Comparison of short-term outcomes after elective surgery following endoscopic stent insertion and emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer

Shorter interval to surgery after self-expanding metallic stent may result in better oncologic outcomes in colon cancer obstruction

INTRODUCTION

Colon cancer obstruction is one of the most serious conditions in colorectal surgery. However, the use of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) has made it possible to avoid emergency surgery and stoma creation, therefore enabling minimally invasive surgery and one-stage operation. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether there is an optimal interval from SEMS to surgery for the best long-term oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

Obstructive colon cancer patients treated with SEMS insertion and received surgery were included in the study. Patient data were retrospectively reviewed in prospectively collected data. Using the ROC curve, the optimal interval to surgery after SEMS insertion was 10 days; the patients were divided into the early surgery group (≤10 days, ES) and the late surgery group (>10 days, LS). Factors contributing to the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed.

RESULTS

83 patients were included in this study. Eight patients (9.6 %) had SEMS insertion failure, with 3 perforations and 5 failed expansions. There were no differences between the ES group and the LS group in terms of pathologic characteristics, incidence of stoma creation, and adjuvant chemotherapy. Twenty-six patients (31.3 %) had recurrences; local (Arnarson et al., 2023) [6], peritoneal seeding (Lee et al., 2013) [8], liver (Ho et al., 2017) [11], lung [7], bone (van Hooft et al., 2020) [2], and abdominal wall metastasis (Chen and Sheen-Chen, 2000) [1]. The 5-year DFS rate was significantly better in the ES group than the LS group (74.3 % vs. 55.01 %; p = 0.0394). The 5-year OS was slightly better in the ES group than the LS group (76.11 % vs. 58.75 %; p = 0.0901). In univariable analysis, the ES group showed a lower risk of recurrence than the LS group (OR: 0.447 [0.204-0.984], p = 0.0455), but this was not reproduced in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that the long-term oncologic outcomes were better in patients who received surgery after SEMS within 10 days. Hence, we propose with caution that elective surgery might be suggested to take place within 10 days from SEMS insertion for better oncologic outcomes.

Oncologic investigation of the interval from stent placement to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is widely used as a bridge to surgery (BTS) procedure for obstructive colorectal cancer. However, evidence regarding the optimal interval between SEMS placement and elective surgery is lacking.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from patients with BTS between January 2013 and October 2021. Inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analyses were used to compare short- and long-term outcomes between the short-interval (SI) and long-interval (LI) groups, using a cutoff of 20 days.

RESULTS

In total, 138 patients were enrolled in this study (SI group, n = 63; LI group, n = 75). In the matched cohort, the patients' backgrounds were well balanced. The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ II postoperative complications was not significantly different between the SI and LI groups (19.0% vs. 14.0%, P = 0.47). There were no significant differences between the SI and LI groups in the 3-year recurrence-free survival (68.0% vs. 76.4%, P = 0.73) or 3-year overall survival rates (86.0% vs. 90.6%, P = 0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

A longer interval did not deteriorate the oncological outcomes. Individual perioperative management with an appropriate interval to improve the patient's condition is required to ensure safe surgery.

Impact of self-expanding metal stents on long-term survival outcomes as a bridge to surgery in patients with colon cancer obstruction: Current state and future prospects

Since self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) were first introduced in acute colon cancer obstruction, the increased rate of primary anastomosis and improved quality of life following SEMS placement have been clearly shown. However, it was demonstrated that SEMS are associated with higher recurrence rates. Although several trials have shown that overall and disease-free survival in patients following SEMS placement is similar with patients undergoing emergency surgery, obstruction and a high incidence of recurrence imposed many concerns. The optimal time interval from SEMS to surgery is still a matter of debate. Some studies have recommended a time interval of ~2 weeks between SEMS insertion and elective surgery. A prolonged interval of time from SEMS insertion to elective surgery and the administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has been proposed. SEMS-NAC might have advantages for improving the surgical and long-term survival outcomes of patients with acute colon cancer obstruction, which is an optional approach in the management of acute colon cancer obstruction.

