Preoperative colonic stents versus emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a meta-analysis

Stenting as bridge to surgery versus upfront emergency resection for non-metastatic left sided obstructing colorectal cancer: risk of peritoneal recurrence and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Oncological outcomes of stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) remain a major concern, despite perioperative benefits it offers. This study aims to evaluate the differences in recurrence patterns and survival in patients with non-metastatic, obstructing left sided colon cancers treated by SBTS versus upfront emergency surgery (ES).

METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-centre cohort study of 227 consecutive patients with non-metastatic, obstructing left sided colon cancer between 2007 and 2016. Primary outcomes were pattern of recurrence, and survival. Univariate, bivariate and multivariate logistic regression were done to determine relationships between factors and recurrence. Kaplan Meier curves and log rank tests were used to analyse survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 227 patients included, 62 underwent SBTS and 165 underwent upfront ES. There was a higher rate of peritoneal recurrence in SBTS group (27.4 vs 15.2% p = 0.034), with no difference observed in overall, liver or lung recurrences. No significant difference in overall survival (p = 0.11), cancer specific survival (p = 0.35), or recurrence free survival (p = 0.107) was observed. Univariate analysis showed that SBTS (OR 2.12, p = 0.036), diabetes mellitus (DM) (OR 2.58, p = 0.013), T4 (OR 2.81, p = 0.001), N + (OR 4.02, p = 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (OR 2.43, p = 0.011) contributed to a higher rate of peritoneal recurrence. Bivariate analysis showed synergistic relationship between T4 tumors and SBTS: in T4 tumors that underwent SBTS, the odds of having peritoneal recurrence was 6.8 times higher when compared to ES (p = 0.004); whilst in T2/3 tumors there was no significant difference observed (OR 1.33, p = 0.55). Multivariable analysis showed SBTS (OR 2.60, p = 0.04), DM (OR 2.88, p = 0.012), N + (OR 2.97, p = 0.026) were significant predictors for peritoneal recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

There are concerns over oncological safety of SBTS even with low rates of stent-related perforation. Higher rates of peritoneal recurrence are seen especially with T4 colon cancers treated with SBTS. SBTS, DM and nodal stage were significant predictors for peritoneal recurrence.

Malignant Acute Colonic Obstruction: Multidisciplinary Approach for Endoscopic Management

Patients presenting with acute colonic obstruction are usually evaluated in the emergency department and multiple specialties are involved in the patients' management. Pre-treatment evaluation is essential in order to establish the correct endoscopic indication for stent implantation. Contrast-enhanced imaging could allow the exclusion of benign causes of colonic obstruction and evaluation of the length of malignant stricture. Endoscopic stenting is the gold standard of treatment for palliative indications whereas there are still concerns about its use as a bridge to surgery. Different meta-analyses showed that stenting as a bridge to surgery improves short-term surgical outcomes but has no role in improving long-term outcomes. Multidisciplinary evaluation is also essential in patients that may be started on or are currently receiving antiangiogenic agents because endoscopic stenting may increase the risk of perforation. Evidence in the literature is weak and based on retrospective data. Here we report on how to correctly evaluate a patient with acute colonic malignant obstruction in collaboration with other essential specialists including a radiologist, surgeon and oncologist, and how to optimize the technique of endoscopic stenting.

Colonic Resection, Stoma, or Self-expanding Metal Stents for Obstructive Left Colon Cancer: the CROSCO-1 study protocol

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. There are several causes of a mechanical left bowel obstructive but CRC accounts for approximately 50% of cases and in 10-30% of whom it is the presenting syndrome. In most cases, the left colon is involved. At present, the range of therapeutic alternatives in the management of obstructive left CRC in emergency conditions (primary resection vs. staged resection with applied self-expanding metallic stents) is broad, whereas internationally validated clinical recommendations in each condition are still lacking. This enormous variability affects the scientific evidence on both the immediate and long-term surgical and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

CROSCO-1 (Colonic Resection, Stoma or Self-expanding Metal Stents for Obstructive Left Colon Cancer) study is a national, multi-center, prospective observational study intending to compare the clinical results of all these therapeutic regimens in a cohort of patients treated for obstructive left-sided CRC.

RESULTS

The primary aim of the CROSCO-1 study is the 1-year stoma rate of patients undergoing primary emergency surgical resection (Hartmann procedure or primary resection and anastomosis) compared with patients undergoing staged resection. Secondary outcomes are 30-day and 90-day major morbidity and mortality, 1-year quality of life and the timing of chemotherapy initiation in the two groups. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of a large prospective cohort study which will analyze what really happens in the common clinical practice of managing patients with obstructive left CRC will have the aim of understanding which is the best strategy in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. Indeed, the CROSCO-1 study will analyze the early surgical outcomes for patients with obstructed left CRC. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies.

Application of metal stent implantation with endoscope and X-ray fluoroscopy combined laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left hemicolon cancer obstruction

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to conduct a case-control study of endoscopic and fluoroscopic metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open Hartmann's procedure in treating acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Additionally, the study aims to discuss the application value of endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction.

METHODS

From June 2011 to December 2019, 23 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent metal stent implantation combined with laparoscopic surgery under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy in Wenzhou Central Hospital were collected, and 20 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent traditional emergency open Hartmann's surgery during the same period were selected as a control group. All patients were diagnosed with left colon obstruction by plain abdominal film and/or CT before the operation and colon adenocarcinoma by colonoscopic biopsy and/or postoperative pathology. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative anal exhaust time, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

This study showed a significant difference in the therapeutic effect between the two groups. Compared with the traditional Hartmann's operation group, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis in endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with the laparoscopic operation group was significantly higher than that in the Hartmann's operation group (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of postoperative complications and hospital stay were significantly lower in the observation group than in the Hartmann's group (P < 0.05). Further subgroup analysis of the overall postoperative complication rate of the two groups showed that the traditional Hartmann's operation group was more likely to have an incomplete intestinal obstruction (P < 0.05). This study also showed no significant differences between the two groups in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, and postoperative anal exhaust time (all P > 0.05). This study also found no significant differences between the two groups in overall survival rates or recurrence-free survival rates (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The comparison of the therapeutic effects of the two groups verified the feasibility of endoscopy combined with X-ray fluoroscopy metal stent placement in combination with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Compared with the traditional emergency open Hartmann's procedure, metal stent implantation under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy combined with laparoscopic surgery is more minimally invasive, safe, and effective. It avoids the traditional second or even third surgical trauma to effectively improve the quality of life of patients, so that patients can recover quickly after surgery.

Colonic stenting in acute malignant large bowel obstruction: audit of efficacy and safety in a Singapore tertiary referral centre

Introduction

Acute malignant large bowel obstruction (MBO) occurs in 8%-15% of colorectal cancer patients. Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) have progressed from a palliative modality to use as bridge to surgery (BTS). We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of SEMS for MBO in our institution.

Methods

The data of patients undergoing SEMS insertion for MBO were reviewed. Technical success was defined as successful SEMS deployment across tumour without complications. Clinical success was defined as colonic decompression without requiring further surgical intervention. Rates of complications, median time to surgery, types of surgery and rates of recurrence were studied.

