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

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.

Short-term Outcomes of Elective Surgery Following Self-Expandable Metallic Stent and Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Left-Sided Colon Cancer Obstruction

BACKGROUND

Colonic stenting reduces morbidity and stoma formation for left-sided colon cancer obstruction, and a prolonged interval between stenting and surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered might result in a lower stoma rate and tumor reduction.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of elective surgery following colonic stenting compared with elective surgery following colonic stenting and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with left-sided colon cancer obstruction.

DESIGN

This is a prospective multicenter cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at 5 medical centers.

PATIENTS

Patients ( n = 100) with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction undergoing colonic stenting between December 2015 and December 2019 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were assigned to the stenting-alone or chemotherapy group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were laparoscopic surgery and stoma rate.

RESULTS

Of the 100 patients who underwent colonic stenting, 52 were assigned to the stenting group and 48 were assigned to the chemotherapy group. No statistically significant differences were detected in stent-related complications. The adverse events associated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were well tolerated. The level of hemoglobin (117.2 vs 107.6 g/L; p = 0.008), albumin (34.2 vs 31.5 g/L; p < 0.001), and prealbumin (0.19 vs 0.16 g/L; p = 0.001) was significantly increased, and the bowel wall thickness (1.09 vs 2.04 mm; p < 0.001) was significantly decreased preoperatively in the chemotherapy group compared with the stenting group. The number of mean harvested lymph nodes was greater in the chemotherapy group than in the stenting group (25.6 vs 21.8; p = 0.04). Laparoscopic surgery was performed more frequently (77.1% vs 40.4%; p < 0.001) and a stoma was created less frequently (10.4% vs 28.8%; p = 0.02) in the chemotherapy group than in the stenting group.

LIMITATIONS

This trial was limited by the nonrandomized design and a short follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that elective surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and colonic stenting is a safe, effective, and well-tolerated treatment approach with a high laparoscopic resection rate and a low stoma rate. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B980 .

RESULTADOS A CORTO PLAZO DE LA CIRUGA ELECTIVA SEGUIDO DE STENT METLICO AUTOEXPANDIBLE Y QUIMIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE EN PACIENTES CON OBSTRUCCIN POR CNCER DE COLON IZQUIERDO

ANTECEDENTES:La colocación de stents colónicos reduce la morbilidad y la formación de estomas por obstrucción por cáncer de colon izquierdo, y el intervalo prolongado entre la colocación de stents y la cirugía con quimioterapia neoadyuvante administrada podría resultar en una menor tasa de estomas y reducción del tumor.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los resultados a corto plazo de la cirugía electiva después de la colocación de stent en el colon en comparación con la cirugía electiva después de la colocación de stent en el colon y la quimioterapia neoadyuvante en pacientes con obstrucción por cáncer de colon izquierdo.DISEÑO:Estudio prospectivo de cohorte multicéntrico.ENTORNO CLINICO:Este estudio se realizó en 5 centros médicos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes (n=100) con obstrucción aguda por cáncer de colon izquierdo que se sometieron a colocación de stent colónico entre diciembre de 2015 y diciembre de 2019.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron asignados al grupo de stent solo o quimioterapia.MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO PRINCIPALES:Los resultados primarios medidos fueron la cirugía laparoscópica y la tasa de ostomía.RESULTADOS:De los 100 pacientes que se sometieron a la colocación de stent colónico, 52 fueron asignados al grupo de colocación de stent y 48 al grupo de quimioterapia. No se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en las complicaciones relacionadas con el stent. Los eventos adversos asociados con la quimioterapia neoadyuvante fueron bien tolerados. Hemoglobina (117,2 g/l vs. 107,6 g/l; p = 0,008), albúmina (34,2 g/l vs. 31,5 g/l; p < 0,001) y prealbúmina (0,19 g/l vs. 0,16 g/l; p = 0,001) aumentaron significativamente y el grosor de la pared intestinal (1,09 mm vs. 2,04 mm; p < 0,001) disminuyó significativamente antes de la operación en el grupo de quimioterapia en comparación con el grupo de colocación de stent. El número medio de ganglios linfáticos extraídos fue mayor en el grupo de quimioterapia que en el grupo de stent (25,6 vs. 21,8; p = 0,04). La cirugía laparoscópica se realizó con mayor frecuencia (77,1 % vs. 40,4 %; p < 0,001) y se creó un estoma con menos frecuencia (10,4 % vs. 28,8 % ; p = 0,02) en el grupo de quimioterapia que en el grupo de colocación de stent.LIMITACIONES:Este ensayo estuvo limitado por el diseño no aleatorio y el corto período de seguimiento.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio sugiere que la cirugía electiva después de la quimioterapia neoadyuvante y la colocación de stent colónico es un tratamiento seguro, efectivo y bien tolerado, con una alta tasa de resección laparoscópica y una baja tasa de estoma. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B980 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