Colon stenting as a bridge to surgery in obstructive colorectal cancer management

Colonic stent placement is a commonly used bridging strategy for surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. The procedure involves the placement of a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) across the obstructive lesion to restore intestinal patency and alleviate the symptoms of obstruction. By allowing patients to receive surgery in a planned and staged manner with time for preoperative optimization and bowel preparation, stent placement may reduce the need for emergency surgery, which is associated with higher complication rates and poorer outcomes. This review focuses on the role of colon stenting as a bridge to surgery in the management of obstructive colorectal cancer. SEMS as a bridge to surgery for left-sided colon cancer has been demonstrated to be particularly useful; however, further research is needed for its application in cases of right-sided colon cancer. Colon stent placement also has limitations and potential complications including stent migration, re-obstruction, and perforation. However, the timing of curative surgery after SEMS placement remains inconclusive. Considering the literature to date, performing surgery at an interval of approximately 2 weeks is considered appropriate. Therefore, colonic stent placement may be an effective strategy as a bridge to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery in obstructive colorectal cancer patients following stents placement: a comprehensive meta-analysis of cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Over the past decade, the use of stent placement as a bridge to surgery (BTS) has emerged as an alternative to emergency surgery for patients with (OCRC). However, the optimal surgical approach remains indeterminate. This study seeks to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a combined treatment modality involving stent placement and laparoscopic surgery for OCRC presenting with malignant obstruction.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted until June 2023 to identify studies that compared laparoscopic to open surgery in patients with OCBC following stent insertion.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis incorporated 12 cohort studies, encompassing 933 patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the 30-day mortality rates between the two groups (relative risk [RR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26 to 4.48; P = 0.95). Compared to the laparoscopic approach group, the open approach group had a higher rate of overall postoperative complications (POCs) (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.72, P < 0.0001). There was no significant variance in lymph node (LN) dissection number between the groups (mean differences [MD], 1.64; 95% CI - 1.51 to 4.78; P = 0.31). Notably, laparoscopic surgery resulted in less intraoperative blood loss (MD, - 25.84 ml; 95% CI - 52.16 to 0.49; P = 0.05) and a longer operation time (MD, 20.99 mins; 95% CI 2.31 to 39.44; P = 0.03). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) (MD - 3.29 days; 95% CI - 5.27 to 1.31; P = 0.001). Conversely, the open approach group had a higher rate of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.96, P = 0.04). Although the number of included studies was insufficient to conduct a meta-analysis, several of them imply that laparoscopic surgery may yield more favorable outcomes in terms of the 3-year overall survival rate (OS), 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS), 5-year OS, and 5-year DFS when compared to open surgery. It is worth noting that these differences lack statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

In patients with OCRC subjected to stent insertion, laparoscopic surgery arguably presents a modest superiority over open surgery by diminishing the overall postoperative risk and potentially reducing the LOS.

Influence of endoscopists' expertise level on clinical outcomes after bridge-to-surgery stenting in obstructive colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This study aimed to investigate the effect of stenting-related factors, including endoscopists' expertise, on clinical outcomes after bridge-to-surgery (BTS) stenting for obstructive colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

We analyzed BTS stenting-related factors, including stenting expertise and the interval between stenting and surgery, in 233 patients (63 [13] years, 137 male) who underwent BTS stenting for obstructive CRC. We evaluated the influence of these factors on post-BTS stenting clinical outcomes such as stent-related complications and cancer recurrence.

RESULTS

The interval between stenting and surgery was ≤ 7 days in 79 patients (33.9%) and > 7 days in 154 patients (66.1%). BTS stenting was performed by endoscopists with ≤ 50, 51-100, and > 100 prior stenting experiences in 94, 43, and, 96 patients, respectively. The clinical success rate of BTS stenting was 93.1%. Stent-related and postoperative complications developed in 19 (8.2%) and 20 (8.6%) patients, respectively. Cancer recurrence occurred in 76 patients (32.6%). Short BTS interval of ≤ 7 days increased the risk of postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR], 2.61 [1.03-6.75]; P = 0.043). Endoscopists' stenting experience > 100 showed greater clinical success of stenting (OR, 5.50 [1.45-28.39]; P = 0.021) and fewer stent-related complications (OR, 0.26 [0.07-0.80]; P = 0.028) compared with stenting experience ≤ 50. BTS stenting-related factors did not affect long-term oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Greater expertise of endoscopists was associated with better short-term outcomes, including high stenting success rate and low rate of stent-related complications after BTS stenting for obstructive CRC. An interval of > 7 days between BTS stenting and surgery was required to decrease postoperative complications.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

Delaying surgery for optimization after colonic stent bridging is safe for left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction: Result from 10-year experience and risks factor analysis

AIM

To evaluate the operative and oncological results after colonic stent bridging for left-sided malignant large bowel intestinal obstruction and the risk factors for survival and recurrence after definitive surgery.

