Comparison of one-stage resection and anastomosis of acute complete obstruction of left and right colon

Large Bowel Obstruction: Etiologies, Diagnosis, and Management

Large bowel obstructions (LBOs) often require urgent surgical intervention. Diagnosis relies on astute history and physical examination, as well as imaging with computed tomography (CT) scan for stable patients. Because of the high mortality associated with colonic perforation in patients with LBOs, decisive surgical decision-making is needed for optimal outcomes. This review seeks to provide an overview of the etiologies of LBO, diagnosis, and general management principles, as well as specific management for the most common etiologies, including colorectal cancer and strictures.

Colorectal Oncologic Emergencies: Recognition, Management, and Outcomes

Colorectal cancer is the third most frequent type of malignancy in the United States, and the age at diagnosis is decreasing. Although the goal of screening is focused on prevention and early detection, a subset of patients inevitably presents as oncologic emergencies. Approximately 15% of patients with colorectal cancer will present as surgical emergencies, with the majority being due to either colonic perforation or obstruction. Patients presenting with colorectal emergencies are a challenging cohort, as they often present at an advanced stage with an increase in T stage, lymphovascular invasion, and metachronous liver disease.

Surgical treatment and overall survival in patients with right-sided obstructing colon cancer-a nationwide retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare baseline characteristics, 90-day mortality and overall survival (OS) between patients with obstructing and non-obstructing right-sided colon cancer at a national level.

METHODS

All patients who underwent resection for right-sided colon cancer between January 2015 and December 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and stratified for obstruction. Primary outcome was 5-year OS after excluding 90-day mortality as assessed by the Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 525 patients (7%) with obstructing and 6891 patients (93%) with non-obstructing right-sided colon cancer were included. Patients with right-sided obstructing colon cancer (OCC) were older and had more often transverse tumour location, and the pathological T and N stage was more advanced than in those without obstruction (p < 0.001). The 90-day mortality in patients with right-sided OCC was higher compared to that in patients with non-obstructing colon cancer: 10% versus 3%, respectively (p < 0.001). The 5-year OS of those surviving 90 days postoperatively was 42% in patients with OCC versus 73% in patients with non-obstructing colon cancer, respectively (p < 0.001). Worse 5-year OS was found in patients with right-sided OCC for all stages. Obstruction was an independent risk factor for decreased OS in right-sided colon cancer (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.57-2.03).

CONCLUSION

In addition to increased risk of postoperative mortality, a stage-independent worse 5-year OS after excluding 90-day mortality was found in patients with right-sided OCC compared to patients without obstruction.

Self-expandable metallic stent as bridge to surgery vs. emergency resection in obstructive right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Emergency resection is common for malignant right-sided obstructive colon cancer. As there is evidence showing a potential benefit of self-expandable metal stents as a bridge to surgery, a new debate has been initiated.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare self-expandable metal stents with emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer.

DATA SOURCE

A systematic search was conducted accessing Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting either emergency surgery or stent placement in right-sided obstructive colon cancer were included.

INTERVENTION

Stent or emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Morbidity rate, mortality rate, stoma rate, laparoscopic resection rate, anastomotic insufficiency rate, success rate of stent.

RESULTS

A total of 6343 patients from 16 publications were analyzed. The stent success rate was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87 to 0.95) with perforation of 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06). Emergency resection was performed laparoscopically at a rate of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.24). Primary anastomosis rate in emergency resection was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91 to 0.97) with an anastomotic insufficiency rate of 0.07 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.11). The mortality rate after emergency resection was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.09). Primary anastomosis and anastomotic insufficiency rate were similar between the two groups (RR: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.1; p = 0.56 and RR: 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.93; p = 0.33). The mortality rate in emergency resection was higher compared to stent (RR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 10.89, p = 0.016).

LIMITATION

No randomized controlled trials are available.

CONCLUSION

Stent is a safe and successful alternative to emergency resection and may increase the rate of minimally invasive surgery. Emergency resection, however, remains safe and did not result in higher rate of anastomotic insufficiency. Further high-quality comparative studies are warranted to assess long-term outcomes.

Surgical outcomes and prognostic factors associated with emergency left colonic surgery

BACKGROUND

Mortality from emergency left-sided colorectal surgery can be substantial due to acuteness of the presentation and the urgent need to operate in the setting of a limited preparation in a morbid patient.

OBJECTIVES

Determine the 30-day postoperative outcomes and identify risk factors for complications and mortality following emergency colorectal operations.

DESIGN

Retrospective SETTINGS: Three tertiary hospitals in three countries.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Factors that were studied included age, sex, ASA score, type and extent of the operation, and presence/absence of malignancy. Unadjusted 30-day patient outcomes examined were complications and mortality. Differences in proportions were assessed using the Pearson chi-square test while logistic regression analyses were carried out to evaluate the correlation between risk factors and outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality SAMPLE SIZE: 104 patients.

RESULTS

Among 104 patients, 70 (67.3%) were men, and 34 (32.7%) were women. The mean (SD) age was 57.2 (17.1) years. The most common indication for emergency colonic surgery was malignant obstruction in 33 (31.7%) patients. The postoperative complication rate was 24% (25/104), and the mortality rate was 12.5% (13/104) within 30 days of the operation. The ASA status (P=.02), presence of malignancy (P=.02), and the presence of complications (P=.004) were significantly related to mortality in the multivariable logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The 30-day mortality of emergency colorectal operations is greatly influenced by the presence of malignancy in the colon and physiological status at the time of the procedure.

LIMITATIONS

The retrospective design and small sample size.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Outcomes according to treatment modalities as a bridge to curative surgery for malignant obstruction of the proximal colon: stent versus stoma

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The optimal treatment for acute malignant obstruction of the proximal colon (MOPC, proximal to the splenic flexure) remains challenging. Emergency resection, the traditional modality for MOPC, has shown significantly high mortality and morbidity rates, according to recent studies. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of stent vs stoma as a bridge to curative surgery for MOPC.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 72 patients who underwent endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) or loop ileostomy for MOPC at six referral centers between January 2011 and July 2021. Clinical and pathological characteristics, procedure-related complications, and long-term mortality rates after curative surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up period of 32 months, 30 patients (41.7%) underwent ileostomy preferentially for more proximal cancer, complete obstruction, and advanced tumor stage compared to the SEMS group. No difference was found in procedure-related complications, but five deaths were observed after ileostomy. Survival analysis for 5-year mortality after curative surgery showed no significant difference between the bridge modalities (log-rank p = 0.253).

CONCLUSION

In this study, SEMS as a bridge to surgery showed relatively safe results in terms of post-procedural mortality. However, these results should be considered when performing ileostomy in patients with more advanced malignant obstruction.

