Colonic stent vs. emergency surgery for management of acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a decision analysis

The use of self-expanding metallic stents in the management of benign colonic obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patients presenting with large bowel obstruction (LBO) frequently undergo emergency surgery that is associated with significant morbidity. In malignant LBO, endoscopic approaches with placement is a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS), have been proposed to prevent emergency surgery and act as a bridge to an elective procedure-with the intention of avoiding a stoma and reducing morbidity. This systematic review aims to assess the quality and outcomes of data available on the use of SEMS in benign causes of colonic obstruction.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the protocol was registered on Prospero (ID: CRD42021239363). PUBMED, MEDLINE, HMIC, CINAHL, AMED, EMBASE, APA and Cochrane databases were searched. Studies were assessed for quality utilising the MINORS criteria. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using random effects models.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included for analysis. 300 patients were included with an average age of 68, and a male predominance of 57%. The quality of the papers included were at risk of bias. The pooled rate of technical success of procedure was 94.4% (95% CI 90.5-96.8%) The pooled rate of clinical success was 77.6% (95% CI: 66.6-85.7%). Adverse effects were low, with perforation 8.8% (4.5-16.6%), recurrence 26.5% (17.2-38.5%) and stent migration 22.5% (14.1-33.8%).

DISCUSSION

This systematic review demonstrated that SEMS for benign colonic obstruction can be a safe and successful procedure. The utilisation of SEMS in malignant disease as a bridge to surgery has been well documented. Whilst the limitations of the data interpreted are appreciated, we postulate that SEMS could be utilised to decompress patients acutely and allow pre-operative optimisation, leading to a more elective surgery with less subsequent morbidity.

Endoscopic Management of Colonic Obstruction

Large bowel obstruction is a serious event that occurs in approximately 25% of all intestinal obstructions. It is attributed to either benign, malignant, functional (pseudo-obstruction), or mechanical conditions. Benign etiologies of colonic obstructions include colon volvulus, anastomotic strictures, radiation injury, ischemia, inflammatory processes such as Crohn's disease, diverticulitis, bezoars, and intussusception.

Analysis of Reported Adverse Events With Colonic Stents: An FDA MAUDE Database Study

BACKGROUND

Colonic stents are indicated for preoperative and palliative decompression of large bowel obstruction. We aim to investigate post Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval outcomes associated with colonic stents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed postmarketing surveillance data from the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database from January 2011 to December 2020.

RESULTS

During the study period, 691 device issues and 742 patient complications were identified. The number of adverse events reported to the FDA mildly increased from 6.40% in 2011 to 7.4% in 2020. Most device complications were due to a positioning problem (n=201, 29%), followed by device break (n=60, 8.6%), delamination (n=41, 6.3%), and migration or expulsion device (n=38, 5.55%). A number of reports described an unclassified adverse event without specifying device or operator problem (n=141, 20.3%). The most reported patient adverse events were perforation (n=150, 20.1%), death (n=47, 6.3%), abdominal pain/discomfort (n=27, 3.6%), and peritonitis (n=24, 3.2%).

CONCLUSION

Findings from the MAUDE database highlight rare but important patient and device complications which endoscopists and referring providers should be aware of before consideration for colonic stent placement.

Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery for obstructive colon cancer: is it safe in the long term?

BACKGROUND

The placement of a self-expanding metal stent in patients with obstructive colon cancer is used as a bridge to surgery. However, due to a lack of consensus and insufficient data, the long-term oncologic outcomes after colonic SEMS placement remain unclear. We assessed the long-term oncologic outcomes and adverse effects of colonic stenting for malignant colonic obstruction.

METHODS

We included 198 patients admitted to Korea University Anam Hospital between 2006 and 2014 for obstructive colon cancer, of whom 98 underwent SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery and 100 underwent direct surgery without stenting. The clinicopathologic characteristics, overall survival, and disease-free survival were compared.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between the two groups. The median follow-up durations were 61.55 and 58.64 months in the SEMS and DS groups, respectively. There were also no significant differences in the 5-year OS (77.4% vs. 74.2%, p = 0.691) and 5-year DFS (61.7% vs. 71.0%, p = 0.194) rates between the groups. However, the DS group had significantly more early postoperative complications (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic SEMS deployment as a bridge to surgery did not negatively affect long-term oncologic outcomes when compared with DS. In addition, colonic stenting decreased early postoperative complications and reduced the time for patients to return to normal daily activities.

Comparison of blowhole colostomy and loop ostomy for palliation of acute malignant colonic obstruction

Purpose

Surgery to create a stoma for decompression might be required for unresectable stage IV cancer patients with complete colonic obstruction. The aim of this study was to compare the results of blowhole colostomy with those of loop ostomy.

Methods

Palliative ileostomy or colostomy procedures performed at a single center between January 2011 and October 2020, were analyzed retrospectively. Fifty-nine patients were identified during this period. The demographic characteristics and outcomes between the blowhole colostomy group (n=24) and the loop ostomy group (n=35) were compared.

Results

The median operative time tended to be shorter in the blowhole colostomy group (52.5 minutes; interquartile range [IQR], 43-65) than in the loop ostomy group (60 minutes; IQR, 40-107), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (P=0.162). The median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter with blowhole colostomy (blowhole, 13 days [IQR, 9-23]; loop, 21 days [IQR, 14-37]; P=0.013). Mean cecum diameter was significantly larger in the blowhole group than in the loop group (8.83±1.91 cm vs. 6.78±2.36 cm, P=0.001), and the emergency operation rate was higher in the blowhole group than in the loop group (22 of 24 [91.7%] vs. 23 of 35 [65.7%], P=0.021).

Conclusion

In surgical emergencies, diverting a blowhole colostomy can be safe and effective for palliative management of colonic obstruction in patients with end-stage cancer and might reduce the operative time in emergent situations.

Self-Expanding Metal Stents Do Not Adversely Affect Long-term Outcomes in Acute Malignant Large-Bowel Obstruction: A Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents as a bridge to surgery in acute malignant large-bowel obstruction has gained popularity. However, long-term oncologic outcomes have not been well established.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate long-term oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing curative resection after the placement of a colonic stent compared with emergency surgery for acute malignant large-bowel obstruction.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective study.

SETTING

All patients presenting at 3 tertiary care centers between April 2002 and December 2012 with a diagnosis of complete malignant large-bowel obstruction were reviewed. Patients with disease distal to the hepatic flexure were selected for analysis.