Results

Seventy-nine patients underwent emergent SEMS placement from September 2013 to February 2020. Their mean age was 68.8 ± 13.8 years and 43 (54%) patients were male. Mean tumour length was 4.2 cm ± 2.2 cm; 89.9% of malignant strictures were located distal to the splenic flexure. Technical and clinical success was 94.9% and 98.7%, respectively. Perforation occurred in 5.1% of patients, with none having stent migration or bleeding. Fifty (63.3%) patients underwent SEMS insertion as BTS. Median time to surgery was 20 (range 6-57) days. Most (82%) patients underwent minimally invasive surgery. Primary anastomosis rate was 98%. Thirty-nine patients had follow-up beyond 1-year posttreatment (median 34 months). Local recurrence and distant metastasis were observed in 4 (10.3%) and 5 (12.8%) patients, respectively.

Conclusion

Insertion of SEMS for acute MBO has high success rates and a good safety profile. Most patients in this audit underwent minimally invasive surgery and primary anastomosis after successful BTS.

The optimal surgery timing after stenting in colorectal cancer patients with malignant obstruction: additionally compared with emergency surgery

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine short-term and long-term outcomes according to time intervals after stenting and compared them with those of emergency surgery (ES) in colorectal cancer (CRC) with malignant obstruction.

METHODS

CRC with malignant obstructions was reviewed retrospectively between January 2008 and July 2018. Of a total of 539 patients who visited the emergency room and underwent ES, 133 were enrolled in the ES group. Of a total of 567 patients who initially received stenting and subsequently underwent elective surgery, 220 were enrolled in the SEMS group. The interval between SEMS placement and elective surgery was classified as < 11 days, 11-17 days, and > 17 days.

RESULTS

For those who received SEMS (n = 220), those with a time interval of 11-17 days (n = 97) had fewer hospital days than those with a time interval of < 11 days (n = 68) (8 days vs. 15 days) and less stoma formation than those with a time interval of > 17 days (n = 55) (1.0% vs. 14.6%). Multivariable analysis revealed a decreased risk of death for the group with a time interval of 11-17 days (20.6%) compared to the ES group (31.6%) (hazard ratio: 0.48; 95% confidence interval: 0.24-0.97). Disease-free survival was comparable between the SEMS and ES groups regardless of the time interval (log-rank p = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

The time interval of 11-17 days after stenting to elective surgery appeared to be associated with the most favorable outcomes.

Which treatment strategy is optimal for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction? A Bayesian meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the best treatment for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction (ALMCO) among emergency surgery (ES), self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), transanal drainage tube (TD), and decompressive stoma (DS).

METHOD

Articles that compared two or more treatments of ALMCO were searched from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Network meta-analyses were performed to calculate the outcomes of primary anastomosis, stoma creation, morbidity, mortality, and 5-year survival.

RESULTS

Fifty-one articles met inclusion criteria. TD was the optimal treatment in performing primary anastomosis [probability of ranking first (Pro-1) 0.96], while ES was the worst [probability of ranking fourth (Pro-4) 0.99]. More permanent stoma was formed in ES and TD groups than in SEMS and DS groups [OR (95%CI): TD vs SEMS: 4.12 (1.89, 9.45); TD vs DS: 3.39 (1.46, 8.75); ES vs DS: 2.55 (1.73, 4.17); SEMS vs ES: 0.33 (0.24, 0.42)]. More morbidity occurred in ES group than in SEMS group [OR (95%CI): ES vs SEMS: 1.44 (1.14, 1.82)]. Besides, SEMS was ranked first in avoiding infection (Pro-4 0.95). For in-hospital mortality, ES was ranked first (Pro-1 0.93). TD was ranked first in recurrence (Pro-1 0.97) and metastasis (Pro-1 0.98). There was no discrepancy in 5-year overall and disease-free survival among all strategies.

CONCLUSION

SEMS as a bridge to surgery reduces stoma formation, and morbidity especially the infection rate with relatively great oncological outcomes. Therefore, SEMS should be recommended first for ALMCO in the medical center with experience and conditions.

A Review of Colonoscopy in Intestinal Diseases

Since the development of the fiberoptic colonoscope in the late 1960s, colonoscopy has been a useful tool to diagnose and treat various intestinal diseases. This article reviews the clinical use of colonoscopy for various intestinal diseases based on present and future perspectives. Intestinal diseases include infectious diseases, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), neoplasms, functional bowel disorders, and others. In cases of infectious diseases, colonoscopy is helpful in making the differential diagnosis, revealing endoscopic gross findings, and obtaining the specimens for pathology. Additionally, colonoscopy provides clues for distinguishing between infectious disease and IBD, and aids in the post-treatment monitoring of IBD. Colonoscopy is essential for the diagnosis of neoplasms that are diagnosed through only pathological confirmation. At present, malignant tumors are commonly being treated using endoscopy because of the advancement of endoscopic resection procedures. Moreover, the characteristics of tumors can be described in more detail by image-enhanced endoscopy and magnifying endoscopy. Colonoscopy can be helpful for the endoscopic decompression of colonic volvulus in large bowel obstruction, balloon dilatation as a treatment for benign stricture, and colon stenting as a treatment for malignant obstruction. In the diagnosis of functional bowel disorder, colonoscopy is used to investigate other organic causes of the symptom.

Preoperative stents for the treatment of obstructing left-sided colon cancer: a national analysis

BACKGROUND

Given the risks associated with urgent colectomy for large bowel obstruction, preoperative colonic stenting has been utilized for decompression and optimization prior to surgery. This study examined national trends in the use of colonic stenting as a bridge to resection for malignant large bowel obstruction and evaluated outcomes relative to immediate colectomy.

METHODS

Adults undergoing colonic stenting or colectomy for malignant, left/sigmoid large bowel obstruction were identified in the 2010-2016 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients were classified as immediate resection (IR) or delayed resection (DR) if undergoing colonic stenting prior to colectomy. Generalized linear models were used to evaluate the impact of resection strategy on ostomy creation, in-hospital mortality, and complications.

RESULTS

Among 9,706 patients, 9.7% underwent colonic stenting, which increased from 7.7 to 16.4% from 2010 to 2016 (p < 0.001). Compared to IR, the DR group was younger (63.9 vs 65.9 years, p = 0.04), had fewer comorbidities (Elixhauser Index 3.5 vs 3.9, p = 0.001), and was more commonly managed at high-volume centers (89.4% vs 68.1%, p < 0.001). Laparoscopic resections were more frequent among the DR group (33.1% vs 13.0%, p < 0.001), while ostomy rates were significantly lower (21.5% vs 53.0%, p < 0.001). After risk adjustment, colonic stenting was associated with reduced odds of ostomy creation (0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.46), but similar odds of mortality and complications.

CONCLUSION

Colonic stenting is increasingly utilized for malignant, left-sided bowel obstructions, and associated with lower ostomy rates but comparable clinical outcomes. These findings suggest the relative safety of colonic stenting for malignant large bowel obstruction when clinically appropriate.

