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. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:832-842. [PMID: 23052501 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-012-2520-0]

Laparoscopic versus open surgery in obstructive colorectal cancer patients following stents placement: a comprehensive meta-analysis of cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, the use of stent placement as a bridge to surgery (BTS) has emerged as an alternative to emergency surgery for patients with (OCRC). However, the optimal surgical approach remains indeterminate. This study seeks to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a combined treatment modality involving stent placement and laparoscopic surgery for OCRC presenting with malignant obstruction.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted until June 2023 to identify studies that compared laparoscopic to open surgery in patients with OCBC following stent insertion.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis incorporated 12 cohort studies, encompassing 933 patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the 30-day mortality rates between the two groups (relative risk [RR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26 to 4.48; P = 0.95). Compared to the laparoscopic approach group, the open approach group had a higher rate of overall postoperative complications (POCs) (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.72, P < 0.0001). There was no significant variance in lymph node (LN) dissection number between the groups (mean differences [MD], 1.64; 95% CI - 1.51 to 4.78; P = 0.31). Notably, laparoscopic surgery resulted in less intraoperative blood loss (MD, - 25.84 ml; 95% CI - 52.16 to 0.49; P = 0.05) and a longer operation time (MD, 20.99 mins; 95% CI 2.31 to 39.44; P = 0.03). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) (MD - 3.29 days; 95% CI - 5.27 to 1.31; P = 0.001). Conversely, the open approach group had a higher rate of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.96, P = 0.04). Although the number of included studies was insufficient to conduct a meta-analysis, several of them imply that laparoscopic surgery may yield more favorable outcomes in terms of the 3-year overall survival rate (OS), 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS), 5-year OS, and 5-year DFS when compared to open surgery. It is worth noting that these differences lack statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

In patients with OCRC subjected to stent insertion, laparoscopic surgery arguably presents a modest superiority over open surgery by diminishing the overall postoperative risk and potentially reducing the LOS.

Oncologic investigation of the interval from stent placement to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is widely used as a bridge to surgery (BTS) procedure for obstructive colorectal cancer. However, evidence regarding the optimal interval between SEMS placement and elective surgery is lacking.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from patients with BTS between January 2013 and October 2021. Inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analyses were used to compare short- and long-term outcomes between the short-interval (SI) and long-interval (LI) groups, using a cutoff of 20 days.

RESULTS

In total, 138 patients were enrolled in this study (SI group, n = 63; LI group, n = 75). In the matched cohort, the patients' backgrounds were well balanced. The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ II postoperative complications was not significantly different between the SI and LI groups (19.0% vs. 14.0%, P = 0.47). There were no significant differences between the SI and LI groups in the 3-year recurrence-free survival (68.0% vs. 76.4%, P = 0.73) or 3-year overall survival rates (86.0% vs. 90.6%, P = 0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

A longer interval did not deteriorate the oncological outcomes. Individual perioperative management with an appropriate interval to improve the patient's condition is required to ensure safe surgery.

Stage IV Colorectal Cancer Management and Treatment

(1) Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Up to 50% of patients with CRC develop metastatic CRC (mCRC). Surgical and systemic therapy advances can now offer significant survival advantages. Understanding the evolving treatment options is essential for decreasing mCRC mortality. We aim to summarize current evidence and guidelines regarding the management of mCRC to provide utility when making a treatment plan for the heterogenous spectrum of mCRC. (2) Methods: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed and current guidelines written by major cancer and surgical societies were reviewed. The references of the included studies were screened to identify additional studies that were incorporated as appropriate. (3) Results: The standard of care for mCRC primarily consists of surgical resection and systemic therapy. Complete resection of liver, lung, and peritoneal metastases is associated with better disease control and survival. Systemic therapy now includes chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy options that can be tailored by molecular profiling. Differences between colon and rectal metastasis management exist between major guidelines. (4) Conclusions: With the advances in surgical and systemic therapy, as well as a better understanding of tumor biology and the importance of molecular profiling, more patients can anticipate prolonged survival. We provide a summary of available evidence for the management of mCRC, highlighting the similarities and presenting the difference in available literature. Ultimately, a multidisciplinary evaluation of patients with mCRC is crucial to selecting the appropriate pathway.

Management of left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions with curative intent: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several management options exist for colonic decompression in the setting of malignant large bowel obstruction, including oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and SEMS as a bridge-to-surgery. Consensus has yet to be reached on optimal treatment pathways. The aim of the present study was to perform a network meta-analysis comparing short-term postoperative morbidity and long-term oncologic outcomes between oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction with curative intent.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were systematically searched. Articles were included if they compared two or more of the following in patients presenting with curative left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: (1) emergent oncologic resection; (2) surgical diversion; and/or (3) SEMS. The primary outcome was overall 90-day postoperative morbidity. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed with inverse variance random effects. Random-effect Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

From 1277 citations, 53 studies with 9493 patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection, 1273 patients undergoing surgical diversion, and 2548 patients undergoing SEMS were included. Network meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in 90-day postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing SEMS compared to urgent oncologic resection (OR0.34, 95%CrI0.01-0.98). Insufficient RCT data pertaining to overall survival (OS) precluded network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis demonstrated decreased five-year OS for patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection compared to surgical diversion (OR0.44, 95%CI0.28-0.71, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bridge-to-surgery interventions may offer short- and long-term benefits compared to urgent oncologic resection for malignant colorectal obstruction and should be increasingly considered in this patient population. Further prospective study comparing surgical diversion and SEMS is needed.

A retrospective evaluation of short-term results from colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery versus emergency surgery for malignant colonic obstruction

The efficacy and safety of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to elective surgery versus emergency surgery to treat malignant colonic obstruction is debated. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients with malignant colonic obstruction treated using different procedure. Subjects admitted to the authors' department with colonic obstruction (n = 87) were studied. They underwent colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery (SEMS group: n = 14) or emergency surgery (ES group: n = 22).Their demographic characteristics, stoma rate, laparoscopy rate and postoperative complications were analyzed, and the potential risk factors of postoperative complications and the optimal time interval from SEMS implantation to elective surgery were explored. The stoma rate was 15.4% in the SEMS group versus 60.0% in the ES group (P = 0.015), and the postoperative complication rate was 7.7% in the SEMS group versus 40.0% in the ES group (P = 0.042). The proportion of patients undergoing laparoscopy in SEMS group was significantly higher than that in ES group (69.2% vs. 15.0%; P = 0.003).The effect of ASA grade on postoperative complications was statistically significant (OR = 24.565; P = 0.008). The Receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve could not determine the optimal time interval between SEMS implantation and elective surgery (AUC = 0.466). SEMS implantation has the advantages of lower temporary stoma rate, less postoperative complications and higher laparoscopy rate compared with ES in the treatment of left malignant intestinal obstruction. ASA grade is a risk factor for postoperative complications. However, larger sample size prospective randomized controlled trials (RCT) are still needed to confirm long-term oncological outcomes.

