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

Long-Term Outcomes of Self-Expandable Metallic Stents as a Bridge to Surgery for Obstructive and Symptomatic Primary Tumors of Stage IV Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity-Score Analysis

Background: Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) was introduced for the treatment of obstructive colorectal cancer (CRC) a few decades ago. However, its long-term outcomes remain controversial, especially for stage IV CRC. The aim of this study was to clarify the outcomes of SEMS as a "bridge to surgery" (BTS) for obstructive and symptomatic primary tumors in stage IV CRC by one-to-one propensity-score matching. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single center from January 2007 to December 2017. Patients with obstructive and symptomatic primary tumors of stage IV CRC underwent primary resection (PR) or placement of a SEMS as a BTS. They were divided into SEMS and PR groups, and their short- and long-term outcomes were compared. Results: In total, 52 patients were reviewed (SEMS group, 21; PR group, 31). Sixteen patients in both groups were matched using propensity scores. Patients in the SEMS group more frequently underwent laparoscopic surgery than those in the PR group (75% versus 19%, P = .004). The two groups showed no significant differences in perioperative and pathological outcomes. The 5-year overall survival was not significantly different between groups (29% versus 20%, P = .53). Conclusions: As a BTS, the use of SEMS for obstructive and symptomatic primary tumors in CRC stage IV can be a comparable option to PR in terms of short- and long-term outcomes, and would be less invasive with respect to surgical procedures.

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.

Endoscopic stent versus diverting stoma as a bridge to surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), an alternative to diverting stoma (DS), has been used as a "bridge to surgery" (BTS) to decompress acute obstruction of colorectal cancer (CRC) for decades. However, whether SEMS is a safe technique for obstruction of CRC without compromising the long-term survival of patients remains unidentified compared to those of DS. The aim of the present study was to elucidate the safety and survival outcomes of SEMS and DS.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and Medline were searched for qualified studies published until October, 2020, in which SEMS or DS was performed as a BTS without resection at the same stage. The last search was on December 5th, 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of included studies. The major complication rate, mortality, 3-year overall survival (OS), and permanent stoma rate were estimated as outcomes.

RESULTS

The present study was registered on INPLASY (No. 2020100079). Seven eligible studies were included, involving 646 and 712 patients who underwent SEMS and DS treatments, respectively. The Clavien-Dindo I/II grade complication rate was significantly lower in the SEMS group than in the DS group (8.68 vs. 16.85%; RR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.84; P = 0.004). The Clavien-Dindo III/IV grade complication rate was comparable in two groups (7.69 vs. 8.79%; RR, 0.82; 95% CI 0.54-1.27; P = 0.37). There were no statistical differences in the short-term mortality (5.16 vs. 4.53%; RR, 1.25; 95% CI 0.75-2.08; P = 0.39), 3-year OS (71.91 vs. 76.60%; RR, 0.93; 95% CI 0.86-1.01; P = 0.10), and permanent stoma rate (22.08 vs. 27.54%; RR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.67-1.06; P = 0.14) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

To some extent, SEMS is a safe BTS technique for acute obstructive CRC, without significant adverse effect on the survival of patients. Given the advantage of minimal invasion, SEMS may be a better alternative to DS for obstructive CRC. However, the conclusions remain to be discussed because of lacking high-quality randomized controlled trails.

MASCC multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for the management of malignant bowel obstruction in advanced cancer

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) for patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) MBO study group conducted a systematic review of databases (inception to March 2021) to identify studies about patients with advanced cancer and MBO that reported on the following outcomes: symptom management, bowel obstruction resolution, prognosis, overall survival, and quality of life. The review was restricted to studies published in English, but no restrictions were placed on publication year, country, and study type. As per the MASCC Guidelines Policy, the findings were synthesized to determine the levels of evidence to support each MBO intervention and, ultimately, the graded recommendations and suggestions.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 17,656 published studies and 397 selected for the guidelines. The MASCC study group developed a total of 25 evidence-based suggestions and recommendations about the management of MBO-related nausea and vomiting, bowel movements, pain, inflammation, bowel decompression, and nutrition. Expert consensus-based guidance about advanced care planning and psychosocial support is also provided.

