated with increased complication rates.

Conclusions

Palliative stents for MCS appear to be effective and safe even in the elderly, and thus, prophylactic stents can be considered for asymptomatic patients.

Covered Metal Stent after Dysfunction of Uncovered Stents for Palliation of Gastrointestinal Malignant Obstruction

Background

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been used for the palliative treatment of malignant gastrointestinal tract obstruction. However, restenosis or incomplete expansion of a first stent is a frequent complication, and the effectiveness of reintervention with placement of a second stent is still controversial.

Objective

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of covered SEMS (cSEMS) placement after dysfunction of uncovered SEMS (uSEMS) by the stent-in-stent technique.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively studied a consecutive series of patients receiving palliative treatment for malignant gastrointestinal obstruction with cSEMS placement after uSEMS dysfunction in a tertiary center from January 2013 to August 2018. Technical and clinical success, time of patency, and adverse events were analyzed.

Results

Twelve patients were included; their mean age was 60 ± 9 years. Eleven patients had gastric outlet obstruction, and 1 patient had compression of the transverse colon due to gastric neoplasia. In 5 cases, there was absence of early clinical success with uSEMS and stent dysfunction in 7 cases (median patency time: 81 days). There was 100% technical success and 91.7% clinical success after cSEMS placement. There were no adverse events nor need for reintervention. The median patency time after placement of both stents was 163 days (vs. 71 days with the initial stent).

Conclusion

cSEMS placement after uSEMS dysfunction is technically feasible and a clinically effective treatment for patients with recurrent malignant gastrointestinal obstruction, with good stent patency in the medium/long term. This approach seems to be safe and without increase in adverse effects.

Optimal management of malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction: do international guidelines agree?

Background

Approximately 20% of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will present with left-sided large bowel obstruction. The optimal management of this cohort of patients remains unclear. We aimed to review international guidelines to see if there was a consensus on the treatment of this surgical emergency.

Methods

The PubMed and Medline databases were searched for guidelines on the management of left-sided, malignant large bowel obstruction (MBO) between 2010 and 2018.

Results

Nineteen guidelines were identified spanning a range of continents. There was no clear consensus on the management of potentially resectable disease. Eight guidelines (42%) suggested primary surgery, two guidelines (11%) suggested stenting as a bridge to surgery and nine guidelines (47%) suggested surgery or stenting could be performed. Primary resection with or without anastomosis was the most frequently recommended procedure (n = 6 35%), but over a third of guidelines gave no operative recommendations. There was very limited detail on the stenting procedure and how long elective surgery should be deferred. In the palliative situation, there was general agreement that stents should be offered in preference to surgery.

Conclusion

International guidelines offer limited and contrasting recommendations on the management of left-sided MBO. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support whether emergency surgery or stenting as a bridge to surgery is the optimal procedure in terms of morbidity, mortality and long-term oncological outcome.

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.

Endoscopic stenting for palliation of intra-abdominal gastrointestinal malignant obstruction: predictive factors for clinical success

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic stenting proved to be a safe alternative to surgery for malignant intra-abdominal gastrointestinal obstruction. Although high technical success rates have been reported, some patients do not experience relief in symptoms.

AIM

This study aimed to analyse the factors predicting the effectiveness of stent placement in patients with gastrointestinal obstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out including 160 patients who underwent palliative stenting for intra-abdominal obstruction in a tertiary centre from December 2012 to July 2017. Technical and clinical success, stent dysfunction and adverse events were analysed.

RESULTS

The rate of technical success was 98%. The rate of early clinical success was 69 and 81% in upper and lower gastrointestinal obstructions, respectively (P=0.107). In the upper tract, obstruction caused by carcinomatosis was the only independent factor predicting early and late clinical failure [odds ratio (OR): 9.7, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.5-38.4, P=0.001 and OR: 7.6, 95% CI: 1.8-31.9, P=0.006, respectively]. In the colon, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of at least 3 was an independent factor for early clinical failure (OR: 29.8, 95% CI: 1.9-464.9, P=0.002) and obstruction caused by carcinomatosis was an independent factor for late clinical failure (OR: 14.4, 95% CI: 1.7-119.6, P=0.013). Perforation occurred in 4 patients (2.5%) and stent dysfunction occurred in 15% of patients (4% stent migration; 9% restenosis). Carcinomatosis was a risk factor for perforation (P=0.039) and migration was higher with shorter 6 cm stents (P=0.044).