PATIENTS

One hundred twenty-two patients who underwent either emergency surgery or placement of a colonic stent with curative intent were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients receiving emergency surgery within 24 hours of presenting with obstructive symptoms, including those with failed stents, were included in the emergency surgery group. All patients with clinically successful stent deployment before surgery were included in the stent group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Overall survival and disease-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients underwent emergency surgery, and 58 patients underwent placement of a self-expanding metal stent. Groups were similar in terms of sex, tumor stage and grade, and Charlson and Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index scores. Patients in the surgery group were older than patients in the stent group. There were no differences in the number of lymph nodes harvested, positive nodes, rates of vascular and perineural invasion, or utilization of chemotherapy. Thirty-day mortality after resection was similar between groups (7.41% vs 4.41%; p > 0.05). Patients who underwent colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery had similar 10-year overall survival (40.5% vs 32.7%; p = 0.13) and 10-year disease-free survival (40.2% vs 33.8%; p = 0.26) compared with those who underwent emergency surgery. Similar results were seen on intention-to-treat analysis.

LIMITATIONS

This was a small retrospective study.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent insertion followed by oncologic resection is associated with similar overall survival and disease-free survival compared with emergency resection. Stent insertion as a bridge to surgery should be considered in patients presenting with malignant colorectal obstruction. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B714Los Stents Metálicos Autoexpandibles No Afectan Negativamente Los Resultados A Largo Plazo En La Obstrucción Maligna Aguda Del Colon: Un Análisis Retrospectivo.

ANTECEDENTES

Los stents metálicos autoexpandibles como puente a una cirugía en la obstrucción maligna aguda del colon han ganado popularidad. Sin embargo, no se han establecido bien los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo.

OBJETIVO

Investigar los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo de los pacientes sometidos a resección curativa después de la colocación de un stent colónico en comparación con la cirugía de urgencia para la obstrucción maligna aguda del colon.

DISEO

Estudio retrospectivo.

MBITO

Entre abril de 2002 y diciembre de 2012, se revisaron todos los pacientes que acudieron a tres centros de tercer nivel con un diagnóstico de obstrucción maligna completa del colon. Se seleccionaron para el análisis los pacientes con enfermedad distal al ángulo hepático.

PACIENTES

Se incluyeron 122 pacientes que fueron operados de urgencia o a una colocación de un stent colónico con intención curativa.

PROCEDIMIENTOS

Los pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía de urgencia dentro de las 24 horas posteriores a la presentación de síntomas obstructivos; se incluyeron aquellos con stents fallidos en el grupo de cirugía de urgencia. Todos los pacientes con colocación clínicamente exitosa del stent antes de la cirugía se incluyeron en el grupo de stent.

PRINCIPALES VARIABLES ANALIZADAS

La sobrevida global y la sobrevida libre de enfermedad se calcularon mediante el método de Kaplan-Meier.

RESULTADOS

Sesenta y cuatro pacientes fueron llevados a cirugía urgente y en 58 pacientes se colocó de un stent metálico autoexpandible. Los grupos fueron similares en relación a sexo, estadio y grado del tumor, puntuación de comorbilidad de Charlson y Charlson-Age. Los pacientes del grupo de cirugía eran mayores que los del grupo de stents. No hubo diferencias en el número de ganglios linfáticos recolectados, ganglios positivos, tasas de invasión vascular y perineural o utilización de quimioterapia. La mortalidad a los 30 días después de la resección fue similar entre los grupos (7,41% frente a 4,41%; p> 0,05). Los pacientes que se sometieron a la colocación de un stent colónico como puente a la cirugía tuvieron una sobrevida general a diez años similar (40,5% vs 32,7%; p = 0,13) y una sobrevida libre de enfermedad a diez años (40,2% vs 33,8%, respectivamente; p = 0,26) en comparación a los operados de urgencia. Se observaron resultados similares en el análisis por intención de tratamiento.

LIMITACIONES

Estudio retrospectivo reducido.

CONCLUSIONES

La utilización de un stent y posteriormente la resección oncológica se asocia a una sobrevida general y una sobrevida libre de enfermedad similar en comparación con la resección de urgencia. La utilización de un stent como puente a la cirugía debe considerarse en pacientes que presentan obstrucción colorrectal maligna. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B714. (Traducción-Dr. Lisbeth Alarcon-Bernes).

Gastrointestinal Perforation With an Intraluminal Stent and Bevacizumab use in Advanced Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Intestinal obstruction is a common acute presentation of advanced rectal cancer, which could be managed with surgical or non-surgical techniques including metallic stenting. Bevacizumab has been gaining popularity in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) in combination with different chemotherapeutic agents, to improve the overall survival rate; however, data regarding the adverse effects of bevacizumab in combination with other treatment modalities have been insufficient. Herein, we present a case of a 37-year-old man diagnosed with advanced rectal cancer with concurrent liver and lung metastases. He was started on Xelox (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab for palliative care. He developed an episode of bowel obstruction, which was managed with emergent placement of a metallic stent. Soon after that, the patient presented emergently with signs and symptoms of intestinal perforation. He underwent emergent surgical intervention with stoma creation and a complicated hospital course. Despite the oncological benefits of bevacizumab for treating metastatic CRC, complications can occur resulting in a devastating outcome, with intestinal perforation being the most serious rare complication.

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

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

Self-expanding Metallic Stents in Acute Mechanical Intestinal Obstructions Resulting from Colorectal Malignancies

Endoscopic colonic stenting with self-expanding metallic stents is now widely used to treat malignant large bowel obstruction, where temporary or permanent decompression of the large bowel is desired. The medical records of patients who underwent endoscopic colonic stenting for malignant large bowel obstruction between May 2004 and May 2011 were reviewed. Success rate, morbidity, and mortality rate along with patient characteristics were documented. Sixty-seven patients were included. The procedure was used as a bridge to surgery in 38 and as a palliative measure in 29. Success rate was 95.5 per cent. Perforation and reobstruction occurred in three and three patients, respectively. All of the patients who developed perforation or reobstruction underwent emergency surgery. Endoscopic stenting offers a safe and effective treatment option in patients with malignant large bowel obstruction with comparable outcomes.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Colon metal stents as a bridge to surgery had no significant effects on the perineural invasion: a retrospective study

Purpose

The long-term oncological effects of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a “bridge to surgery” are contradictory, and perineural invasion was supposed to be enhanced by the stenting. In this retrospective study, we compared the perineural invasion and the oncological outcomes between the stent as a bridge to surgery (SBTS)- and emergency surgery (ES)-treated patients to evaluate the results of stenting on the perineural invasion.

Methods

The clinical data of patients with acute intestinal obstruction caused by colorectal cancer from January 2013 to January 2017 were retrospectively collected. Forty-three patients underwent semi-elective curative resection after endoscopic SEMS insertion, and sixty-three underwent ES. The adverse events and long-term follow-up outcomes were assessed. The clinicopathological characteristics, perineural invasion rates, and survival rates were compared between the two patient groups.

Results

Stent insertion resulted in significantly lower stoma rate (32.6% vs 46%; P = 0.03), post-operative overall complication rate (11.6% vs 28.6%, P = 0.038), and total hospital stay (17.07 ± 5.544 days vs 20.48 ± 7.372 days, P = 0.042). Compared with the ES group, there was no significant increase in the incidence of peripheral invasion in the SBTS group (39.5% vs 47.6%, P = 0.411). No significant difference was noted in the survival rate and long-term prognosis between the SEMS and ES groups (P = 0.964). The technical success rate was 95.6%, and the clinical success rate was 97.7%.