CONCLUSION

This MASCC Guideline provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations about MBO management for patients with advanced cancer.

Is a small-caliber or large-caliber endoscope more suitable for colonic self-expandable metallic stent placement? A randomized controlled study

OBJECTIVES

The colonic self-expandable metallic stent (C-SEMS) with a 9-French (Fr) delivery system allows for a small-caliber endoscope (SCE) to be used to treat malignant colonic obstruction. Despite the lack of evidence, the SCE has become popular because it is considered easier to insert than the large-caliber endoscope (LCE). We aimed to determine whether the SCE is more suitable than the LCE for C-SEMS placement.

METHODS

Between July 2018 and November 2019, 50 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo C-SEMS for colon obstruction were recruited in this study. Patients were randomized to the SCE or LCE group. The SCE and LCE were used with 9-Fr and 10-Fr delivery systems, respectively. The primary outcome was the total procedure time. Secondary outcomes were the technical success rate, complication rate, clinical success rate, insertion time, guidewire-passage time, stent-deployment time, and colonic obstruction-scoring-system score.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients (SCE group, n = 22; LCE group, n = 23) were analyzed. The procedure time in the LCE group (median, 20.5 min) was significantly (p = 0.024) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 25.1 min). The insertion time in the LCE group (median, 2.0 min) was significantly (p = 0.0049) shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 6.0 min). A sub-analysis of the procedure difficulties showed that the insertion time in the LCE group (median, 5.0 min) was significantly shorter than that in the SCE group (median, 8.5 min).

CONCLUSION

Both LCE and SCE can be used for C-SEMS; however, LCE is more suitable than SCE as it achieved a faster and equally efficacious C-SEMS placement as that of SCE.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN 32748).

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Comparison of the Oncological Outcomes of Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery and Surgery Alone in Stages II to III Obstructive Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

We evaluated the oncological outcomes of bridge to surgery (BTS) using stent compared with surgery alone for obstructive colorectal cancer.

Methods

Consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stages II to III obstructive colorectal cancer at our institution from January 2009 to March 2020, were registered retrospectively and divided into 43 patients in the BTS group and 65 patients in the surgery alone group. We compared the surgical and oncological outcomes between the 2 groups.

Results

Stent-related perforation did not occur. One patient in whom the stent placement was unsuccessful underwent emergency surgery with poor decompression (clinical success rate, 97.7%). The pathological characteristics were not significantly different between the groups. The following surgical outcomes in the BTS group were superior to those in the surgery alone group; nonemergency surgery (P<0.001), surgical approach (P=0.006), and length of hospital stay (P=0.020). The median follow-up time was 44.9 months (range, 1.1-126.5 months). The 3-year relapse-free survival rates were 68.4% and 58.2% (P=0.411), and the overall survival rates were 78.3% and 88.2% (P=0.255) in the surgery alone and BTS groups, respectively. The 3-year locoregional recurrence rates were 10.2% and 8.0% (P=0.948), and distant metastatic recurrence rates were 13.3% and 30.4% (P=0.035) in the surgery alone and BTS groups, respectively.

Conclusion

This study revealed that BTS with stent may be associated with a higher frequency of distant metastatic recurrence. Stent for stages II to III obstructive colorectal cancer potentially worsens oncological outcomes.

Self-expanding metal stent insertion by colorectal surgeons using a two-person approach colonoscopy without fluoroscopic monitoring in the management of acute colorectal obstruction: a 14-year experience

BACKGROUND

Placement of a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) in patients presenting with an acute colorectal obstruction (ACO) may obviate emergency surgery (ES), potentially effectively palliating incurable tumors, acting as a bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with operable or potentially operable tumors and achieving effective decompression of other ACO. We present our experience with SEMS insertion by colorectal surgeons without fluoroscopic monitoring for ACO especially for acute malignant colorectal obstruction (AMCO) for nearly a 14-year period (2007-2020).

