Reviewing the Management of Obstructive Left Colon Cancer: Assessing the Feasibility of the One-stage Resection and Anastomosis After Intraoperative Colonic Irrigation

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Safety profile of a multimodal fail-safe model to minimize postoperative complications in oncologic colorectal resections-a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Despite innovations in surgical techniques, major complications following colorectal surgery still lead to a significant morbidity and mortality. There is no standard protocol for perioperative management of patients with colorectal cancer. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a multimodal fail-safe model in minimizing severe surgical complications following colorectal resections.

METHODS

We compared major complications in patients with colorectal cancers who underwent surgical resections with anastomosis during 2013-2014 (control group) with patients treated during 2015-2019 (fail-safe group). The fail-safe group had preoperative bowel preparation and a perioperative single dose of antibiotics, on-table bowel irrigation and early sigmoidoscopic assessment of anastomosis in rectal resections. A standard surgical technique for tension-free anastomosis was adapted in the fail-safe approach. The chi-square test measured relationships between categorical variables, t-test estimated the probability of differences, and the multivariate regression analysis determined the linear correlation among independent and dependent variables.

RESULTS

A total of 924 patients underwent colorectal operations during the study period; however, 696 patients had surgical resections with primary anastomoses. There were 427 (61.4%) laparoscopic and 230 (33.0%) open operations, while 39 (5.6%) laparoscopic procedures were converted. Overall, the rate of major complications (Dindo-Clavien grade IIIb-V) significantly reduced from 22.6% for the control group to 9.8% for the fail-safe group (p < 0.0001). Major complications mainly occurred due to non-surgical reasons such as pneumonia, heart failure, or renal dysfunction. The rates of anastomotic leakage (AL) were 11.8% (22/186) and 3.7% (n = 19/510) for the control and fail-safe groups, respectively (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

We report an effective multimodal fail-safe protocol for colorectal cancer during the pre-, peri-, and postoperative period. The fail-safe model showed less postoperative complications even for low rectal anastomosis. This approach can be adapted as a structured protocol during the perioperative care of patients for colorectal surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in the German Clinical Trial Register (Study ID: DRKS00023804 ).

Management of left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions with curative intent: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several management options exist for colonic decompression in the setting of malignant large bowel obstruction, including oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and SEMS as a bridge-to-surgery. Consensus has yet to be reached on optimal treatment pathways. The aim of the present study was to perform a network meta-analysis comparing short-term postoperative morbidity and long-term oncologic outcomes between oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction with curative intent.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were systematically searched. Articles were included if they compared two or more of the following in patients presenting with curative left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: (1) emergent oncologic resection; (2) surgical diversion; and/or (3) SEMS. The primary outcome was overall 90-day postoperative morbidity. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed with inverse variance random effects. Random-effect Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

From 1277 citations, 53 studies with 9493 patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection, 1273 patients undergoing surgical diversion, and 2548 patients undergoing SEMS were included. Network meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in 90-day postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing SEMS compared to urgent oncologic resection (OR0.34, 95%CrI0.01-0.98). Insufficient RCT data pertaining to overall survival (OS) precluded network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis demonstrated decreased five-year OS for patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection compared to surgical diversion (OR0.44, 95%CI0.28-0.71, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bridge-to-surgery interventions may offer short- and long-term benefits compared to urgent oncologic resection for malignant colorectal obstruction and should be increasingly considered in this patient population. Further prospective study comparing surgical diversion and SEMS is needed.

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.

Is colonic lavage a suitable alternative for left-sided colonic emergencies?

BACKGROUND

The use of intra-operative colonic lavage (IOCL) with primary anastomosis remains controversial in the emergency left-sided large bowel pathologies, with alternatives including Hartmann’s procedure, manual decompression and subtotal colectomy.

AIM

To compare the peri-operative outcomes of IOCL to other procedures.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for articles employing IOCL from inception till July 13, 2020. Odds ratio and weighted mean differences (WMD) were estimated for dichotomous and continuous outcomes respectively. Single-arm meta-analysis was conducted using DerSimonian and Laird random effects.