Case report: Stent-first strategy as a potential approach in the management of malignant right-sided colonic obstruction with cardiovascular risks

In obstructing left-sided colonic or rectal cancer, endoscopic stent placement with the purpose of decompression and bridge to elective colon resection has been widely utilized and accepted. However, in malignant right-sided colonic obstruction, stent placement prior to colectomy is still highly controversial, due to lower clinical success and high anastomotic leak. We report a case of malignant right-sided colonic obstruction based on the radiological findings of irregular thickening of ascending colon wall and dilation of proximal large bowel on enhanced computed tomography scan. The 72-year-old woman presented with obvious abdominal distension. Due to concerning cardiovascular complications as intermittent chest pain and a long history of type 2 diabetes, a three-step therapeutic plan was instigated. Initially, a self-expandable metallic stent was placed palliatively to relieve the bowel obstruction. Consecutively, coronary angiography was performed, and two coronary stents were implanted to alleviate more than 80% stenosis of two main coronary arteries. One month later, laparoscopic radical resection of right colon and lymphadenectomy were successfully performed, with a blood loss less than 50 millimeters and a harvest of 29 lymph nodes, 1 being positive. The patient was discharged one week postoperatively with no complications, and received adjuvant chemotherapy one month later. During a follow-up of more than one year, the patient was in complete remission with no recurrence and cardiovascular events. In patients presenting with malignant right-sided colonic obstruction and peril of high cardiovascular risks, we propose colonic and coronary stent-first strategy to emergency surgery as a potential approach so as to ensure sufficient cardiovascular preparation improving perioperative safety. Moreover, the anatomical location of the tumor would be significantly achievable thus granting high-quality radical colon resection and lymphadenectomy.

Clinical outcomes of palliative self-expandable metal stent placement in right- and left-sided malignant colon obstruction: A Honam Association for the Study of Intestinal Disease (HASID) multicenter study

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is commonly used for palliation of left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO). However, right-sided MCO is usually treated surgically. Recent studies that compared palliative SEMS insertion and emergency surgery in right-sided MCOs have reported conflicting results. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of palliative SEMS placement in left-sided MCOs and right-sided MCOs and to investigate the predictive factors for clinical success and risk factors for complications. Data from 469 patients who underwent palliative SEMS placement for MCO at 6 hospitals in the Honam province of South Korea between 2009 and 2018 were reviewed. Among them, 69 patients with right-sided MCO and 400 patients with left-sided MCO who underwent SEMS placement for palliative purposes were enrolled. Clinical success, overall survival, complications, and predictive factors for clinical success and risk factors for complications were included as the main outcome measures. The clinical success rates were 97.1% (65/67) in right-sided MCO patients and 88.2% (353/400) in left-sided MCO patients. Complications including stent migration, tumor ingrowth, outgrowth, perforation, bacteremia/fever, and bleeding occurred in 10.1% (7/69) of right-sided MCO patients and 19.9% (79/400) of left-sided MCO patients. The mean overall survival of right-sided MCO was 28.02 months and 18.23 months for left-sided MCO. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, T3 stage tumors and the use of uncovered stents were significant factors for the clinical success of SEMS. The use of covered stents and performance status score of 0 to 2 were independent significant risk factors for complications. Palliative SEMS placement in right-sided MCO showed better clinical success rates than left-sided MCO. The use of uncovered stents is recommended for higher clinical success rates and lower complication rates.

Differences in clinical outcomes according to the time interval between the bridge to surgery stenting and surgery for left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction

Background

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is commonly used as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO). However, the optimal time interval between BTS stenting and surgery for left-sided MCO is unclear, and the results of previous studies are conflicting. This study aimed to determine the differences in clinical outcomes according to the time interval between BTS stenting and surgery in left-sided MCO.

Methods

Data from 594 patients who underwent SEMS placement for MCO between January 2009 and December 2018 were reviewed. Among them, 148 patients who underwent SEMS placement as BTS treatment and curative surgery were enrolled. The enrolled patients were divided into three groups according to the interval between BTS stenting and surgery: group 1 (interval ≤2 weeks), group 2 (interval 2–3 weeks), and group 3 (interval >3 weeks).

Results

Group 2 and 3 patients underwent significantly higher rates of laparoscopic surgery than those in group 1 (83.7, 81.0 vs. 53.2 %, respectively; P=0.003, P=0.003, respectively). Also, rates of stoma formation directly after resection were significantly higher in group 1 compared to groups 2 and 3 (21.3 vs 2.3, 6.9%, respectively; P=0.008, P=0.043, respectively). Bridging interval had no effect on SEMS-related complications, resection-related complications, 90-day mortality, permanent stoma formation, 3-year disease-free survival, and 3-year overall survival.

Conclusions

A bridging interval of > 2 weeks between BTS stenting and surgery for left-sided MCO is preferable for lower stoma formation rates and higher rates of laparoscopic approach operation, with no difference in short-term and long-term outcomes including complication, mortality, and survival.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-022-02644-9.

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.

Timing and outcome of right- vs left-sided colonic anastomotic leaks: Is there a difference?

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leaks (AL) contribute to postoperative mortality, prolonged hospitalization, and increased health care costs. While left-sided AL (LAL) are well described in the literature, there is a paucity of studies on outcomes and management of right-sided AL (RAL). This study aimed to compare the timing of RAL versus LAL, and the variable diagnosis, management and outcomes of RAL versus LAL. We hypothesized that the timing of RAL may be later compared to LAL and may result in worse overall outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative intent surgery for neoplastic disease from January 1995 to December 2015 were included. Patients that underwent an anastomosis below the peritoneal reflection, neoadjuvant treatment, fecal diversion, previous colectomy/anastomosis, multiple anastomoses, and patients with inflammatory bowel disease or hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes were excluded. Patient demographics, neoplastic data, operative data, time to AL, methods utilized for diagnosis of AL, and management of AL were collected. The primary endpoint was timing of AL, and secondary endpoints were management and outcome based on RAL versus LAL. RAL and LAL were analyzed and compared using Chi-squared and categorical variables were expressed as number (percentage) and continuous variables expressed as median (interquartile range).

RESULTS

A total of 2223 patients underwent oncologic resection for colonic neoplasia (1457 right sided and 766 left sided anastomoses). 67% of patients were male and median age was 69 years (range, 34-91). There were 48 total AL events (2.16%): 26 RAL (1.78%) and 22 LAL (2.87%). There was no statistical difference in leak rates between RAL and LAL and no difference in time to diagnosis or management (Table 1). RAL had significantly decreased operative time (p = 0.016), decreased intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.002), and increased diagnosis by CT/plain radiograph (p = 0.04). All patients that underwent surgery for leak had some form of fecal diversion performed. Morbidity and mortality were comparable between groups (p = 0.70; p = 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found overall very low AL rates with comparable timing of RAL and LAL, and no difference in management or outcome of RAL vs. LAL. These findings are informative for patient and surgeon expectations before and after surgery and when AL is suspected.