CONCLUSION

Stents are effective and safe for palliation of intra-abdominal obstruction. Carcinomatosis predicts an unfavourable clinical outcome. Palliative stenting as an option should be weighed carefully in these patients.

Long-term Postprocedural Outcomes of Palliative Emergency Stenting vs Stoma in Malignant Large-Bowel Obstruction

Importance

Colonic stenting was introduced for palliation of malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO) more than 20 years ago but remains controversial.

Objective

To compare outcomes after palliative stenting vs stoma creation in patients with MLBO requiring emergency management.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This observational cohort study assessed 345 patients from New York State with an urgent or emergency admission to the hospital for obstruction secondary to colorectal cancer and who underwent stenting or stoma creation from October 1, 2009, through December 31, 2013. Patients were excluded if they underwent resection within 1 year of the index admission.

Exposures

Palliative stenting vs stoma creation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes included subsequent operation and readmission within 90-day and 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital death, major medical and surgical complications, length of stay, total charges, and discharge dispositions. Multivariable hierarchical analyses and propensity score matching were used to compare outcomes between the exposure groups.

Results

The cohort included 345 patients (mean [SD] age, 69.9 [14.4] years in the stoma group and 70.9 [16.8] years in the stent group; 87 men [50.3%] in the stoma group and 90 [52.3%] in the stent group; and 114 non-Hispanic white patients [65.9%] in the stoma group and 90 [52.3%] in the stent group). Most patients undergoing stenting were treated at high-volume (104 [60.5%]) vs medium-volume (42 [24.4%]) or low-volume (26 [15.1%]) hospitals (P < .001). Patients undergoing stenting were significantly less likely to experience prolonged length of stay (odds ratio [OR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.97; P = .04), more likely to be discharged to their usual residence (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.07-0.28; P < .001), and tended to have similar or fewer complications (major events: OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.30-2.18; P = .68; procedural complications: OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.11-1.22; P = .10). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of 90-day and 1-year readmission to the hospitals (90 days: OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.49-1.78; P = .83; 1 year: OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.37; P = .30). Subsequent operation at 90 days was also not different between the groups (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.26-6.89; P = .72), but there was a higher chance of subsequent operation at 1 year after the stenting procedure (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.12-7.68; P = .03), with most subsequent operations being restenting.

Conclusions and Relevance

In patients with MLBO and if resection is not part of the treatment plan, stenting is safe and improves the efficiency of care with obvious quality-of-life benefits. It should be offered at experienced centers, and patients should be counseled regarding increased risk of subsequent stenting within 1 year.

Using stents in the management of malignant bowel obstruction: the current situation and future progress

The use of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) has been considered an effective and safe alternative to emergency surgery as bridge to surgery or for palliation in advanced colorectal cancer even though more recent data have raised concerns on both early and long-term outcomes when patients are treated with bridge to surgery indications. Areas covered: A comprehensive literature review of articles on endoscopic management of malignant bowel obstruction was performed. Indication, technique, outcomes, benefits and risks of these treatments in acute malignant colonic obstruction were reviewed. The clinical effectiveness and safety of SEMS in obstructive colorectal cancer, as bridge to surgery or for palliation compared to surgery, is discussed. Expert commentary: SEMS placement, when performed in tertiary level center with appropriate expertise in colorectal stenting, may have several advantages over surgery avoiding the potential for surgical morbidity in a typically frail group of patients even though these advantages are to be carefully balanced over the risk of life-threatening, stent-related complications.

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes of Endoscopic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery for Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: A Comparative Study

AIM

With consideration of the theoretical link between the stent insertion and the increased risk of tumor cells spillaged, which may lead to distant metastases, there is a concern about long-term clinical outcomes after the usage of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a "bridge to surgery" in the malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO) treatment. This cohort study aimed to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of SEMS as a bridge to surgery (SEMS group) with those of emergency surgery (ES group) for MCO.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients who underwent semielective curative resection after endoscopic SEMS insertion were included from October 2007 to December 2012 in the SEMS group were compared with 33 patients who underwent emergency curative surgery for MCO during the same period in the ES group. The clinical pathologic characteristics and the overall survival (OS) rate were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographics, tumor stage, location, and histology between the SEMS and ES groups. The median OS times were 37 months for the SEMS group and 23 months for the ES group. The proportions of patients who received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were comparable (SEMS group versus ES group, 70.4% versus 45.5%; P = .138). There were no significant differences in terms of the long-term oncological outcome between two groups in the 3-year OS rate (55.6% versus 39.4%; P = .2119) and the 5-year OS rate (48.1% versus 36.4%; P = .3570).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term oncological outcomes of the SEMS group were comparable to those of the ES group.