Conclusions

Preoperative colon stenting was an effective transitional method for colorectal cancer patients with complete obstruction. Short-term stent implantation had no significant effect on perineural invasion in patients with CRC.

Technical and Clinical Outcomes After Colorectal Stenting in Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction: A Single-Center Experience

Purpose

Malignant large bowel obstruction is a surgical emergency that requires urgent decompression. Stents are increasingly being used, though reported outcomes are variable. We describe our multidisciplinary experience in using stents to manage malignant large bowel obstruction.

Methods

All patients undergoing colorectal stent insertion for acute large bowel obstruction in a teaching hospital were included. Outcomes, complications, and length of stay (LOS) were recorded.

Results

Over a 7-year period, 73 procedures were performed on 67 patients (37 male, mean age of 76 years). Interventional radiology was involved in all cases. Endoscopic guidance was required in 24 cases (32.9%). In 18 patients (26.9%), treatment intent was to bridge to elective surgery; 16 had successful stent placement; all had subsequent curative resection (laparoscopic resection, 8 of 18; primary anastomosis, 14 of 18). Overall LOS, including both index admission and elective admission, was 16.4 days. Treatment intent was palliative in 49 patients (73.1%). In this group, stents were successfully placed in 41 of 49 (83.7%). Complication rate within 30 days was 20%, including perforation (2 patients), per rectal bleeding (2), stent migration (1), and stent passage (5). Nineteen patients (38.8%) required subsequent stoma formation (6, during same admission; 13, during subsequent admission). Overall LOS was 16.9 days.

Conclusion

In our experience colorectal stents can be used effectively to manage malignant large bowel obstruction, with only selective endoscopic input. As a bridge to surgery, most patients can avoid emergency surgery and have a primary anastomosis. In the palliative setting, the complication rate is acceptable and two-thirds avoid a permanent stoma.

Colonic Stent Use in Patients With Malignant Flexure Tumors Presenting With Obstruction

Background and Objective:

Colonic stenting in left-sided tumor is being commonly used. However, placing a stent in the flexure tumors is rare because it is technically more difficult. In this study, we aimed to retrospectively screen patients with flexure tumors admitted to our clinic who were treated using a colonic stent and discuss our findings.

Methods:

Patients admitted to the emergency department for obstructive colonic tumors between 2012 and 2017 were retrospectively evaluated, and 21 patients treated using stents were included in the study. The expandable metal stent (Wallflex®, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) was placed at the obstruction through the lead wire.

Results:

The mean age of the patients was 62 years, and the ratio of females to males was 3:18. Splenic flexure tumors were detected in 18 patients and hepatic flexure tumors in 3 patients. Seven of the patients were stented for palliative purposes. Fourteen of the cases underwent surgery. Three of them underwent laparoscopic surgery and eleven underwent open surgery.

Conclusions:

Preoperative stenting in colonic flexura tumors is associated with faster healing, less postoperative complications, lower rates of colostomy, and higher rates of minimally invasive surgery, and can be safely used at experienced centers.

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.

Impact on surgical and oncological results of the use of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery for potentially curable occlusive colorectal neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

The outcomes of patients treated with colonic stents as a bridge to surgery (BTS) have recently been questioned in terms of safety and long-term oncologic outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects on surgical and oncologic outcomes of colonic stents as a BTS for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients operated on for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer with or without distant disease between September 2002 and October 2015, comparing the patients treated with a colonic stent as a BTS (Stent group) with those directly operated on (Surgery group).

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent urgent surgery, while stent placement as a BTS was attempted in 57 patients. The Stent group had more patients treated with a laparoscopic approach (64.9 vs. 5%, P<.001), higher primary anastomosis rate (91.2 vs. 55%, P=.001), less need for stomata (10.5 vs. 50%, P=.001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (7 vs. 12 days, P=.014). Thirty-day morbidity was reduced in the Stent group, although not significantly (29.8 vs. 50%, P=.104). However, 30-day mortality was significantly lower (1.8 vs. 20%, P=.015). Regarding the long-term oncologic outcomes, no significant differences were found when comparing overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, distant recurrence-free survival or progression-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic stenting as a BTS for potentially resectable obstructive colorectal cancer seems to offer better surgical and equal long-term oncologic outcomes when compared to those of patients directly operated on.

Outcomes and complications of self-expanding metal stent placement for malignant colonic obstruction in a single-center study

Introduction

Approximately 20% of cases of colorectal cancer are accompanied by acute colonic obstruction. While emergency colonic surgery is associated with high mortality and morbidity rates, placement of a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) has been suggested as an alternative method. The SEMS placement can serve as either a definitive treatment in palliative cases or a bridge to surgery.

Aim

To summarize the experience of our center in the treatment of malignant colonic obstruction using SEMS placement.

Material and methods

A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent a SEMS placement for colorectal stricture in the study period. The procedures were performed under fluoroscopic guidance with colonoscopic assistance, and uncovered stents were used in all patients.

Results

The study population consisted of 28 patients treated with SEMS placement due to malignant colonic obstruction. The majority of procedures were performed with palliative intent. The overall technical success rate was 96.5%, and clinical success was achieved in all of the successfully placed SEMSs. One fatal complication due to colonic perforation occurred. In the bridge-to-surgery group, all patients experienced tumor resection with no stoma creation.

Conclusions

The SEMS placement is an optimal treatment in the vast majority of acute colonic obstruction cases. Due to the possibility of potentially fatal complications, SEMS procedures should be performed by proficient endoscopists.

Comparison of efficacies of the self-expandable metallic stent versus transanal drainage tube and emergency surgery for malignant left-sided colon obstruction

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Patients with left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction require emergency treatment. Emergency stoma surgery has traditionally been recommended, however many stomas became permanent, decreasing patient quality of life. Recently, self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) and transanal decompression tubes (TDT) have become widely used decompression methods to avoid stoma surgery. In this study, we evaluated: 1) the efficacy of SEMS compared with TDT and emergency surgery (ES) to avoid permanent stomas; and 2) the safety and success rate of each treatment.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from 56 patients who underwent SEMS, TDT, or emergency surgery for malignant left-sided colon obstruction. We compared the permanent stoma rate of each group, and assessed whether or not each treatment was an independent risk factor for permanent stomas. We compared morbidity and mortality for each treatment group (SEMS, TDT, ES), and the success rate of the decompression procedures (SEMS and TDT).

RESULTS

The permanent stoma rates in the SEMS, TDT, and ES groups were 5.3%, 50.0%, and 56.0%, respectively. Emergency surgery (vs. SEMS) and TDT (vs. SEMS) were independent risk factors for permanent stomas, as was age ≥ 75 years. Operative morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay were not different between groups. The success rate of SEMS was significantly higher than TDT; however, two deaths, including one perforation, occurred in the former group.