AIM

To explore the safety and effectiveness of SEMS insertion in the management of ACO by colorectal surgeons using a two-person approach colonoscopy without fluoroscopic monitoring.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of patients retrospectively to identify all patients presenting to our unit with ACO especially with AMCO who had stenting carried out to achieve colonic decompression. All 434 procedures were performed by colorectal surgeons using a two-person approach colonoscopy without fluoroscopic monitoring.

RESULTS

The overall technique success rate and clinic success rate by SEMS insertion were 428/434 (98.6%) and 412/434 (94.9%). The overall incidence of complications by SEMS insertion was 19/434 (4.4%). The complications included clinical perforation (6/434, 1.4%); stent migration (2/434, 0.5%), 1 of which re-stent; stent detachment (fell off) (3/434, 0.7%), none of them with re-stent; stool impaction (6/434, 1.4%), 1 of which re-stent; and abdominal or anal pain (2/434, 0.5%). There was no hemorrhage in any of the 434 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS insertion is a relatively safe and effective technique for colonic decompression in dealing with ACO as either a BTS or as a palliative measure. It is also a solution to other causes of ACO such as recurrent tumor, benign diseases, or extra-luminal compression. Therefore, ES was largely avoided.

Stent as a bridge to surgery versus urgent surgery for malignant right colonic obstruction: A multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The impact of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) for malignant right colonic obstruction remains undefined. The aim of this study was to compare short-term postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) and urgent colectomy for patients with malignant right-sided obstruction.

METHODS

A total of 98 consecutive patients who underwent SEMS placement during the period 2004-2015 from three hospitals were included. For comparative analyses, patients were matched (1:2) with 196 patients treated with emergency colectomy from our prospective database.

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable in terms of demographics and tumor characteristics. The proportion of patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy was higher in SBTS group than urgent colectomy group (75.5% vs. 37.2%; p < 0.001). Patients treated with SBTS were less likely to have a temporary stoma constructed (3.1% vs. 10.7%; p = 0.024). SBTS was associated with significantly less median estimated blood loss (90 vs. 100 ml; p = 0.029), shorter length of hospital stay (11 vs. 12 days; p < 0.001), lower overall postoperative complication rate (18.4% vs. 31.3%; p = 0.018), and wound-related complication rate (5.1% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.019) compared with urgent surgery. Reoperation rate, 30-day mortality, and lymph nodes harvested were not significantly different between two groups. Disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS insertion is safe and feasible for treating malignant right-sided obstruction. SBTS is associated with better short-term outcomes and equivalent long-term oncologic results compared with urgent colectomy.

Propensity score-matched comparison of stenting as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction

Background

Bridge to elective surgery (BTS) using self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) is a common alternative to emergency surgery (ES) for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction (AMLCO). However, studies regarding the long-term impact of BTS are limited and have reported unclear results.

Methods

A multicenter observational study was performed at three hospitals from April 2012 to December 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was introduced to minimize selection bias. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The secondary endpoints included surgical approaches, primary resection types, total stent-related adverse effects (AEs), surgical AEs, length of hospital stay, 30-day mortality and tumor recurrence.

Results

Forty-nine patients in both the BTS and ES groups were matched. Patients in the BTS group more often underwent laparoscopic resection [31 (63.3%) vs. 8 (16.3%), p < 0.001], were less likely to have a primary stoma [13 (26.5%) vs. 26 (53.1%), p = 0.007] and more often had perineural invasion [25 (51.0 %) vs. 13 (26.5 %), p = 0.013]. The median overall survival was significantly lower in patients with stent insertion (41 vs. 65 months, p = 0.041). The 3-year overall survival (53.0 vs. 77.2%, p = 0.039) and 5-year overall survival (30.6 vs. 55.0%, p = 0.025) were significantly less favorable in the BTS group. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, stenting (hazard ratio(HR) = 2.309(1.052–5.066), p = 0.037), surgical AEs (HR = 1.394 (1.053–1.845), p = 0.020) and pTNM stage (HR = 1.706 (1.116–2.607), p = 0.014) were positively correlated with overall survival in matched patients.