A multicenter case-control study of self-expanding metallic stent versus trans-anal colorectal tube for stage II/III non-right-sided obstructive colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) and trans-anal colorectal tube (TCT) are alternative treatments to conventional emergency surgery for non-right-sided obstructive colon cancer (NROCC). However, the one with better short- and long-term outcomes remains controversial. Thus, this multicenter case-control study aimed to analyze and compare SEMS and TCT for NROCC.

METHODS

Patients with stage II/III NROCC who underwent surgery between January 2010 and December 2019 at either of the eight selected Japanese affiliate hospitals were, retrospectively, reviewed. Baseline characteristics between the SEMS and TCT groups were adjusted by propensity score (PS) matching.

RESULTS

Among 239 reviewed patients (SEMS: 76, TCT: 163), 180 were finally included in two well-balanced cohorts through PS: SEMS group (65 patients) and TCT group (115 patients). Technical success, clinical success, morbidity, and short-term mortality were not significantly different between the two groups. SEMS placement achieved significantly higher rates for primary resection/anastomosis without stoma (SEMS: 90.8% vs. TCT: 77.4%, p < 0.001) and laparoscopic surgery (SEMS: 64.6% vs. TCT: 43.5%, p < 0.001) than TCT placement. However, 5-year overall survival (SEMS: 83.7% vs. TCT: 86.4%; p = 0.822) and 5-year relapse-free survival (SEMS: 64.7% vs. TCT: 66.4%; p = 0.854) showed no significant differences between these groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both SEMS and TCT revealed similar long-term outcomes, but SEMS placement was better in achieving primary resection/anastomosis and laparoscopic surgery in patients with stage II/III NROCC.

Stenting as a bridge to surgery in obstructing colon cancer: Long-term recurrence pattern and competing risk of mortality

BACKGROUND

Stenting as a bridge to curative surgery (SBTS) for obstructing colon cancer (OCC) has been associated with possibly worse oncological outcomes.

AIM

To evaluate the recurrence patterns, survival outcomes, and colorectal cancer (CRC)-specific death in patients undergoing SBTS for OCC.

METHODS

Data from 62 patients undergoing SBTS at a single tertiary centre over ten years between 2007 and 2016 were retrospectively examined. Primary outcomes were recurrence patterns, overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and CRC-specific death. OS and CSS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier curves. Competing risk analysis with cumulative incidence function (CIF) was used to estimate CRC-specific mortality with other cause-specific death as a competing event. Fine-Gray regressions were performed to determine prognostic factors of CRC-specific death. Univariate and multivariate subdistribution hazard ratios and their corresponding Wald test P values were calculated.

RESULTS

28 patients (45.2%) developed metastases after a median period of 16 mo. Among the 18 patients with single-site metastases: Four had lung-only metastases (14.3%), four had liver-only metastases (14.3%), and 10 had peritoneum-only metastases (35.7%), while 10 patients had two or more sites of metastatic disease (35.7%). The peritoneum was the most prevalent (60.7%) site of metastatic involvement (17/28). The median follow-up duration was 46 mo. 26 (41.9%) of the 62 patients died, of which 16 (61.5%) were CRC-specific deaths and 10 (38.5%) were deaths owing to other causes. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS probabilities were 88%, 74%, and 59%; 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS probabilities were 97%, 83%, and 67%. The highest CIF for CRC-specific death at 60 mo was liver-only recurrence (0.69). Liver-only recurrence, peritoneum-only recurrence, and two or more recurrence sites were predictive of CRC-specific death.

CONCLUSION

The peritoneum was the most common metastatic site among patients undergoing SBTS. Liver-only recurrence, peritoneum-only recurrence, and two or more recurrence sites were predictors of CRC-specific death.

Postoperative infectious complications have a negative oncological impact in patients after stent placement with malignant large bowel obstruction

PURPOSE

In this study, we aimed to investigate the oncological impact of postoperative infection in patients with malignant large bowel obstruction managed by self-expandable metallic stent placement as a bridge to surgery.

METHODS

The cohort of this multicenter retrospective study comprised 129 patients with pathological stage II/III malignant large bowel obstruction who had undergone bridge to surgery. Patients were allocated to no-postoperative infection (n = 116) and postoperative infection groups (n = 13).

RESULTS

The postoperative infection group had a significantly greater proportion of men, fewer harvested lymph nodes, and longer postoperative hospital stays than did the no-postoperative infection group. Self-expandable metallic stent-related variables, including clinical failure, were not associated with postoperative infection. Male sex and low body mass index were identified as risk factors for postoperative infection by multivariate logistic regression. Three-year relapse-free survival rates were 75.5% and 30.8% in the no-postoperative infection and postoperative infection groups, respectively; this difference is statistically significant. Male sex, postoperative infection, and T4 were identified as independent prognostic factors by multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis. The postoperative infection group had a significantly higher total recurrence rate and shorter interval to recurrence than did the no-postoperative infection group.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to show that postoperative infection in bridge to surgery patients has a negative oncological impact. This finding indicates that further improvement in perioperative management of bridge to surgery patients is required to minimize postoperative infection and that patient-risk stratification and additional therapy would contribute to improving oncological outcomes.

Outcomes of Palliative Colonic Stent Placement in Malignant Colonic Obstruction: Experience from a Tertiary Care Oncology Center in India

Introduction Colonic self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement is the preferred method for palliation of malignant colonic obstruction. We analyzed outcomes of patients who underwent colonic SEMS placement for palliation at a tertiary care oncology center in Western India.

Methods Retrospective review of the endoscopy database was done for patients who underwent colonic SEMS placement at our center between January 2013 and September 2021. Demographic details, intent of stent placement, site of obstruction, length of stricture, technical success of stenting, clinical success, and complications (both immediate and long term) were noted.

Results Sixty-one patients underwent colonic SEMS placement during the study period (mean age 53.6 years, 50.7% men). Obstruction was due to primary colonic malignancy in 43 (70.5%) patients and extracolonic malignancies in 18 (29.5%) patients. Most common extracolonic malignancy was gallbladder cancer in 8 (44.4%) patients. Most common site of obstruction was sigmoid colon in 18 (29.5%) patients. Proximal colonic obstruction was seen in 17 (27.9%) patients. Peritoneal metastases were seen in 26 (42.6%) patients. Colonoscopy revealed an impassable stenosis in 58 (95.1%) patients. Median length of stricture was 5 cm (range 2–9 cm). Technical success was achieved in 98.3% (60/61). Clinical success was achieved in 51 (86.4%) patients. Perforation during colonic SEMS placement was seen in 2 (3.4%) patients. Stent migration was seen in 3 (5.9%) patients, needing surgery for retrieval in all 3 patients. Over a median follow-up of 9 months (0–21 months), stent block was seen in 7 (13.7%) patients. Stent block developed after a median period of 6 months. Of these patients, three patients underwent SEMS placement within the SEMS and the other four patients underwent surgery.

Conclusion Colonic SEMS placement achieves good palliation of malignant colonic obstruction in approximately 87% patients. Long-term complications like obstruction occur in a few patients after a median duration of 6 months.