Detection methods of synchronous colorectal lesions in proximal colon for patients with obstructive colorectal cancer: a literature review

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer holds a high morbidity and mortality rate. As a common method for colorectal cancer detection, colonoscopy has difficulty in passing through the malignant stenosis in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer, which results in incomplete detection and missed diagnosis. The missed synchronous lesions increase the risk of metachronous cancer. Therefore, detecting proximal synchronous lesions in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer should be appreciated before operation.

AREA COVERED

This review evaluates related literature, aiming at providing clinicians with more ideas and attention for detecting proximal synchronous lesions in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

EXPERT OPINION

In patients with obstructive colorectal cancer, missed diagnosis of lesions proximal to the obstruction may lead to metachronous colorectal cancer. Except for preoperative colonoscopy which is difficult to pass through malignant stenosis, other methods that can evaluate proximal colon segment are critical. This article introduced several preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative measures for synchronous lesions detection. The choice of methods should base on patients' conditions, aiming at a high diagnostic yield and low risk. Early detection and resection of synchronous lesions in the proximal section of malignant obstruction are expected to minimize the risk of metachronous colorectal cancer and even effect follow-up treatment strategy, which deserves the attention of clinicians.

Colonic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency resection for right-sided malignant large bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative colonic stenting for malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO), also called bridge to surgery (BTS), is considered a great substitute treatment for emergency resection (ER) in the left-sided colon. However, its efficacy in the right-sided colon remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative short-term outcomes between BTS and ER for right-sided MLBO.

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic literature search throughout December 2020 was performed to identify studies comparing short-term outcomes between BTS and ER for right-side MLBO. The main outcome measures were postoperative complications and mortality rates. A meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect or a random-effect method to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 5136 patients, of whom 1662 (32.4%) underwent BTS and 3474 (67.6%) underwent ER. This meta-analysis demonstrated that BTS resulted in reductions in postoperative complications (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66-0.92) and mortality (OR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.28-0.92) than ER.

CONCLUSION

The results of this meta-analysis indicate that BTS for right-sided MLBO confers preferable short-term outcomes as well as for left-sided. This suggests that BTS results in a reduction of postoperative complications and mortality for right-sided MLBO than ER.

Comparing Emergent and Elective Colectomy Outcomes in Elderly Patients: A NSQIP Study

Introduction

With the increasing prevalence of colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide, especially in the elderly, and the variability between physiological and chronological age and its impact on functional status, acute symptoms leading to emergent surgery due to colorectal malignancy may lead to increased morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to identify the outcome differences of elective vs. emergent open colectomy in patients above 80 years.

Methods

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was reviewed from 2010 to 2014 for open colectomy based on CPT codes. Comparison between groups was done based on the clinical context at presentation as elective or emergent surgery. Data were analyzed using SAS.

Results

Elective colectomies were performed in 8289 (70.8%) vs. emergent colectomies in 3409 (29.1%). Emergent colectomy patients had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) preoperative classification III-IV, 1429 (42.0%) and 224 (6.6%), vs. 1238 (14.9%) and 21 (0.2%) in elective colectomy patients (p < 0.0001). Emergent colectomy patients had more comorbidities such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (493 (14.5%) vs. 796 (9.6%)), congestive heart failure (206 (6.0%) vs. 310 (3.8%)), dialysis (106 (3.1%) vs. 56 (0.7%)), and acute renal failure (166 (4.9%) vs. 46 (0.6%)) (p < 0.0001), respectively. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were significantly higher in emergent colectomy (1651 (48.4%) and 872 (25.6%)) vs. elective colectomy (1859 (22.4%) and 567 (6.8%)) (p < 0.0001), respectively.

Conclusion

Emergent open colectomy in elderly patients carries a higher risk of morbidity and mortality when compared to elective open colectomy with risk factors being higher ASA classification and more comorbidities.

Short-term outcomes of stents in obstructive rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With acute obstruction due to rectal or recto-sigmoid cancer, the safety and success of deploying self-expandable metal stents has been controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the existing evidence on the outcomes and complication rates of stent placement in these patients.

METHODS

We performed a literature search of PubMed by using appropriate keywords, and manual reference screening of included articles was done. The article screening, data extraction, and quality assessment was done by four independent reviewers. A meta analyses was performed for the main outcome measures: technical and clinical success and complication rates.

RESULTS

We identified 962 articles in the search. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included 32 articles in the meta-analysis. The pooled technical success rate across 26 studies that reported it was 97% [95% confidence interval (CI): 95%-99%] without evidence of significant heterogeneity (I² = 0.0%, P = 0.84), and the clinical success rate across 26 studies that reported it was 69% (95% CI: 58%-79%) with evidence of significant heterogeneity (I² = 81.7%, P < 0.001). The pooled overall complication rate across the 32 studies was 28% (95% CI: 20%-37%) with evidence of significant heterogeneity (I² = 79.3%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The use of rectal stents in obstructing rectal or recto-sigmoid tumors seems to be technically feasible. A high rate of technical success, however, does not always translate into clinical success. A considerable complication rate is associated with this approach. Randomized controlled trials are needed to compare the outcomes of rectal stent placement with those of surgery.

Colonic Stents as a Bridge to Surgery Compared with Immediate Resection in Patients with Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction in a NY State Database

BACKGROUND

There is controversy surrounding the efficacy and safety of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery compared with immediate resection in patients presenting with an acute malignant large bowel obstruction.

METHODS

Retrospective longitudinal cohort study using the NYS SPARCS Database. Patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction who either had stent followed by elective surgery within 3 weeks (bridge to surgery) or underwent immediate resection between October 2009 and June 2016 in the state of New York were included. The primary outcome was rate of stoma creation at index resection. Secondary outcomes were 90-day readmission, reoperation, procedural complications, and discharge disposition.

RESULTS

A total of 3059 patients were included, n = 2917 (95.4%) underwent an immediate resection and n = 142 (4.6%) underwent bridge to surgery. We analyzed 139 patients in propensity score-matched groups. Patients in the bridge to surgery group were less likely than those in the immediate resection group to get a stoma at the time of surgery (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.60). They were also less likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility or require a home health aide upon discharge (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22-0.61). There were no differences in rates of 90-day readmission, reoperation, or procedural complications between groups.

DISCUSSION

Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery leads to less stoma creation, a significant quality of life advantage, compared with immediate resection. Patients should be counseled regarding these potential benefits when the technology is available.

Biopsy sampling during self-expandable metallic stent placement in acute malignant colorectal obstruction: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Histopathology is a crucial part of diagnosis and treatment guidance of colorectal cancer. In Denmark, it is not routine to biopsy during self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a treatment option for acute colorectal obstruction of unknown etiology. This is due to lack of knowledge about the risks of hemorrhage, and thus the risk to aggravate the deteriorating overview conditions. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate whether there is evidence to avoid biopsy sampling during acute SEMS placement.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies. Studies were included if they described biopsy sampling in relation to SEMS placement. Additionally, national and international guidelines were scrutinized on Google and by visiting the websites of national and international gastrointestinal societies.