Conclusions

Self-expanding metal stents as “a bridge to surgery” are associated with more perineural invasion, a higher recurrence rate and worse overall survival in patients with acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction compared with emergency surgery.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in emergency colorectal surgery

AIM

There is a requirement for an expansive and up to date review of the management of emergency colorectal conditions seen in adults. The primary objective is to provide detailed evidence-based guidelines for the target audience of general and colorectal surgeons who are responsible for an adult population and who practise in Great Britain and Ireland.

METHODS

Surgeons who are elected members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Emergency Surgery Subcommittee were invited to contribute various sections to the guidelines. They were directed to produce a pathology-based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence-based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after two votes were included in the guidelines.

RESULTS

All aspects of care (excluding abdominal trauma) for emergency colorectal conditions have been included along with 122 recommendations for management.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence-based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of emergency colorectal conditions and should serve as practical text for clinicians managing colorectal conditions in the emergency setting.

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

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

The Value of Haematological Parameters and Tumour Markers in the Prediction of Intestinal Obstruction in 1474 Chinese Colorectal Cancer Patients

Intestinal obstruction, a life-threatening problem, often occurs in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the cause of obstruction is still unknown. Very few prediction models for intestinal obstruction in CRC exist, and their results are unreliable. Therefore, we investigated whether preoperative serum tumour markers (STMs) combined with haematological and biochemical markers could be used as predictors. We retrospectively analysed 1474 patients with CRC who underwent radical resection after admission. Several clinical features, STMs, and serum biochemical and haematological indicators were analysed. Predictors of intestinal obstruction were analysed with univariate and multivariate logistic regression. The accuracy of the multivariate predictors of obstruction was measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to create survival curves. Obstruction was found more in males (62.18%), never-smokers (73.95%), the left colon (54.20%), the tumour diameter > 4.5 cm (55.88%), high differentiation (89.50%), and negative nerve invasion (70.17%). The serum tumour markers (STMs) and peripheral blood routine indexes (PBRI) were significantly associated with obstructive status (p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the neutrophil and lymphocyte counts, carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19-9, carbohydrate antigen 125, albumin, alkaline phosphatase, gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, total protein, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were predictors of intestinal obstruction (p < 0.05). The AUC for the curve with all the eight factors was 0.715 (95% confidence interval: 0.673-0.758). The STMs and PBRI were related to the obstruction status of the patients, and they could be used in combination with other clinical factors to significantly improve diagnosis and management of intestinal obstruction in CRC patients.

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.

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.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Efficacy and safety of self-expanding metallic stent placement followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy and scheduled surgery for treatment of obstructing left-sided colonic cancer

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery for obstructing left-sided colon cancer.

Methods

Eleven consecutive patients with obstructing left-sided colon cancer between May 2014 and November 2015 were included retrospectively. All patients received SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The primary outcome measure was stoma and laparoscopic surgery.

Results

Chemotherapy was with two cycles of CAPOX (54.5%) or three cycles mFOLFOX6 (45.5%). Median serum albumin and hemoglobin levels before surgery were significantly higher than before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.01 and p = 0.008 respectively) and before SEMS (p = 0.01 and p = 0.003 respectively). Median bowel wall thickness proximal to the upper edge of tumor was significantly more before neoadjuvant chemotherapy than before stent (p = 0.003), and significantly less before surgery than before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.003). No patient underwent stoma creation. Laparoscopic surgery was performed in nine (81.8%) patients. No local recurrence or metastases developed over median cancer-specific follow-up of 44 months (range, 37–55 months).

Conclusion

SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery appears to be safe and well tolerated in patients with obstructing left-sided colon cancer.