[Enteroenterostomy in surgical treatment of malignant colonic obstruction]

AIM

To consider surgical tactics and to study the immediate results of primary enteroenterostomy in surgical treatment of malignant colonic obstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Radical surgery was performed in 170 (63.9%) out of 266 patients with malignant obstructive colonic obstruction. Colonic resection followed by anastomosis was performed in 68 patients. Conventional hemicolectomy (9 patients) and various original techniques of Y-shaped ileotransversanastomoses (27 patients) were used for right-sided tumor process. In case of left-sided tumor we used intraoperative colonic irrigation with enterosorption (20 operations), Y-shaped anastomoses (9 operations) and subtotal colectomy (3 operations).

RESULTS

There was significantly increased mortality in patients with sub- and decompensated stages of malignant colonic obstruction. Postoperative mortality after radical surgery was 10.6%, after palliative interventions - 21.9%. There was similar postoperative mortality after various types of radical interventions with/without enteroenterostomy (8.8% and 11.8%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In favorable clinical situation radical surgery with tumor removal at the first emergency stage should be preferred for malignant colonic obstruction. At the specialized hospital segmental colonic resection with primary anastomosis is possible after comprehensive assessment of surgical risk, intraoperative colonic irrigation is obligatory for left-sided tumor. This approach increases surgical effectiveness and provides early rehabilitation.

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.

Self-Expanding Metallic Stents for the Management of Emergency Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction: a Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This paper evaluates the safety and effectiveness of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) for the management of emergency malignant colorectal obstruction in patients otherwise requiring multi-stage surgery. No systematic review has been conducted comparing SEMS to only multi-stage surgery.

METHODS

Bibliographic databases, including Cochrane, PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL, were searched in September 2011 and repeated in November 2013. A pre-determined protocol outlined the study inclusion and appraisal.

RESULTS

Forty articles were included, seven compared SEMS to multi-stage surgery. Included studies were of low to moderate quality. Bowel perforation was the most severe stent-related complication, while tumor- and stent-related events occurred most frequently. No significant differences in rates of obstruction relief were reported between treatments, and results regarding relative quality of life were inconclusive. SEMS recipients progressed to elective surgery sooner and required shorter post-procedural hospital stays, but commonly required re-intervention. SEMS provided enduring palliative relief of obstruction, with comparable survival longevity between treatments. Conclusion: SEMS placement is a viable alternative to multi-stage surgery, providing patients with benefits as a bridge-to-surgery and relief of obstruction in a palliative context, with minimal differences in clinical success and safety compared to multi-stage surgery.

Role of stenting in gastrointestinal benign and malignant diseases

Advances in stents design have led to a substantial increase in the use of stents for a variety of digestive diseases. Initially developed as a non-surgical treatment for palliation of esophageal cancer, the stents now have an emerging role in the management of malignant and benign conditions as well as in all segments of the gastrointestinal tract. In this review, relevant literature search and expert opinions have been used to evaluate the key-role of stenting in gastrointestinal benign and malignant diseases.

Long-term outcome of stenting as a bridge to surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate both the short- and long-term outcomes associated with colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery in patients with obstructing adenocarcinoma of the colon.

METHOD

Patients with potentially curable acute left-sided colonic obstruction treated with stenting as a bridge to surgery (n = 28) or with emergency surgical resection (n = 39) from January 1998 to December 2008 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Short-term data on postoperative mortality, morbidity, necessity of intensive care and length of hospital stay were compared. Overall survival and disease-free survival were also analysed.

RESULTS

Patients in the two study arms had similar demographic profiles. Those receiving preoperative stenting had a higher likelihood of a laparoscopic resection (P < 0.001). The emergency surgery group had a higher rate of postoperative complications (P = 0.024), rate of intensive care unit admission (P = 0.013) and longer total length of hospital stay (9 vs 12 days, P = 0.001). With a median follow-up of 26.5 and 31.3 months for the stenting and surgical resection groups, there was no difference in overall and disease-free survival (overall survival 30 vs 31 months, P = 0.858; disease-free survival 13 vs 12 months, P = 0.989). There was no difference in the rate of systemic recurrence (8 vs 13, P = 0.991).