Survival Outcomes after Elective or Emergency Surgery for Synchronous Stage IV Colorectal Cancer

Patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) who have not undergone primary tumor resection (PTR) are at risk of sudden medical emergencies. Despite the ongoing controversy over the necessity and timing of PTR in patients with stage IV CRC, studies comparing the survival outcomes of elective and emergency surgery in this population are scarce. This is a retrospective study conducted at a single institute. The patients were divided into two groups: the elective surgery (ELS) group (n = 46) and the emergency surgery (EMS) group (n = 26). The primary outcome was 2-year overall survival (OS). During a median follow-up period of 27.0 months, the 2-year OS was significantly better in the ELS group (80% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.002). No significant differences were observed in the 2-year relapse-free survival and 30-day postoperative complication rates. Planning and performing elective surgery could help increase the survival rate of patients with synchronous stage IV CRC, especially those that undergo simultaneous or staged metastasectomy.

Experience in the treatment of obstructive colorectal cancer with self-expandable colon prosthesis in a tertiary hospital

Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent neoplasms, with an increasing incidence in recent years. Intestinal obstruction is present at the time of diagnosis in 10-30% of patients. The aim of our study is to describe our experience in the use of colonic SEMS in the treatment of colonic stenosing neoplasia. For this purpose, we retrospectively evaluated the 92 patients treated with self-expandable metallic prostheses in our hospital between 2016 and 2021. In 66.3% of patients the prosthesis placement was bridge to curative surgery and in 33.7% with palliative attitude. The stenosis location was differentiated: rectum (2.1%), rectosigmoid junction (20.7%), sigma (58.7%), left colon (8.7%), splenic angle (8.7%) and transverse colon (1.1%); being the size of the self-expandable metallic prostheses used 60x25 mm, 90x25 mm and 120x25 mm. The procedure was technically effective in 92.4% of the cases and clinically effective in 89.1%, with post-procedural perforations being detected in 9 patients (9.8%). Survival 30 days after prosthesis placement was 91.3%. No mortality directly related to the procedure was detected. In our experience, placement of self-expandable metallic prostheses is a safe and effective option in the initial management of neoplastic colon stenosis.

Clinical Significance of Surgical Resection Timing from Endoscopic Stenting for Left-Sided Large-Bowel Obstruction in Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal interval between self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) insertion and surgery remains controversial in malignant left-sided large-bowel obstruction (MLLO), especially with respect to oncologic aspects.

AIMS

The aim of this study is to examine whether the time interval to surgery is related to oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

Prospectively collected database of MLLO between January 2005 and December 2017 were reviewed. They were divided according to established cut-off value of 14 days for the time interval to surgery. The two groups (early and late groups) were compared with respect to disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Additional subgroup analysis was performed using the established cut-off values for patients with stage II and III tumors.

RESULTS

A total of 149 patients underwent surgery after SEMS insertion. There were no significant differences between the early and late groups in the 5-year DFS (78.0% vs 72.4%; P = 0.513) and the OS (74.2% vs 75.7%; P = 0.864) rates in all MLLO. Subgroup analysis showed that there were significant differences between the two groups for DFS and OS in stage II MLLO. The multivariate Cox regression analysis in stage II MLLO demonstrated that the time to surgery was a prognostic factor for DFS (HR, 2.051; 95% CI, 1.528-42.136; P = 0.014) and for OS (HR, 4.947; 95% CI, 1.520-16.107; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

The time to surgery was demonstrated not to be a significant prognostic factor in all MLLO. However, it was a prognostic factor for patients with stage II MLLO.

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons after stenting as a bridge to surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction are non-inferior to the outcomes of colorectal surgeons in the elective setting: single center experience

PURPOSE

To analyze if perioperative and oncologic outcomes with stenting as a bridge to surgery (SEMS-BS) and interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons for left-sided occlusive colonic neoplasms (LSCON) are non-inferior to those obtained by colorectal surgeons for non-occlusive tumors of the same location in the full-elective context.

METHODS

From January 2011 to January 2021, patients with LSCON at University Regional Hospital in Málaga (Spain) were directed to a SEMS-BS strategy with an interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons and included in the study group (SEMS-BS). The control group was formed with patients from the Colorectal Division elective surgical activity dataset, matching by ASA, stage, location and year of surgery on a ratio 1:2. Stages IV or palliative stenting were excluded. Software SPSS 23.0 was used to analyze perioperative and oncologic (defined by overall -OS- and disease free -DFS-survival) outcomes.

RESULTS

SEMS-BS and control group included 56 and 98 patients, respectively. In SEMS-BS group, rates of technical/clinical failure and perforation were 5.35% (3/56), 3.57% (2/56) and 3.57% (2/56). Surgery was performed with a median interval time of 11 days (9-16). No differences between groups were observed in perioperative outcomes (laparoscopic approach, primary anastomosis rate, morbidity or mortality). As well, no statistically significant differences were observed in OS and DFS between groups, both compared globally (OS:p < 0.94; DFS:p < 0.67, respectively) or by stages I-II (OS:p < 0.78; DFS:p < 0.17) and III (OS:p < 0.86; DFS:p < 0.70).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of a strategy with SEMS-BS for LSCON are non-inferior to those obtained in the elective setting for non-occlusive neoplasms in the same location. Technical and oncologic safety of interval colectomy performed on a semi-scheduled situation by acute care surgeons is absolutely warranted.

Intestinal stents: Structure, functionalization and advanced engineering innovation

Intestinal stents are a palliative treatment option that solves many shortcomings of traditional surgeries for cancer-induced intestinal obstructions. The present review provides an overview of the incidence, clinical manifestations and limitations in the treatment of intestinal cancers. The paper also discusses material property requirements, indications, complications and the future of stent-assisted therapy. The advantages and disadvantages of different materials and processing techniques for intestinal stents are reviewed along with new stent treatment combinations for colorectal cancer. Challenges that require further cooperative studies are also detailed. The future development of intestinal stents will depend on innovation in material designs as well as the utilization of multi-functional strategies and innovative engineering solutions.

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.

Clinical outcome of decompressing colostomy for acute left-sided colorectal obstruction: a consecutive series of 100 patients

PURPOSE

Aim of our study was to evaluate the outcomes of a consecutive series of patients who were treated with a decompressing colostomy (DC) for acute left-sided colorectal obstruction.

METHOD

A consecutive series of 100 patients with acute left-sided colorectal obstruction who underwent DC from January 2015 to August 2020 was retrospectively analyzed. Demographic characteristics, etiology of the obstruction, postoperative morbidity- and mortality rates, DC-related complication and stoma reversal rates were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 100 included patients, 64 had malignant- and 36 had benign obstruction. The mean age was 69 years, 42% was male, and the ASA score was 2. Morbidity and mortality rates after DC construction were 20 and 2%, respectively. In 39% of the patients, DC ended up as a permanent stoma and in 61% as bridge to surgery (BtS). DC related complication rate was 32%, with a re-intervention rate of 9%. Elective colorectal resection was performed in 59 cases (59%) with subsequent postoperative morbidity rate of 20%. Stoma reversal rate was 77% for the patients who underwent DC as BtS. Stoma reversal was performed in 66% of the patients with benign obstruction and in 36% for oncological obstruction.

