Long-term results of palliative stent placement for acute malignant colonic obstruction

A Japanese Prospective, Multicenter Study of Colonic Stenting for Palliation Using a High Axial Force Self-Expandable Metal Stent for Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction in 200 Patients

Evidence of the efficacy and safety of colorectal stent placement for palliation remains insufficient. This single-arm, prospective, multicenter study with a WallFlex enteral colonic stent included 200 consecutive patients with malignant large bowl obstruction in the palliation cohort. The technical and clinical success, as well as stent patency and complications as short-term (≤7 days) and long-term (>7 days) outcomes, of high axial force self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement was evaluated. The technical and clinical success rates were 98.5% and 94.5%, respectively. Non-recurrent colorectal obstruction at 1 year was 63.9%, and 71.2% of the patients remained free of recurrent colorectal obstruction until death or the last follow-up. Fifty-six patients (28.0%) received chemotherapy, and five patients were administered bevacizumab after stent placement. The overall complication rate was 47%, including four (2.0%) early-onset and ten (5.0%) late-onset perforations, mostly due to stent-edge injury. Only the use of a long SEMS was a risk factor for perforation. In conclusion, endoscopic colorectal stenting using high axial force SEMS is an effective and safe procedure for palliation in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction. However, care should be taken to avoid perforation at the stent edge when using a long SEMS.

Efficacy and Safety of Fluoroscopy-Guided Self-Expandable Metal Stent Placement for Treatment of Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

AIM

To investigate long-term outcomes after SEMS insertion in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction and to identify the risk factors for complications.

METHODS

The data of 119 patients with malignant colorectal obstruction who received SEMS insertion between March 2014 and February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the intent of treatment, i.e., stenting as "bridge to surgery" (surgical group) and stenting for palliation (palliative group). Technical and clinical success rates and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The overall technical and clinical success rates were 97.5% and 96.6%, respectively. The technical and clinical success rates and complication rate were comparable between the two groups. In the palliative group, the mean stent patency time was 230 days. Patency rates were not significantly different between primary CRC and recurrent CRC. Incidence of complications was higher in the palliative group than in the surgical group. In multivariate analysis, chemotherapy before stent implantation may increase the risk of stent-related complications, whereas chemotherapy after stent implantation did not. Additionally, the factors independently associated with complications were female sex and preoperative chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS under fluoroscopic guidance is a safe and effective treatment for malignant colorectal obstruction. For patients with resectable CRC, stent placement can serve as a bridge to elective surgery. It is worth noting that adjuvant chemotherapy between SEMS and surgery did not increase the complications. For patients with recurrent CRC, stent placement can relieve symptoms, alleviate pain, and improve quality of life.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

A Comparison of Open and Laparoscopic-assisted Colectomy for Obstructive Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

We performed a retrospective multi-center cohort analysis to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery for obstructive colon cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 455 patients with colon cancer with ileus underwent surgery at Yokohama City University Hospital and four related institutions from April 2000 to March 2016.

RESULTS

There were 414 cases in the open surgery group and 41 cases in the laparoscopic surgery group with no marked differences in the gender or age. The postoperative complication rate, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, was lower in the laparoscopic group compared to the open surgery group. The postoperative hospital stay was 16 days in the open surgery group and 9 days in the laparoscopic surgery group (p=0.004). Among the various factors examined, the operation approach was identified as a statistically significant independent risk factor for postoperative complications (p=0.015).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative treatment for colon cancer with ileus and elective laparoscopic surgery are thought to be useful for achieving curative treatment, avoiding colostomy, and shortening the length of hospital stay.

Endoscopic stenting for colorectal cancer obstruction as a bridge-to-surgery strategy

BACKGROUND

Acute obstructive colorectal cancer requires prompt decompression commonly by emergency surgery (ES). However, self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been increasingly used as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) strategy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an 8-year period, consecutive patients with acute left-sided colonic obstruction, due to locally advanced colorectal cancer, underwent ES or SEMS implantation. We evaluated technical/clinical success of SEMS, adverse events, and overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the two therapeutic options.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients underwent ES (n = 23) or SEMS (n = 22). The two groups were comparable for sex, age, ASA score and cancer site/stage. Technical and clinical successes of SEMS were 100% and 72.7%, respectively. Clinical success correlated with neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) at baseline (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-0.98, P = .04). SEMS allowed primary anastomosis in the 45.5% of cases (0% in ES). SEMS implantation allowed a higher rate of surgery carried out by a laparoscopic approach: 36.4% vs 13.0% in ES. Performance of a definitive stoma and complications were similar. Median OS (34 in SEMS; 45 in ES, P = .33) and DFS (36 in SEMS; 35 in ES, P = .35) did not differ between the two groups. At univariate analysis, DFS was positively associated with primary anastomosis (HR = 2.44, 95% CI 1.4-16.6, P = .04) and laparoscopic surgery (HR = 8.33, 95% CI 1.08-50, P = .04), and inversely associated with a NLR > 3.6 (HR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.16-0.92, P = .03). At multivariate analysis, no feature retained an independent predictive power.

CONCLUSION

SEMS is an effective and safe procedure, equivalent to emergency surgery in terms of complications, OS and DFS, providing the chance of a primary anastomosis in the majority of patients.