CONCLUSION

Stenting as a bridge to surgery is a safe strategy for acute left-sided colonic obstruction with improved short-term outcome and comparable long-term oncological results.

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.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction: comparison with emergency surgery

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) are now regarded as an effective and safe intervention for malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO). However, manipulation of the tumor might lead to the spillage of tumor cells and result in distant metastases. We aimed to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS as a bridge to surgery with those of emergency surgery for MCO.

METHODS

Between June 2005 and December 2011, 60 patients who underwent elective curative resection after endoscopic SEMS insertion were included in the "SEMS group". The SEMS group was matched to 180 patients who underwent emergency curative surgery for MCO during the same period ["Emergency surgery (ES) group"]. The clinicopathologic characteristics, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographics, tumor stage, location, and histology between the SEMS group and the ES group. The median follow-up times were 41.4 months (IQR, 22.2-60.0 months) for the SEMS group and 45.0 months (IQR, 20.9-68.1 months) for the ES group. The proportions of patients who received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were comparable (SEMS group vs. ES group, 68.3 % vs. 77.8 %; P = 0.210). The long-term prognosis did not significantly differ between two groups in either the 5-year RFS rate (79.6 % vs. 70.2 %; P = 0.218) or the 5-year OS rate (97.8 % vs. 94.3 %; P = 0.469).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS insertion as a bridge to surgery were comparable to those of primary curative surgery.

Status and literature review of self-expandable metallic stents for malignant colorectal obstruction

Use of colorectal stents has increased dramatically over the last decades. Colorectal stents offer an alternative way to relieve fatal intestinal obstruction and can take place of emergency surgery, which associated with significant morbidity and mortality and a high incidence of stoma creation, to elective resection. Although there remain a few concerns regarding the use of stents as a bridge to surgical resection, use of self-expandable metallic stents for palliation in patients with unresectable disease has come to be generally accepted. Advantages of colorectal stents include acute restoration of luminal patency and allowance of time for proper staging and surgical optimization, and the well-known disadvantages are procedure-related complications including perforation, migration, and stent failure. General indications, procedures, and clinical outcomes as well as recent evidences regarding the use of colorectal stents will be discussed in this review.

Current management of acute malignant large bowel obstruction: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The management of colonic obstruction has changed in recent years. In distal obstruction, optimal treatment remains controversial, particularly after the appearance and use of colonic endoluminal stents. The purpose of this study was to review the current treatment of acute malignant large bowel obstruction according to the level of evidence of the available literature.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar for articles published through January 2013 to identify studies of large bowel obstruction and colorectal cancer. Included studies were randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials, reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis.

RESULTS

After a literature search of 1,768 titles and abstracts, 218 were selected for full-text assessment; 59 studies were ultimately included. Twenty-five studies of the diagnosis and treatment of obstruction and 34 studies of the use of stents were assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

In view of the various alternatives and the lack of high-grade evidence, the treatment of distal colonic obstruction should be individually tailored to each patient.

Palliative treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction caused by advanced malignancy: a self-expanding metallic stent or surgery? A system review and meta-analysis

We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) vs. surgery for the palliative treatment of colorectal obstruction caused by advanced colorectal malignancy. The databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane controlled trials registry and the Chinese Wanfang were retrieved (updated to 31 August 2011) to identify eligible studies. We calculated the odds ratio or weighted mean difference and its corresponding 95 % confidence interval. In total, nine primary studies were included in this analysis. The success rate of SEMS placement was 93.9 %, with short-term and long-term complication rates of 26.2 and 16.1 %, respectively. Combined analyses revealed that the SEMS group had a similar risk of short-term complications as the surgical group (P = 0.22). Moreover, SEMS was not associated with a higher mortality risk than surgical intervention (P = 0.22) and it required a significantly shorter hospitalization time (P < 0.01); however, SEMS patients had a higher risk of long-term complications (P = 0.03). Because of great heterogeneities between patients and chemoradiotherapy, we did not analyze the survival times of the two groups. These results support the feasibility of SEMS as a palliative treatment for malignant colorectal obstruction caused by incurable malignancy, as it requires shorter hospitalization and is followed by quick recovery. However, the risk of long-term complications such as perforation and stent migration should be borne in mind.