CONCLUSION

DC as bridge to possible elective resection for acute left-sided colorectal obstruction is an effective strategy with low morbidity and mortality rates and a high stoma reversal rate, especially for benign obstruction. However, DC is less appropriate for patients in whom DC turns out to be a permanent stoma due to a relatively high stoma related complications.

Management of obstructive colon cancer: Current status, obstacles, and future directions

Approximately 10%–18% of patients with colon cancer present with obstruction at the initial diagnosis. Despite active screening efforts, the incidence of obstructive colon cancer remains stable. Traditionally, emergency surgery has been indicated to treat patients with obstructive colon cancer. However, compared to patients undergoing elective surgery, the morbidity and mortality rates of patients requiring emergency surgery for obstructive colon cancer are high. With the advancement of colonoscopic techniques and equipment, a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) was introduced to relieve obstructive symptoms, allowing the patient’s general condition to be restored and for them undergo elective surgery. As the use of SEMS placement is growing, controversies about its application in potentially curable diseases have been raised. In this review, the short- and long-term outcomes of different treatment strategies, particularly emergency surgery vs SEMS placement followed by elective surgery in resectable, locally advanced obstructive colon cancer, are described based on the location of the obstructive cancer lesion. Controversies regarding each treatment strategy are discussed. To overcome current obstacles, a potential diagnostic method using circulating tumor DNA and further research directions incorporating neoadjuvant chemotherapy are introduced.

Transanal decompression tube is superior to self-expandable metallic colonic stent for malignant colorectal obstruction: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, self-expandable metallic colonic stent (SEMS) and transanal decompression tube (TDT) used as a 'bridge to surgery' (BTS) have been widely used. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and oncological safety of SEMS and TDT as BTS to transform MLBO into elective surgery.

METHODS

Between February 2013 and March 2019, 62 patients with MLBO received SEMS (n = 32) or TDT (n = 30), and elective one-stage surgery later. We evaluated decompression efficiency and oncological safety in selective operation in TDT and SEMS groups, including preoperative preparation time, surgical approach, number of lymphatic dissection and vascular invasion, ulcer formation and histopathological findings of resected specimens.

RESULTS

The preoperative preparation time in the SEMS group was shorter than that of the TDT group (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the groups in postoperative length of hospital stay (P > 0.05). The number of vascular invasions in the TDT group was less than that in the SEMS group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the risk of wound abscess and ulcer formation in the TDT group was significantly lower than that in the SEMS group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that SEMS is associated with a relatively poor oncological outcome and the placement of TDT as BTS in MLBO patients may be a better alternation.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Optimal Management of the Malignant Alimentary Tract Obstruction: Expert Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The purpose of this expert review is to describe the current methodologies available to manage malignant alimentary tract obstructions as well the evidence behind the various methods (including their efficacy and safety), indications, and appropriate timing of interventions.

METHODS

This is not a formal systematic review but is based on a review of the literature to provide best practice advice statements. No formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of recommendation is carried out. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: For all patients with alimentary tract obstruction, the decision about specific interventions should be made in a multidisciplinary setting including oncologists, surgeons, and endoscopists and take into account the characteristics of the obstruction, patient's expectations, prognosis, expected subsequent therapies, and functional status. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: For patients who present with esophageal obstruction from esophageal cancer and who are potential candidates for resection or chemoradiation, clinicians should not routinely insert a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) without multidisciplinary review because of high rates of stent migration, higher morbidity and mortality, and potentially lower R0 (microscopically negative margins) resection rates. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: For patients who present with esophageal obstruction from esophageal cancer who are potential candidates for resection and who have concerns of malnutrition, clinicians may consider the use of enteral feeding tubes (via nasogastric or percutaneous route). Clinicians should be aware of the potential risk of abdominal wall tumor seeding as well as making subsequent gastric conduit formation difficult with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy placement. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: For patients who present with esophageal obstruction from esophageal cancer who are not candidates for resection, clinicians should consider either SEMS insertion or brachytherapy as sole therapy or in combination. Clinicians should not consider the use of laser therapy or photodynamic therapy because of the lack of evidence of better outcomes and superior alternatives. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: For patients with malignant esophageal obstruction who are undergoing SEMS placement, clinicians should use a fully covered or partially covered SEMS and not an uncovered SEMS, with consideration of a stent-anchoring/fixation method. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: For patients with gastric outlet obstruction who have a life expectancy greater than 2 months, have good functional status, and who are surgically fit, surgical gastrojejunostomy should be considered. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: For patients with gastric outlet obstruction who are undergoing surgical gastrojejunostomy, a laparoscopic approach is favored over an open approach because of lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: For patients with gastric outlet obstruction who are not candidates for gastrojejunostomy (surgical or endoscopic ultrasound-guided), clinicians should consider the insertion of an enteral stent. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Enteral stents should not be used in patients with multiple luminal obstructions or severely impaired gastric motility because of the limited benefit in these scenarios. Clinicians can consider placement of a venting gastrostomy in these patients. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Depending on the experience of the endoscopist, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy is an acceptable alternative to surgical gastrojejunostomy and enteral stent placement. Clinicians should be aware that there are currently no dedicated Food and Drug Administration-approved devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: For patients with malignant colonic obstruction who are candidates for resection, insertion of SEMS is a reasonable choice as a "bridge to surgery" to allow for one-stage, elective resection. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: For patients with malignant colonic obstruction who are not candidates for resection, either SEMS placement or a diverting colostomy are reasonable choices depending on the patient's goals and functional status. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: SEMS is a reasonable option for patients with proximal (or right-sided) malignant obstructions, both as a "bridge to surgery" and in the palliative setting. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: SEMS placement is a reasonable alternative for patients with extracolonic malignancy who are not candidates for surgery, although their placement is more technically challenging, clinical success rates are more variable, and complications (including stent migration) are more frequent.

Emergency resection or diverting stoma followed by elective resection in patients with colonic obstruction due to locally advanced cancer: a national cohort study

AIM

The aim was to assess long-term prognosis after emergency resection versus primary diverting stoma followed by elective tumour resection.

METHOD

A national-register-based cohort study with retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. All Swedish patients with non-metastatic obstructive locally advanced colon cancer treated with emergency resection or diverting stoma, followed by an elective resection, between 2007 and 2017 were included. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare all-cause mortality between patients with emergency resection and elective right- and left-sided resection. The multivariable model was adjusted for year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, tumour location and pN stage.

RESULTS

In all, 751 patients with a tumour in the right colon and 700 patients with a tumour in the left colon were included. Emergency resection was more common in patients with right-sided colon tumours (681/751) than in patients with left-sided colon tumours (483/700). The 5-year overall survival in patients with right-sided tumours was 25% after emergency resection and 46% after diverting stoma followed by elective resection (log-rank test P = 0.001). The corresponding numbers for patients with left-sided colon tumours were 40% and 64% (P < 0.001). Emergency resection was independently associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with left-sided tumour (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% CI 1.21-2.19) but not in patients with right-sided tumour (hazard ratio 1.21, 95% CI 0.80-1.81).

