Emergency surgery for obstructing colorectal cancers: a comparison between right-sided and left-sided lesions

Stage IV Colorectal Cancer at Initial Presentation versus Progression during and after Treatment, Differences in Management: Management Differences for Initial Presentation versus Progression of Disease after Initial Treatment

Stage IV colorectal cancer is a prevalent disease and understanding the appropriate treatment options is important. Medical oncologic treatment remains the mainstay of treatment in cases where curative resection is not possible. Surgical intervention is indicated if the primary tumor and associated metastases are amenable to curative resection or if obstructive, bleeding, or perforative complications arise from the tumor. New endoscopic techniques can provide palliation and benefit for patients who cannot undergo surgery and may speed time to chemotherapy initiation. Recently, immunotherapy has shown promise at managing, controlling, and regressing advanced disease, in some cases converting it to curative with resection. For patients that progress while on treatment, continued medical therapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Further research into the benefits of asymptomatic primary tumor resection without curative intent needs to be performed. Colorectal cancer, and more specifically metastatic colorectal cancer, continues to have improved 1- and 5-year survival rates and likely will continue to do so over the coming months and years.

Prognostic value of primary tumor location in colorectal cancer: an updated meta-analysis

The clinical, histological, and molecular differences between right-sided colon cancer (RCC) and left-sided colon cancer (RCC) have received considerable attention. Over the past decade, many articles have been published concerning the association between primary tumor location (PTL) of colorectal cancer and survival outcomes. Therefore, there is a growing need for an updated meta-analysis integrating the outcomes of recent studies to determine the prognostic role of right vs left-sidedness of PTL in patients with colorectal cancer. We conducted a comprehensive database review using PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library databases from February 2016 to March 2023 for prospective or retrospective studies reporting data on overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of RCC compared with LCC. A total of 60 cohort studies comprising 1,494,445 patients were included in the meta-analysis. We demonstrated that RCC is associated with a significantly increased risk of death compared with LCC by 25% (hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19-1.31; I2 = 78.4%; Z = 43.68). Results showed that patients with RCC have a worse OS compared with LCC only in advanced stages (Stage III: HR, 1.275; 95% CI 1.16-1.4; P = 0.0002; I2 = 85.8%; Stage IV: HR, 1.34; 95% CI 1.25-1.44; P < 0.0001; I2 = 69.2%) but not in primary stages (Stage I/II: HR, 1.275; 95% CI 1.16-1.4; P = 0.0002; I2 = 85.8%). Moreover, a meta-analysis of 13 studies including 812,644 patients revealed that there is no significant difference in CSS between RCC and LCC (HR, 1.121; 95% CI 0.97-1.3; P = 0.112). Findings from the present meta-analysis highlight the importance of PTL in clinical decision-making for patients with CRC, especially in advanced stages. We provide further evidence supporting the hypothesis that RCC and LCC are distinct disease entities that should be managed differently.

Application of metal stent implantation with endoscope and X-ray fluoroscopy combined laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left hemicolon cancer obstruction

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to conduct a case-control study of endoscopic and fluoroscopic metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open Hartmann's procedure in treating acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Additionally, the study aims to discuss the application value of endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction.

METHODS

From June 2011 to December 2019, 23 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent metal stent implantation combined with laparoscopic surgery under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy in Wenzhou Central Hospital were collected, and 20 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent traditional emergency open Hartmann's surgery during the same period were selected as a control group. All patients were diagnosed with left colon obstruction by plain abdominal film and/or CT before the operation and colon adenocarcinoma by colonoscopic biopsy and/or postoperative pathology. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative anal exhaust time, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