Colonic stents for malignant bowel obstruction: current status and future prospects

Introduction: Although more than two decades are already passed from the first description of this technique, the debate remains open on the role of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) placement in the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO). According to most recent data, SEMS placement is considered a safe and effective alternative treatment as a bridge to surgery(BTS). In addition, stent placement should be considered as primary option for palliative treatment of obstructing cancer.Areas covered: Current status, indication, technique, oncological outcomes, advantages, and risks of SEMS placement in MBO were reviewed.Expert commentary: The placement of colonic SEMS for palliation and for BTS in patients with MBO has been increasingly reported and it seems to have several advantages over emergency surgery. Substantial concerns of tumor seeding following SEMS placement, especially in case of perforation, have been raised in numerous studies. Actually, no significant differences are reported in oncologic long-term survival between patients undergoing stent placement as a BTS and those undergoing emergency surgery. Considering all the mentioned factors, indication for colorectal stenting should be evaluated only in highly specialized centers, in the context of multidisciplinary approach where risks and benefits of stenting are carefully weighed, especially in the BTS setting.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery after placing a self-expanding metallic stent for malignant rectal obstruction: a case report

BACKGROUND

Approximately 20% of colorectal cancer patients show complete or incomplete bowel obstruction as an early symptom. Preoperative nonsurgical decompression such as placing a self-expanding metallic stent for malignant colorectal obstruction has been shown to be effective for reducing perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, there is a lack of published studies reporting robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) after self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement for malignant rectal obstruction (MRO). To our knowledge, this is the first report to do so.

CASE PRESENTATION

An 80-year-old man with incomplete paralysis of the lower limbs as well as bladder-rectal disorder due to a spine fracture sustained in a fall accident 26 years ago presented with lower abdominal pain and vomiting. Abdominal multi-detector computed tomography revealed an obstructive rectal tumor with distended bowel on the oral side. Emergency colonoscopy was performed, and an SEMS placed. The patency of SEMS and decompression of the distended bowel was confirmed, and elective RALS was performed 29 days after SEMS placement. To our knowledge, this is the first report of RALS after decompression with SEMS placement for MRO.

CONCLUSIONS

RALS after SEMS placement is a safe and feasible therapeutic strategy for MRO.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Bowel obstruction: a narrative review for all physicians

Small and large bowel obstructions are responsible for approximately 15% of hospital admissions for acute abdominal pain in the USA and ~ 20% of cases needing acute surgical care. Starting from the analysis of a common clinical problem, we want to guide primary care physicians in the initial management of a patient presenting with acute abdominal pain associated with intestinal obstruction.

Acute abdominal obstruction: Colon stent or emergency surgery? An evidence-based review

According to the American Cancer Society and Colorectal Cancer Statistics 2017, colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death in the world in 2018. Previous studies demonstrated that 8%-29% of patients with primary CRC present malignant colonic obstruction (MCO). In the past, emergency surgery has been the primary treatment for MCO, although morbidity and surgical mortality rates are higher in these settings than in elective procedures. In the 1990s, self-expanding metal stents appeared and was a watershed in the treatment of patients in gastrointestinal surgical emergencies. The studies led to high expectations because the use of stents could prevent surgical intervention, such as colostomy, leading to lower morbidity and mortality, possibly resulting in higher quality of life. This review was designed to provide present evidence of the indication, technique, outcomes, benefits, and risks of these treatments in acute MCO through the analysis of previously published studies and current guidelines.

A Pediatric Nasogastroscope Facilitates Colorectal Endoscopic Stenting

PURPOSE

Endoscopic placement of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) to relieve malignant colorectal obstruction has been widely accepted in clinical practice. Despite increasing experience, early and late complications occur with an incidence ranging from 4% to 20%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We have adopted a modification in the technique. A pediatric nasogastroscope (4.8 mm in diameter) has been used to pass the obstruction. It is possible to have a direct vision of the anatomy and pathology, and to pass the guidewire above the obstruction, through the nasogastroscope, under direct vision. Fluoroscopy was also used to follow the course of the guidewire and deployment of the stent.