Management and outcomes of bowel obstruction in patients with stage IV colon cancer: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Bowel obstruction is a common complication of late-stage abdominal cancer, especially colon cancer, which has been investigated predominantly in small, single-institution studies.

OBJECTIVE

We used a large, population-based data set to explore the surgical treatment of bowel obstruction and its outcomes after hospitalization for obstruction among patients with stage IV colon cancer.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PATIENTS

We identified 1004 patients aged 65 years or older in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer January 1, 1991 to December 31, 2005, who were later hospitalized for bowel obstruction.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We describe outcomes after hospitalization and analyzed the associations between surgical treatment of obstruction and outcomes.

RESULTS

Hospitalization for bowel obstruction occurred a median of 7.4 months after colon cancer diagnosis, and median survival after obstruction was approximately 2.5 months. Median hospitalization for obstruction was about 1 week and in-hospital mortality was 12.7%. Between discharge and death, 25% of patients were readmitted to the hospital at least once for obstruction, and, on average, patients lived 5 days out of the hospital for every day in the hospital between obstruction diagnosis and death. Survival was 3 times longer in those whose obstruction claims suggested an adhesive obstruction origin. In multivariable models, surgical compared with nonsurgical management was not associated with prolonged survival (p = 0.134).

LIMITATIONS

Use of an administrative database did not allow determination of quality of life or relief of obstruction as an outcome, nor could nonsurgical interventions, eg, endoscopic stenting or octreotide, be assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based study of patients with stage IV colon cancer who had bowel obstruction, overall survival following obstruction was poor irrespective of treatment. Universally poor outcomes suggest that a diagnosis of obstruction in the setting of advanced colon cancer should be considered a preterminal event.

Study of the behavior of a bell-shaped colonic self-expandable NiTi stent under peristaltic movements

Managing bowel obstruction produced by colon cancer requires an emergency intervention to patients usually in poor conditions, and it requires creating an intestinal stoma in most cases. Regardless of that the tumor may be resectable, a two-stage surgery is mandatory. To avoid these disadvantages, endoscopic placement of self-expanding stents has been introduced more than 10 years ago, as an alternative to relieve colonic obstruction. It can be used as a bridge to elective single-stage surgery avoiding a stoma or as a definitive palliative solution in patients with irresectable tumor or poor estimated survival. Stents must be capable of exerting an adequate radial pressure on the stenosed wall, keeping in mind that stent must not move or be crushed, guaranteeing an adequate lumen when affected by peristaltic waves. A finite element simulation of bell-shaped nitinol stent functionality has been done. Catheter introduction, releasing at position, and the effect of peristaltic wave were simulated. To check the reliability of the simulation, a clinical experimentation with porcine specimens was carried out. The stent presented a good deployment and flexibility. Stent behavior was excellent, expanding from the very narrow lumen corresponding to the maximum peristaltic pressure to the complete recovery of operative lumen when the pressure disappears.

Meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing endoscopic stenting and surgical decompression for colorectal cancer obstruction

PURPOSE

Surgical decompression is the traditional treatment for acute colorectal cancer obstruction. In recent years, colorectal stenting has been used to relieve the obstruction. This study used meta-analytic techniques to compare colonic stenting versus surgical decompression for colorectal cancer obstruction.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of several databases was conducted. The search identified 321 potential abstracts and titles of which eight randomized trials involving 353 patients were retrieved in full text. A meta-analysis of the studies included was carried out to identify the differences in outcomes between the two procedures.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis showed no significant differences for mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.91) and morbidity (OR 2.05) rates between the two strategies while the permanent stoma creation rate was significantly higher in the surgical group as compared to the stent group (OR 3.12). By comparing surgery and colonic stenting in studies which analyzed the use of stenting as a "bridge to surgery," the pooled analysis showed that primary anastomosis was more frequent in the stent group as compared to the surgical group (OR 0.42), and the stoma creation was more frequent in the surgical group as compared to the stent group (OR 2.36).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggested that, in patients with acute colorectal cancer obstruction, stent placement improved several outcomes, such as primary anastomosis, stoma formation, and permanent stoma, while it failed to show an improvement in mortality and morbidity risk.