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.

Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction

Large bowel obstruction is a serious and potentially life-threatening surgical emergency which is associated with high morbidity and mortality rate. The most common etiology is colorectal cancer which accounts for over 60% of all large bowel obstructions. Proper assessment, thoughtful decision-making and prompt treatment is necessary to decrease the high morbidity and mortality which is associated with this entity. Knowledge of the key elements regarding the presentation of a patient with a large bowel obstruction will help the surgeon in formulating an appropriate treatment plan for the patient. Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the various treatment options available is necessary when caring for these patients. This chapter will review the presentation of patients with malignant large bowel obstruction, discuss the various diagnostic modalities available, as well as discuss treatment options and the various clinical scenarios in which they are most appropriately utilized.

Large Bowel Obstruction

Nearly one-quarter of bowel obstructions occur in the large bowel. As with all bowel obstructions, large bowel obstructions have three defining characteristics: partial or complete, intrinsic or extrinsic, benign or malignant. The work-up for a large bowel obstruction should focus on the etiology of the obstruction as well as severity. Management strategy is contingent on the previous characteristics and can include endoscopy, diversion, or resection. This chapter will discuss common and rare etiologies of large bowel obstructions as well as management strategies for clinical guidance.

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.

When simple hernia is not that simple: Treatment of concomitant pathology in acute care surgery, a case report

•

Highlighting the possibility of concurrent double pathology in acute care surgery.

•

Conflicting clinical features can delay the diagnosis and alter the management.

•

High index od suspicious is paramount in the interpretation of patient findings.

•

In comorbid patients, we can expand the indication of radiology in small ventral hernia.

•

One-stage colonic resection is still feasible in acute colonic obstruction even in.

Introduction

Obstructed colon cancer is not an uncommon surgical emergency. Many other surgical diseases may overlap their presenting symptoms. This paper aims to report a colon cancer case with delayed diagnosis due to a long-standing para-umbilical hernia (PUH).

Case report

60-year-old female patient presented to our emergency department (ED) with an obstructed PUH. The patient underwent watchful conservative management many times before due to associated comorbidities. This history of recurrent intestinal obstruction and incomplete regain of regular bowel habits after every hospital admission raises the possibility for concealed pathology. Further investigations, including computed tomography (CT), revealed a suspicion of an obstructed malignant mass at the colon's splenic flexure accompanied with complete bowel obstruction. The patient and their family consulted for exploratory laparotomy and the possibility of stoma formation. The intra-operative finding was constant with a small ventral defect, and a dilated bowel loops up to a left colon transition zone. We achieved left hemicolectomy with a primary anastomosis after intra-operative bowel lavage. The postoperative period was uneventfully, and the patient was discharged home after seven days of admission. Follow up in the outpatient surgical clinic for three months revealed no recordable complications. The patient had transferred to the oncology center for the completion of adjuvant therapy.

Discussion

This case had a small PUH with recurrent obstruction. The delay in its management was due to the patient's comorbidities. However, the incomplete resolution of patient symptoms during watchful oversight increases the likelihood of another hidden pathology that required further investigation. We expanded CT indication in such patients to find the exact cause of patient symptoms, especially chronic constipation and incomplete recovery after every admission. While concurrent pathology is the norm in elective surgery and can be dealt with safely, in non-elective surgery, a thorough search about the patient's exact complaints is mandatory to decrease morbidity and mortality rates.

Conclusion

In the same patient, both colon cancer and abdominal wall hernias can produce conflicting symptoms and delay diagnosis. However, with a high index of suspicion and correlation of patient symptoms, can be safely managed without morbidity.

Large Bowel Obstruction in the Setting of Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma

Large bowel obstruction (LBO) is a potential surgical emergency, commonly caused by colorectal carcinoma, diverticular stricture, and volvulus. LBO secondary to chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) is a rare occurrence. We report an 81-year-old man with a history of CLL/SLL who presented to the emergency department with episodes of abdominal cramps and discomfort, diarrhea, vomiting, subjective flushes, and sweats. After a thorough evaluation, the patient was found to have a malignancy-mediated mechanical LBO at the hepatic flexure due to colonic compression by extensive pericolic lymphadenopathy. After resuscitation and medical optimization, an urgent laparotomy with oncologic right hemicolectomy was performed. Analysis of resected specimens, including lymph nodes, revealed atypical CD23- CLL/SLL cells. Postoperatively, aside from temporary ileus, the patient recovered well and was discharged home.

Stent as a bridge to surgery or immediate colectomy for malignant right colonic obstruction: propensity-scored, national database study

Background

The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of urgent colectomy and placement of a self-expanding metallic stent followed by colectomy for patients with malignant right colonic obstruction. Right-sided malignant obstruction is less common than left-sided. Stenting for malignant left colonic obstruction has been reported to reduce postoperative complications. However, the impact of stenting for malignant right colonic obstruction remains undefined.

Methods

The study included patients with right-sided malignant obstruction or stenosis undergoing colectomy between April 2012 and March 2017 identified from a nationwide database. Propensity score matching analysis was used to compare mortality and morbidity rates, proportion receiving a stoma and postoperative stay between urgent colectomy and stent groups.

Results

From 9572 patients, 1500 pairs were generated by propensity score matching. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between the urgent colostomy and stent groups (1·6 versus 0·9 per cent respectively; P = 0·069). Complications were more common after urgent colectomy than stenting (22·1 versus 19·1 per cent; P = 0·042). Surgical-site infection was more likely with urgent colectomy (7·1 versus 4·4 per cent; P = 0·001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in anastomotic leakage (3·8 versus 2·6 per cent; P = 0·062). The proportion of patients needing a stoma was higher with urgent colectomy than primary treatment with stents (5·1 versus 1·7 per cent; P &lt; 0·001). Postoperative stay was longer after urgent colectomy (15 versus 13 days; P &lt; 0·001).

Conclusion

Stenting followed by colectomy in patients with malignant right colonic obstruction may provide more favourable perioperative outcomes than urgent colectomy.

Right-sided vs. left-sided obstructing colonic cancer: results of a multicenter study of the French Surgical Association in 2325 patients and literature review

PURPOSE

Few studies compared management and outcomes of obstructing colonic cancer (OCC), according to the tumor site. Our aim was to compare patient and tumor characteristics, postoperative and pathological results, and oncological outcomes after emergency management of right-sided vs. left-sided OCC.

METHODS

A national cohort study including all consecutive patients managed for OCC from 2000 to 2015 in French surgical centers members of the French National Surgical Association (AFC).