RESULTS

Of 28 studies were included in this meta-analysis, involving 1142 undergoing IOCL, and 634 other interventions. IOCL leads to comparable rates of wound infection when compared to Hartmann’s procedure, and anastomotic leak and wound infection when compared to manual decompression. There was a decreased length of hospital stay (WMD = -7.750; 95%CI: -13.504 to -1.996; P = 0.008) compared to manual decompression and an increased operating time. Single-arm meta-analysis found that overall mortality rates with IOCL was 4% (CI: 0.03-0.05). Rates of anastomotic leak and wound infection were 3% (CI: 0.02-0.04) and 12% (CI: 0.09-0.16) respectively.

CONCLUSION

IOCL leads to similar rates of post-operative complications compared to other procedures. More extensive studies are needed to assess the outcomes of IOCL for emergency left-sided colonic surgeries.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Long-term outcome after one-stage surgery without preoperative decompression for stage II/III malignant colorectal obstruction: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

Whether malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO) after one-stage curative surgery without preoperative decompression has a poor prognosis remains unclear. We assessed long-term outcomes of one-stage surgery without preoperative decompression for stage II/III MCO.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled patients with stage II/III colorectal cancer (CRC) between April 2011 and December 2017. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was used to reduce the possibility of selection bias.

RESULTS

In total, 464 stage II/III CRC patients were identified, of which 145 (31%) had obstruction (MCO group) and 319 (69%) did not (non-MCO group). In the MCO group, 59 (40.7%) had emergency MCO (E-MCO) and 86 (59.3%) had semi-emergency MCO (SE-MCO). The median follow-up was 37.0 (range 0-86.5) months. The tumor was deeper and larger, and serum carcinoembryonic antigen level was higher (p < 0.001, respectively) in the MCO group (including E-MCO and SE-MCO). Venous invasion-positivity rate was significantly higher (MCO and SE-MCO only, p = 0.003 and 0.009, respectively) than that in the non-MCO group. Laparoscopic surgery rate was significantly lower (MCO and E-MCO only, p < 0.001) than that in the non-MCO group. Before PSM, disease-free survival (DFS) of the SE-MCO patients was worse than that of the non-MCO patients (p = 0.046). After PSM, DFS was not significantly different between the non-MCO and MCO, E-MCO, and SE-MCO groups (p = 0.619, 0.091, and 0.308, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term prognosis in patients with stage II/III MCO after one-stage surgery without preoperative decompression was similar to that in patients without MCO.

What is the Best Option Between Primary Diverting Stoma or Endoscopic Stent as a Bridge to Surgery with a Curative Intent for Obstructed Left Colon Cancer? Results from a Propensity Score Analysis of the French Surgical Association Multicenter Cohort of 518 Patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic stent (ES) as a bridge to surgery in obstructed left colon cancer (OLCC) is controversial. Our goal was to compare the operative and oncological results of primary diverting colostomy (PDC) and ES for the curative treatment of OLCC.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2015, patients who underwent PDC or ES in a curative intent for OLCC at member centers of the French Surgical Association were included. Patients with unresectable tumors and/or synchronous metastases were excluded. Comparisons between the two groups were performed after ponderation with propensity score for: demographic and tumor characteristics, operative, and oncological results.

RESULTS

A total of 518 patients were included: PDC (n = 327); ES (n = 191). The demographic characteristics were similar between the groups. ES failed in 23% of the patients (11% perforation). Cumulative tumor resection rates were 80% and 86% after PDC and ES, respectively (p = 0.049). The rates of primary anastomosis were 57% in the PDC group and 40% in the ES group (p < 0.0001). The permanent stoma rates were similar between the two groups (29% vs. 28%, p = 0.0586). Cumulative overall, surgical, and medical complications were significantly higher in PDC group. The resected tumors were significantly smaller and less frequently perforated and metastatic in the PDC group. The median overall survival was significantly higher after PDC (123.6 vs. 58.5 months, p = 0.046), whereas the median disease-free survival was similar between the two groups (54.1 vs. 53.6 months, p = 0.646).

CONCLUSIONS

Although endoscopic stenting is associated with better surgical outcomes than diverting stoma, it may negatively impact histological features and overall survival.

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.