CONCLUSION

SEMS seems to be effective in avoiding permanent stomas, but caution should be taken to avoid complications.

Who requires emergency surgery for colorectal cancer and can national screening programmes reduce this need?

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing emergency colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery are at higher risk of poor outcome than those managed electively. The aim of this national study is to identify groups at high risk of undergoing unplanned CRC surgery and assess short and long-term outcome in this cohort subsequent morbidity and mortality as well as quantify their long-term survival. The aim of this national study is to identify groups at high risk of undergoing unplanned CRC surgery and assess short and long-term outcome, subsequent morbidity and mortality as well as quantify their long-term survival.

METHODS

The Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database between the years of 1997-2012 was used to identify all patients that had undergone surgery for colorectal cancer. Multivariable logistic regression analysis and cox regression analyses were undertaken to identify patient factors predictive of undergoing emergency and quantify their long-term survival.

RESULTS

A total of 286,591 patients underwent resection for CRC between April 1997 and April 2012, of which 24.3% (69,718 patients) were admitted as emergencies and underwent emergency surgery. Independent predictors of undergoing emergency surgery were female gender (OR 1.23, CI: 1.21-1.25, p < 0.001), older age (>79 years old OR 1.55, CI: 1.50-1.60, p < 0.001), social deprivation (most deprived quintile, OR 1.64, CI: 1.50-1.80, p < 0.001) and Black African/Caribbean ethnicity (OR 1.36, CI: 1.21-1.66, p < 0.001). All cause 30- and 90-day mortality within the emergency group was significantly higher than that for the electively managed patients group (13.3% versus compared with 3.4% at 30-days) as was 90-day (20.0% versus compared with 5.8% at 90-days). Amongst patients eligible for bowel screening there was an approximate 40% significant reduction in the proportion of patients requiring emergency surgery before and after its introduction in 2006 (23.4%-14.9%, p < 0.001). This reduction in emergency surgery included both proximal and distal cancer resections.

CONCLUSION

Older, socially deprived and ethnic minority patients with colorectal cancer are more likely to present as emergencies requiring CRC surgery. Public health initiatives, such as bowel cancer screening, appear to have concomitantly reduced emergency and increased elective surgical rates within the eligible cohort. This is likely to have a beneficial impact on population survival. Strategies aimed at preventing emergency presentation by identifying patients at specific risk could improve survival outcome for colorectal cancer surgery in England.

Colonic self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: an 8-year review

INTRODUCTION

Colonic stenting has evolved to be an alternative to emergency laparotomy in the management of acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. This retrospective comparative study aimed to review the outcomes of colonic stent as bridge to surgery with emergency operation in a regional hospital in Hong Kong.

METHOD

Consecutive patients who were admitted from January 2006 to July 2014 with diagnosis of malignant left-sided colonic obstruction (from splenic flexure to rectosigmoid colon) were included. Patients with peritonitis or disseminated disease were excluded. Colonic stenting was attempted in all eligible patients when fluoroscopy was available in the endoscopy suite during office hour. Otherwise, emergency operation was performed. For patients with clinical success in colonic stenting, interval colectomies were performed. The postoperative outcomes, including the 30-days mortality, the stoma creation rate, the complication rate as well as the survival data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis.

RESULTS

From January 2006 to July 2014, 62 patients underwent colonic stenting and 40 patients underwent emergency operations. The technical success rate and the clinical success rate of stenting were 95.2 and 83.9 %, respectively. Laparoscopic resection was achieved in 74.2 % in the stenting group. More primary anastomoses were performed in the stenting group (71.0 vs. 27.5 %, p = 0.000). The stenting group had a significantly lower permanent stoma rate (16.1 vs. 52.5 %, p < 0.000), fewer Dindo grade III to IV postoperative morbidity (16.1 vs. 40 %, p = 0.007), and the 30-day mortality rate was lower (3.2 vs. 17.5 %, p = 0.018), translating into a better overall 5-year survival rate. The disease-free survival was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonic self-expanding metal stent is effective in the management of acute left-sided colonic obstruction. It is associated with reduced stoma creation rate and postoperative morbidity. The oncological safety is not jeopardized by stenting and the interval operation.

Safety and efficacy of palliative systemic chemotherapy combined with colorectal self-expandable metallic stents in advanced colorectal cancer: A multicenter study

PURPOSE

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is an accepted palliative therapy for management of acute malignant bowel obstruction in advanced colorectal cancer. Nevertheless, data are lacking on the effects of systemic chemotherapy combined with colorectal SEMS. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of palliative chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer combined with colorectal SEMS placement.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicentre retrospective study included all consecutive advanced colorectal cancer patients who received first-line palliative chemotherapy combined with endoscopic stenting for colorectal cancer with obstruction. We analyzed the number of cycles and the type of combination used. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, response rate, grade 3-4 toxicity and the outcomes of SEMS for malignant colorectal obstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients were included. Among them, 25 patients received oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil combination chemotherapy. Objective response and stabilization occurred in 38 and 24% of patients, respectively. The median overall survival and progression-free survival from the start of chemotherapy were 18 and 5months, respectively. The objective response rate and overall disease control rate were 38 and 62%, respectively. Toxicity was generally acceptable. Major complications related to stenting included perforation (8%), stent migration (5%), and reobstruction secondary to tumor ingrowths (13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy combined with colonic stenting as a first-line treatment seems to be a valid option in advanced colorectal cancer patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.

Stenting for obstructing colon cancer: fewer complications and colostomies

Background and Objectives:

Colonic stenting has been used in the setting of malignant obstruction to avoid an emergent colectomy. We sought to determine whether preoperative placement of a colonic stent decreases morbidity and the rate of colostomy formation.

Methods:

Cases of obstructing sigmoid, rectosigmoid, and rectal cancer from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2011, were identified in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. All patients were treated at hospitals in the United States, and the database generated national estimates. Postoperative complications, mortality, and the rate of colostomy formation were analyzed.

Results:

Of the estimated 7891 patients who presented with obstructing sigmoid, rectosigmoid, or rectal cancer necessitating intervention, 12.1% (n = 956) underwent placement of a colonic stent, and the remainder underwent surgery without stent placement. Of the patients who underwent stenting, 19.9% went on to have colon resection or stoma creation during the same admission. Patients who underwent preoperative colonic stent placement had a lower rate of total postoperative complications (10.5% vs 21.7%; P < .01). There was no significant difference in mortality (4.7% vs 4.2%; P = .69). The rate of colostomy formation was more than 2-fold higher in patients who did not undergo preoperative stenting (42.5% vs 19.5%; P < .01). Preoperative stenting was associated with increased use of laparoscopy (32.6% vs 9.7%; P < .01).