RESULTS

During the study period, 2325 patients with OCC were divided in right-sided (n = 819, 35%) and left-sided (n = 1506, 65%) locations. Patients with right-sided OCC were older, more frequently females, and associated with comorbidities, history of cancer, or previous laparotomy. Surgical management was more frequently performed for right-sided than left-sided OCC (99 vs. 96%, p < 0.0001). Tumor resection was more frequently performed in right-sided OCC (95 vs. 90%, p < 0.0001). Among the resected patients, primary anastomosis was more frequently performed in case of right-sided OCC (86 vs. 62%, p < 0.0001). Definitive stoma rate was lower in right-sided location (17 vs. 46%, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between locations in terms of cumulative morbidity, anastomotic leak, unplanned reoperation, and mortality. Five-year overall and disease-free survival rates were significantly lower in right-sided OCC (43 and 36%) than in left-sided OCC (53 and 46%, p < 0.0001 and p = 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients with right-sided OCC are frailer than left-sided OCC, tumor resection and anastomosis are more frequently performed, without difference in surgical results. However, right-sided OCC is associated with worse prognosis than distal location.

Comparison of decompression tubes with metallic stents for the management of right-sided malignant colonic obstruction

BACKGROUND

Emergency surgical resection is a standard treatment for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction; however, the procedure is associated with high rates of mortality and morbidity. Although a bridge to surgery can be created to obviate the need for emergency surgery, its effects on long-term outcomes and the most practical management strategies for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction remain unclear.

AIM

To determine the appropriate management approach for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

METHODS

Forty patients with right-sided malignant colonic obstruction who underwent curative resection from January 2007 to April 2017 were included in the study. We compared the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients who received bridges to surgery established using decompression tubes and those created using self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS). The primary outcome was the overall survival duration (OS) and the secondary endpoints were the disease-free survival (DFS) duration and the preoperative and postoperative morbidity rates. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

There were 21 patients in the decompression tube group and 19 in the SEMS group. There were no significant differences in the perioperative morbidity rates of the two groups. The OS rate was significantly higher in the decompression tube group than in the SEMS group (5-year OS rate; decompression tube 79.5%, SEMS 32%, P = 0.043). Multivariate analysis revealed that the bridge to surgery using a decompression tube was significantly associated with the OS (hazard ratio, 17.41; P = 0.004). The 3-year DFS rate was significantly higher in the decompression tube group than in the SEMS group (68.9% vs 45.9%; log-rank test, P = 0.032). A propensity score–adjusted analysis also demonstrated that the prognosis was significantly better in the decompression tube group than in the SEMS group.

CONCLUSION

The bridge to surgery using trans-nasal and trans-anal decompression tubes for right-sided malignant colonic obstruction is safe and may improve long-term outcomes.

Do Self-Expanding Metal Stents as a Bridge to Surgery Benefit All Patients with Obstructive Left-Side Colorectal Cancers?

Background

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been increasingly used in patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (OLCC); however, stent-specific complications (e.g., perforations) might worsen the long-term survival outcome. Strict indication needed to be identified to confirm the benefit subgroups. This study was designed to explore the indication for emergency surgery (ES) and SEMS in patients with OLCC and to suggest optimal strategies for individuals.

Methods

After propensity score matching, 36 pairs were included. Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes (3-year overall survival (OS) and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS)) were compared between the ES and SEMS groups. Independent risk factors were evaluated among subgroups. Stratification survival analysis was performed to identify subgroups that would benefit from SEMS placement or ES.

Results

The perioperative outcomes were similar between the SEMS and ES groups. The 3-year OS was comparable between the SEMS (73.5%) and ES (60.0%) groups, and the 3-year DFS in the SEMS group (69.7%) was similar to that in the ES group (57.1%). The pT stage was an independent risk factor for 3-year DFS (p = 0.014) and 3-year OS (p = 0.010) in the SEMS group. The comorbidity status (p = 0.049) independently affected 3-year DFS in the ES group. The 3-year OS rate was influenced by the cM stage (p = 0.003). Patients with non-pT4 stages in the SEMS group showed obviously better 3-year OS (95.0%) than the other subgroups. The 3-year OS rate was 36.4% in the ES group when patients had a worse comorbidity status than their counterparts.

Conclusion

SEMS might be preferred for patients of obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer in the "high-operative risk group" with existing comorbidities or those without locally advanced invasion, such as the non-pT4-stage status.

Comparison of the long-term outcomes of the self-expandable metallic stent and transanal decompression tube for obstructive colorectal cancer

AIM

Endoscopic decompression using the self-expandable metallic colonic stent (SEMS) or transanal decompression tube (TDT) can convert emergency surgery into elective one-stage surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC). The aim of the present study was to clarify the effect of SEMS and TDT on long-term oncological outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 76 consecutive pathological stage II and III OCRC patients who were inserted with SEMS or TDT as a bridge to curative surgery between 2009 and 2018.

RESULTS

There were 53 SEMS cases and 23 TDT cases. The tumor was located in the left colon in 58 cases and in the right colon in 18 cases. The interval between the decompression and the surgery was 16.5 days in the SEMS group and 13.0 days in the TDT group (P = 0.09). Technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 100% for SEMS, and 95% and 91% for TDT, respectively. Stoma was created in four patients in the SEMS group, and in five in the TDT group (P = 0.08). Three-year overall survival rates of the SEMS and TDT groups were 82% and 86% (P = 0.94), and disease-free survival rates were 68% and 62% (P = 0.79), respectively. The recurrence pattern was not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

This study found no statistically significant differences between the effects of SEMS and TDT for OCRC as a bridge to surgery on long-term outcomes.

2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation

ᅟ

Obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer represent challenging matters in terms of diagnosis, life-saving strategies, obstruction resolution and oncologic challenge. The aims of the current paper are to update the previous WSES guidelines for the management of large bowel perforation and obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) and to develop new guidelines on obstructive right colon carcinoma (ORCC).

Methods

The literature was extensively queried for focused publication until December 2017. Precise analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group formed by a pool of experts: the statements and literature review were presented, discussed and voted at the Consensus Conference of the 4th Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) held in Campinas in May 2017.

Results

CT scan is the best imaging technique to evaluate large bowel obstruction and perforation. For OLCC, self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), when available, offers interesting advantages as compared to emergency surgery; however, the positioning of SEMS for surgically treatable causes carries some long-term oncologic disadvantages, which are still under analysis. In the context of emergency surgery, resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) is preferable to Hartmann’s procedure, whenever the characteristics of the patient and the surgeon are permissive. Right-sided loop colostomy is preferable in rectal cancer, when preoperative therapies are predicted.

With regards to the treatment of ORCC, right colectomy represents the procedure of choice; alternatives, such as internal bypass and loop ileostomy, are of limited value.