This study showed a significant difference in the therapeutic effect between the two groups. Compared with the traditional Hartmann's operation group, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis in endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with the laparoscopic operation group was significantly higher than that in the Hartmann's operation group (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of postoperative complications and hospital stay were significantly lower in the observation group than in the Hartmann's group (P < 0.05). Further subgroup analysis of the overall postoperative complication rate of the two groups showed that the traditional Hartmann's operation group was more likely to have an incomplete intestinal obstruction (P < 0.05). This study also showed no significant differences between the two groups in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, and postoperative anal exhaust time (all P > 0.05). This study also found no significant differences between the two groups in overall survival rates or recurrence-free survival rates (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The comparison of the therapeutic effects of the two groups verified the feasibility of endoscopy combined with X-ray fluoroscopy metal stent placement in combination with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Compared with the traditional emergency open Hartmann's procedure, metal stent implantation under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy combined with laparoscopic surgery is more minimally invasive, safe, and effective. It avoids the traditional second or even third surgical trauma to effectively improve the quality of life of patients, so that patients can recover quickly after surgery.

Colorectal adenocarcinoma in Uganda: are right-sided and left-sided colon cancers two distinct disease entities?

INTRODUCTION

In Western countries, right-sided colon cancers (RSCC) present at an older age and advanced stage. Researchers believe that there is a difference between left-sided colon cancer (LSCC) and RSCC. In Uganda, however, it is unknown whether differences exist in the pathological profile between RSCC and LSCC. The aim of this study was to determine the differences in clinicopathological characteristics between RSCC and LSCC in Ugandan patients.

METHODOLOGY

A cross-sectional study was conducted in which colorectal adenocarcinoma formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue (FFPE) blocks were obtained from 2008 to 2021. Colorectal specimens were obtained from prospectively recruited patients. In the retrospective study arm, FFPE blocks and data were obtained from the archives of pathology laboratory repositories. Parameters studied included age, sex, location of the tumour, grade, stage, lymphovascular (LVI) status, and histopathological subtype between LSCC and RSCC.

RESULTS

Patients with RSCC were not older than those with LSCC (mean age, 56.3 years vs 53.5 years; p = 0.170). There was no difference in the stage between RSCC and LSCC. Poorly differentiated tumours were more commonly found in RSCC than in LSCC (18.7% vs 10.1%; p = 0.038). Moderately and poorly differentiated colonic tumours were more common with RSCC (89.3%) than with LSCC (75.1%) (p = 0.007). Younger patients had more poorly differentiated tumours than older patients (19.6% versus 8.6%; p = 0.002). LVI was more common with RSCC than with LSCC (96.8% vs 85.3%; p = 0.014). Mucinous adenocarcinoma (MAC) was more common with RSCC (15.8%) compared with LSCC (8.5%) (p = 0.056) although statistical significance was borderline.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicopathological features of RSCCs tend to be different from those of LSCCs. RSCCs tend to be associated with MAC, a higher grade and LVI status compared to LSCC. LSCC and RSCC present predominantly with an advanced stage; therefore, national screening programmes for the early detection of CRC are necessary to reduce mortality in our Ugandan population.

Segmental or right hemi-colectomy? The optimal surgical procedure for transverse colon cancer: a propensity score-matched, multicenter, retrospective study

PURPOSE

Extended colectomy is sometimes chosen for treatment of transverse colon cancer (TCC) because of concerns about short- and long-term outcomes. However, there is still a lack of evidence regarding the optimal surgical procedure.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected and analyzed data of patients who underwent surgical treatment of pathological stage II/III TCC at four hospitals from January 2011 to June 2019. We excluded the patients with TCC located at distal transverse colon, and just evaluated and analyzed proximal and middle third TCC. Inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analyses was used to compare short- and long-term outcomes between patients who underwent segmental transverse colectomy (STC) and those who underwent right hemicolectomy (RHC).

RESULTS

In total, 106 patients were enrolled in this study (STC group, n = 45; RHC group, n = 61). The patients' backgrounds were well balanced after matching. The incidence of major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) was not significantly different between the STC and RHC groups (4.5% vs. 5.6%, respectively; P = 0.53). The 3-year recurrence-free survival and overall survival rates were not significantly different between the STC and RHC groups (88.2% vs. 81.8%, P = 0.86 and 90.3% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.79, respectively).

CONCLUSION

RHC has no significant benefits over STC with respect to either short- or long-term outcomes. STC with necessary lymphadenectomy could be an optimal procedure for proximal and middle TCC.