Conclusions:

Our study characterizes the national incidence of preoperative placement of a colonic stent in the setting of malignant obstruction. Preoperative stent placement is associated with lower postoperative complications and a lower rate of colostomy formation. The results support the hypothesis that stenting as a bridge to surgery may benefit patients by converting an emergent surgery into an elective one.

Acute Treatment of Malignant Colorectal Occlusion: Real Life Practice

Introduction

Colorectal cancer presents itself as acute bowel occlusion in 10–40% of patients. There are two main therapeutic approaches: urgent surgery and endoluminal placement self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS).

Aims and Methods

This study intended to better clarify the risk/benefit ratio of the above-mentioned approaches. We conducted a retrospective longitudinal multicenter study, including 189 patients with acute malignant colorectal occlusion, diagnosed between January 2005 and March 2013.

Results

Globally (85 patients – 35 bridge-to-surgery and 50 palliative), SEMS's technical success was of 94%. Palliative SEMS had limited clinical success (60%) and were associated with 40% of complications. SEMS occlusion (19%) was the most frequent complication, followed by migration (9%) and bowel perforation (7%). Elective surgery after stenting was associated with a higher frequency of primary anastomosis (94% vs. 76%; p = 0.038), and a lower rate of colostomy (26% vs. 55%; p = 0.004) and overall mortality (31% vs. 57%; p = 0.02). However, no significant differences were identified concerning postoperative complications. Regarding palliative treatment, no difference was found in the complications rate and overall mortality between SEMS and decompressive colostomy/ileostomy. In this SEMS subgroup, we found a higher rate of reinterventions (40% vs. 5%; p = 0.004) and a longer hospital stay (14, nine vs. seven, three days; p = 0.004).

Conclusion

SEMS placement as a bridge-to-surgery should be considered in the acute treatment of colorectal malignant occlusion, since it displays advantages regarding primary anastomosis, colostomy rate and overall mortality. In contrast, in this study, palliative SEMS did not appear to present significant advantages when compared to decompressive colostomy.

Colonic perforation with intraluminal stents and bevacizumab in advanced colorectal cancer: retrospective case series and literature review

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are increasingly used in the treatment of malignant large bowel obstruction in the setting of inoperable colorectal cancer. Perforation is a well-known complication associated with these devices. The addition of the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor bevacizumab is suspected to increase the rate, but the extent of the increase is not known.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients receiving SEMS in tertiary hospitals in Calgary, Alta., between October 2001 and January 2012.

RESULTS

We reviewed the records of 87 patients with inoperable colorectal cancer who received SEMS during our study period. Nine perforations occurred in total: 4 of 30 (13%) patients who received no chemotherapy, 3 of 47 (6%) who received chemotherapy but no bevacizumab, and 2 of 10 (20%) who received chemotherapy and bevacizumab. These two patients received bevacizumab with FOLFIRI after SEMS placement, and they had peritoneal disease.

CONCLUSION

Our case series and other studies suggest that bevacizumab may increase the risk of colonic perforation in the setting of SEMS. Caution should be used when combining these therapies.

Endoscopic stent placement in the management of malignant colonic obstruction: Experiences from two centers

OBJECTIVE

Intestinal obstruction due to colorectal tumors requires immediate surgical decompression. Endoscopic stent placement for acute malignant colonic obstruction is gaining widespread acceptance as an alternative to emergency surgery. Our aim in this study was to evaluate the success and complication rates of endoscopic stenting for malignant colonic obstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with acute malignant colonic obstruction who underwent endoscopic stenting between 2011-2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Data included demographic features, localization of obstruction, endoscopic stenting indications, rate of technical and clinical success, complications, morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Endoscopic stent was successfully placed in 77 out of 82 procedures (93.9%). A colostomy was placed in five cases in which endoscopic stent could not be inserted. There were complications in seven patients with technically successful stents (9.0%). These included three stent migrations, one perforation, and rectal hemorrhage in three patients. There were no stent-related deaths.

CONCLUSION

The mortality rate of emergency surgery for malignant bowel obstruction is relatively high. The use of colonic stents can avoid surgery in patients who are not suitable for emergency surgery and may allow adequate time for preoperative preparation, counseling and staging for those who are suitable for further intervention. We believe that self-expandable metallic stent placement is a safe, effective, and minimal invasive alternative treatment method for malignant colonic obstruction.

Clinical impact of prophylactic antibiotic treatment for self-expandable metallic stent insertion in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction

Purpose. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics (PA) for reducing the infectious complications and the potential risk factors responsible for the infectious complications after stent insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of 224 patients who underwent self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) insertion for malignant colorectal obstruction from May 2004 to December 2012. Results. There were 145 patients in the PA group and 79 in non-PA group. The CRP level in PA group was significantly higher than that in non-PA. Abdominal tenderness and mechanical ileus were significantly more frequent in PA group than those in non-PA. The frequency of post-SEMS insertion fever, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), and bacteremia was not significantly different between PA and non-PA groups. In multivariate analysis, the CRP level was risk factor related to post-SEMS insertion SIRS. However, in propensity score matching analysis, there was no independent risk factor related to post-SEMS insertion fever, SIRS, and bacteremia. Conclusion. The use of PA in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction may be not effective to prevent the development of infectious complications after SEMS insertion.

Systematic review of emergent laparoscopic colorectal surgery for benign and malignant disease

Laparoscopic surgery has become well established in the management of both and malignant colorectal disease. The last decade has seen increasing numbers of surgeons trained to a high standard in minimally-invasive surgery. However there has not been the same enthusiasm for the use of laparoscopy in emergency colorectal surgery. There is a perception that emergent surgery is technically more difficult and may lead to worse outcomes. The present review aims to provide a comprehensive and critical appraisal of the available literature on the use of laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCS) in the emergency setting. The literature is broadly divided by the underlying pathology; that is, inflammatory bowel disease, diverticulitis and malignant obstruction. There were no randomized trials and the majority of the studies were case-matched series or comparative studies. The overall trend was that LCS is associated with shorter hospital stay, par or fewer complications but an increased operating time.Emergency LCS can be safely undertaken for both benign and malignant disease providing there is appropriate patient selection, the surgeon is adequately experienced and there are sufficient resources to allow for a potentially more complex operation.

[Analysis of postoperative complications following acute surgery for colorectal cancer]

Our aim was to improve the outcome of emergency surgeries for colorectal cancer (CRC). Authors compared two periods: 2004-2006 and 2007-2011. Targeted cases were emergency admissions, in which the diagnosis of colorectal cancer is only revealed during work-up or during surgery. No other exclusion criteria were set. Analyzed main endpoints were anastomotic leak, postoperative mortality, resecability. ASA classification and TNM stages were assessed in order to learn morbidity and general condition prior to acute surgery. Considering the experience gained in prior period, in 2007, authors have made a change in treatment strategy. In following years leakage ratio became ten times lower and mortality was reduced by 5%. There is a great chance that fast work-up and preparation for surgery may decrease complications and mortality. The aim would be for CRC patients, is to reach surgery in an early stage of disease as possible, at least before complications develop.