Clinical scenarios in the case of perforation might be dramatic, especially in case of free faecal peritonitis. The importance of an appropriate balance between life-saving surgical procedures and respect of oncologic caveats must be stressed. In selected cases, a damage control approach may be required.

Medical treatments including appropriate fluid resuscitation, early antibiotic treatment and management of co-existing medical conditions according to international guidelines must be delivered to all patients at presentation.

Conclusions

The current guidelines offer an extensive overview of available evidence and a qualitative consensus regarding management of large bowel obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer.

Surgical management of obstructive right-sided colon cancer at a national level results of a multicenter study of the French Surgical Association in 776 patients

AIM

To report the results of surgery for obstructive right colon cancer (ORCC) and to identify risk factors associated with worse outcomes that may help surgeons to choose the best surgical option.

METHODS

This is a retrospective national cohort study, including all patients operated on for ORCC from 2000 to 2015. Those treated with colonic stent or symptomatic treatment were excluded. We described outcomes after surgery for ORCC and performed multivariate analyses for mortality, morbidity and survival.

RESULTS

Among 776 patients analyzed, 716 (92%) had their primary tumor removed, with primary anastomosis in 582 (82%). The remaining 194 underwent anastomosis with loop ileostomy (n = 21), resection with double-end stoma (n = 113), defunctioning stoma without resection (n = 48) and ileocolic by-pass (n = 12). Postoperative mortality, morbidity and anastomotic leak rates were 10%, 51% and 14%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, age >70, ASA score ≥3 and hemodynamic instability were predictors of postoperative mortality whereas ASA score ≥3, hemodynamic instability and intra-operative complications were predictors of severe morbidity. No factors were correlated with anastomotic leak. After a median follow-up of 26 months, 8% of patients were alive with a permanent stoma. Five-year overall, disease-free and cancer-specific survival was 42%, 42% and 62%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, peritonitis, synchronous metastases and absence of adjuvant chemotherapy were predictors of decreased overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency surgery for ORCC is associated with high mortality and morbidity. Two third of patients with ORCC can be managed with resection and primary anastomosis. For high-risk patients, a staged surgical management may be discussed.

Laparoscopic versus open colectomy for obstructing right colon cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hemicolectomy is the treatment of choice for intestinal obstruction from right colon cancer. This review compares the laparoscopic vs open access in hemicolectomy for patients with right colon cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies published after January 2017 was performed according to the Prisma guidelines. The study has been recorded on the Prospero register (CRD42016044108).

RESULTS

Five studies were included for review. Only one anastomotic leak was reported in conventional open anastomosis group (1.9%) and none of the studies included in the meta-analysis reported re-operations during the first 30 postoperative days. The 30-day postoperative mortality did not differ between the two groups. The length of incision, blood loss, early mobilization after surgery, the 30-day postoperative overall complication rate and hospital length of stay were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group. The difference in the duration of procedure was statistically significant in favor of the open group. The number of dissected lymph nodes, the overall survival at 5 years and time to flatus were described only in one study, without any significant difference. Finally, none of the trials reported any information concerning differences in the costs between the two techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The better outcomes described in this study achieved with laparoscopy, must be interpreted with caution because of the small number of patients involved, the selection and publication bias and the low level of evidence of the analysed trials. Indeed, the advantages of a minimally invasive approach, which have been demonstrated by the present meta-analysis, should encourage the use of laparoscopy also in emergency setting.

Effectiveness and safety of metallic stent for ileocecal obstructive colon cancer: a report of 4 cases

Background and study aims  Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been widely used for left-sided colorectal obstruction. Few studies on SEMS placement for right-sided colonic obstructions have been reported because stenting in the right colon is technically difficult, particularly in the ileocecal region. We present 4 cases of successful bridge-to-surgery stenting for ileocecal cancer. Using an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography catheter with a movable tip and a decompression tube was effective for stenting. No adverse events occurred during or after SEMS placement in any of these cases. Short-term stenting for ileocecal cancer seems to be effective and safe.

Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Clinical Severity of Anastomotic Leakage in Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous multicenter randomized trials demonstrated that omitting mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) did not increase anastomotic leakage rates or other infectious complications. However, the most serious concern regarding the omission of MBP is ongoing fecal peritonitis after anastomotic leakage occurs. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical manifestations and severity of anastomotic leakage between patients who underwent MBP and those who did not.

METHODS

This study was a single-center retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. From January 2006 to September 2013, 1369 patients who underwent elective rectal cancer resection with primary anastomosis were identified and analyzed.

RESULTS

Anastomotic leakage rates were not significantly different between patients who did not undergo MBP (77/831, 9.27%) and those who did (42/538, 7.81%). However, a significantly lower rate of clinical leakage requiring surgical exploration was observed in the leakage without MBP group (30/77, 39.0%) compared with the leakage with MBP group (30/42, 71.4%) (P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in the clinical severity of anastomotic leakage as assessed by the length of hospital stay, time to resuming a normal diet, length of antibiotic use, ileus rate, transfusion rate, ICU admission rate, and mortality rate between the leakage without MBP and leakage with MBP groups.

CONCLUSION

MBP was not found to affect the clinical severity of anastomotic leakage in elective rectal cancer surgery.

Long-term outcomes of palliative colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute proximal malignant colonic obstruction: a multicenter trial

Background and study aims Long-term data are limited regarding clinical outcomes of self-expanding metal stents as an alternative for surgery in the treatment of acute proximal MBO. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of stenting to surgery for palliation in patients with incurable obstructive CRC for lesions proximal to the splenic flexure. Patients and methods Retrospective multicenter cohort study of obstructing proximal CRC patients with who underwent insertion of a SEMS (n = 69) or surgery (n = 36) from 1999 to 2014. The primary endpoint was relief of obstruction. Secondary endpoints included technical success, duration of hospital stay, early and late adverse events (AEs) and survival. Results Technical success was achieved in 62/69 (89.8 %) patients in the SEMS group and in 36 /36 (100 %) patients who underwent surgery (P = 0.09). In the SEMS group, 10 patients underwent stenting as a bridge to surgery and 59 underwent stent placement for palliation. Clinical relief was achieved in 78 % of patients with stenting and in 100 % of patients who underwent surgery (P < 0.001). Patients with SEMS had significantly less acute AEs compared to the surgery group (7.2 % vs. 30.5 %, P = 0.003). Hospital mortality for the SEMS group was 0 % compared to 5.6 % in the surgery group (P = 0.11). Patients in the SEMS group had a significantly shorter median hospital stay (4 days) as compared to the surgery group (8 days) (P < 0.01). Maintenance of decompression without the recurrence of bowel obstruction until death or last follow-up was lower in the SEMS group (73.9 %) than the surgery group (97.3 %; P = 0.003). SEMS placement was associated with higher long-term complication rates compared to surgery (21 % and 11 % P = 0.27). Late SEMS AEs included occlusion (10 %), migration (5 %), and colonic ulcer (6 %). At 120 weeks, survival in the SEMS group was 5.6 % vs. 0 % in the surgery group (P = 0.8). Conclusions Technical and clinical success associated with proximal colonic obstruction are higher with surgery when compared to SEMS, but surgery is associated with longer hospital stays and more early AEs. SEMS should be considered the initial mode of therapy in patients with acute proximal MBO and surgery should be reserved for SEMS failure, as surgery involves a high morbidity and mortality.