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

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

Colonic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency resection for right-sided malignant large bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative colonic stenting for malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO), also called bridge to surgery (BTS), is considered a great substitute treatment for emergency resection (ER) in the left-sided colon. However, its efficacy in the right-sided colon remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the postoperative short-term outcomes between BTS and ER for right-sided MLBO.

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic literature search throughout December 2020 was performed to identify studies comparing short-term outcomes between BTS and ER for right-side MLBO. The main outcome measures were postoperative complications and mortality rates. A meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect or a random-effect method to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 5136 patients, of whom 1662 (32.4%) underwent BTS and 3474 (67.6%) underwent ER. This meta-analysis demonstrated that BTS resulted in reductions in postoperative complications (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66-0.92) and mortality (OR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.28-0.92) than ER.

CONCLUSION

The results of this meta-analysis indicate that BTS for right-sided MLBO confers preferable short-term outcomes as well as for left-sided. This suggests that BTS results in a reduction of postoperative complications and mortality for right-sided MLBO than ER.

Long-term and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open resection following tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer: a single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

The benefits of laparoscopic surgery over open surgery are well documented; however, the suitability of laparoscopic surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer is still controversial. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the clinical benefits of laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer after tube decompression.

METHODS

We analyzed the outcomes of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery for curative resection after tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer at our hospital between January, 2007 and March, 2018.

RESULTS

This study comprised 67 patients: 29 patients who underwent open surgery and 38 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery. The morbidity within 30 days after surgery was comparable between the groups. The 3-year overall survival rates of the open and laparoscopic groups were 83.3 and 79.4%, respectively (p = 0.6244), and the 3-year disease-free survival rates were 59.3 and 71.2%, respectively (p = 0.3200). Multivariate analysis showed that nodal stage (p = 0.021) was an independent prognostic factor for OS and sex (p = 0.010) and side-ness (p = 0.048) were independent prognostic factors for DFS.

CONCLUSION

If adequate decompression is achieved, laparoscopic resection following tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer can be a safe alternative to open surgery.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Emergency resection or diverting stoma followed by elective resection in patients with colonic obstruction due to locally advanced cancer: a national cohort study

AIM

The aim was to assess long-term prognosis after emergency resection versus primary diverting stoma followed by elective tumour resection.

METHOD

A national-register-based cohort study with retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. All Swedish patients with non-metastatic obstructive locally advanced colon cancer treated with emergency resection or diverting stoma, followed by an elective resection, between 2007 and 2017 were included. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare all-cause mortality between patients with emergency resection and elective right- and left-sided resection. The multivariable model was adjusted for year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, tumour location and pN stage.

RESULTS

In all, 751 patients with a tumour in the right colon and 700 patients with a tumour in the left colon were included. Emergency resection was more common in patients with right-sided colon tumours (681/751) than in patients with left-sided colon tumours (483/700). The 5-year overall survival in patients with right-sided tumours was 25% after emergency resection and 46% after diverting stoma followed by elective resection (log-rank test P = 0.001). The corresponding numbers for patients with left-sided colon tumours were 40% and 64% (P < 0.001). Emergency resection was independently associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with left-sided tumour (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% CI 1.21-2.19) but not in patients with right-sided tumour (hazard ratio 1.21, 95% CI 0.80-1.81).

CONCLUSION

Diverting stoma followed by elective resection is associated with improved survival compared with emergency resection in patients with left-sided colonic obstruction due to locally advanced tumours.

Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction

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

Measurement of circumferential tumor extent of colorectal cancer on CT colonography: relation to clinicopathological features and patient prognosis after surgery

PURPOSE

To examine the relationship between circumferential tumor extent of colorectal cancer (CRC) on CT colonography (CTC) and clinicopathological features including patient prognosis after surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study performed at our institution from January 2013 to December 2019 enrolled 195 consecutive patients (110 men, 85 women; mean age, 64.7 years) with CRC evaluated by contrast-enhanced CTC before surgery. The circumferential tumor extent rate (CER) was measured by CTC in virtual colon dissection (VCD) mode to examine the relation between the CER and clinicopathological features and patient prognosis.