Outcomes after stenting for malignant large bowel obstruction without radiologist support

AIM: To assess outcomes after colonic stent insertion for obstructing colorectal malignancies performed by an endoscopist without radiologist support.

METHODS: This is a retrospective study of all stents inserted by a single surgeon in a District General Hospital over an eight year period. All stents were inserted for patients with acute large bowel obstruction secondary to a malignant colorectal pathology either for palliation or as a bridge to surgery. Procedures were performed by a single surgeon endoscopically with fluoroscopic control in the X-ray department but without the support of an interventional radiologist. Data was collected prospectively on a pre-designed database.

RESULTS: The indication for all stent procedures was an obstructing colorectal malignancy. Out of 53 patients, the overall success rate was 90.6%. Eight patients had a stent intended as a bridge to surgery and 45 as a palliative procedure. Technical success was achieved in 50 out of 53 procedures (94.3%) and clinical success in 48 of those remaining 50 (96.0%). Those with unsuccessful technical or clinical procedures went on to have defunctioning stomas to treat their obstruction. There were six complications from the technically successful stents (12.0%). These included one migration, one persisting obstructive symptoms and four cases of tumour overgrowth of the stents at a later date. Haemorrhagic complications, perforation or mortality were not observed in our series. Our results are comparable to several other studies assessing stent outcomes for obstructing bowel cancer.

CONCLUSION: Our data suggests that colorectal stents can be inserted without radiologist support by an adequately trained individual with good outcomes.

Systematic review of self-expanding stents in the management of benign colorectal obstruction

AIM

Colorectal obstruction due to benign disease is likely to become more prevalent. Self-expanding stents have been shown to be effective in reducing morbidity and allowing one-stage resection or improved palliation in colorectal cancer. This review assessed the use of self-expanding stents in benign colorectal obstruction.

METHOD

A systematic review was performed using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Keywords included: 'benign disease' 'colorectal obstruction', 'stent', 'endoprosthesis' and 'prosthesis' Original articles from all relevant listings were sourced. These were hand searched for further articles of relevance. The main outcome measures assessed were technical and clinical success, perforation, reobstruction and stoma avoidance in the bridge to surgery population.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 130 articles; the 21 included studies yielded a pooled analysis of 122 patients. Diverticulitis was the predominant aetiology (66/122, 54%). Technical success was achieved in 115/122 (94%) and clinical success in 108/120 (87%) patients. Overall, the perforation rate was 12% (15/122) and the reobstruction rate was 14% (17/122). A stoma was avoided in 48% (23/48) of bridge to surgery patients. Perforation and stoma avoidance in the bridge to surgery group were worse with an aetiology of diverticulitis.

CONCLUSION

Complication rates in stenting for benign colorectal obstruction are higher than for malignant obstruction. On the basis of limited published evidence, stenting cannot be recommended for benign colorectal obstruction.

Self-expandable metal stents for malignant colonic obstruction: data from a retrospective regional SIED-AIGO study

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stents are a non-surgical option for the treatment of symptomatic malignant colorectal obstruction as palliative treatment or as a bridge to surgery.

AIMS

To report data from a regional study on self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

Two hundred and four patients (male 54.9%, mean age of 69.5 ± 14.2) were retrospectively evaluated and data on technical and clinical success, and complications, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Technical and clinical success rates were 99% and 94.6% respectively, with 36.7% treated on an emergency basis and 63.3% electively. Palliative treatment was administered to 70.1%, and as a bridge to surgery for 29.9%. Complications were 17 neoplastic ingrowths, 10 stent migrations, and 4 perforations. Palliative treatment was associated with a higher risk of stent ingrowth (p=0.003), and chemotherapy with a lower risk of stent ingrowth (p=0.009).

CONCLUSION

This regional study, although it has certain limitations, confirms the positive role of self-expandable metal stents in the treatment of symptomatic malignant colorectal obstruction, and that chemotherapy decreases the risk of ingrowth.

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.

The new nitinol conformable self-expandable metal stents for malignant colonic obstruction: a pilot experience as bridge to surgery treatment

Introduction. Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are a nonsurgical option for treatment of malignant colorectal obstruction also as a bridge to surgery approach. The new nitinol conformable stent has improved clinical outcomes in these kinds of patients. We report a pilot experience with nitinol conformable SEMS placement as bridge to surgery treatment in patients with colorectal obstruction. Materials and Methods. Between April and August 2012, we collected data on colonic nitinol conformable SEMS placement in a cohort of consecutive symptomatic patients, with malignant colorectal obstruction, who were treated as a bridge to surgery. Technical success, clinical success, and adverse events were recorded. Results. Ten patients (7 male (70%)), with a mean age of 69.2 ± 10.1, were evaluated. The mean length of the stenosis was 3.6 ± 0.6 cm. Five patients (50%) were treated on an emergency basis. The median time from stent placement to surgery was 16 days (interquartile range 7–21). Technical and clinical success was achieved in all patients with a significant early improvement of symptoms. No adverse events due to the SEMS placement were observed. Conclusion. This pilot study confirmed the important role of nitinol conformable SEMS as a bridge to surgery option in the treatment of symptomatic malignant colorectal obstruction.

A novel anchoring system for colonic stents: a pilot in vivo study in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Colorectal stents have a proven role in colorectal cancer as palliative care or a bridge to surgery. However, their efficacy and anchoring to the tissue varies according to stent design with stent migration rates up to 50 %. We present preliminary in vivo results of a new end-luminal anchoring system for stent fixation to the rectal canal. The aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of the stent using the anchoring system while subjecting the device to daily abdominal pressures related to daily activities in a porcine animal model.

METHODS

Ex vivo anatomical and physical studies were performed to improve the system's structure and safety. Four female pigs were followed for the acute and chronic (16 weeks) period. Two animals were euthanized and underwent en-bloc pelvic visceral excision and histopathological examination. Device fixation time, animal behavior, device patency, anoscopic examination and histopathological features were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean anchoring time was 13.83 weeks (standard error ± 1.38 weeks). One of the animals experienced early device expulsion with no complications. No obstruction was noted in any of the animals. Macroscopic examination revealed mild focal submucosal scarring in one animal and a normal examination in the other. Hematoxylin and eosin staining revealed mucosal ulceration and mixed inflammatory cell infiltrate, with no signs of granulomata, foreign body giant cell reaction or microabscess formation.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel fixation device designed for long-term intrarectal implantation was well tolerated and maintained anal canal patency without migration. Larger studies are needed before its implementation in humans.