Emergency surgery for obstructing colonic cancer: a comparison between right-sided and left-sided lesions

PURPOSE

Few studies compare management and outcomes of obstructive colonic cancer, depending on the tumor site. We aim to evaluate the differences in patient characteristics, tumor characteristics, and outcomes of emergency surgery for obstructive right-sided versus left-sided colonic cancers.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2009, 71 consecutive patients had an emergency colectomy following strict and clear definition of obstruction in a single institution. We retrospectively analyzed pre, per, and postoperative data that were prospectively collected.

RESULTS

There were 31 and 40 patients in the right and left group, respectively. Patients aged over 80 were more frequent in the right group (p = 0.03). At operation, ileocecal valve was less often competent in the right group (p = 0.03). The one-stage strategy was more frequent in the right group (p = 0.008). Patients in the right group had a higher rate of nodes invasion (p = 0.04). One- and two-year mortality rate in the right group had a tendency to be higher.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients presenting with a right obstructive colonic cancer are older, have a more advanced locoregional disease, and are more often treated in a one-stage strategy than patients with a left obstructive tumor.

Ileostomy reversal with handsewn techniques. Short-term outcomes in a teaching hospital

INTRODUCTION

Fecal diversion is considered an effective procedure to protect bowel anastomosis at high risk for leak. Some concerns exist regarding the risk for a significant morbidity associated to ileostomy creation itself and moreover to its closure. Surgical expertise and closure techniques are considered potential factors influencing morbidity. Aim of the study is to present a single-institution experience with ileostomy closures, in a teaching hospital, whereas ileostomy reversal is mainly performed by young residents.

METHODS

A prospective database was investigated to extract data of patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure between January 2005 and December 2014. Ileostomy reversion was always realized in a handsewn fashion, performing either a direct closure (DC) or a resection plus end-to-end anastomosis (EEA). Postoperative morbidity was graded according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Outcomes after DC and EEA were compared by Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-eight patients were included. Ileostomy reversal was performed by EEA in 236 patients (79.19 %) and by DC in 62 patients (20.81 %). Surgery was performed with a peristomal access in 296 cases (99.33 %). Incidence of anastomotic leak was 0.67 % (2/298). Overall reoperation rate was 0.34 % (1/298). Short-term overall morbidity rate was 20.47 %; but major complications (≥ grade III) occurred in only one patient (0.34 %). Mortality was nil. No significant differences in postoperative morbidity were found between the DC and EEA group.

CONCLUSION

Loop ileostomy reversal is a safe procedure, associated to a low major morbidity and excellent results, even if performed with a handsewn technique by supervised trainee surgeons.

Should patients With obstructing colorectal cancer have proximal diversion?

BACKGROUND

Up to 20% of patients with colorectal cancer present with obstruction. The goal of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of patients with obstructing colon cancer who underwent resection and primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Procedure Targeted Colectomy databases from 2012 to 2014 were reviewed. Patients undergoing colorectal resection with or without diverting ostomy for obstructing colorectal cancer were analyzed. Propensity score-matched cohorts of diverted and nondiverted patients were created accounting for patient characteristics. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and readmission.

RESULTS

There were 2,323 patients (92%) with no proximal diversion and 204 patients (8%) with proximal diversion. In univariate analysis, patients with colorectal resection with diversion were significantly more likely to have any complication (P = .001), sepsis (P = .01), and blood transfusion (P = .001). Diversion patients were also significantly more likely to be readmitted to the hospital within 30 days of the index procedure (P = .02). Proximal diversion was associated with any complication (P = .01), failure to wean off ventilator (P = .05), and longer length of stay (P = .01) in matched cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Proximal diversion in the setting of obstructive colorectal cancer is associated with higher rates of any complication, deep wound infection, sepsis, and readmission. Surgeons who perform a primary anastomosis with diversion for obstructing colorectal cancer should take into account the significant risk for postoperative complications.

Radiologic Placement of Uncovered Stents for the Treatment of Malignant Colonic Obstruction Proximal to the Descending Colon

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety, feasibility, and patency rates of radiologic placement of uncovered stents for the treatment of malignant colonic obstruction proximal to the descending colon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study. From May 2003 to March 2015, 53 image-guided placements of uncovered stents (44 initial placements, 9 secondary placements) were attempted in 44 patients (male:female = 23:21; mean age, 71.8 years). The technical and clinical success, complication rates, and patency rates of the stents were also evaluated. Technical success was defined as the successful deployment of the stent under fluoroscopic guidance alone and clinical success was defined as the relief of obstructive symptoms or signs within 48 h of stent deployment.

RESULTS

In total, 12 (27.3 %) patients underwent preoperative decompression, while 32 (72.7 %) underwent decompression with palliative intent. The technical success rate was 93.2 % (41/44) for initial placement and 88.9 % (8/9) for secondary placement. Secondary stent placement in the palliative group was required in nine patients after successful initial stent placement due to stent obstruction from tumor ingrowth (n = 7) and stent migration (n = 2). The symptoms of obstruction were relieved in all successful cases (100 %). In the palliative group, the patency rates were 94.4 % at 1 month, 84.0 % at 3 months, 64.8 % at 6 months, and 48.6 % at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The radiologic placement of uncovered stents for the treatment of malignant obstruction proximal to the descending colon is feasible and safe, and provides acceptable clinical results.

A Population-Based Analysis of Three Treatment Modalities for Malignant Obstruction of the Proximal Colon: Acute Resection Versus Stent or Stoma as a Bridge to Surgery

BACKGROUND

Malignant obstruction of the proximal colon (MOPC) traditionally has been treated with acute resection. However, morbidity and mortality rates following these emergency surgeries are high. Initial bowel decompression by stent placement or stoma construction has been used for distal obstructions as an alternative approach. This study evaluated whether these alternative treatment strategies could be beneficial for patients with a MOPC as well.

METHODS

All patients undergoing a colonic resection for a MOPC between January 2009 and December 2013 and who were registered in the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit were analyzed.