RESULTS

CER had association with tumor invasion depth (T), nodal involvement (N), distant metastasis (M), and stage. The Kruskal-Wallis tests showed significant difference for T, N and the stage (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0021 and p < 0.0001) and Wilcoxon rank sum test showed significant difference for M (p = 0.0015). According to the log-rank test, there were no significant differences in OS or DFS between patients with high and low CER.

CONCLUSION

Circumferential tumor extent was significantly correlated with TNM categories and stage of CRC, but not with patient prognosis after surgery.

Diversion, resection, or stenting as a bridge to surgery for acute neoplastic left-sided colonic obstruction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies with curative intent

INTRODUCTION

The debate on the best surgical management strategy for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction is ongoing. Decompressing colostomy (DC) and stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) are the currently proposed alternative approaches to emergency colectomy (EC). However, the results of a traditional meta-analysis were inconclusive. Therefore, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the three approaches for acute left-sided colonic obstruction.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of Embase, PubMed, Google Scholar and the Cochrane library was performed. A traditional meta-analysis and subsequent NMA were conducted.

FINDINGS

A significantly greater number of primary anastomoses were performed in the DC cohort than in the EC and SBTS cohorts. The 90-day mortality rate was significantly lower in the DC cohort than in the EC and SBTS cohorts. Higher costs were associated with the SBTS cohort (by US$2,000) than with the EC cohort. The locoregional recurrence rate was higher for the SBTS cohort than for the EC cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from the first NMA suggests there may be some clinical advantages associated with DC as an alternative approach to the EC and SBTS approaches for adequately selected patients with malignant large bowel obstruction.

Emergency surgery for complicated colorectal cancer in central Brazil

Objective to report clinical and pathological features of patients with colorectal cancer diagnosed during emergency abdominal surgery.

Methods records of 107 patients operated between 2006 and 2010 were reviewed.

Results there were 58 women and 49 men with mean age of 59.8 years. The most frequent symptoms were: abdominal pain (97.2%), no bowel movements (81.3%), vomiting (76.6%), and anorexia (40.2%). Patients were divided into five groups: obstructive acute abdomen (n = 68), obstructive acute perforation (n = 21), obstructive acute inflammation (n = 13), abdominal sepsis (n = 3), and severe gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 2). Tumors were located in the rectosigmoid (51.4%), transverse colon (19.6%), ascendent colon (12.1%), descendent colon (11.2%), and 5.6% of the cases presented association of two colon tumors (synchronic tumors). The surgical treatment was: tumor resection with colostomy (85%), tumor resection with primary anastomosis (10.3%), and colostomy without tumor resection (4.7%). Immediate mortality occurred in 33.4% of the patients. Bivariate analysis of sex, tumor location and stage showed no relation to death (p > 0.05%).

Conclusions colorectal cancer may be the cause of colon obstruction or perfuration in patients with nonspecific colonic complaints. Despite the high mortality rate, resection of tumor is feasible in most patients.

Bridge to Surgery for Obstructing Colonic Cancer: A Comparison between Right- and Left-sided Lesions

Objectives:

Few studies have compared management and outcomes of bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colonic cancer according to the location of the tumor. Additional information is needed about this procedure's characteristics and short-term and long-term outcomes. We aimed to compare patient and tumor characteristics, and outcomes of BTS for obstructive right-sided versus left-sided colonic cancers.

Methods:

This was a retrospective, single center, cohort study. The study cohort comprised 149 patients, including 48 with right-sided and 101 with left-sided obstructive colonic cancers, who were treated with BTS between January 2007 and December 2017. Data on medical history, investigations, treatments, and prognosis were collected from an electronic database of a single hospital. The primary end points were overall (OS) and disease-free (DFS) survival and short-term surgical outcomes.