Acute GI obstruction

Acute gastrointestinal obstruction occurs when the normal flow of intestinal contents is interrupted. The blockage can occur at any level throughout the gastrointestinal tract. The clinical symptoms depend on the level and extent of obstruction. Various benign and malignant processes can produce acute gastrointestinal obstruction, which often represents a medical emergency because of the potential for bowel ischemia leading to perforation and peritonitis. Early recognition and appropriate treatment are thus essential. The typical clinical symptoms associated with obstruction include nausea, vomiting, dysphagia, abdominal pain and failure to pass bowel movements. Abdominal distention, tympany due to an air-filled stomach and high-pitched bowel sounds suggest the diagnosis. The diagnostic process involves imaging including radiography, ultrasonography, contrast fluoroscopy and computer tomography in less certain cases. In patients with uncomplicated obstruction, management is conservative, including fluid resuscitation, electrolyte replacement, intestinal decompression and bowel rest. In many cases, endoscopy may aid in both the diagnostic process and in therapy. Endoscopy can be used for bowel decompression, dilation of strictures or placement of self-expandable metal stents to restore the luminal flow either as a final treatment or to allow for a delay until elective surgical therapy. When gastrointestinal obstruction results in ischemia, perforation or peritonitis, emergency surgery is required.

Long-term release of a malignant ileal obstruction by placement of a colorectal self-expandable metal stent

An 84-year-old man underwent the Hartmann procedure with an R1 resection for advanced rectal cancer. One year after surgery, the patient presented with abdominal pain and vomiting. Abdominal radiography and computed tomography revealed an expanding small bowel and ileal obstruction caused by invasion of local, recurrent rectal cancer. In order to release the ileal obstruction, a colorectal self-expandable metal stent was placed via a through-the-scope technique using a colonoscope inserted through a stoma in the transverse colon. After stent placement, the patient's clinical symptoms and signs improved and the symptoms of obstruction did not recur. No major complications associated with the placement of the stent were observed during the 7-month follow-up period. Thus, self-expandable metal stents are a safe and effective palliative treatment for malignant gastroduodenal or colorectal obstructions, and as a bridge to surgery. However, endoscopic placement of these stents in cases of malignant small bowel obstruction is not yet feasible because of the limitations of endoscopic access and the stent delivery system. To our knowledge, this is the first report of malignant ileal obstruction treated with a colorectal self-expandable metal stent using a colonoscope. This case indicates that colorectal self-expandable metal stents can be effectively and safely used to treat malignant ileal obstructions.

Successful Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Placement for a Case of Distal Rectal Stenosis due to Gastric Cancer Metastasis

A 47-year-old woman was diagnosed as having advanced gastric cancer with malignant ascites. Despite chemotherapy, recurrent peritoneal dissemination was seen 1.5 years after operation. A computed tomography scan revealed rectal stenosis due to Schnitzler's metastasis. When the distance from the distal end of the obstruction to the anal verge is less than 5 cm, stent replacement has been said to be contraindicated due to the development of anal pain and foreign body sensation. Although the distance from the distal end of the obstruction to the anal verge was 4 cm in this case, a WallFlex^TM colonic stent could be placed. She stayed home, and luminal patency remained until she died 270 days after stent insertion. This report demonstrates that rectal obstruction located less than 5 cm from the anal verge due to Schnitzler's metastasis could be treated by stenting without any symptomatic or technical complications.

The management of gastrointestinal tract malignancies

Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for many patients with malignancies of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. The coordination of patient care and timing of surgical intervention require a multidisciplinary approach. It is not unusual for GI malignancies to be discovered in a hospital setting; patients with these malignancies are frequently admitted and discharged from nonsurgical services. Therefore, it is imperative that all physicians involved in the care of patients with GI malignancies have knowledge regarding the workup and surgical treatment of GI tract lesions. This article is a brief overview of the workup and surgical management of malignancies of the GI tract.

Managing acute colorectal obstruction by "bridge stenting" to laparoscopic surgery: Our experience

AIM: To verify the clinical results of the endoscopic stenting procedure for colorectal obstructions followed by laparoscopic colorectal resection with “one stage anastomosis”.

METHODS: From March 2003 to March 2009 in our surgical department, 48 patients underwent endoscopic stenting for colorectal occlusive lesion: 30 males (62.5%) and 18 females (37.5%) with an age range from 40 years to 92 years (median age 69.5). All patients enrolled in our study were diagnosed with an intestinal obstruction originating from the colorectal tract without bowel perforation signs. Obstruction was primitive colorectal cancer in 45 cases (93.7%) and benign anastomotic stricture in 3 cases (6.3%).

RESULTS: Surgical resection was totally laparoscopic in 69% of cases (24 patients) while 17% (6 patients) of cases were video-assisted due to the local extension of cancer with infiltrations of surrounding structures (urinary bladder in 2 cases, ileus and iliac vessels in the others). In 14% of cases (5 patients), resection was performed by open surgery due to the high American Society of Anesthesiologists score and the elderly age of patients (median age of 89 years). We performed a terminal stomy in only 7 patients out of 35, 6 colostomies and one ileostomy (in a total colectomy). In the other 28 cases (80%), we performed bowel anastomosis at the same time as resection, employing a temporary ileostomy only in 5 cases.

CONCLUSION: Colorectal stenting transforms an emergency operation in to an elective operation performable in a totally laparoscopic manner, limiting the confection of colostomy with its correlated complications.

Prospective, controlled, randomized study of intraoperative colonic lavage versus stent placement in obstructive left-sided colonic cancer

BACKGROUND

The main aim of this study was to compare short-term results and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent intraoperative colonic lavage (IOCL) with primary anastomosis with those who had stent placement prior to scheduled surgery for obstructive left-sided colonic cancer (OLCC).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, controlled, randomized study of patients diagnosed with OLCC. Patients were divided into two groups: stent and deferred surgery (group 1) and emergency IOCL (group 2). Demographic variables, risk prediction models, postoperative morbidity and mortality, staging, complications due to stent placement, surgical time, clinical follow-up, health costs, and follow-up of survival were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (15 group 1 and 13 group 1) were enrolled. The study was suspended upon detecting excess morbidity in group 2. The two groups were homogeneous in clinical and demographic terms. Overall morbidity in group 1 was 2/15 (13.3%) compared with 7/13 (53.8%) in group 2 (p = 0.042). None of the 15 patients in group 1 presented anastomotic dehiscence compared with 4/13 (30.7%) in group 2 (p = 0.035). Surgical site infection was detected in 2 (13.3%) patients in group 1 and in 6 (46.1%) in group 2 (p = 0.096). Postoperative stay was 8 days (IQR 3, group 1) and 10 days (IQR 10, group 2) (p = 0.05). The mean follow-up period was 37.6 months (SD = 16.08) with no differences in survival between the groups.

CONCLUSION

In our setting, the use of a stent and scheduled surgery is safer than IOCL and is associated with lower morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and equally good long-term survival.