CONCLUSION

Diverting stoma followed by elective resection is associated with improved survival compared with emergency resection in patients with left-sided colonic obstruction due to locally advanced tumours.

Short- and long-term outcomes of a self-expandable metallic stent versus a transanal decompression tube for pathological stage II and III left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

Few studies have investigated the long-term oncological outcomes of the self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC). We conducted this study to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of the SEMS with those of the traditional transanal decompression tube (TDT) in patients with stage II and III left-sided OCRC.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective study were 78 patients with pathological stage II and III left-sided OCRC who underwent radical surgery after SEMS or TDT placement, between April, 2005 and September, 2019. We compared perioperative data, including decompression success rates and 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS), between the SEMS and TDT groups.

RESULTS

A SEMS was placed in 60 (76.9%) patients and a TDT was placed in 18 (23.1%) patients, achieving a clinical success rate of decompression of 98.3% in the SEMS group and 77.8% in the TDT group (P = 0.009). The 3-year RFS of the overall cohort was better in the SEMS group than in the TDT group (74.9% vs. 40.9%, respectively; P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Decompression using a SEMS as the BTS may improve oncological outcomes over those achieved by a TDT in patients with left-sided stage II and III OCRC.

Emergency Management of Obstructive Colorectal Cancer - A Retrospective Study of Efficacy and Safety in Self-expanding Metallic Stents and Trans-anal Tubes

BACKGROUND/AIM

The self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) has recently been used for obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC), and reports of its use are increasing. However, the long-term results of OCRC after using SEMS remain unclear. This study investigated the characteristics of SEMS compared to trans-anal tube (TAT) and clarified the long-term results and efficacy of SEMS for OCRC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We analyzed 48 patients who required SEMS or TAT for emergent decompression of OCRC and underwent resection for OCRC between 2007 and 2019. The perioperative factors and long-term results in the two groups were evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients with OCRC were divided into the SEMS (n=23) and the TAT group (n=25). No significant differences were seen in background factors, complications and the 5-year overall survival after surgery (p=0.3500) between the two groups. The clinical success of decompression (p=0.0072), oral intake (p<0.0001) and change in serum albumin (p<0.0001) from decompression to surgery were significantly better in the SEMS compares to the TAT group.

CONCLUSION

The long-term outcomes in the SEMS group were not significantly different than in the TAT group, and nutritional status was better in patients with SEMS, suggesting that SEMS is very effective and may be the first-line treatment of OCRC.

A novel animal model of colonic stenosis to aid the development of new stents for colon strictures

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colonic stenosis, primarily caused by colon cancer and Crohn's disease, is increasing each year. The development of safer stents for colonic stenosis is required because perforation associated with cancer stent placement worsens the prognosis and stent placement for anastomotic stenosis due to Crohn's disease or colectomy is not first choice due to the high migration rate. The wall of the large intestine where the stent is inserted receives the complex forces from the peristaltic movement of the large intestine and stool in addition to the reaction tension of the stent, causing perforation and migration. Animal models may help develop new and safe stents, but no animal model closely reproduces the condition of human colonic stenosis. Herein, we present a novel animal model of colonic stenosis, which closely replicates the human colonic size.

METHODS

The artificial colonic stenosis model was developed by wrapping the porcine colon with a silicone sheet after laparotomy. The usefulness of the model was evaluated by investigating the availability of endoscopic stent placement, morphological maintenance of colonic stenosis, adverse effects on pigs, and modeling time. The first three and the last three modeling times were analyzed using Student's t-test.

RESULTS

Endoscopic stent placement was performed in all cases without intraoperative complications. There were no postoperative model complications or deaths. Adhesions to the surrounding tissue in the abdominal cavity of the artificial colon stenosis were slight. The morphology of the isolated artificial stenoses was completely maintained, and no necrosis or perforation was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a novel and feasible animal model of colonic stenosis using pigs. We believe that this animal model will be useful for developing a safer stent for obstruction caused by benign diseases and colon cancer.

Long-term survival after self-expanding metallic stent or stoma decompression as bridge to surgery in acute malignant large bowel obstruction

Aim

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as bridge to surgery have been questioned due to the fear of perforation and tumour spread. This study aimed to compare SEMS and stoma as bridge to surgery in acute malignant large bowel obstruction in the Swedish population.

Method

Medical records of patients identified via the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Register 2007–2009 were collected and scrutinized. The inclusion criterion was decompression intended as bridge to surgery due to acute malignant large bowel obstruction. Patients who underwent decompression for other causes or had bowel perforation were excluded. Primary endpoints were 5-year overall survival and 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary endpoints were 30-day morbidity and mortality rates.

Results

A total of 196 patients fulfilled the inclusion criterion (SEMS, 71, and stoma, 125 patients). There was no significant difference in sex, age, ASA score, TNM stage and adjuvant chemotherapy between the SEMS and stoma groups. No patient was treated with biological agents. Five-year overall survival was comparable in SEMS, 56 per cent (40 patients), and stoma groups, 48 per cent (60 patients), P = 0.260. Likewise, 3-year disease-free survival did not differ statistically significant, SEMS 73 per cent (43 of 59 patients), stoma 65 per cent (62 of 95 patients), P = 0.32. In the SEMS group, 1.4 per cent (one patient) did not fulfil resection surgery compared to 8.8 per cent (11 patients) in the stoma group (P = 0.040). Postoperative complication and 30-day postoperative mortality rates did not differ, whereas the duration of hospital stay and proportion of permanent stoma were lower in the SEMS group.

Conclusion

This nationwide registry-based study showed that long-term survival in patients with either SEMS or stoma as bridge to surgery in acute malignant large bowel obstruction were comparable. SEMS were associated with a lower rate of permanent stoma, higher rate of resection surgery and shorter duration of hospital stay.

Comparison of the prognosis of four different treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

There is controversy regarding the efficacy of different treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction. This study investigated the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of several treatment strategies for acute left malignant colonic obstruction.

Methods

We searched for articles published in PubMed, Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, and Cochrane Library between January 1, 2000, and July 1, 2020. We screened out the literature comparing different treatment strategies. Evaluate the primary and secondary outcomes of different treatment strategies. The network meta-analysis summarizes the hazard ratio, odds ratio, mean difference, and its 95% confidence interval.

Results

The network meta-analysis involved 48 articles, including 8 (randomized controlled trials) RCTs and 40 non-RCTs. Primary outcomes: the 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the CS-BTS strategy and the DS-BTS strategy were significantly better than those of the ES strategy, and the 5-year OS of the DS-BTS strategy was significantly better than that of CS-BTS. The long-term survival of TCT-BTS was not significantly different from those of CS-BTS and ES. Secondary outcomes: compared with emergency resection (ER) strategies, colonic stent-bridge to surgery (CS-BTS) and transanal colorectal tube-bridge to surgery (TCT-BTS) strategies can significantly increase the primary anastomosis rate, CS-BTS and decompressing stoma-bridge to surgery (DS-BTS) strategies can significantly reduce mortality, and CS-BTS strategies can significantly reduce the permanent stoma rate. The hospital stay of DS-BTS is significantly longer than that of other strategies. There was no significant difference in the anastomotic leakage levels of several treatment strategies.