Results:

Significantly more patients with right-sided cancers had postoperative complications (29.2% vs. 14.9%, p = 0.039). Additionally, postoperative chemotherapy was administered to a marginally significantly greater proportion of patients with left-sided cancers (29.2% vs 45.5%, p = 0.057). The long-term outcomes were comparable between the two groups (the 5-year OS rates were 67.6% and 80.9% [p = 0.117] and the 5-year DFS rates were 62.2% and 58.6% [p = 0.671]). Multivariate analyses using all studied variables showed that lymphovascular invasion, advanced T stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent poor prognostic factors.

Conclusions:

The long-term outcome was not different between the right- and left-sided groups. In a BTS setting, postoperative complications may reduce the compliance of adjuvant chemotherapy in right-sided cancers and affect long-term outcomes.

Prediction of Postoperative Ileus in Patients With Colorectal Cancer by Preoperative Gut Microbiota

Background

Ileus and postoperative ileus (POI) are common complications of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, little is known about the gut microbiota associated with ileus.

Method

Differences in gut microbiota were evaluated by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. We characterized the gut microbiota in 85 CRC patients (cohort 1) and detected differences, and an independent cohort composed of 38 CRC patients (cohort 2) was used to evaluate the results.

Results

The gut microbiota of CRC patients with and without ileus exhibited large differences in alpha- and beta-diversities and bacterial taxa. The Firmicutes-to-Bacteroidetes ratio and microbial dysbiosis index (MDI) showed greater dysbiosis among ileus patients than among those without ileus. According to the location of CRC, the difference in gut microbiota between patients with and without ileus was more obvious in those with distal CRC than in those with proximal CRC. Finally, Faecalibacterium was significantly reduced in the postoperative perioperative period in patients with ileus. Thus, we used Faecalibacterium as a biomarker for predicting perioperative or POI: the AUC value was 0.74 for perioperative ileus and 0.67 for POI that appeared at 6 months after hospital discharge. The predictive power was evaluated in Cohort 2, with an AUC value of 0.79.

Conclusion

These findings regarding difference of gut microbiota in postoperative CRC patients may provide a theoretical basis for the use of microbiota as biomarkers for the prediction of POI.

Surgical intervention for mechanical large bowel obstruction at a tertiary hospital: Which patients receive a stoma and how often are they reversed?

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of large bowel obstruction (LBO) is heterogeneous and influenced by multiple variables. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the surgical interventions and outcomes of patients necessitating surgery for LBO.

METHODS

Patients with LBO between 2000 and 2017 were included. Main outcomes measures are intraoperative findings, operative management, post-operative outcomes and stoma closure rates.

RESULTS

133 patients were included with predominately left-sided obstruction (82%). The most common etiology was colorectal cancer (44%) followed by extrinsic malignant compression (29%). The most common operation performed was fecal diversion without resection (46%). This group had significantly more stage 4 carcinoma, carcinomatosis and had the lowest stoma closure rate (16%). Eighty-six percent of the operated patients underwent fecal diversion, of these, 27% had stoma reversal at 6 months. Patients that had a resection and anastomosis with diverting loop ileostomy were most likely to undergo stoma reversal (p = 0.005) and had the lowest number of patients with stage-IV carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single institution analysis, the management of LBO entails high operative and stoma rates, with less than 30% of patient undergoing stoma closure. Resection, anastomosis and DLI had the highest chance of stoma reversal.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Factors associated with failure of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in colorectal and gastric surgery

Background: The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway is widely applied in the perioperative period of stomach and colorectal surgery, and can decrease the length of hospital stay of the patients without compromising the safety of the patients. However, some patients are removed from this pathway for various reasons. Here we found some factors that taking the patients out from the procedures. Methods: A retrospective analysis of collected data of 550 patients over a 3-year period was conducted, with 292 in the ERAS group and 258 in the conventional care group. Then various basic elements were analyzed to explore the reasons for the failure to complete the ERAS program. Results: Total length of hospital stay after surgery was significantly shorter in the ERAS group, and a similar incidence of complication rates were observed in the two groups. In this study, the significant factors that associated with complications were advanced age (OR 2.18; p = .031), history of abdominal surgery (OR 2.03; p = .04), incomplete gastrointestinal obstruction (OR 3.42; p < .001), laparoscopic surgery (OR 0.39; p = .004) and intraoperative neostomy (OR 2.37; p = .006). Conclusions: We found that advanced age (>80 years old), history of abdominal surgery, gastrointestinal obstruction and stoma formation were the risk factors. We anticipated to design a risk assessment system upon the high-risk patients from the present ERAS pathway, and make a modified ERAS pathway for those patients.