METHODOLOGY

Consecutive patients who underwent colonic stenting for malignant left-sided colonic obstruction were included. Patients for palliative stenting or emergency surgery, patient with low rectal tumour or peritoneal metastasis were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included stent success rate, stenting related complications, rate of stoma formation and long-term oncological outcome including recurrence rate and recurrence free survival rate.

RESULTS

From June 2011 to June 2021, a total of 222 patients underwent colonic stenting. 112 patients were bridged to surgery after initial stenting, but 7 patients dropped out. Overall survival was 35 months (IQR = 17.75-75.25 months) in the early operation group, 30 months (IQR = 17.5-49.5 months) in the delayed surgery group HR 0.981 (95%CI 0.70-1.395, p = 0.907). Sensitivity analysis performed by excluding stent complications and emergency surgery yielded the same conclusion. Overall stenting complications rate was 17.1%. 11 patients (10.4%) required emergency surgery.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference between early and delayed surgery groups (>4weeks) in the overall survival and recurrence in patients who had stent-bridge to surgery for malignant left colonic obstruction. It is safe to defer definitive surgery to optimize patients and allow better recovery from initial obstruction after colonic stenting before definitive surgery without adversely affecting the oncological outcomes.

Safety of early surgery after self-expandable metallic stenting for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metallic stenting (SEMS) is usual for the temporary resolution of obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (CRC) as a bridge to elective surgery. However, there is no consensus regarding adequate time intervals from stenting to radical surgery. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal time interval that results in favorable short- and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Data on patients with obstructive left-sided CRC who underwent elective radical surgery after clinically successful SEMS deployment in five tertiary referral hospitals from 2004 to 2016 were analyzed, retrospectively. An inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analysis was used to minimize bias. Postoperative short- and long-term outcomes were compared between two groups: an early surgery (within 8 days) group and delayed surgery (after 8 days) group.

RESULTS

Of 311 patients, 148 (47.6%) underwent early and 163 (52.4%) underwent delayed surgery. The median surgery interval was 9.0 days. After adjustment, the groups had similar patient and tumor characteristics. In terms of short-term outcomes, there was no difference in hospitalization length or postoperative complications. No deaths were observed. With a median follow-up of 71.0 months, no significant difference was observed between the groups in 5-year overall survival (early vs. delayed surgery: 79.6% vs. 71.3%, P = 0.370) and 5-year disease-free survival (early vs. delayed surgery: 59.1% vs. 60.4%, P = 0.970).

CONCLUSIONS

In obstructive left-sided CRC, the time interval between SEMS and radical surgery did not significantly influence short- and long-term outcomes. Therefore, early surgery after SEMS could be suggested if there is no reason to postpone surgery for preoperative medical optimization.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Colon cancer patient with long-term colon stent placement: Case report and literature review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer mortality globally. Large bowel obstruction (occurring in 15-30% of patients with CRCs) accounts for approximately 80% of medical emergencies related to CRC. Currently, there is no standard treatment of this condition. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recommends self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) as a bridge (two weeks) to surgery for left-sided obstructing colon cancer. In the present report, we describe an 81-year-old male with colon cancer who underwent colon stent placement for 32 months, but later underwent radical resection. A follow-up of more than four-months revealed that his condition was normal. The history as well as application and advantages of SEMS are discussed in this report.