Principles of surgical oncology in the elderly

Elderly patients constitute the largest group in oncologic medical practice, despite the fact that in solid cancers treated operatively, many patients are denied standard therapies and where such decision making is based solely on age. The “natural” assumptions that we have are often misleading; namely, that the elderly cannot tolerate complex or difficult procedures, chemotherapy, or radiation schedules; that their overall predictable medical health determines survival (and not the malignancy); or that older patients typically have less aggressive tumors. Clearly, patient selection and a comprehensive geriatric assessment is key where well-selected cases have the same cancer-specific survival as younger cohorts in a range of tumors as outlined including upper and lower gastrointestinal malignancy, head and neck cancer, and breast cancer. The assessment of patient fitness for surgery and adjuvant therapies is therefore critical to outcomes, where studies have clearly shown that fit older patients experience the same benefits and toxicities of chemotherapy as do younger patients and that when normalized for preexisting medical conditions,that older patients tolerate major operative procedures designed with curative oncological intent. At present, our problem is the lack of true evidence-based medicine specifically designed with age in mind, which effectively limits surgical decision making in disease-based strategies. This can only be achieved by the utilization of more standardized, comprehensive geriatric assessments to identify vulnerable older patients, aggressive pre-habilitation with amelioration of vulnerability causation, improvement of patient-centered longitudinal outcomes, and an improved surgical and medical understanding of relatively subtle decreases in organ functioning, social support mechanisms and impairments of health-related quality of life as a feature specifically of advanced age.

Colorectal stents for the management of malignant colonic obstructions

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancer in the western world. Acute colonic obstruction is one of the common presentations of colon cancer. Emergency surgical decompression is the traditional treatment of choice but is associated with high morbidity and mortality. In recent years colonic stents have been used to relieve the obstruction.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to compare the colonic stenting versus emergency surgical decompression with regards to benefits and risks.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches were carried out May 2010 in the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE and Ovid CINAHL.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing colonic stenting versus surgical decompression for obstructing colorectal cancers were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data on the characteristics of the trial, methodological quality of the trials, mortality, morbidity, technical and clinical success rate, operating time, hospital stay and other measured secondary outcomes from each trial were collected. And the data were analysed with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using RevMan Analysis. For each outcome, odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on available data analysis was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Five randomised trials were identified with a total of 207 participants, 102 to colorectal stenting and 105 to emergency surgery. There was statistically significant higher clinical success rate in the emergency surgery group. The average time of clinical relief of obstruction was 0.66 day in the colonic stent group and was 3.55 days in the emergency surgery group. The stent insertion was successful in 86.02% of attempted stent placements. There was no statistically significant difference in the 30-day mortality between two groups. The 30 day mortality rate was similar, 2.3% in both groups. The stent related perforation rate was 5.88%. The stent migration rate was 2.13%. The stent obstruction rate was 2.13%. There was no statistically significant difference in overall complication rate in both groups. The complication rate was 39.22% in the colonic stent group and was 45.71% in the emergency surgery group. The mean hospital stay was 11.53 days in the colonic stent group and was 17.15 days in the emergency surgery group. The mean procedure/operating time was 113.93 minutes in the colonic stent group compared to 143.85 minutes in the emergency surgery group. The median blood loss was 50 ml in the colonic stent group and 350 ml in the emergency surgery group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of colonic stent in malignant colorectal obstruction seems to have no advantage over emergency surgery. The clinical success rate was statistically higher in emergency surgery group. However, use of colorectal stents seems to be as safe in the malignant colorectal obstruction as the emergency surgery with no statistically significant difference in the mortality and morbidity. Colorectal stents are associated with acceptable stent perforation, migration and obstruction rates. The advantages of colorectal stent includes shorter hospital stay and procedure time and less blood loss. However, due to the variability in the sample size and trial designs in the included studies, further randomised trials with bigger sample size and well defined trial design are needed to achieve the robust evidence.

Community experience of colonic stenting in patients with acute large bowel obstructions

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) can provide temporary relief of acute large bowel obstructions. Placement of SEMS creates the opportunity for semi-elective 1-stage surgical resections, use of possible adjuvant therapy or palliative relief of malignant obstructions. Our aim was to assess the likelihood of success and possible complication rates of SEMS insertion in a community hospital setting in patients presenting with large bowel obstructions.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review at a single community-based hospital. This review addressed the technical success in deployment of the SEMS, clinical success defined by relief of the obstruction, procedure-related complications, surgical interventions and completion of adjuvant therapy for patients with large bowel obstructions.

RESULTS

In a 34-month period, 16 patients underwent 16 SEMS procedures. The average age of patients was 69.4 years and 7 (44%) were women. Thirteen patients had intrinsic colorectal cancers, 1 had an extracolonic lesion (ovarian cancer) and 2 had strictures due to diverticular disease. Technical success occurred in all 16 patients, but only 15 (94%) had clinical success. No procedure-related deaths (defined as death within 7 days) occurred. Palliative stenting occurred in 5 patients (31%). Eleven patients (69%) eventually had surgery. Stenting allowed a window for neoadjuvant therapy in 4 patients. Ten of 11 patients (91%) had a 1-stage procedure. One patient had a cecal perforation presenting 2 days after SEMS. This patient received a defunctioning ileostomy.

CONCLUSION

In appropriate patients with large bowel obstructions, SEMS proced ures can be safely and effectively performed in a community-based setting.

Enteral stents

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2010 for articles related to enteral, esophageal, duodenal, and colonic stents. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

Expandable metal stents for malignant colorectal strictures

The surgical management of malignant colorectal obstruction is still controversial and has higher associated mortality and complication rates compared with elective surgery. Placement of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) has been proposed as an alternative therapeutic approach for colonic decompression of patients with acute malignant obstruction. SEMS placement may be used both as a bridge to surgery in patients who are good candidates for curative resection and for palliation of those patients presenting with advanced stage disease or with severe comorbid medical illnesses.

Self-expanding metallic stents for acute left-sided large-bowel obstruction: a review of 130 patients

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement in acute left-sided large-bowel obstruction.

METHOD

From 1997 to 2008, 130 patients [mean 67 (SD 14.7)] underwent SEMS insertion for acute left-sided large-bowel obstruction. One-hundred and one procedures were palliative, and 29 patients underwent stent insertion as a bridge for surgery. The success rate and the outcome were analysed.

RESULTS

The chief causes of obstruction were primary (67%) and recurrent (16%) colorectal carcinoma. The success rate was 88% after insertion of the first stent. In nine patients, insertion of a second stent was required. Complications occurred in 20% of the insertions, with migration (10.8%) being the most common. Perforation occurred in two patients and one developed a colovesical fistula. In patients with palliative stenting, 14 (13.9%) required subsequent surgery, with a stoma placed in all except three. Among the 29 patients who underwent SEMS insertion as a bridge to surgery, subsequent surgical resection was performed in 26 patients at a mean interval of 12 days (SD 18.0). Primary anastomosis was performed in 24 patients. The mean survival for those who underwent SEMS insertion as a bridge to surgery was 40 (95% confidence interval: 24-55) months.

CONCLUSION

SEMS placement is safe and effective in relieving acute left-sided colonic obstruction. It allows subsequent definitive surgery on an elective setting and also serves as good palliation for advanced or disseminated disease.