RESULTS

Early and late complications have been reduced with the new technique.

CONCLUSIONS

In the most recent experience of 64 patients, early and late complications have been reduced significantly. This new technique reduces radiation exposure by 70% for the patients and for the operators.

Laparoscopic colectomy after self-expanding metallic stent placement through the ileocecal valve for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction: A case report

A 78-year-old man with a history of open sigmoidectomy for sigmoid cancer presented with abdominal pain and vomiting. Abdominal multi-detector CT revealed an obstructive ileocecal tumor with distended small bowel on the oral side. We performed emergency drainage using a transnasal decompression tube, and 2 days later, we conducted a colonoscopic examination, which lead to a provisional diagnosis of obstruction with a malignant tumor invading the ileocecal valve. We then placed a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) through the ileocecal valve. We confirmed patency of the ileocecal valve and removed the transnasal decompression tube 2 days after SEMS placement. We then performed elective laparoscopic colectomy 8 days after SEMS placement. To the best of our knowledge, there has been only one previous report of laparoscopic colectomy after decompression with SEMS placement through the ileocecal valve for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

Percutaneous Antegrade Colonic Stent Insertion Using a Proximal Trans-peritoneal Colopexy Technique

INTRODUCTION

Conventionally, colonic stents are inserted with a retrograde trans-anal approach-however, stenting of right-sided or proximal transverse colon lesions may pose a challenge due to tortuosity or long distances. We report three successful cases of percutaneous antegrade colonic stenting in patients using a proximal trans-peritoneal colopexy technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three patients underwent a proximal trans-peritoneal colopexy technique for antegrade colonic stent placement. The patients included three males, ages 89, 92 and 55, who were unsuitable for conventional methods. All patients had a colopexy with the aid of three gastropexy sutures performed under CT or fluoroscopic guidance and subsequent colonic access, followed by the crossing lesion and subsequent deployment of an uncovered colonic stent. A 10-Fr pigtail catheter was exchanged for the sheath, capped and left in place along with the colopexy suture anchors.

RESULTS

Percutaneous antegrade colonic stent placement was technically successful in all patients with no complications. Follow-up at 10 days, a tubogram confirmed stent patency. The pigtail drain and suture anchors were subsequently removed.

CONCLUSION

Antegrade colonic stenting with the use of a three point colopexy is a straightforward well-tolerated procedure and is a useful technique in a cohort of patients in whom conventional stenting has failed/is unsuitable. Additionally, we believe we have reported the first two cases involving transverse colon access for stenting.

Malignant Bowel Obstruction in Advanced Gynecologic Cancers: An Updated Review from a Multidisciplinary Perspective

Malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a major complication in women with advanced gynecologic cancers which imposes a significant burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare systems. Symptoms of MBO are challenging to palliate and result in progressive decompensation of already vulnerable patients with limited therapeutic options and a short prognosis. However, there is a paucity of guidelines or innovative approaches to improve the care of women who develop MBO. MBO is a complex clinical situation that requires a multidisciplinary approach to ensure the appropriate treatment modality and interprofessional care to optimally manage these patients. This review summarizes the current literature on the different approaches targeting MBO management including surgical intervention, chemotherapy, total parenteral nutrition, and pharmacological treatment. In addition, the impact of MBO management on patients' quality of life (QOL) is examined. This article focuses on the challenges in developing evidence-based treatment guidelines for MBO and barriers in clinical trial design for MBO and proposes strategies to advance the MBO management. Collaboration is essential to design studies that may improve the overall care and quality of life for these patients. Prospective data are needed to inform clinical practice, establish a new benchmark for evidence-based MBO management, and better understand the biology of MBO.