Self-Expandable Metal Stent as a Bridge to Surgery for Left-Sided Acute Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: Optimal Timing for Elective Surgery

OBJECTIVES

This randomized, single-center, retrospective, comparative cohort study is aimed at investigating the optimal time interval from self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement to surgery and potential risk factors for complications in patients with acute malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

A total of 64 patients with left-sided acute malignant colorectal obstruction treated with SEMS placement and subsequent surgery between January 2013 and September 2020 were enrolled and allocated to a case group (SEMS placing time ≤ 14 days; n = 19 patients) and a control group (SEMS placing time > 14 days; n = 45 patients). The primary outcome was the difference in baseline information, patients' conditions during surgery, and postoperative conditions between the two groups. The secondary outcome included potential risk factors of postoperative complications. The propensity score matching (PSM) and super learner (SL) methods were used to eliminate multiple confounding factors of baseline data. A cohort of 21 samples was used for external validation, comprising 6 cases and 15 controls.

RESULTS

A significant difference was observed between the two groups in intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.009), postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.002), postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grading ≥ II) (P < 0.001), stoma creation (P < 0.001), and primary anastomosis (P < 0.001). After a 1 : 3 PSM analysis, no statistically significant differences between eight confounding variables of the two groups were observed (P > 0.05). Caliper set as 0.2 multiple logistic regression analysis showed that the potential risk factor for postoperative complications was SEMS placing time (RR = 0.109, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.028-0.433; P = 0.002), indicating that SEMS placing time > 14 days was an independent risk factor for postoperative complications in bridge-to-surgery (BTS) setting. The area under the AUC curve was 76.7% and validated using the validation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Long duration of SEMS placement (>14 days) may not influence surgical difficulty but could increase the risk of postoperative complications.

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.

What are the factors predictive of postoperative complications in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing stenting as a bridge to surgery?

OBJECTIVE

Using a self-expanding metal stent as a bridge to surgery (BTS) is considered a reasonable strategy for patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction. Since postoperative complications have a negative impact on patient survival, we aim to clarify the predictors of complications in patients undergoing BTS using a self-expanding metal stent.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 61 patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) who underwent stenting as a BTS at our institution. We analyzed the association of postoperative complications with clinicopathologic, surgical, and patient factors, and with the prestenting or preoperative laboratory data.

RESULTS

Both postoperative complications in general and severe complications were significantly associated with a longer stenotic-section length (p = 0.007 and p = 0.003), lower preoperative hemoglobin levels (p < 0.001 and p = 0.081), and lower prestenting hemoglobin levels (p = 0.006 and p = 0.042). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that lower prestenting (<13.0 g/dl) and preoperative (<11.5 g/dl) hemoglobin levels were independent predictive factors for postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR]: 4.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-18.90; p = 0.040; and OR: 4.93; 95% CI: 1.35-20.28; p = 0.016). A stenotic-section length of 5.0 cm or greater was predictive of severe complications (OR: 25.67; 95% CI: 1.95-1185.00; p = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that lower hemoglobin levels before stenting and a longer length of the stenotic section of bowel might predict postoperative complications in patients with CRC undergoing BTS for obstruction.

A longer interval after stenting compromises the short- and long-term outcomes after curative surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Intestinal decompression using self-expandable metallic colonic stents (SEMSs) as a bridge to surgery is now considered an attractive alternative to emergency surgery. However, data regarding the optimal timing of surgery after stenting are limited.

METHODS

We investigated the impact of the interval between stenting and surgery on short- and long-term outcomes in 92 obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC) patients who had a SEMS inserted and subsequently received curative surgery.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 70.5 years, and the median interval between SEMS insertion and the surgery was 17 (range 5-47) days. There were 35 postoperative complications, including seven major postoperative complications. An interval of more than 16 days was an independent predictor of a poor relapse-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-7.81, p = 0.015). An interval of more than 35 days was independently associated with major postoperative complications (HR = 16.6, 95% CI 2.21-125, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

A longer interval between stenting and surgery significantly compromised the short- and long-term outcomes. Surgery within 16 days after stenting might help maximize the benefit of SEMS without interfering with short- and long-term outcomes.

Time interval between self-expandable metal stent placement or creation of a decompressing stoma and elective resection of left-sided obstructive colon cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of resection after decompression of left-sided obstructive colon cancer is unknown. Revised expert-based guideline recommendations have shifted from an interval of 5 - 10 days to approximately 2 weeks following self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement, and recommendations after decompressing stoma are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the recommended bridging intervals after SEMS and explore the timing of resection after decompressing stoma.