Conclusion

Comprehensive literature research, we find that CS-BTS and DS-BTS strategies can bring better 5-year OS and DFS than ER. DS-BTS strategies have a better 5-year OS than CS-BTS strategies. Without considering the hospital stays, DS-BTS strategy is the best choice.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13017-021-00355-2.

Current Status of the Self-Expandable Metal Stent as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Results from an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature

Background: The current use of endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery is not always accepted in standard clinical practice to treat neoplastic colonic obstructions. Objectives: The role of colonic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) positioning as a bridge to resective surgery versus emergency surgery (ES) for malignant obstruction, using all new data and available variables, was studied and we focused on short- and long-term results. Materials and Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases were included. The search comprised only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the interventions that included SEMS positioning versus ES. The primary outcomes were the rates of overall postoperative mortality, clinical and technical success. The secondary outcomes were the short- and long-term results. Results: A total of 12 studies were eligible for further analyses. A laparoscopic colectomy was the most common operation performed in the SEMS group, whereas the traditional open approach was commonly used in the ES group. Intraoperative colonic lavage was seldomly performed during ES. There were no differences in mortality rates between the two groups (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.04; I² = 0%). In the SEMS group, the rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher in of SEMS (69.75%) than in the ES (55.07%) (RR 1.26, 95% 245 CI 1.01 to 1.57; I² = 86%). Conversely, the upfront Hartmann procedure was performed more frequently in the ES (39.1%) as compared to the SEMS group (23.4%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85; I² = 23%). The overall postoperative complications rate was significantly lower in the SEMS group (32.74%) than in the ES group (48.25%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91; I² = 65%). Conclusions: In the presence of malignant colorectal obstruction, SEMS is safe and associated with the same mortality and significantly lower morbidity than the ES group. The rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher than the ES group. Nevertheless, recurrence and survival outcomes are not significantly different between the two groups. The analysis of short- and long-term results can suggest the use of SEMS as a bridge to resective surgery when it is performed by an endoscopist with adequate expertise in both colonoscopy and fluoroscopic techniques and who performed commonly colonic stenting.

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.

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).

Comparison of survival and perioperative outcome of the colonic stent and the transanal decompression tube placement and emergency surgery for left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective multi-center observational study "The CODOMO study"

PURPOSE

Advances in endoscopic technology have led to the reevaluation of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. In Japan, after inclusion of SEMS placement as a BTS in the medical insurance coverage in 2012, this procedure has been increasingly performed. However, a transanal decompression tube (TADT) placement has been used as a BTS. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the optimal strategy for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (OLCRC) by comparing SEMS and TADT placement with emergency surgery.

METHODS

We included 301 patients with stage II and III OLCRC from 27 institutions. The study patients were divided into Surgery group (emergency surgery, n = 103), SEMS group (BTS by SEMS, n = 113), and TADT group (BTS by TADT, n = 85). We compared the survival and perioperative outcomes of patients in the Surgery group as a standard treatment with those in the SEMS and TADT groups.

RESULTS

The 3-year relapse-free survival rate in patients in the Surgery group was 74.8%, while that in patients in the SEMS group and TADT group were 69.0% (p = 0.39) and 55.3% (p = 0.006), respectively. The technical success rate was not statistically different, but the clinical success rate was significantly higher in the SEMS group than in the TADT group (p = 0.0040). With regard to postoperative complications after curative surgery, the SEMS group had significantly lower of complications (≥ grade 2) than the Surgery group (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent SEMS placement for OLCRC had similar oncological outcomes to patients who underwent emergency surgery.

Long-term outcomes of colonic stent as a "bridge to surgery"for left-sided malignant large-bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

The role of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction is still debated. Here we assess the morbidity, mortality and long-term oncological outcomes as a bridge to surgery for patients with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

METHOD

Prospective observational study with retrospective analysis of patients with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction undergoing stenting. April 2006-April 2018. We assessed all patients with intent-to treat and per protocol analyses and long-term follow-up variables.

RESULTS

Colonic stent was performed in 117 patients. Technical and clinical success of SEMS placement: 94.4% (111/117), only 4.3% perforation. Elective surgery resection following the strategy of SEMS was performed in 83.8% (98/117). A laparoscopic approach was: 25.6% (30/117); 76.9% in the last two years. Primary anastomosis rate: 92.8% (91/98), without protective stoma in any patients. Anastomotic leakage rate: 8.2% (8/97). Median follow-up: 44.5 months (range 0-109). The intent-to-treat analysis showed overall and disease-free survival rates of 63.3% (74/117) and 58.1% (68/117), and local and distant recurrence rates: 9.4% (11/117) and 58.1% (68/117). In the per protocol analysis, overall and disease-free survival rates: 63.2% (62/98) and 60.2% (58/98), and local and distant recurrence rates: 10.2% (10/98) and 36.7% (36/98). Disease progression was predominantly observed during the first 5 years' follow-up as disease recurrence; after five years' follow-up, 60% of the patients were disease-free.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of the study SEMS as a bridge to surgery achieves perioperative results comparable to non-occlusive colonic cancer surgery and does not adversely affect long-term oncological outcomes. Further investigations are needed.

Obstructing Left-Sided Colonic Cancer: Is Endoscopic Stenting a Bridge to Surgery or a Bridge to Nowhere?

For the 8-29% colorectal cancers that initially manifest with obstruction, emergency surgery (ES) was traditionally considered the only available therapy, despite high morbidity and mortality rates and the need for colostomy creation. More recently, malignant obstruction of the left colon can be temporized by endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), used as bridge to surgery (BTS), facilitating a laparoscopic approach and increasing the likelihood that a primary anastomosis instead of stoma would be used. Despite these attractive outcomes, the superiority of the BTS approach is not clearly established. Few authors have stressed the potential cancer risk associated with perforations that may occur during endoscopic stent placement, facilitating neoplastic spread and negatively impacting prognosis. For this reason, the current literature focuses on long-term oncologic outcomes such as disease-free survival, overall survival and recurrence rate that do seem not to differ between the ES and BTS approaches. This lack of consensus has spawned differing and sometimes discordant guidelines worldwide. In conclusion, 20 years after the first description of a colonic stent as BTS, the debate is still open, but the growing number of articles about the use of SEMS as a BTS signifies a great interest in the topic. We hope that these data will finally converge on a single set of recommendations supporting a management strategy with well-demonstrated superiority.

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.