Fluoroscopic Stent Placement as a Bridge to Surgery for Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

Purpose

To assess the outcomes of single-stage surgery following fluoroscopic stent placement for malignant colorectal obstruction.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 46 patients (28 male and 18 female; mean age, 67.2 years) who had undergone fluoroscopic stent placement followed by laparoscopic resection (n = 31) or open surgery (n = 15) for malignant colorectal obstruction. The surgical outcomes were analyzed and compared. After a mean follow-up of 38.9 months, the recurrence-free and overall survival were estimated, and prognostic factors were evaluated.

Results

The mean interval between stent placement and surgery was 10.2 days. Primary anastomosis was possible in all patients. The mean postoperative length of hospitalization was 11.0 days. Bowel perforation was detected in six patients (13.0%). During the follow-up, ten patients (21.7%) developed recurrence; these included five of the six patients with bowel perforation. Bowel perforation had a significant effect on recurrence-free survival (p = 0.010).

Conclusion

Single-stage surgery following fluoroscopic stent placement may be effective for treating malignant colorectal obstruction. Stent-related bowel perforation is a significant predictive factor for tumor recurrence.

Oncologic impact of colonic stents for obstructive left-sided colon cancer

Colonic stenting has had a significant positive impact on the management of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in terms of both palliative treatment and bridge-to-surgery (BTS). Notably, many studies have convincingly demonstrated the effectiveness of stenting as a BTS, resulting in improvements in short-term outcomes and quality of life, safety, and efficacy in subsequent curative surgery, and increased cost-effectiveness, whereas the safety of chemotherapy after stenting and the long-term outcomes of stenting as a BTS are controversial. Several studies have suggested an increased risk of perforation in patients receiving bevacizumab chemotherapy after colonic stenting. In addition, several pathological analyses have suggested a negative oncological impact of colonic stenting. In contrast, many recent studies have demonstrated that colonic stenting for OLCC does not negatively impact the safety of chemotherapy or long-term oncological outcomes. The updated version of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines released in 2020 included colonic stenting as a BTS for OLCC as a recommended treatment. It should be noted that the experience of endoscopists is involved in determining technical and clinical success rates and possibly oncological outcomes. This review discusses the positive and negative impacts of colonic stenting on OLCC treatment, particularly in terms of oncology.

Current practice for the treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer in China: a nationwide cross-sectional survey

PURPOSE

This study surveyed the current practice of surgical treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in China.

METHODS

All colorectal surgery departments at tertiary or secondary hospitals in China were invited to complete a web-based questionnaire between August 27 and September 2, 2020.

RESULTS

Overall, completed questionnaire were received from 357 hospitals. Emergency surgery was the mainstay of treatment for OLCC, with the open approach accounting for up to 61.62%. The stoma rate of emergency surgery was up to 80%, mainly due to inadequate bowel preparation and severe edema of colon walls. Hartmann's procedure (61.62%) was the most preferred operation. A total of 243 hospitals (68.7%) reported that they would consider the use of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge for elective surgery. More than 50% of the hospitals participating in this study reported the success rate of SEMS placement, as well as the resolution rate of obstruction more than 80%, and the stent-related perforation rate was < 5%. A total of 126 hospitals considered carrying out a strategy of SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery and believed that it might further improve treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS is a feasible option for the treatment of OLCC in addition to traditional emergency surgery, and its clinical benefits have been preliminarily recognized.

Laparoscopic resection after self-expanding stent insertion for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer: Clinicopathological features and outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic resection for obstructive colon cancer (CC) after insertion of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) is reportedly difficult. However, this has not yet been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, we investigated the influence of SEMS insertion on laparoscopic resection.

METHODS

This retrospective comparative study included 87 patients with obstructive left-sided CC (December 2011-December 2019). Patients were assigned to two groups based on elective laparoscopic surgery for (1) obstructive CC necessitating emergent decompression with SEMS insertion (SEMS group) and (2) obstructive CC without emergent decompression (control group).