Thirty-day mortality after emergency surgery for obstructing colon cancer: survey and dedicated score from the French Surgical Association

AIM

The aim was to define risk factors for postoperative mortality in patients undergoing emergency surgery for obstructing colon cancer (OCC) and to propose a dedicated score.

METHOD

From 2000 to 2015, 2325 patients were treated for OCC in French surgical centres by members of the French National Surgical Association. A multivariate analysis was performed for variables with P value ≤ 0.20 in the univariate analysis for 30-day mortality. Predictive performance was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

A total of 1983 patients were included. Thirty-day postoperative mortality was 7%. Multivariate analysis found five significant independent risk factors: age ≥ 75 (P = 0.013), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥ III (P = 0.027), pulmonary comorbidity (P = 0.0002), right-sided cancer (P = 0.047) and haemodynamic failure (P < 0.0001). The odds ratio for risk of postoperative death was 3.42 with one factor, 5.80 with two factors, 15.73 with three factors, 29.23 with four factors and 77.25 with five factors. The discriminating capacity in predicting 30-day postoperative mortality was 0.80.

CONCLUSION

Thirty-day postoperative mortality after emergency surgery for OCC is correlated with age, ASA score, pulmonary comorbidity, site of tumour and haemodynamic failure, with a specific score ranging from 0 to 5.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Is bridge to surgery stenting a safe alternative to emergency surgery in malignant colonic obstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

Despite studies showing superior results in terms of reduced stoma rate and higher primary anastomosis rate, the safety of bridge to surgery stenting (BTS stent) for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction, especially in oncological terms, remains a concern.

AIM

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether BTS stent is a safe alternative to emergency surgery (EmS).

METHODS

Randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing BTS stent and EmS for left-sided colonic obstruction caused by primary cancer of the colon, up to Sep 2018, were retrieved from the Pubmed, Embase database, clinical trials registry of U. S. National Library of Medicine and BMJ and Google Search.

RESULTS

There were seven eligible RCTs, involving a total of 448 patients. Compared to EmS, BTS stent had a significantly lower risk of overall complications (RR = 0.605; 95% CI 0.382-0.958; p = 0.032). However, the overall recurrence rate was higher in the BTS stent group (37.0% vs. 25.9%; RR = 1.425; 95% CI 1.002-2.028; p = 0.049). BTS stent significantly increased the risk of systemic recurrence (RR = 1.627; 95% CI 1.009-2.621; p = 0.046). This did not translate into a significant difference in terms of 3-year disease-free survival or 3-year overall survival.

CONCLUSION

BTS stent is associated with a lower rate of overall morbidities than EmS. However, BTS stent was associated with a greater chance of recurrence, especially systemic recurrence. Clinicians ought to be aware of the pros and cons of different interventions and tailor treatments for patients suffering from left-sided obstructing cancer of the colon.

Ileus caused by obstructing colorectal cancer-impact on long-term survival

PURPOSE

It is unclear whether obstructing colorectal cancer (CRC) has a worse prognosis than non-obstructing CRC. Of CRC patients, 10-28% present with symptoms of acute obstruction. Previous studies regarding obstruction have been primarily based on short-term outcomes, risk factors and treatment modalities. With this study, we want to determine the long-term survival of patients presenting with acute obstructive CRC.

METHODS

This single-centre observational retrospective cohort study includes all CRC patients who underwent surgery between December 2004 and 2010. Patients were divided into two groups: ileus and no ileus. Survival analyses were performed for both groups. Additional survival analyses were performed in patients with and without synchronous metastases. The primary outcome was survival in months.