Long-term outcomes of stent-related perforation in malignant colon obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The placement of self-expandable metallic stents as a bridge to surgery in malignant colon obstruction is concerning due to the long-term oncological results reported in recent published studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the oncological consequences of stent-related perforations in patients with malignant colon obstruction and potentially curable disease.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Ovid and ISRCTN Registry were searched, with no restrictions. We performed five meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effect sizes by using a random-effect model. The outcomes were global, locoregional and systemic recurrence rate and 3 and 5 year-survival rate depending on the presence or absence of stent-related perforation.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies (950 patients) were included. The overall rate of stent-related perforation was 8.9%. The global recurrence rate was significantly higher in stent-related perforation group (41.2 vs. 30.8%; OR 1.70; 95%CI: 1.02-2.84; p = 0.04). Locoregional recurrence rate was higher in the perforated group than in the non-perforated group (26.6 vs. 12.5%), with statistically significant differences (OR 2.41; 95% CI:1.33-4.34; p = 0.004). No significant differences were found in systemic recurrence rate (13.6 vs. 20.5%; OR 0.77; 95%CI: 0.35-1.7; p = 0.51); 3-year overall survival rate (65.4 vs. 74.8%; OR 0.63; 95% CI:0.29-1.39; p = 0.25) and 5-year overall survival rate (48.3 vs. 58.6%; OR 0.67; 95%CI: 0.27-1.65; p = 0.38).

CONCLUSION

Stent-related perforation is associated with an increased risk of global and locoregional recurrence. The successful placement of the stent as a bridge to surgery in the curative purpose of patients with obstructed colon cancer does not exclude the presence of underlying perforation, with the consequent danger of disease spread. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020152817.

[Minimally invasive interventions in emergency large bowel surgery]

The current trends in the treatment of various surgical diseases of large bowel using minimally invasive operations are reviewed in the manuscript. It is shown that laparoscopy is currently possible in most cases for urgent large bowel diseases.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic approach to colonic obstruction for colon cancer

BACKGROUND

We speculated that a laparoscopic approach to emergent/urgent partial colectomy for colonic obstruction would be associated with less morbidity and shorter length of stay with similar mortality to open colectomy. We compared the outcomes of laparoscopic and open approaches to emergent/urgent partial colectomy for colonic obstruction from colonic cancer using data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database for the period of 2012-2017.

METHODS

Multivariate analysis compared NSQIP data points following laparoscopic, laparoscopic converted to open, and open colectomy for emergent/urgent colectomy for colonic obstruction from colon cancer from 2012 to 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 1293 patients who underwent emergent colectomy for colon obstruction from colon cancer during 2012-2017 were identified within the NSQIP database. Laparoscopic approach was used for colonic obstruction in 19.3% of operations with a conversion rate of 28.5%. A laparoscopic approach to obstructing colonic cancers was associated with lower morbidity (50% vs. 61.8%, AOR: 0.67, P = 0.01) and shorter hospitalization length (10 days vs. 13 days, mean difference: 3 days, P < 0.01) compared with an open approach. However, the mean operation duration was longer in laparoscopic operations than open operations (159 min vs. 137 min, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic approach to malignant colonic obstruction is associated with decreased morbidity. This suggests that efforts should be directed towards increasing the utilization of laparoscopic approaches for the surgical treatment of colonic obstruction.

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.

Obstructive left side colon cancer: time for a tailored operative approach?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) obstruction is frequent but doubts remain on the best treatment. The aim of this study is to analyze the different operative approach used for CRC treatment and evaluate the outcomes for the different cases.

METHODS

Patients were collected from January 2014 to December 2019 and divided in four groups: two "P" groups, namely the Hartmann's procedure (PH) group and the primary anastomosis (PA) group, and two "S" groups, namely the deviating stoma (SD) group and the self-expanding metallic stent (SS) group. The main endpoints were the quality of life and the oncologic safety.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight patients were enrolled. The mean follow-up time was 39 months. The stomas were performed less frequently in SS but lasted more in that group. Only 45% underwent reversal surgery. Cumulative operating time was greater in S versus P groups. The rate of major complications was similar. PA had greater overall survival and disease-free survival rates than PH.

CONCLUSIONS

The various options of treatment should have different indications: primary anastomosis in stable patients, Hartmann in critical cases, SEMS for palliative intent and stoma when neo-adjuvant therapy is needed.

Cost-effectiveness of palliative emergent surgery versus endoscopic stenting for acute malignant colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic stenting has demonstrated value over emergent surgery as a palliative intervention for patients with acute large bowel obstruction due to advanced colorectal cancer. However, concerns regarding high reintervention rates and the risk of perforation have brought into question its cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

A decision tree analysis was performed to analyze costs and survival in patients with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer who present with acute large bowel obstruction. The model was designed with two treatment arms: self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement and emergent surgery. Costs were derived from medicare reimbursement rates (US$), while effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The model was tested for validation using one-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Endoscopic stenting resulted in an average cost of $43,798.06 and 0.68 QALYs. Emergent surgery cost $5865.30 more, while only yielding 0.58 QALYs. This resulted in an ICER of - $58,653.00, indicating that SEMS placement is the dominant strategy. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated that emergent surgery would require an improved survival rate in comparison to endoscopic stenting to become the favored treatment modality. In 100,000 probabilistic simulations, endoscopic stenting was favored 96.3% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute colonic obstruction in the presence of unresectable or metastatic disease, endoscopic stenting is a more cost-effective palliative intervention than emergent surgery. This recommendation would favor surgery over SEMS placement with improved surgical survival, or if the majority of patients undergoing stenting required reintervention.

Novel Predictive Nomogram for Identifying Difficult Guidewire Insertion in Patients With Malignant Colorectal Obstruction and Sphincterotome-Assisted Guidewire Insertion for Improving the Success Rate of Self-Expandable Metal Stent Insertion

Aims: This study aimed to identify risk factors related to guidewire insertion (GWI) failure and construct a novel predictive nomogram. In addition, sphincterotome-assisted guidewire insertion (SAGWI) in difficult cases was evaluated for efficacy and safety.

Methods: We reviewed the data of 509 patients with malignant colorectal obstruction who underwent endoscopic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion from 2007 to 2018 in our center, retrospectively. We identify risk factors associated with GWI failure by multivariate logistic regression analysis and construct a novel predictive nomogram. Improvements in the GWI and technical and clinical success rates were assessed for the SAGWI technique.

Results: A total of 509 patients with malignant colorectal obstruction were included. Increases of 6.9% and 7.0% were found in the GWI success rate by intention-to-treat (ITT; p < 0.001) and per-protocol (PP; p < 0.001) analyses after SAGWI, respectively. Increases of 6.5% and 6.6% in the technical success rate were found by ITT (p < 0.001) and PP (p < 0.001) analyses after SAGWI, respectively. Increases of 5.8% and 6.0% in the clinical success rate were found by ITT (p < 0.001) and PP (p < 0.001) analyses after SAGWI, respectively. Regarding the GWI failure-related factors, a sharply angulated stricture was an independent risk factor, and an experienced colonoscopist was an independent protective factor. A novel effective predictive nomogram was constructed.

Conclusion: The novel predictive nomogram can be conveniently used to identify difficult cases. A sharply angulated stricture and an experienced colonoscopist are independent factors related to GWI failure. The SAGWI technique is an effective and safe method for addressing technically difficult cases.