RESULTS

From the 49,013 patients registered in the DSCA, 1860 (3.8 %) were selected for further analysis. Acute resection was performed in 1774 patients (95.4 %), 44 patients (2.4 %) were treated with initial decompression using stent placement and resection, and 42 patients (2.3 %) with stoma construction followed by resection. Thirty-day mortality was 8.8, 2.4, and 2.4 %, respectively. Mortality was significantly lower after a bridging strategy (stent or stoma) compared with acute resection (p = 0.04). Complications following the resection occurred in 39.6% in the acute resection group and in 27.3 and 31.7% in the stent and stoma group, respectively (p = 0.167).

CONCLUSIONS

Acute resection was performed in the vast majority of patients with obstructive proximal colon cancer and resulted in a 40 % morbidity and 9 % mortality rate. A bridging strategy may be a valid alternative in some of these patients, because a significantly lower postoperative mortality rate was seen in a subgroup of patients initially treated with a stent or stoma.

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.

Evidence-based Clinical Management of Acute Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

Acute malignant colorectal obstruction (AMCO) is an emergency associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). Emergency surgery is standard therapy for AMCO, and 1-stage surgery without colostomy is preferable, but it is occasionally difficult in the emergency setting. A self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) enables noninvasive colonic decompression and subsequent 1-stage surgery, which has been widely applied for CRC with AMCO. However, recent accumulation of high-quality evidence has highlighted some problems and the limited efficacy of SEMS for AMCO. In palliative settings, SEMS placement reduces hospital stay and short-term complication rates, whereas it increases the frequency of long-term complications, such as delayed perforation. SEMS placement does not seem compatible with recent standard chemotherapy including bevacizumab. As a bridge to surgery, while SEMS placement provides a lower clinical success rate than emergency surgery, it can facilitate primary anastomosis without stoma. However, evidence regarding long-term survival outcomes with SEMS in both palliative and bridge to surgery settings is lacking. The efficacy of transanal colorectal tube placement, another endoscopic treatment, has been reported, but its clinical evidence level is low due to the limited number of studies. This review article comprehensively summarizes the current knowledge about surgical and endoscopic management of CRC with AMCO.

Comparison of emergency surgeries for obstructed colonic cancer with elective surgeries: A retrospective study

Objective:

Colon cancer patients presented with obstruction were known to have worse postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, but conflicting data has been reported in recent years. We aimed to investigate postoperative complication rates, and short and long-term oncological outcomes in patients with colon cancer treated with either emergency surgery due to obstruction or elective surgery.

Methods:

Two hundred fifty two patients were analyzed. Patients presented with obstruction and underwent an emergency surgery, and patients operated under elective circumstances were compared according to their demographic variables, tumor characteristics, and short and long term treatment outcomes.

Results:

Distribution of age, gender and comorbidities were similar between both the groups. Need for an end colostomy was significantly higher in obstructed patients (22.7% vs 1.6%, respectively). Obstructed patients were tending to be at an advanced stage. Postoperative morbidity and mortality, and prognosis of colon cancer patients presented with obstruction is worse than patients operated under elective circumstances.

Conclusions:

Colon cancer patients presented with obstruction constitutes more than one quarter of all patients. These patients have significantly higher morbidity and mortality rates. Obstructed colon cancer usually appears at advanced stage. Primary resection and anastomosis is safe in most of the cases.

Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes Between Emergency Surgery and Bridge to Surgery for Malignant Obstruction in Right-Sided Colon Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Malignant obstruction in right-sided colon (MORC) has traditionally been treated by emergency resection with primary anastomosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate short-term postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes according to the surgical approach adopted for MORC.

METHODS

A total of 1785 patients who underwent curative surgery for stage II or III colon cancer in seven hospitals were reviewed retrospectively. Seventy-four of 1785 patients had MORC. We compared the postoperative outcome and long-term oncologic outcome between the emergency surgery (ES) group (49 patients) and the bridge to surgery (BS) group (25 patients) for 74 patients with MORC.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the length of the distal and proximal resection margin (p = 0.820 and p = 0.620) or the number of metastatic lymph nodes (p = 0.221). There were no differences in flatus passage (p = 0.242), start of diet (p = 0.336), hospital stay (p = 0.444), or postoperative morbidity (p = 0.762). The 5-year overall survival rates were 73.2 % in the ES group and 90.7 % in the BS group (p = 0.172). Moreover, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 71.9 % in the ES group and 76.2 % in the BS group (p = 0.929).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the above results, the postoperative course of the ES group was similar to that of the BS group. In addition, the long-term oncologic outcome of the BS group was similar or slightly better than that of the ES group. BS after colonic stent may be an alternative option for MORC.

Emergency resection versus bridge to surgery with stenting in patients with acute right-sided colonic obstruction: a systematic review focusing on mortality and morbidity rates

PURPOSE

No consensus exists on the optimal treatment of acute malignant right-sided colonic obstruction (RSCO). This systematic review aims to compare procedure-related mortality and morbidity rates between primary resection and stent placement as a bridge to surgery followed by elective resection for patients with acute RSCO.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library were searched for all relevant literature. Primary endpoints were procedure-related mortality and morbidity. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the MINORS criteria.

RESULTS

Fourteen cohort studies were eligible for analysis. A total of 2873 patients were included in the acute resection group and 155 patients in the stent group. Mean mortality rate for patients who underwent acute resection with primary anastomosis was 10.8% (8.1-18.5%). Overall mortality for patients initially treated with a colonic stent followed with elective resection was 0%. Major morbidity was 23.9% (9.3-35.6%) and 0.8% (0-4.8%), respectively. Both mortality and major morbidity were significantly different. In addition, stent placement shows lower rates of anastomotic leakages (0 vs 9.1%) and fewer permanent ileostomies (0 vs 1.0%).

CONCLUSION

Primary resection for patients with acute RSCO seems to be associated with higher mortality and major morbidity rates than stent placement and elective resection. In addition, stent placement resulted in fewer anastomotic leakages and permanent ileostomies. However, as no high-level studies are available on the optimal treatment of RSCO and proximal stenting is considered technically challenging, future comparative studies are warranted for the development of an evidence-based clinical decision guideline.

An evaluation of treatment results of emergency versus elective surgery in colorectal cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer is still one of the most common causes of cancer related deaths in the world despite improvements in diagnosis and treatment modalities, and application of community-based screening methods. Symptoms of colorectal cancer are non-specific and usually manifest following local progression. A number of patients with advanced stage colorectal cancer present to emergency departments with obstruction as the first sign of disease without any previous symptoms. This presentation is an indication for emergency surgery that has a high rate of morbidity and mortality. In this study, we aimed to determine the factors associated with early diagnosis and survival by comparing postoperative results of colorectal cancer patients who underwent surgery under emergency or elective situation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Files of colorectal patients treated between 2009-2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Data on patient age, gender, operation type, intraoperative results, length of hospital stay, co-morbidities, postoperative complications and pathological results were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference between groups in terms of age, gender, and pathology results (p>0.05). The difference between groups in terms of postoperative length of hospital stay, presence of co-morbid diseases, pathological stage, and postoperative complications was statistically significant (p<0.05). Length of hospital stay, advanced stage on admission, complications such as surgical site infection, evisceration, and anastomosis leakage rates were higher in patients in the emergency surgery group.