METHODS

This nationwide study included patients registered between 2009 and 2016 in the prospective, mandatory Dutch ColoRectal Audit. Additional data were collected through patient records in 75 hospitals. Only patients who underwent either SEMS placement or decompressing stoma as a bridge to surgery were selected. Technical SEMS failure and unsuccessful decompression within 48 hours were exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

510 patients were included (182 SEMS, 328 decompressing stoma). Median bridging interval was 23 days (interquartile range [IQR] 13 - 31) for SEMS and 36 days (IQR 22 - 65) for decompressing stoma. Following SEMS placement, no significant differences in post-resection complications, hospital stay, or laparoscopic resections were observed with resection after 11 - 17 days compared with 5 - 10 days. Of SEMS-related complications, 48 % occurred in patients operated on beyond 17 days. Compared with resection within 14 days, an interval of 14 - 28 days following decompressing stoma resulted in significantly more laparoscopic resections, more primary anastomoses, and shorter hospital stays. No impact of bridging interval on mortality, disease-free survival, or overall survival was demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on an overview of the data with balancing of surgical outcomes and timing of adverse events, a bridging interval of approximately 2 weeks seems appropriate after SEMS placement, while waiting 2 - 4 weeks after decompressing stoma further optimizes surgical conditions for laparoscopic resection with restoration of bowel continuity.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND/AIM

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Supplementary Information

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

Comparison of colonic stents, stomas and resection for obstructive left colon cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Emergency surgery (ES) is the standard-of-care for left-sided obstructing colon cancer, with self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) and diverting colostomies (DCs) being alternative approaches. The aim of this study was to review the short- and long-term outcomes of SEMS versus ES or DC.

METHODS

Embase and Medline were searched for articles comparing SEMS versus ES or DC. Primary outcomes were survival and recurrence rates. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative outcomes. SEMS-specific outcomes include success and complication rates. Pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were estimated with DerSimonian and Laird random effects used to account for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were included, involving 15,224 patients in 8 randomized controlled trials and 25 observational studies. There were high technical and clinical success rates for SEMS, with low rates of complications. Our meta-analysis revealed increased odds of laparoscopic surgery and anastomosis, and decreased stoma creation with SEMS compared to ES. SEMS led to fewer complications, including anastomotic leak, wound infection, ileus, myocardial infarction, and improved 90-day in-hospital mortality. There were no significant differences in 3- and 5-year overall, cancer-specific and disease-free survival. SEMS, compared to DC, led to decreased rates of stoma creation, higher rates of ileus and reoperation, and led to longer hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS leads to better short-term outcomes but confers no survival advantage over ES. It is unclear whether SEMS has better short-term outcomes compared to DC. There is a lack of randomized trials with long-term outcomes for SEMS versus DC, hence results should be interpreted with caution.

Outcomes of self-expandable metal stent as bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for left-sided obstructing colon cancer: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Long-term outcomes of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) as bridges to surgery versus emergency surgery in the treatment of left-sided obstructing colon cancer remain unclear.

METHODS

Using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching to compare overall survival, the stoma requirement, postoperative complications, and the length of stay between the SEMS and emergency surgery groups.

RESULTS

Compared with the emergency surgery group, the SEMS group showed worse survival (hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-3.01), a higher incidence of postoperative ileus (8% vs. 4%, P = 0.010), a longer postoperative length of stay (14 vs. 12 days, P < 0.001), and a lower stoma requirement (10% vs. 29%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SEMSs as bridges to surgery are associated with significantly poorer overall survival, a higher incidence of postoperative ileus, a longer length of stay, and a lower stoma requirement than is emergency surgery.

The optimal time interval between the placement of self-expandable metallic stent and elective surgery in patients with obstructive colon cancer