RESULTS

In total, 43 studies were included in the review. Among these, one recommended biopsy during SEMS placement, three advised against biopsy, 23 just reported biopsy was performed during the procedure, and 16 reported biopsy before or after the procedure, or the timing was not specified. Among the 12 included guidelines, only two described biopsy during SEMS placement.

CONCLUSION

The literature on the subject is limited. In 24 of the 43 included studies, biopsy sampling was done during SEMS placement without reporting a decrease in the technical success rate. The included guidelines were characterized by a general lack of description of whether biopsy during SEMS placement should be performed or not. Prospective studies are needed in order to establish the real risk of hemorrhage, if any, when a biopsy is obtained.

Short- and long-term outcomes of self-expanding metallic stent placement vs. emergency surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy does not recommend self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for malignant colorectal obstruction (MCRO). However, no universally accepted consensus has been determined. The present study aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS placement vs. emergency surgery (ES) for MCRO. Surgical resection of colorectal cancer was performed in 3,840 patients between April 2001 and June 2016. Of these, 93 patients had MCRO requiring emergency decompression. Only patients in whom the colorectal lesion was ultimately resected were included; thus, the present study included 62 patients treated with MCRO via SEMS placement as a BTS (n=25) or via ES (n=37). The rates of laparoscopic surgery, primary anastomosis, stoma formation, lymph node dissection, adverse events, 30-day mortality and disease-free survival were evaluated. The clinical success rate of SEMS placement was 92.0% (23/25). Compared with the ES group, the SEMS group had higher rates of laparoscopic surgery (68.0 vs. 2.7%; P<0.001) and primary anastomosis (88.0 vs. 51.4%; P=0.003), a greater number of dissected lymph nodes (30 vs. 18; P=0.001), and lower incidences of stoma formation (24.0 vs. 67.6%; P=0.002) and overall adverse events (24.0 vs. 62.2%; P=0.004). The 30-day mortality and disease-free survival of the SEMS group were not significantly different to that of the ES group (0 vs. 2.7%; P=1.000; log-rank test; P=0.10). In conclusion, as long as adverse events such as perforation are minimized, SEMS placement as a BTS could be a first treatment option for MCRO. The present study is registered in the University Hospital Medical Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN R000034868).

Does preoperative stent positioning in obstructive left sided colon cancer increase the risk of perineural invasion?

Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction depending on local expertise. However, concerns still exist regarding its oncological safety. In particular, several reports showed an increased prevalence of perineural tumor invasion following stent placement. Since perineural invasion negatively affects oncological outcomes, the present study sought to evaluate this controversial association. We retrospectively reviewed 114 patients presenting with left-side obstructing colon cancer over a 10-year period. The relationship between perineural invasion and colonic stenting was analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses. Perineural invasion was found to be strongly associated with pathological features, including TNM stage, (p < 0.001), poor differentiation (p = 0.002), vascular invasion (p < 0.001), lymphatic invasion (p < 0.001), whereas no significant association with preoperative stenting was observed (p = 0.918) after performing univariate analysis. In the multivariate model, only TNM stage III-IV (OR: 6.810, 95% CI 1.972-23.518, p = 0.002) and venous invasion (OR: 5.325, 95% CI 1.911-14.840, p = 0.001) were independently associated with perineural invasion. The results of this study suggest no association between preoperative colonic stenting and perineural invasion.

Self-expandable metallic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery versus emergency surgery for acute malignant right-sided colorectal obstruction

Background

The use of a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery has increased for patients with obstructing colorectal cancer. However, relatively few reports have compared SEMS as a bridge to elective surgery for acute malignant obstruction of the right-sided colon (MORC) vs. emergency surgery (ES). This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of elective surgery after SEMS placement vs. ES for patients (including stage IV cases) with acute MORC.

Methods

Patients with acute MORC who underwent radical resection for a primary tumour from July 2008 to November 2016 at Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University were retrospectively enrolled. Postoperative short-term outcomes, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the SEMS and ES groups.

Results

In total, 107 patients with acute MORC (35 in the SEMS group and 72 in the ES group) were included for analysis. The Intensive Care Unit admission rate was lower (11.4% vs. 34.7%, P = 0.011), the incidence of complications was reduced (11.4% vs. 29.2%, P = 0.042), and the postoperative length of hospitalisation was significantly shorter (8.23 ± 6.50 vs. 11.18 ± 6.71 days, P = 0.033) for the SEMS group. Survival curves showed no significant difference in PFS (P = 0.506) or OS (P = 0.989) between groups. Also, there was no significant difference in PFS and OS rates between patients with stage II and III colon cancer. After colectomy for synchronous liver metastases among stage IV patients, the hepatectomy rates for the SEMS and ES groups were 85.7% and 14.3%, respectively (P = 0.029). The hazard ratio for colectomy alone vs. combined resection was 3.258 (95% CI 0.858–12.370; P = 0.041).

Conclusion

Stent placement offers significant advantages in terms of short-term outcomes and comparable prognoses for acute MORC patients. For synchronous liver metastases, SEMS placement better prepares the patient for resection of the primary tumour and liver metastasis, which contribute to improved survival.

Anticoagulation and antiplatelet management in gastrointestinal endoscopy: A review of current evidence

The role of endoscopic procedures, in both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes is continually expanding and evolving rapidly. In this context, endoscopists will encounter patients prescribed on anticoagulant and antiplatelet medications frequently. This poses an increased risk of intraprocedural and delayed gastrointestinal bleeding. Thus, there is now greater importance on optimal pre, peri and post-operative management of anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy to minimise the risk of post-procedural bleeding, without increasing the risk of a thromboembolic event as a consequence of therapy interruption. Currently, there are position statements and guidelines from the major gastroenterology societies. These are available to assist endoscopists with an evidenced-based systematic approach to anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet management in endoscopic procedures, to ensure optimal patient safety. However, since the publication of these guidelines, there is emerging evidence not previously considered in the recommendations that may warrant changes to our current clinical practices. Most notably and divergent from current position statements, is a growing concern regarding the use of heparin bridging therapy during warfarin cessation and its associated risk of increased bleeding, suggestive that this practice should be avoided. In addition, there is emerging evidence that anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy may be safe to be continued in cold snare polypectomy for small polyps (< 10 mm).

Short-term outcomes after self-expandable metal stent insertion for obstructing colon cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are used as a bridge to surgery for colon cancer patients as an alternative to emergency surgery. Currently, there is a paucity of literature from Saudi Arabia on the preoperative usage of SEMS.

OBJECTIVE

Determine whether SEMS are associated with a higher rate of complications.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study SETTINGS: Tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In patients diagnosed with obstructing colon cancer, up-front surgical resection was compared with insertion of SEMS followed by surgical resection between the years 2009 and 2013.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate of stent-related short-term complications. Secondary endpoint, postoperative complications.