CONCLUSION

Risk groups should be determined in order to diagnose colorectal cancer patients at an early stage while they are still asymptomatic, and this information should be incorporated into effective screening programs. This approach will be beneficial to treatment outcomes, complication rates, length of hospital stay, and survival and treatment results.

Efficacy of self-expanding metallic stent for right-sided colonic obstruction due to carcinoma before 1-stage laparoscopic surgery

PURPOSE

The aim of this small study was to assess the clinical outcomes of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement followed by 1-stage laparoscopic resection for treatment of acute right-sided colonic obstruction due to carcinoma.

METHOD

From January 2012 to December 2012, we performed 1-stage laparoscopic colectomy after placement of SEMS for right-sided obstructive colon carcinoma in 4 patients.

RESULTS

SEMS placement was technically successful in all cases and symptoms were immediately relieved. The presence of the endoluminal stent did not prevent a laparoscopic approach; moreover, decompression of the bowel obstruction provided a wide field of view and working space for the laparoscopic procedure. There were no cases of conversion to laparotomy and no intraoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

One-stage laparoscopic surgery, as a minimally invasive therapy, can be safely performed by SEMS placement in patients with acute right-sided colonic obstruction due to carcinoma. A large sample study is required to confirm the efficacy of this procedure.

Comparative study of postoperative complications in patients with and without an obstruction who had left-sided colorectal cancer and underwent a single-stage operation after mechanical bowel preparation

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to compare postoperative complications for single-stage surgery after mechanical bowel preparation in patients who experienced obstruction and those who did not.

Methods

From 2000 to 2011, 1,224 patients underwent a single-stage operation for left colorectal cancer after bowel preparation. Nonobstruction (NOB) and obstruction (OB) colorectal cancer patients were 1,053 (86.0%) and 171 (14.0%), respectively. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were compared between groups.

Results

The OB group had poor preoperative conditions (age, white blood cell, hemoglobin, albumin level, and advanced tumor stage) compared with the NOB group (P < 0.05). Mean on-table lavage time for the OB group was 17.5 minutes (range, 14-60 minutes). Mean operation time for the OB group was statistically longer than that of the NOB group (OB: 210 minutes; range, 120-480 minutes vs. NOB: 180 minutes; range, 60-420 minutes; P < 0.001). Overall morbidity was similar between groups (NOB: 19.7% vs. OB: 23.4%, P = 0.259). Major morbidity was more common in the OB group than in the NOB group, but the difference was without significance (OB: 11.7% vs. NOB: 7.6%, P = 0.070). Postoperative death occurred in 16 patients (1.3%), and death in the OB group (n = 7) was significantly higher than it was in the NOB group (n = 9) (4.1% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.001). Twelve patients had surgical complications, which were the leading cause of postoperative death: postoperative bleeding in five patients and leakage in seven patients.

Conclusion

Postoperative morbidity for a single-stage operation for obstructive left colorectal cancer is comparable to that for NOB, regardless of poor conditions of the patient.

Outcome of emergency one-stage resection and anastomosis procedure for patients with obstructed colorectal cancer

PURPOSES

The purpose of this study was to verify the outcome of the emergency one stage resection and anastomosis procedure for patients with obstructed colorectal cancer.

METHODS

An emergency one stage resection and anastomosis procedure was performed for 40 patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. The outcome was verified and compared dividing into two groups. 17 patients under the age of 70 in (Group A), 23 patients 70 years and over in (Group B).

RESULTS

The operative mortality rate in both groups was 0%. As a result, postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups. The overall survival rate after a 5-year period in both groups was 41.8%, regarding all patients and the survival curves for the two groups, was not significantly different. The 5 year survival rate in stage II or III showed no differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The one-stage resection and anastomosis of the large bowel could be applied safely to emergency patients, which in turn allows for excellent short-term operative results in both groups mentioned. This particular procedure should be positively enforced, even in elderly patients in their 70's.

Status and literature review of self-expandable metallic stents for malignant colorectal obstruction

Use of colorectal stents has increased dramatically over the last decades. Colorectal stents offer an alternative way to relieve fatal intestinal obstruction and can take place of emergency surgery, which associated with significant morbidity and mortality and a high incidence of stoma creation, to elective resection. Although there remain a few concerns regarding the use of stents as a bridge to surgical resection, use of self-expandable metallic stents for palliation in patients with unresectable disease has come to be generally accepted. Advantages of colorectal stents include acute restoration of luminal patency and allowance of time for proper staging and surgical optimization, and the well-known disadvantages are procedure-related complications including perforation, migration, and stent failure. General indications, procedures, and clinical outcomes as well as recent evidences regarding the use of colorectal stents will be discussed in this review.

Management of colonic obstruction: a review

Large bowel obstruction is a common problem with many different causes, the most common being colorectal adenocarcinoma, extracolonic adenocarcinoma, diverticular disease, volvulus, and inflammatory bowel disease. The nature of the obstruction can influence the best management. Historically, treatment of obstruction consisted of surgical removal of the obstruction if possible and decompression of the bowel with an ostomy. Other strategies for managing obstruction have evolved as alternatives to stomas, including primary resection with anastomosis and endoscopic stent placement. The choice of treatment can therefore be tailored to the individual patient with good success.

Surgical management of obstructed and perforated colorectal cancer: still debating and unresolved issues

SUMMARY Emergency surgery for obstruction and perforation from colorectal cancer (CRC) predicts poorer outcomes compared with elective surgery. For obstructed cancers, the evidence suggests significantly poorer outcomes with multistaged procedures compared with single-stage procedures in this group. Stenting remains an attractive option as a ‘bridge-to-surgery’, with multiple single-center studies demonstrating excellent short-term outcomes. However, contradictory evidence from three randomized trials casts doubts on stenting as the preferred modality for initial management of all curative obstructed CRCs. Results from a UK multicenter randomized controlled trial are still awaited. Palliative stenting shows predominantly positive results and is a valuable option for nonresectable or incurable CRCs. All authors agree on emergency surgery as the primary modality of treatment for perforated malignancies. Short-term outcomes are markedly poorer than the elective surgery group and correlate with the degree of peritoneal contamination. Long-term outcomes are comparable to elective surgery when perioperative deaths are excluded.