RESULTS

The SEMS group had a longer operation time (283.3 ± 79.3 min vs 222.2 ± 79.4 min, P = 0.002) and greater blood loss (204.8 ± 417.6 mL vs 53.7 ± 166.1 mL, P = 0.029) on univariate analysis; however, in multiple linear regression analysis, SEMS was not an independent risk factor for both operation time (Δ operation time 25.5 min: P = 0.19) and blood loss (Δ blood loss 33.6 mL: P = 0.58). The complication rate based on Clavien-Dindo grade II did not differ significantly (17% vs 20%, P = 1.00), whereas the rates of conversion to laparotomy (17% vs 2%, P = 0.016) and stoma creation (26% vs 2%, P = 0.001) were higher in the SEMS group. In oncological outcomes, there was no intergroup difference in the 5-year disease-free survival (80.0% vs 72.2%, P = 0.76) and overall survival (100% vs 86.3%, P = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery after SEMS for left-sided CC is demanding due to higher conversion rates to open surgery. However, this study also revealed that it is as safe as laparoscopic surgery for cases without SEMS because of comparable complication rate and long-term outcomes.

Surgical Dilemmas Associated with Malignant Large Bowel Obstructions

Despite an increase in screening colonoscopy, with the objective to decrease the incidence of colorectal cancer, a third of patients will present with an obstructing cancer. Malignant large bowel obstructions (MLBO) pose a challenging workup and treatment paradigm where an oncologic primary tumor resection must be balanced with relieving the obstruction, functional outcomes, palliation, and consideration for adjuvant therapy. A thorough work up with cross-sectional imaging and medical optimization should be attempted; however, patients may present in extremis and require emergent intervention. The onset of MLBO can be insidious, but result in electrolyte derangements, perforation, small bowel obstruction, hemorrhage, and ischemia. Self-expandable metallic stents have been used as palliation or as a bridge to surgery and have allowed for minimally invasive surgical options as well as a decrease in stoma rates. Patients with signs of colon ischemia or perforation require emergent surgery, which is associated with an increase in stoma formation, morbidity, mortality, and a decrease in overall survival.

Definition of large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer: A systematic review

AIM

Controversies on therapeutic strategy for large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer mainly concern acute conditions, being essentially different from subacute obstruction. Clearly defining acute obstruction is important for design and interpretation of studies as well as for guidelines and daily practice. This systematic review aimed to evaluate definitions of obstruction by colorectal cancer in prospective studies.

METHOD

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Eligibility criteria included randomized or prospective observational design, publication between 2000 and 2019, and the inclusion of patients with an obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. Provided definitions of obstruction were extracted with assessment of common elements.

RESULTS

A total of 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 99 prospective observational studies were included. Obstruction was specified as acute in 28 studies, complete/emergency in five, (sub)acute or similar terms in four and unspecified in 78. Five of 16 RCTs (31%) and 37 of 99 cohort studies (37%) provided a definition. The definitions included any combination of clinical symptoms, physical signs, endoscopic features and radiological imaging findings in 25 studies. The definition was only based on clinical symptoms in 11 and radiological imaging in six studies. Definitions included a radiological component in 100% of evaluable RCTs (5/5) vs. 54% of prospective observational studies (20/37, P = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review, the majority of prospective studies did not define obstruction by colorectal cancer and its urgency, whereas provided definitions varied hugely. Radiological confirmation seems to be an essential component in defining acute obstruction.

Oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery after metallic stent insertion for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer: a multicenter comparative study

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) are used as a bridge to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. However, the role of laparoscopic resection after successful stent deployment is not well established. We aimed to compare the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open surgery after successful colonic stent deployment in patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, 179 (97 laparoscopy, 82 open surgery) patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer who underwent radical resection with curative intent after successful stent deployment were retrospectively reviewed. To minimize bias, we used inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analysis. The short- and long-term outcomes between the groups were compared.

RESULTS

Both groups had similar demographic and tumor characteristics. The operation time was longer, but the degree of blood loss was lower in the laparoscopy than in the open surgery group. There were nine (9.3%) open conversions. After adjustment, the groups showed similar patient and tumor characteristics. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (laparoscopic vs open: 68.7% vs 48.5%, p = 0.230) and overall survival (OS) (laparoscopic vs open: 79.1% vs 69.0%, p = 0.200) estimates did not differ significantly across a median follow-up duration of 50.5 months. Advanced stage disease (DFS: hazard ratio [HR] 1.825, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.072-3.107; OS: HR 2.441, 95% CI 1.216-4.903) and post-operative chemotherapy omission (DFS: HR 2.529, 95% CI 1.481-4.319; OS: HR 2.666, 95% CI 1.370-5.191) were associated with relatively worse long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Stent insertion followed by laparoscopy with curative intent is safe and feasible; the addition of post-operative chemotherapy should be considered after successful treatment.