SAMPLE SIZE

65.

RESULTS

Twenty-four (36.9%) patients underwent SEMS placement; 41 (63.1%) underwent primary surgery. The median (interquartile range) hospital stay was significantly higher among the SEMS group (13 [8.5] days versus 7 [3] days in the primary surgery group, P<.001). Five patients (20.8%) in the SEMS group developed complications: 2 (8.3%) perforations, 2 (8.3%) obstructions, and 1 (4.2%) stent migrations.

CONCLUSION

SEMS is associated with longer hospital stays and short-term serious complications. Further research should be conducted, preferably with a larger sample size.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design, small sample size.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Bridge to surgery using a self-expandable metallic stent for stages II-III obstructive colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Bridge to surgery (BTS) using a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) for the treatment of obstructive colorectal cancer improves the patient's quality of life. This study aimed to examine prognostic factors of obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed stage II-III resectable colon cancer cases (Cur A) retrospectively registered between January 2005 and December 2017. Overall, 117 patients with Cur A obstructive colorectal cancer were evaluated: 67 of them underwent emergency surgery (ES Group) and 50 of them after BTS with SEMS placement (BTS group). We compared surgical results and prognoses between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients underwent endoscopic SEMS placement, which technical success of 96% and morbidity rate of 18%. Primary anastomosis rates were 77.6% in ES and 95.7% in BTS (p <  0.001); postoperative complication, 46.3% in ES and 10.5% in BTS (p <  0.001); pathological findings of lymphatic invasion, 66.7% in ES and 100% in BTS (p <  0.001); venous invasion were 66.8% in ES and 92% in BTS (p = 0.04); and recurrence of 25.4% in ES and 39.1% in BTS. The 3-year overall survival was significantly different between two groups (ES, 86.8%:BTS, 58.8%), BTS is worse than ES (log-rank test; p <  0.001). Venous invasion independently predicted worsened recurrence-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The vascular invasiveness was correlated with tumor progression after SEMS placement, and the survival rate was lower in BTS. SEMS potentially worsens prognostic outcomes in stage II-III obstructive colorectal cancer.

Comparison of different types of covered self-expandable metal stents for malignant colorectal obstruction

BACKGROUND

Stent migration is one of the main drawbacks of covered self-expandable metal stent (SEMSs), occurring in up to 40% of malignant colorectal obstruction management cases. Various types of covered SEMSs have been developed to reduce this risk. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and complication rates of the flare-type covered SEMS (Flare) with those of the double-layered covered SEMS (ComVi).

METHODS

We performed a prospective, randomized study in four tertiary referral centers between July 2016 and April 2018. Patients with malignant colorectal obstruction were eligible for the study. The primary outcome was migration rate as observed within the first month. Rates of technical success, clinical success, and complications within the first month were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were included (mean age, 70.5 ± 12.5 years; male, 31 [51.7%]). Flare and ComVi stents were applied in 30 patients each. The Flare and ComVi groups showed comparable technical success rates (90% [27/30] vs. 96.7% [29/30], p = 0.605) and clinical success rates (85.2% [23/27] vs. 75.9% [22/29], p = 0.589). Migration occurred in three (11.1%) and four (13.8%) cases in the Flare and ComVi groups, respectively, without significant difference (p = 0.99), and the risk of other complications, including perforation and re-obstruction, did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that both flare-shape and double-layered covered SEMSs are equally effective options for the management of malignant colorectal obstruction with low migration rates when compared with previously reported migration risk of covered SEMS.

Surgical outcomes of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of high quality prospective and randomised controlled trials

Self-expanding metallic stent placement as a bridge to surgery has been reported as an alternative to emergency surgery for acute malignant colorectal obstruction. However, results from clinical trials and previous meta-analyses are conflicting. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes between emergency surgery and self-expanding metallic stents for malignant large bowel obstruction. Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched for prospective and randomised controlled trials. The outcomes of focus included 3- and 5-year overall and disease-free survival, overall tumour recurrence, overall complication and 30-day mortality rate, length of hospital and ICU stay, overall blood loss, number of patients requiring transfusion, total number of lymph nodes harvested, stoma and primary anastomosis rate. Twenty-seven studies were included with a total of 3894 patients. There was no significant difference in terms of 3-year and 5-year disease-free and overall survival. Stenting resulted in less blood loss (mean difference -234.72, P < 0.00001) and higher primary anastomosis rate (RR 1.25, P < 0.00001). For curative cases, bridge to surgery groups had lower 30-day mortality rate (RR 0.65, P = 0.01), lower overall complication rate (RR 0.65, P < 0.0001), more lymph nodes harvested (mean difference 2.51, P = 0.005), shorter ICU stay (mean difference -2.27, P = 0.02) and hospital stay (mean difference -7.24, 95% P < 0.0001). Compared to emergency surgery, self-expanding metallic stent interventions improve short-term surgical outcomes, especially in the curative setting, but have similar long-term oncological and survival outcomes.

Comparison of colonic stents, stomas and resection for obstructive left colon cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Emergency surgery (ES) is the standard-of-care for left-sided obstructing colon cancer, with self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) and diverting colostomies (DCs) being alternative approaches. The aim of this study was to review the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS versus ES or DC.

METHODS

Embase and Medline were searched for articles comparing SEMS versus ES or DC. Primary outcomes were survival and recurrence rates. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative outcomes. SEMS-specific outcomes include success and complication rates. Pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were estimated with DerSimonian and Laird random effects used to account for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included, involving 15,224 patients in 8 randomized controlled trials and 25 observational studies. There were high technical and clinical success rates for SEMS, with low rates of complications. Our meta-analysis revealed increased odds of laparoscopic surgery and anastomosis, and decreased stoma creation with SEMS compared to ES. SEMS led to fewer complications, including anastomotic leak, wound infection, ileus, myocardial infarction, and improved 90-day in-hospital mortality. There were no significant differences in 3- and 5-year overall, cancer-specific and disease-free survival. SEMS, compared to DC, led to decreased rates of stoma creation, higher rates of ileus and reoperation, and led to longer hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS leads to better short-term outcomes but confers no survival advantage over ES. It is unclear whether SEMS has better short-term outcomes compared to DC. There is a lack of randomized trials with long-term outcomes for SEMS versus DC, hence results should be interpreted with caution.

Fluoroscopic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery versus Emergency Management for Malignant Obstruction of the Colon

Aim

To investigate the feasibility of a SEMS (self-expandable metallic stent) as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 83 patients that were in accordance with inclusion criteria; of these, 33 patients that underwent fluoroscopy-guided SEMS placement followed by elective curative resection were classified as a SEMS group and 50 patients, who received emergency surgery (ES), were classified as an ES group. The clinicopathological characteristics, surgery-related parameters, complications, and three-year survival rate were compared between the two groups.