A bridge to surgery (BTS) after a colonic stent for obstructive colon cancer has not been accepted as a standard treatment strategy. Also, there is no consensus regarding the optimal time interval for BTS. We aimed to identify the optimal timing for BTS after stent placement to decrease the oncologic risk. We retrospectively collected data of 174 patients who underwent BTS after stent placement for stage II or III obstructive colon cancer from five hospitals. We divided the patients into three groups based on the time interval for BTS after stent placement: within 7 days (Group 1), from 8 to 14 days (Group 2), and after 14 days (Group 3). The primary outcome was to compare the oncologic outcomes including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rate (RR) among the three groups. Groups 1, 2, and 3 involved 75, 56, and 43 patients, respectively. Postoperative morbidity rates were 17.3%, 10.8%, and 9.3% in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.337). RRs were 16.0%, 35.7%, and 30.2% in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.029). In multivariate analysis, the time interval for BTS was an independent risk factor for DFS (P < 0.001; HR, 14.463; 95% CI, 1.458–3.255) and OS (P = 0.027; HR, 4.917; 95% CI, 1.071–3.059). In conclusion, the perioperative short-term outcome was not affected by the time interval of BTS. However, elective surgery within 7 days after colonic stent might be suggested to balance the short-term benefits and long-term oncologic risks.

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

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

Optimal management of malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction: do international guidelines agree?

Background

Approximately 20% of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer will present with left-sided large bowel obstruction. The optimal management of this cohort of patients remains unclear. We aimed to review international guidelines to see if there was a consensus on the treatment of this surgical emergency.

Methods

The PubMed and Medline databases were searched for guidelines on the management of left-sided, malignant large bowel obstruction (MBO) between 2010 and 2018.

Results

Nineteen guidelines were identified spanning a range of continents. There was no clear consensus on the management of potentially resectable disease. Eight guidelines (42%) suggested primary surgery, two guidelines (11%) suggested stenting as a bridge to surgery and nine guidelines (47%) suggested surgery or stenting could be performed. Primary resection with or without anastomosis was the most frequently recommended procedure (n = 6 35%), but over a third of guidelines gave no operative recommendations. There was very limited detail on the stenting procedure and how long elective surgery should be deferred. In the palliative situation, there was general agreement that stents should be offered in preference to surgery.

Conclusion

International guidelines offer limited and contrasting recommendations on the management of left-sided MBO. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to support whether emergency surgery or stenting as a bridge to surgery is the optimal procedure in terms of morbidity, mortality and long-term oncological outcome.

Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for acute obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective study

Purpose: Acute obstructive colorectal cancer is a common emergency that requires decompression immediately. The aim of the study was to compare short-term and long-term results of acute obstructive colorectal cancer treated by the self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) versus emergency surgery.

Patients and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 78 patients who were diagnosed as acute obstructive colorectal cancer that underwent elective surgery after stent insertion (stent group, N=37) or emergency surgery (emergency group, N=41) from January 2013 to October 2016. The Kaplan–Meier method was conducted to calculate overall survival. Univariate analyses were performed using the Mann–Whitney U analysis, Pearson’s chi-square test, and Fisher’s exact test. In addition, continuous variables were compared using the Student’s t-test.

Results: The baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. The stent group had increased preoperative serum albumin level and decreased ASA risk score. In addition, operation time, diet time, harvested lymph nodes and total stoma creation of the stent group were better than that of the emergency group. The complications and mortality during hospitalization were not significantly different between the two groups. The overall survival was not significantly different while the quality of life of survival patients in the stent group was better than that of the emergency group.

Conclusion: For acute obstructive colorectal cancer, a stent as a BTS seems to be a safe and feasible alternative option for emergency surgery in the management of acute obstructive colorectal cancer.

Bridge-to-surgery versus emergency surgery in the management of left-sided acute malignant colorectal obstruction - Efficacy, safety and long-term outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Compare efficacy, safety and long-term outcomes of bridge-to-surgery and emergency surgery in acute malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 94 consecutive patients with left-sided acute malignant colorectal obstruction treated with curative intent between 2010-2017.

RESULTS

48 patients underwent stent placement and 46 underwent emergency surgery. Technical and clinical success were 100% and 87%. Laparoscopy and one-staged operation were more frequent in bridge-to-surgery (44% vs 2%, p < 0.001; 73% vs 30%, p < 0.001). Fewer permanent stomas were created in bridge-to-surgery (15% vs 35%, p = 0.013). Overall morbidity was 36%. Immediate and post-procedure stent related-complications occurred in 6% and 13%; surgery-related complications occurred in 28% (bridge-to-surgery: 15% vs emergency surgery: 41%, p = 0.004). No differences were found regarding tumor recurrence, recurrence-free survival and overall survival. R1 resection (HR 47.2, _95%CI:4.1-543.7), number of lymph nodes harvested (HR 0.9 _95%CI:0.8-0.99) and adjuvant therapy (HR 0.1 _95%CI:0.01-0.9) predicted recurrence-free survival; pTMN stage IV (HR 7.3, _95%CI:1.1-47.6), number of lymph nodes harvested (HR 0.90, _95%CI:0.8-0.97), adjuvant therapy (HR 0.1, _95%CI:0.02-0.4) and surgery-related complications (HR 5.3, _95%CI:1.02-27.3) influenced overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Stent placement has a high success, similarly to emergency surgery, being associated with higher primary anastomosis and lower stoma rates. Tumor recurrence rate, recurrence-free survival and overall survival were comparable between groups; surgery-related complications influenced overall survival.