Stent as bridge to surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction reduces adverse events and stoma rate compared with emergency surgery: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Twenty years after the first description of the technique, the debate is still open on the role of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to elective surgery for symptomatic left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. The aim was to compare morbidity rates after colonic stenting bridge to surgery (SBTS) versus emergency surgery (ES) for left-sided malignant obstruction.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on SBTS or ES for acute symptomatic malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction. The primary outcome was overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 8 RCTs and 497 patients. Overall mortality within 60 days after surgery was 9.6% in SBTS-treated patients and 9.9% in ES-treated patients (relative risk [RR], 0.99; P = .97). Overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery was 33.9% in SBTS-treated patients and 51.2% in ES-treated patients (RR, 0.59; P = .023). The temporary stoma rate was 33.9% after SBTS and 51.4% after ES (RR, 0.67; P < .001). The permanent stoma rate was 22.2% after SBTS and 35.2% after ES (RR, 0.66; P = .003). Primary anastomosis was successful in 70.0% of SBTS-treated patients and 54.1% of ES-treated patients (RR, 1.29; P = .043).

CONCLUSIONS

SBTS was associated with lower short-term overall morbidity and lower rates of temporary and permanent stoma. Depending on multiple factors such as local expertise, clinical status including level of obstruction, and level of certainty of diagnosis, SBTS does offer some advantages with less risk than ES for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction in the short term.

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

Importance

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

Objective

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

Design, Setting, and Participants

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

Exposures

Palliative stenting vs stoma creation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

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

Results

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

Conclusions and Relevance

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

Self-expanding metallic stent improves histopathologic edema compared with transanal drainage tube for malignant colorectal obstruction

AIMS

To compare the usefulness of the self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) with that of the transanal drainage tube (TDT) and emergency surgery after failure of decompression (ESFD) in patients with malignant colonic obstruction (MCO), and to evaluate post-decompression histopathologic changes.

METHODS

From January 2010 to June 2015, 39 patients with MCO received SEMS, TDT, and ESFD. We evaluated the outcomes including success rates of placement, clinical outcomes after decompression, and histopathologic findings of the resected specimens.

RESULTS

Technical success rates were 100% for SEMS and 78.9% for TDT. Clinical success rates were 100% for SEMS and 80.0% for TDT. Postoperative ileus was significantly less frequent after SEMS than after TDT (p = 0.014). Histopathologic edema grade was significantly lower for SEMS than for TDT and ESFD (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between edema grade and duration of decompression in the TDT group (p = 0.629), while all patients with SEMS were classified in a low edema grade (grade 0-2). The rate of stoma creation was significantly higher in patients with a high edema grade (grade 3) than in those with a low edema grade (grade 0-2) (p = 0.003). There was no microscopic perforation in any group.

CONCLUSION

Significantly greater resolution of histopathologic edema was achieved after placement of SEMS than after placement of TDT. These findings provide an indication of favorable clinical outcomes of SEMS in comparison with TDT and ESFD. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Examination of Physicians' Perception of the Indications of Colorectal Stents in the Management of Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction: A Provincial Survey

Introduction. Data are conflicting when assessing indications for colorectal self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) in managing acute malignant large bowel obstruction (MLO). In November 2014, European and American Societies published guidelines to aid in understanding which patients might benefit from colorectal stenting. Yet, there remain marked disparities in clinical practice. Methods. A web-based survey was sent to Gastroenterologists and Surgical Specialists across Quebec to assess physicians' knowledge and adherence to the indications for colonic SEMS placement in the management of MLO using eight clinical scenarios. Results. Out of 112 respondents, 74% preferred surgical intervention in young, healthy individuals with MLO. Advanced age and comorbidities motivated 56.3% (95% CI 47.1-65.5%) of participants to opt for SEMS placement. In palliative settings of patients undergoing chemotherapy including bevacizumab, a minority of respondents followed guidelines, 12.5% (95% CI 6.4-18.6%) for young patients and 25.0% for elderly patients (95% CI 17.0-33.0%). The pooled overall adherence to guidelines was 50.4% (95% CI 40.7-59.3%). Conclusion. This survey suggests that guidelines recommendations are not being implemented by at least half of specialists involved in the care of patients with MLO. Future studies should attempt to identify possible barriers responsible for this impaired knowledge translation and tailored educational initiatives planned accordingly.