Covered self-expandable metal stents are more associated with complications in the management of malignant colorectal obstruction

BACKGROUND

The use of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) for the treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction is increasing. However, results of risk factors for its complications are inconsistent. This study aimed to examine the clinical effectiveness of the procedure as well as the complications and risk factors associated with the complications.

METHODS

Medical records of patients with malignant colorectal obstruction who underwent endoscopic placement of covered or uncovered SEMS were reviewed retrospectively. The procedure was performed by two endoscopists with experience in pancreatobiliary endoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 152 patients were included (102 men; mean age, 70 ± 12.5 years). The procedure was performed for palliative management in 83 patients and performed as a bridge to surgery in 69 patients. There were 111 uncovered stents and 41 covered stents. The technical success rate was 100% and the clinical success rate 94.1%. Overall complications were observed in 49 patients (32.2%) during the follow-up period (median, 98 days; interquartile range, 19-302 days). Obstruction (17.1%), migration (7.9%), perforation (5.2%), bleeding (1.3%), and tenesmus (0.7%) were the causes of the complications. Stage IV disease, carcinomatosis peritonei, complete obstruction of the colon, palliative intention, and covered stents increased the complications based on the univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis revealed that complete obstruction of the colon and covered stents were significantly independent risk factors for complications. In the palliative group, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significantly shorter median duration to the onset of complications in the covered stent group than in the uncovered stent group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although SEMS in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction is effective both as palliative therapy and as a bridge to surgery, one-third of patients experienced complications. Severity of obstruction and stent type can influence outcomes.

Palliative stenting of the digestive tract: a case series of a single centre

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Obstruction of the gastrointestinal tract due to cancer can be treated with stenting. The aim was to review the local experience with endoscopic stenting. All patients treated with stenting in a ten years period from 2001-2010 were studied.

RESULTS

Fifty one patients received 57 stents because of oesophageal cancer. Mean survival after stent placement was 141 days. No case of perforation occurred. In nine cases (17%) clogging with food occurred. Tumour overgrowth was noted in four cases. Twenty four patients received 28 stents in their colon or rectum. The stents were placed in the rectum (n=6), the sigmoid (n=14), the descending colon (n=1), and the transverse colon (n=3). Mean survival was 276 days. Perforation did not occur. Tumour ingrowth was seen in two patients. One patient received a second stent. Dislocation occurred in two cases. There were two cases of clogging (8%) by stool. Fourteen patients received a total of 18 stents because of obstructing stomach cancer. Mean survival after placement was 121 days. There was no perforation, one case of clogging, and four cases of tumour ingrowth. Eight patients had stent placement in their duodenum. Mean survival after stent placement was 84 days. No perforation or clogging occurred. But three cases of tumour ingrowth were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

The present series shows that placement of expandable stents in the digestive tract in normal daily practice is feasible, safe, with a low number of complications, and provides good palliation for their remaining life.

Colorectal stents: do we have enough evidence?

BACKGROUND

The use of colonic stents has significantly evolved over the last few years. Emergency surgery for colonic obstructions is usually associated with significant mortality, morbidity and often stoma formation. Colonic stents provide an alternative way to relieve colonic obstruction, and hence avoiding the risks associated with emergency surgery. This literature review aims to summarize the important current evidence regarding colorectal stenting and show whether further evaluation of the procedure is required.

RESULTS

The available large number of non-randomized studies suggests that Self-Expandable-Metal-Stents (SEMS) placement for acute colonic obstruction could be considered as safe and effective alternative to surgery in experienced hands either as a bridge to surgery or as a palliative measure. This evidence has led to SEMS being widely adopted. However, randomized evidence has begun to show the defects that are inherent in the low level evidence that has so far supported SEMS use and it may be that reports of randomized controlled trials may clarify the patient population where SEMS placement is appropriate.

CONCLUSION

While we are still waiting for the outcome of the multicentre randomized controlled trials in the UK and Europe, clinicians must be aware of the current evidence limitations and apply SEMS use pragmatically.

Expandable metal stents for malignant colorectal strictures

The surgical management of malignant colorectal obstruction is still controversial and has higher associated mortality and complication rates compared with elective surgery. Placement of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) has been proposed as an alternative therapeutic approach for colonic decompression of patients with acute malignant obstruction. SEMS placement may be used both as a bridge to surgery in patients who are good candidates for curative resection and for palliation of those patients presenting with advanced stage disease or with severe comorbid medical illnesses.