Results

No significant differences between the two groups were observed in any of the clinicopathologic characteristics except for higher preoperative absolute neutrophil count in the ES group (P < 0.001). Compared to the ES group, the SEMS group has significantly more cases, which featured a laparoscopic approach (72.7% vs. 14.0%, P < 0.001), lower overall stoma rate (0% vs. 34.0%, P < 0.001), and lower overall postoperative morbidity (27.3% vs. 56.0%, P=0.010). The oncological outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups in terms of three-year overall survival (P=0.125). The technical and clinical success rates of stent placement were 91.7% and 100%, respectively.

Conclusion

Patients treated with the stent-surgery approach had significant short-term superiorities and similar long-term outcomes, compared to patients who had emergency surgery alone. The SEMS is, therefore, safe and feasible as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction.

The optimal time interval between the placement of self-expandable metallic stent and elective surgery in patients with obstructive colon cancer

A bridge to surgery (BTS) after a colonic stent for obstructive colon cancer has not been accepted as a standard treatment strategy. Also, there is no consensus regarding the optimal time interval for BTS. We aimed to identify the optimal timing for BTS after stent placement to decrease the oncologic risk. We retrospectively collected data of 174 patients who underwent BTS after stent placement for stage II or III obstructive colon cancer from five hospitals. We divided the patients into three groups based on the time interval for BTS after stent placement: within 7 days (Group 1), from 8 to 14 days (Group 2), and after 14 days (Group 3). The primary outcome was to compare the oncologic outcomes including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rate (RR) among the three groups. Groups 1, 2, and 3 involved 75, 56, and 43 patients, respectively. Postoperative morbidity rates were 17.3%, 10.8%, and 9.3% in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.337). RRs were 16.0%, 35.7%, and 30.2% in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.029). In multivariate analysis, the time interval for BTS was an independent risk factor for DFS (P < 0.001; HR, 14.463; 95% CI, 1.458–3.255) and OS (P = 0.027; HR, 4.917; 95% CI, 1.071–3.059). In conclusion, the perioperative short-term outcome was not affected by the time interval of BTS. However, elective surgery within 7 days after colonic stent might be suggested to balance the short-term benefits and long-term oncologic risks.

Quasi-elective left colectomy after endoscopic colon stenting for obstructive cancer yields comparable oncologic outcome to full-elective operation

PURPOSE

Whether deferring surgery after endoscopic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for neoplastic stricture, and operating patients in a quasi-elective situation, may result in similar oncologic outcomes to elective operations is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the disease-free survival (DFS) rates of patients who underwent an interval colon resection after SEMS placement or an elective operation with comparable cancer stages.

METHODS

From a prospective dataset, we retrospectively selected patients with the following characteristics: (1) left-sided colon cancer and (2) cancer stage I to III. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) palliative surgery and (2) emergency operation. Then we stratified patients into two groups: (A) full-elective left colon resection and (B) quasi-elective left colon resection, defined as surgery performed after SEMS placement for obstructive colon cancer. DFS function was studied by the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

After 1:2 matching based on cancer stage, 106 patients of the group A were compared with 53 patients of group B. In each group, there were 9.4% of stage I, 39.4% of stage II, and 50.9% of stage III patients. The rate of technical failure in SEMS placement was 3.8%. After a mean follow-up of 54 months, 16 (15.1%) patients in the full-elective groups and 10 (18.9%) in the quasi-elective group experience cancer recurrence (log rank = 0.588). DFS curve did not reach the median value.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS placement with interval colon resection for obstructive neoplastic strictures seems to provide similar long-term oncologic outcomes to operations performed in an elective setting when a low rate of technical failure is achieved.

Transanal drainage tubes vs metallic stents for acute malignant left-sided bowel obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of acute malignant left-sided bowel obstruction is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, transanal drainage tubes (DTs) and metallic stents (MSs) used as a "bridge to surgery" have become widely used decompression methods compared with emergency surgery. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DTs and MSs for the decompression of acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

All studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, CNKI and the Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by two of the coauthors independently and were analyzed with RevMan5.3. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Eleven studies, which included three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 8 observational studies, were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from low to moderate. The pooled results of the technical success rate showed that the difference was not statistically significant between the2 devises. The differences in clinical success rate, operative time and complications were statistically significant between MSs and DTs, and MSs were associated with a better clinical success rate, increased operative time and fewer complications. Sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results, and the publication bias was low.

CONCLUSION

MS insertion for acute left-sided malignant bowel obstruction is effective and safe with a better technical success rate and with fewer complications than decompression using a DT, and MS insertion can avoid stoma formation. Moreover, MS insertion appears to be a useful treatment strategy for malignant colonic obstruction even if the lesion is located in the right colon. More large-sample, multicenter, high-quality RCTs are needed to verify the outcomes of this meta-analysis.

Laparoscopic Approach to Large Bowel Neoplastic Obstruction After Self-Expandable-Metal-Stent (SEMS) Placement

Endoscopic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to surgery in large bowel neoplastic obstruction is an alternative to emergency surgery for the obstructive colorectal neoplasms. This study aims to analyze postoperative and long-term outcomes in a series of patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal resection after SEMS placement. The analysis, after the stratification based on the time elapsed between the onset of the occlusive symptoms and the SEMS positioning, revealed an interesting result, with lower mortality for patients who underwent the procedure within 24 hours of hospitalization (P=0.0159). This trend may indicate the need to reduce the endoscopic time schedules as much as possible, even if an emergency procedure is needed. The laparoscopic approach, after stent placement as bridge therapy, can be a safe alternative to emergency surgery, if the procedure is precociously applied.

Long-term tumour outcomes of self-expanding metal stents as 'bridge to surgery' for the treatment of colorectal cancer with malignant obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To explore the long-term oncological results of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) as a surgical transition compared with those of simple emergency surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies involving long-term tumour outcomes comparing SEMS with emergency surgery was conducted. All studies included information on 3-year and 5-year survival rates, 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates, and local and overall recurrence rates; the results were expressed as odds ratios.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 articles and 2508 patients were included, including 5 randomised controlled trials, 3 prospective studies, and 16 retrospective studies. The 3-year survival rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.12, P = 0.05), 5-year survival rate (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.70-1.17, P = 0.67), 3-year DFS rate (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.91-1.42, P = 0.65), 5-year DFS rate (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 0.91-2.02, P = 0.17), overall recurrence rate (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77-1.41, P = 0.14), and local recurrence rate (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.84-2.23, P = 0.92) were determined. There was no significant difference between the randomised and observational studies in the subgroup analysis, and the 5-year survival rate was higher in studies with a stent placement success rate of ≥ 95%.

CONCLUSION

SEMS implantation was a viable alternative in malignant left colon obstruction as a transition to surgery; its long-term survival results, including 5-year DFS and overall survival, were equivalent to those of emergent surgery.

Propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcome between stent as bridge to surgery and emergency resection in patients with malignant left-sided colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Although self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with left-sided obstructing colonic cancer has shown promising short-term results, it is used infrequently owing to uncertainty about its oncological safety. This population study compared long-term oncological outcomes between emergency resection and SEMS placement as BTS.