To resect or not to resect: The hamletic dilemma of primary tumor resection in patients with asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer

Primary tumor resection (PTR) in advanced asymptomatic colorectal cancer (CRC) has been a matter of intense debate for long time. With the advances in systemic treatments, this practice has decreased over the years, although it remains still pervasive. Although the removal of primary tumor has been extensively interrogated both in retrospective and prospective studies, it still remains a clinical conundrum. There are many arguments for and against PTR in CRC both from the preclinical and the clinical point of view. Two scoring models have been published aiming at identifying patients who are suitable candidate for PTR, but they deserve further investigations in larger datasets. While awaiting the results of ongoing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on this controversial topic, both upfront systemic treatment and PTR followed by chemotherapy should be considered valid options in patients with asymptomatic mCRC. Clinical selection and a shared-decision making approach are the keys to success.

Malignant Bowel Obstruction: Reappraising the Value of Surgery

Urgent palliative surgery in the setting of advanced malignancy is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and cost. Malignant bowel obstruction is the most frequent indication for such intervention. Traditional surgical dogma is often invoked to justify associated risks and cost, but little evidence exists to support surgical over nonsurgical approaches. Evolving evidence may provide more meaningful guidance for treatment selection.

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.

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.

Endoscopic stenting as bridge-to-surgery (BTS) in left-sided obstructing colorectal cancer: Experience with conformable stents

BACKGROUND

Compared to emergency surgery, self-expandable metallic stents are effective and safe when used as bridge-to-surgery (BTS) in operable patients with acute colorectal cancer obstruction. In this study, we report data on the new conformable colonic stents.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate clinical effectiveness of conformable stents as BTS in patients with acute colorectal cancer obstruction.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at six Italian Endoscopic Units.

PATIENTS

Data about patients with acute malignant colorectal obstruction were collected between 2007 and 2012.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All patients were treated with conformable stents as BTS. Technical success, clinical success, rate of primary anastomosis and colostomy, early and late complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Data about 88 patients (62 males) were reviewed in this study. Conformable SEMS were correctly deployed in 86 out of 88 patients, with resolution of obstruction in all treated patients. Tumor resection with primary anastomosis was possible in all patients. A temporary colostomy was performed in 40. Early complications did not occur. Late complications occurred in 11 patients. Stent migration was significantly higher in patients treated with partially-covered stents compared to the uncovered group (35% vs. 0%, P<0.001). Endoscopical re-intervention was required in 12% of patients. One patient with rectal cancer had an anastomotic dehiscence after surgery and he was successfully treated with endoscopic clipping. One year after surgery, all patients were alive and local recurrence have not been documented.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective and uncontrolled study.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary data from this large case series are encouraging, with a high rate of technical and clinical success and low rate of clinically relevant complications. Partially-covered SEMS should be avoided in order to reduce the risk of endoscopic re-intervention.

Palliative Stent Insertion for Acute Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: Long-term Patency and Survival

PURPOSE

To investigate the long-term outcome of palliative stent insertion for acute malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

From May 2009 to February 2015, consecutive patients with acute malignant colorectal obstruction underwent palliative stent insertion in our center. Technical success, clinical success, and long-term outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients with acute malignant colorectal obstruction underwent palliative stent insertion. Technical success was achieved in 42 of 45 patients. Clinical success was achieved in 41 of 42 patients. During a follow-up of 5 days to 25 months (mean, 6.9±4.5 mo), the cumulative 6- and 12-month patency rates were 88.6% and 72.7%, respectively. The cumulative 6- and 12-month survival rates were 60.1% and 14.3%, respectively. The independent predictor of prolonging survival was subsequent chemotherapy after stenting (P=0.017).

CONCLUSION

Palliative colorectal stent insertion can provide a good long-term outcome in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.

Value in palliative cancer surgery: A critical assessment

Emergency operations are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost compared to elective operations. Palliative and emergent surgery for patients with advanced malignancies is associated with additional risk and remains controversial. Emergent or palliative interventions can be broadly categorized according to indication. Tumor related complications (bleeding, obstruction, or perforation) merit specific consideration, as do specific presentations such as pneumoperitoneum, pneumatosis intestinalis, or peritonitis from other causes that may arise during active therapy for malignancies. Although nonoperative, endoscopic, and interventional treatment modalities are frequently available, surgery remains the only effective therapy in selected situations such as small intestinal obstruction and tumor perforation. Selection of patients for surgery requires consideration of factors including overall prognosis, performance status, and patients' priorities. Selection and risk assessment tools underscore the limited capacity of patients' with higher risk features for durable recovery but do not supplant nuanced clinical judgment. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:311-315. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery after stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery after insertion of a colonic stent for obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Between April 2005 and August 2013, 58 patients underwent surgery after the insertion of a colonic stent for obstructive colorectal cancer. We analyzed the outcomes of the patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery vs. those who underwent open surgery.

RESULTS

We compared blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, and complications in 26 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery and 32 patients who underwent open surgery. Blood loss was significantly less in the laparoscopic surgery group, but operative time was significantly shorter in the open surgery group. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic surgery group than in the open surgery group, but the difference was not significant. There was no significant difference in postoperative surgical complications between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The patients who underwent laparoscopic resection had less blood loss, although no significant difference was found in postoperative morbidity or mortality. Thus, laparoscopic resection after stent insertion is a feasible and safe option for patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Surgical Management of Complicated Colon Cancer

The management of complicated colon cancer (locally invasive, obstructed, or perforated cancers) can pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges to surgical management. Adherence to traditional surgical oncologic principles must often be balanced with the patients' clinical presentation and other parameters. While the goal of an R0 (no residual microscopic disease) resection must always be kept in mind, situations sometimes arise which can make this difficult to achieve. Recognition of complicated disease and availability of varied therapeutic modalities is important to ensure favorable patient outcomes. This review will discuss the surgical management of complicated colon cancer, with special focus on locally advanced disease.