Stenting as a bridge to resection versus emergency surgery for left-sided colorectal cancer with malignant obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aims to discuss the safety and feasibility of a combined treatment consisting of stent insertion and elective surgery for left-sided colorectal cancer with malignant obstruction.

METHODS

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that discussed the safety and feasibility of stenting as a bridge to surgery in malignant colorectal cancer were identified in a search of medical databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and SCIENCE. Each paper's quality was assessed using the Jadad scale. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3, and statistical heterogeneity between RCTs was defined as I²>50%.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs included 594 patients were selected and analyzed. Of the included patients, 281 underwent stent insertion followed by elective surgery (SG group), and 313 underwent emergency surgery (EG group). The meta-analysis revealed that the patients in the SG group had a higher one-stage anastomosis rate. Patients in the SG had lower mortality rates and minor complications. There was no significant difference in anastomotic leakage between the two groups. The funnel plot showed that there was no publication bias in these outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Stenting as a bridge to surgery was safe and feasible in left-sided colorectal cancer with malignant obstruction. Compared with the patients in the EG group, the SG patients had an improved primary anastomosis rate and experienced no increase in the risk of other complications.

Long-term outcomes and prognostic factors of patients with obstructive colorectal cancer: A multicenter retrospective cohort study

AIM: To investigate the long-term oncologic outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer (CRC) at multiple Japanese institutions.

METHODS: We identified 362 patients diagnosed with obstructive colorectal cancer from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2012 in Yokohama Clinical Oncology Group’s department of gastroenterological surgery. Among them, 234 patients with stage II/III disease who had undergone surgical resection of their primary lesions were analyzed, retrospectively. We report the long-term outcomes, the risk factors for recurrence, and the prognostic factors.

RESULTS: The five-year disease free survival and cancer-specific survival were 50.6% and 80.3%, respectively. A multivariate analysis showed the ASA-PS (HR = 2.23, P = 0.026), serum Albumin ≤ 4.0 g/dL (HR = 2.96, P = 0.007), T4 tumor (HR = 2.73, P = 0.002) and R1 resection (HR = 6.56, P = 0.02) to be independent risk factors for recurrence. Furthermore, poorly differentiated cancers (HR = 6.28, P = 0.009), a T4 tumor (HR = 3.46, P = 0.011) and R1 resection (HR = 6.16, P = 0.006) were independent prognostic factors in patients with obstructive CRC.

CONCLUSION: The outcomes of patients with obstructive CRC was poor. T4 tumor and R1 resection were found to be independent prognostic factors for both recurrence and survival in patients with obstructive CRC.

Treatment of older patients with colorectal cancer: a perspective review

In a continuously aging population, the burden of colorectal cancer (CRC) is rising among older patients. Despite the fact that almost half of the cases occur in patients over 75 years, this age group is subjected to disparities regarding diagnostic and therapeutic options. So far, exclusion of older patients from randomized clinical trials has resulted in a lack of evidence-based guidelines. Nevertheless, newer data from studies specifically targeting older patients and subgroup analyses indicate that proper treatment planning and specific medical and geriatric assessment can achieve a safe and beneficial treatment result in older patients, often with similar outcomes to their younger counterparts. Resection of the primary tumour, if feasible, should be the primary goal of surgery aiming for cure, although it should be avoided under emergency conditions. Chronological age per se should not be an exclusion criterion for adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy, or targeted therapies. Careful patient selection, dose adjustments, close monitoring and early intervention in the event of side effects are essential. The benefits of treatment must be balanced with potential effects of treatment and patients' wishes.