METHODS

Through a national collaborative research project, long-term outcome data were collected for all patients who underwent resection for left-sided obstructing colonic cancer between 2009 and 2016 in 75 Dutch hospitals. Patients were identified from the Dutch Colorectal Audit database. SEMS as BTS was compared with emergency resection in the curative setting after 1 : 2 propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Some 222 patients who had a stent placed were matched to 444 who underwent emergency resection. The overall SEMS-related perforation rate was 7·7 per cent (17 of 222). Three-year locoregional recurrence rates after SEMS insertion and emergency resection were 11·4 and 13·6 per cent (P = 0·457), disease-free survival rates were 58·8 and 52·6 per cent (P = 0·175), and overall survival rates were 74·0 and 68·3 per cent (P = 0·231), respectively. SEMS placement resulted in significantly fewer permanent stomas (23·9 versus 45·3 per cent; P < 0·001), especially in elderly patients (29·0 versus 57·9 per cent; P < 0·001). For patients in the SEMS group with or without perforation, 3-year locoregional recurrence rates were 18 and 11·0 per cent (P = 0·432), disease-free survival rates were 49 and 59·6 per cent (P = 0·717), and overall survival rates 61 and 75·1 per cent (P = 0·529), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Overall, SEMS as BTS seems an oncologically safe alternative to emergency resection with fewer permanent stomas. Nevertheless, the risk of SEMS-related perforation, as well as permanent stoma, might influence shared decision-making for individual patients.

Comparative outcomes between palliative ileostomy and colostomy in patients with malignant large bowel obstruction

Objectives: Palliative stoma creation should be considered in patients at high risk of colonic metallic stent failure. However, it is unclear whether ileostomy or colostomy is superior. This study compared short-term outcomes between palliative ileostomy and colostomy. Methods: We identified 82 patients with malignant large bowel obstruction, caused by various advanced cancers, between January 2005 and December 2016. We compared short-term outcomes between the ileostomy group (n = 33) and the colostomy group (n = 49). Results: For all 82 patients, clinical success was achieved. Three patients with ileostomy died within 30 days of ostomy formation. The ileostomy group had statistically significant differences in median operative time (113 vs. 129 minutes, p = 0.045) and blood loss (8 vs. 40 g, p = 0.037) in comparison with the colostomy group. No statistically significant differences were observed in the surgical complications (30.3 vs. 38.8%, p = 0.431), in the median period to oral intake (3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.335) and in the hospital stay after surgery (32 vs. 27 days, p = 0.509) between the two groups. Overall stoma-related complications occurred in 27 (32.9%) patients. Stoma-related complications occurred more frequently in the ileostomy group (16/33 vs. 11/49 patients, p = 0.014). High output stoma (6 patients) and irritation (5 patients) occurred more frequently in the ileostomy group. Conclusions: Palliative colostomy is superior to ileostomy due to fewer stoma-related complications. When ileostomy is required, aggressive interventions for high output stomas should be implemented.

Fluoroscopy-guided long intestinal tube placement for the treatment of malignant bowel obstruction

The aim of the present study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of long intestinal tube placement under fluoroscopic guidance for the treatment of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO). The cases of 74 patients with MBO who underwent long intestinal tube placement under fluoroscopic guidance during the period between June 2015 and October 2017 were reviewed. The clinical characteristics were retrospectively analysed with respect to efficacy, safety and outcome. Long intestinal tube placement was successfully completed in all 74 patients. The mean time required for tube placement was 31.09±16.25 min and the mean insertion depth of the tube was 153±39 cm. In 58 cases, the symptoms of abdominal pain, abdominal bloating and vomiting were greatly improved following 1-3 days of tube decompression. The symptoms of the remaining 16 patients were not effectively relieved following decompression. No serious complications were observed in any patients. Overall, for patients with severe MBO, long intestinal tube placement under fluoroscopic guidance appears to be an effective and safe treatment, and it may improve quality of life.

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.

Impact on surgical and oncological results of the use of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery for potentially curable occlusive colorectal neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

The outcomes of patients treated with colonic stents as a bridge to surgery (BTS) have recently been questioned in terms of safety and long-term oncologic outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects on surgical and oncologic outcomes of colonic stents as a BTS for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients operated on for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer with or without distant disease between September 2002 and October 2015, comparing the patients treated with a colonic stent as a BTS (Stent group) with those directly operated on (Surgery group).

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent urgent surgery, while stent placement as a BTS was attempted in 57 patients. The Stent group had more patients treated with a laparoscopic approach (64.9 vs. 5%, P<.001), higher primary anastomosis rate (91.2 vs. 55%, P=.001), less need for stomata (10.5 vs. 50%, P=.001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (7 vs. 12 days, P=.014). Thirty-day morbidity was reduced in the Stent group, although not significantly (29.8 vs. 50%, P=.104). However, 30-day mortality was significantly lower (1.8 vs. 20%, P=.015). Regarding the long-term oncologic outcomes, no significant differences were found when comparing overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, distant recurrence-free survival or progression-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic stenting as a BTS for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer seems to offer better surgical and equal long-term oncologic outcomes when compared to those of patients directly operated on.

Ten-year survival after endoscopic stent placement as a bridge to surgery in obstructing colon cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Self-expandable metal stents are used increasingly in the treatment of obstructing colorectal cancer (CRC). Although endoscopic colon stenting is widely accepted in palliation, disagreement exists about its role in a curative setting. This study aims to describe long-term survival data in a large patient group treated with colon stenting as a bridge to surgery for CRC.

METHODS

This prospective study included 97 patients who presented in a Belgian hospital between 1998 and 2013 with obstructing, although potentially curable, CRC. All patients underwent endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery. Procedure-related adverse events and long-term follow-up data were retrospectively collected and compared with the CRC mortality in Belgium in the same time span.

RESULTS

Overall survival in this observational cohort did not differ significantly from survival in all Belgian patients with CRC in the same period (P = .14). One-year, 5-year, and 10-year survival rates were similar in both groups (95.9% vs 79.0%; 54.7% vs 51.2%; 41.0% vs 35.6%, respectively). The technical success rate was 94.8%. Seventy-three patients did not experience any adverse event. Stent migration occurred in 9 patients, whereas micro-perforations and macro-perforations were observed in 14 patients, without influence on survival. Incidence rates of peritoneal metastases did not differ between patients with and without any type of perforation (22.2% vs 15.2%, respectively; P = .47). The type of stent influenced the overall adverse event risk, mainly driven by a significant increase in stent migration in case of Wallstent enteral (Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, Mass).

CONCLUSIONS

Colon stenting before surgery is effective and did not worsen the survival outcome in patients with obstructing CRC who were treated with curative intent, which affirms the role for stenting as a bridge to surgery.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery in malignant left side colonic obstructions: a meta-analysis

Background

The placement of a metallic stent as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) could represents an option for the treatment of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction in centres with adequate skills. Several meta-analyses demonstrated better short-term outcomes after SBTS when compared with emergency surgery (ES); however, some studies reported a higher local recurrence rate. The aim of the present review is to investigate the long-term outcomes of stent bridge to surgery as compared to ES.