Successful single-stage laparoscopic surgery using a preoperative self-expanding metallic stent in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Although a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) or a transnasal or transanal decompression tube is sometimes used as a bridge to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer, the optimal decompression procedure to achieve successful laparoscopic surgery remains unclear.

METHODS

Forty-two patients with obstructive colorectal cancer who were preoperatively decompressed by using SEMS (the SEMS group, n = 20) or a decompression tube (the DT group, n = 22) between January 2010 and February 2017 were included in this retrospective study.

RESULTS

In the SEMS group, 20 patients (100%) were able to eat and 17 patients (85%) were able to undergo total colonoscopy preoperatively, but no patients could do so in the DT group (P < 0.01 and P < 0.01, respectively). The serum albumin level increased in the time between admission and just before surgery in five patients in the SEMS groups (25%), whereas it decreased in all patients in the DT group (P = 0.037). Laparoscopic surgery was performed more frequently in the SEMS groups (19 patients, 95%) than in the DT group (13 patients, 59.1%) (P = 0.018). Primary anastomosis without stoma was also achieved more frequently in the SEMS groups (19 patients, 95%) than in the DT group (15 patients, 68.2%) (P = 0.047). Anastomotic leakage did not occur in the SEMS group, but it did occur in one patient in the DT group. The recurrence-free survival rate did not differ between the groups (median follow-up period: 21 months).

CONCLUSION

In patients with obstructive colorectal cancer, SEMS appears to be more effective than a decompression tube as a preoperative treatment to achieve successful laparoscopic resection without stoma.

Current status of colonic stent for obstructive colorectal cancer in Japan; a review of the literature

Colorectal cancer is the most common cancer in Japan. Approximately 10%-20% of the patients with colorectal cancer present with large bowel obstruction, and those who present with malignant colonic obstruction (MCO) require urgent decompression because MCO can cause electrolytic fluid imbalance, colonic necrosis, bacterial translocation, and death. Placement of colonic stents (self-expandable metallic stents) for MCO is a major and standard endoscopic treatment that has been available since 2012 in Japan. This review presents the current conditions and future prospects of this procedure based on the literature. The current indication of colonic stent placement is malignant colorectal stenosis. One of the purposes of using stents is palliative treatment; further, its advantages over emergency surgery with colostomy include avoidance of colostomy, relief of obstruction, shorter hospitalization, and better quality of life. In addition, stent placement can also be used as a bridge to surgery since the duration of the hospitalization is shorter and postoperative complications, colostomy rates, and mortality rates are lower with elective than with emergency surgery. Although recent studies have reported low complication rates related to colonic stents, complications may still occur, highlighting the importance of good preparation, adequate staffing, backup systems, and informed consent. The current major problem related to colonic stents is the lack of evidence on patients' long-term prognoses for bridge to surgery purposes, awaiting the results of ongoing clinical research.

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

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

Feasibility of laparoscopic surgery after stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

A growing number of patients with obstructive colorectal cancer are being treated with self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) followed by laparoscopic resection. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of stent insertion and laparoscopic surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer and to compare these outcomes to regular laparoscopic surgery for non-obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of patients with a malignant colonic obstruction who underwent SEMS placement followed by elective laparoscopic resection. The comparison was made between stent-laparoscopy and laparoscopy alone for non-obstructive colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery was successful in 97.1% of all cases. Fifteen patients underwent an elective laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon and rectal cancer after SEMS. The mean interval from SEMS insertion to laparoscopic surgery was 21.5 days. There was no conversion to open surgery and no need for a diverting stoma. One patient (6.7%) experienced paralytic ileus. Our comparison of stent-laparoscopy to regular laparoscopy for non-obstructive colorectal cancer treatment showed comparable short-term postoperative outcomes with the exception of blood loss, which was greater in the stent-laparoscopy group.

CONCLUSION

Elective laparoscopic surgery after colonic stenting is a safe and feasible strategy for the treatment of an acute malignant colonic obstruction.