Methods

A systematic review was performed to retrieve studies comparing long-term oncologic outcomes of SBTS and ES. Local and overall recurrence rate, overall and disease-free survival were retrieved and results were expressed as risk ratios.

Results

Seventeen studies and a total of 1,333 patients were included in the analysis. No significant differences were reported in recurrence rate [risk ratio (RR) =1.11; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.84-1.47, P=0.47], 3-year mortality (RR =0.90; 95% CI: 0.73-1.12, P=0.34) and 5-year mortality (RR =1.00; 95% CI: 0.82-1.22, P=0.99). There were no differences among randomized and observational studies.

Conclusions

SBTS has similar long-term oncologic outcomes to ES and in centres with appropriate skill should be considered the best treatment option for left-sided malignant colonic obstructions.

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Colon Cancer

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons is dedicated to ensuring high-quality patient care by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus. The Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee is composed of society members who are chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery. This committee was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus. This is accompanied by developing Clinical Practice Guidelines based on the best available evidence. These guidelines are inclusive and not prescriptive. Their purpose is to provide information on which decisions can be made, rather than to dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, health care workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. It should be recognized that these guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient.

Clinical outcomes of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as palliative treatment for malignant colorectal obstruction: A single-center study from Japan

Objectives

We aimed to assess the efficacy of self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) implantation as palliative treatment for malignant colorectal obstruction.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with malignant colorectal obstruction who underwent SEMS insertion as palliative treatment in our hospital between March 2013 and December 2016. We analyzed demographic, clinical, and operative characteristics.

Results

A total of 13 patients (8 males, 5 females; median age, 80.1 years) were reviewed. Tumor location included the left colon, rectum, and right colon in 38.5%, 38.5%, and 23% of the patients, respectively. Advanced and early colorectal cancer were noted in 7 (63.6%) and 4 (36.4%) cases, respectively. The mean ColoRectal Obstruction Scoring System score was 0.92 before stenting and 3.92 after stenting. Oral intake was resumed at a median of 2.1 days after SEMS placement. Median stent patency was 7.6 months, and 69.2% of patients maintained stent patency until death or the end of follow-up. Stent-related adverse effects included: re-occlusion (4 cases, 30.8%); stent migration (1 case, 7.7%), and pain with tenesmus (2 cases, 15.4%). In patients with re-occlusion (median follow-up interval, 1.3 months), stent patency was maintained for a median of 10.3 months (early failure, within 3 months; late failure, >11 months).

Conclusion

SEMS placement as a palliative treatment is likely to fail within a year, leading to re-occlusion. It is very important to maintain vigilant monitoring using X-ray, CT, and colonoscopy after SEMS placement, with close cooperation between the endoscopist and surgeon. A logistic framework involving careful follow-up, even in the absence of symptoms, and a combined team involving endoscopists and surgeons should be established to support re-intervention and surgery. We recommend vigilant monitoring of patients who received SEMS placement for palliation of malignant colorectal obstruction.

•

It is necessary to establish a logistic framework with a mixed team of endoscopists and surgeons to support re-intervention and surgery.

•

Colorectal stenting is a valid therapeutic option, palliative SEMS placement is likely to result in re-occlusion within a year of stenting.

Safety and efficacy of self-expandable metal stents for obstructive proximal and distal large bowel cancer

Self-expandable metal stents are often used to treat obstructive large bowel cancers. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of colonic stent insertion carried out in a district general hospital. Methods A retrospective review was carried out between 1 January 2007 and 28 February 2014 to identify patients who underwent stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction. Results Seventy-five patients (median age 75.2 years, 70.6% male) with primary colorectal cancer underwent stent insertion - 53 underwent semi-elective self-expanded metal stent insertion (for subacute bowel obstruction) and 22 had emergency stent inserted (for acute bowel obstruction). The majority (88%) had self-expanded metal stents inserted for palliation. Technical and clinical success rates were 98.7% and 91.2%, respectively. One patient had stent-related perforation; there was no procedure-related mortality. Conclusion This study shows that self-expanded metal stent insertion in malignant colorectal obstruction is safe and effective and can be successfully delivered in a district general hospital with high technical and clinical success rates.

Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Surgery for Obstructive Colorectal Cancer After Tube Decompression

BACKGROUND

It is debatable whether laparoscopic surgery is suitable for obstructive colorectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and oncological effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery after tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer in 54 patients (18 laparoscopic resections, 36 open resections).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between groups with respect to mean size, location, depth, and stage of tumor, median operating times, or median number of lymph nodes retrieved. Abdominal wound infection rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic than in the open group (0%:22%, P=0.02), as were mean times to first gas passage after surgery (2.3:3.4 d, P=0.002) and mean postoperative hospital stays (16:24.3 d, P=0.03). The 3-year disease-free survival rate of curative resection cases in the laparoscopic (85%) and open (72%) groups were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery after tube decompression achieves faster recovery and equal oncological outcome as open surgery and should be a treatment of choice for obstructive colorectal cancer.

Preoperative colonic stents vs emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: Meta-analysis with systematic review of the literature

AIM

To investigate by meta-analytic study and systematic review, advantages of colonic stent placement in comparison with emergency surgery.

METHODS

We conducted an extensive literature search by PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase and the Cochrane Libraries. We searched for all the papers in English published till February 2016, by applying combinations of the following terms: Obstructive colon cancer, colon cancer in emergency, colorectal stenting, emergency surgery for colorectal cancer, guidelines for obstructive colorectal cancer, stenting vs emergency surgery in the treatment of obstructive colorectal cancer, self-expanding metallic stents, stenting as bridge to surgery. The study was designed following the Prisma Statement. By our search, we identified 452 studies, and 57 potentially relevant studies in full-text were reviewed by 2 investigators; ultimately, 9 randomized controlled trials were considered for meta-analysis and all the others were considered for systematic review.

RESULTS

In the meta-analysis, by comparing colonic stenting (CS) as bridge to surgery and emergency surgery, the pooled analysis showed no significant difference between the two techniques in terms of mortality [odds ratio (OR) = 0.91], morbidity (OR = 2.38) or permanent stoma rate (OR = 1.67); primary anastomosis was more frequent in the stent group (OR = 0.45; P = 0.004) and stoma creation was more frequent in the emergency surgery group (OR = 2.36; P = 0.002). No statistical difference was found in disease-free survival and overall survival. The pooled analysis showed a significant difference between the colonic stent and emergency surgery groups (OR = 0.37), with a significantly higher 1-year recurrence rate in the stent group (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

CS improves primary anastomosis rate with significantly high 1-year follow-up recurrence and no statistical difference in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival.

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.

Comparison between metallic stent and transanal decompression tube for malignant large-bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

The short-term safety and efficacy of a self-expandable metallic colonic stent (SEMS) insertion followed by elective surgery, "bridge to surgery (BTS)", for malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO) have been well described comparing with emergency surgery. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes of endoscopic decompression using a SEMS versus a transanal decompression tube (TDT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2005 to November 2014, a total of 101 patients with MLBO underwent surgery at our single institution were retrospectively identified. Among them, 73 patients who underwent preoperative complete insertion of a decompression device (TDT, n = 45; SEMS, n = 28) were finally included in this study. Six patients with incomplete insertion of a decompression device (TDT, n = 5; SEMS, n = 1) were also excluded. The primary endpoints of this study were the postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. The secondary endpoints were decompression-related outcomes. Additionally, propensity score matched (PSM) analysis was conducted in short-term outcomes between the groups.

RESULTS

The SEMS group had significantly higher proportion of right-sided tumor and bigger tumor size compared with those of the TDT group. The SEMS group had a significantly higher proportion of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery, and consequently, a longer surgical duration than did the TDT group. Higher rates of insertion failure and perforation were recognized in the TDT group than in the SEMS group (10.0% versus 3.6% and 8.9% versus 0.0%, respectively), although these differences were not statistically significant (P = 0.406 and 0.291, respectively). The two groups showed similar occurrences of anastomotic leakage, bowel obstruction, overall complications, and mortality. Compared with the TDT group, the SEMS group had a significantly lower rate of surgical site infection (24.4% versus 3.6%, respectively; P = 0.023 and P = 0.025 after PSM) and a shorter length of hospital stay (median, 21 d [interquartile range, 18-29 d] versus 38 d [interquartile range, 28-45 d], respectively; P = 0.015 and P = 0.003 after PSM). Solid food intake after decompression and preoperative temporary discharge occurred only in the SEMS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative SEMS insertion for MLBO is effective with at least equivalent short-term outcomes and superior preoperative quality of life compared with decompression using TDT.

High mortality rates after nonelective colon cancer resection: results of a national audit

AIM

Colon cancer resection in a nonelective setting is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this retrospective study is to identify risk factors for overall mortality after colon cancer resection with a special focus on nonelective resection.

METHOD

Data were obtained from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Patients undergoing colon cancer resection in the Netherlands between January 2009 and December 2013 were included. Patient, treatment and tumour factors were analysed in relation to the urgency of surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality.

RESULTS

The study included 30 907 patients. A nonelective colon cancer resection was performed in 5934 (19.2%) patients. There was a 4.4% overall mortality rate, with significantly more deaths after nonelective surgery (8.5% vs 3.4%, P < 0.001). Older patients, male patients and patients with high comorbidity, advanced tumours, perforated tumours, a tumour in the right or transverse colon and postoperative anastomotic leakage were at risk of postoperative death. In nonelective resections, a right-sided tumour and postoperative anastomotic leakage were associated with high mortality.

CONCLUSION

Nonelective colon cancer resection is associated with high mortality. In particular, right-sided resections and patients with tumour perforation are at particularly high risk. The optimization of patients prior to surgery and expeditious operation after diagnosis might prevent the need for a nonelective resection.

Australian contemporary management of synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

This article outlines the current Australian multidisciplinary treatment of synchronous metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma and assesses the factors that influence patient outcome.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the prospective 'Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer' registry, describing the patient treatment pathway and documenting the extent of disease, resection of the colorectal primary and metastases, chemotherapy and biological therapy use. Cox regression models for progression-free and overall survival were constructed with a comprehensive set of clinical variables. Analysis was intentionn-ton-treat, quantifying the effect of treatment intent decided at the multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT).

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and nine patients presented with synchronous metastatic disease between July 2009 and November 2015. Median follow-up was 15.8 months; 4.4% (group 1) had already curative resections of primary and metastases prior to MDT, 22.2% (group 2) were considered curative but were referred to MDT for opinion and/or medical oncology treatment prior to resection and 70.2% were considered palliative at MDT (group 3). Overall, 83% received chemotherapy, 55% had their primary resected and 23% had their metastases resected; 13% of resections were synchronous, 20% were staged with primary resected first and 62% had only the colorectal primary managed surgically. Performance status, metastasis resection (R0 versus R1 versus R2 versus no resection), resection of the colorectal primary and treatment intent determined at MDT were the most significant factors for progression-free and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest Australian series of synchronous metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma and offers insight into the nature and utility of contemporary practice.

Outcome of bridge to surgery stenting for obstructive left colon cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was to compare short- and long-term outcomes of stent insertion followed by surgery with those of emergency surgery for left colon malignant obstructions.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who received curative resection due to obstructive primary left colon cancer and who were diagnosed with stage II or III from January 2004 to December 2010 in six hospitals affiliated with The Catholic University of Korea were reviewed. One hundred and twelve patients in self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) group were matched to 56 patients in the emergency surgery (ES) group using propensity score matching method. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between the groups. Perioperative outcomes and pathologic results were also compared.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups after matching. The analysis of perioperative outcomes showed short-term advantages of stent insertion. Patients in the SEMS group were more likely (87.5 versus 75.0%, P = 0.049) to have a distal resection margin >5 cm. Harvesting ≥12 lymph nodes were more frequent (89.3 versus 71.4%, P = 0.007) in the SEMS group. Five-year DFS was 69.5% in the SEMS group and 73.1% in the ES group (P = 0.464). Five-year OS was not different between the groups (79.7 versus 77.7%, P = 0.989).

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS can be a reasonable therapeutic option for malignant obstruction in patients with left colon cancer until definitive conclusion about the long-term survival effect of SEMS is made from further large-scale prospective randomized trials.

Safety and efficacy of palliative systemic chemotherapy combined with colorectal self-expandable metallic stents in advanced colorectal cancer: A multicenter study

PURPOSE

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is an accepted palliative therapy for management of acute malignant bowel obstruction in advanced colorectal cancer. Nevertheless, data are lacking on the effects of systemic chemotherapy combined with colorectal SEMS. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of palliative chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer combined with colorectal SEMS placement.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicentre retrospective study included all consecutive advanced colorectal cancer patients who received first-line palliative chemotherapy combined with endoscopic stenting for colorectal cancer with obstruction. We analyzed the number of cycles and the type of combination used. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, response rate, grade 3-4 toxicity and the outcomes of SEMS for malignant colorectal obstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients were included. Among them, 25 patients received oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil combination chemotherapy. Objective response and stabilization occurred in 38 and 24% of patients, respectively. The median overall survival and progression-free survival from the start of chemotherapy were 18 and 5months, respectively. The objective response rate and overall disease control rate were 38 and 62%, respectively. Toxicity was generally acceptable. Major complications related to stenting included perforation (8%), stent migration (5%), and reobstruction secondary to tumor ingrowths (13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy combined with colonic stenting as a first-line treatment seems to be a valid option in advanced colorectal cancer patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.