RESULTS

A total of 1236 patients were included in the analyses. Ileus occurred in 178 patients (14.4%). The 5-year survival for patients with an ileus was 32% and without 60% (P < 0.01). In patients without synchronous metastases, survival with and without an ileus was 40.9 and 68.4%, respectively (P < 0.01). If ileus presentation was complicated by a colon blowout, 5-year survival decreased to 29%. No significant difference was found in patients with synchronous metastases. Survival at 5 years in this subgroup was 10 and 12% for patients with and without an ileus, respectively (P = 0.705).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with obstructive CRC have a reduced short-term overall survival. Also, long-term overall survival is impaired in patients who present with acute obstructive CRC compared to patients without obstruction.

Modified enhanced recovery after surgery protocols are beneficial for postoperative recovery for patients undergoing emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: A propensity score matching analysis

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is acknowledged to reduce perioperative stress in several surgical diseases. Here, we investigated whether modified ERAS is associated with beneficial effects in the setting of emergency colorectal surgery.We retrospectively evaluated the medical records of 839 consecutive patients with obstructive colorectal cancer undergoing surgical intervention at 4 institutes. Among them, 356 cases were managed with a multidisciplinary team approach to care (modified ERAS protocols), and the remaining 483 cases were treated based on traditional protocols. According to modified ERAS or traditional care, propensity score (PS) matching was performed to adjust biases in patient selection. The primary outcome was gastrointestinal function recovery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and length of hospital stay.Modified ERAS was associated with postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery, including time to first flatus (P = .002), first defecation (P = .008), and prolonged ileus (P = .016). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, fewer total episodes of grade II or higher postoperative complications were observed in patients cared for with modified ERAS than in patients with traditional care (P = .002). Median (interquartile range) postoperative hospital stay in the modified ERAS group was 6 (3-22) days versus 9 (7-27) days in the traditional care group (P < .001). Furthermore, the interval from operation to postoperative chemotherapy (d) was significantly shorter in the modified ERAS group (35.6 ± 11.5 vs 47.6 ± 23.8, P < .001).The modified ERAS was safe and associated with clinical benefits, including fast recovery of bowel function, reduced postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stay for patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

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.

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

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

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Long-term Outcomes of One Stage Surgery Using Transanal Colorectal Tube for Acute Colorectal Obstruction of Stage II/III Distal Colon Cancer

Purpose

Since oncological outcomes of transanal colorectal tube (TCT) placement, an endoscopic treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) with acute colorectal obstruction (ACO), remain unknown, this study analyzed long-term outcomes of TCT placement for stage II/III CRC with ACO.

Materials and Methods

Data were retrospectively reviewed from consecutive patients with distal stage II/III CRC who underwent surgery between January 2007 and December 2011 at two Japanese hospitals. One hospital conducted emergency surgery and the other performed TCT placement as the standard treatment for all CRCs with ACO. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to adjust baseline characteristics between two groups.

Results

Among 754 patients with distal stage II/III CRC, 680 did not have ACO (non-ACO group) and 74 had ACO (ACO group). The PS matching between both hospitals identified 234 pairs in the non-ACO group and 23 pairs in the ACO group. In the non-ACO group, the surgical quality was equivalent between the two institutions, with no significant differences in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). In the ACO group, the rate of primary resection/anastomosis was higher in the TCT group than in the surgery group (87.0% vs. 26.1%, p < 0.001). No significant differences were noted between the surgery and the TCT groups in OS (5-year OS, 61.9% vs. 51.5%; p=0.490) and DFS (5-year DFS, 45.9% vs. 38.3%; p=0.658).

Conclusion

TCT placement can achieve similar long-term outcomes to emergency surgery, with a high rate of primary resection/anastomosis for distal stage II/III colon cancer with ACO.

Using a Video-Laparoscope for Intraoperative Colonoscopy: An Experimental Study on Intraluminal Temperature Values and Tissue Damage

Laparoscopy systems possess remarkable heat production. Video-laparoscopy was used for colonoscopy intraoperatively in rabbits. Rod lens type laparoscopes 5 and 10 mm in diameter connected with 175 and 300-W xenon light sources were used in combination. Physiological parameters including blood pressure, pulse, oxygen saturations, and luminal temperatures were investigated during 20 minutes of colonoscopy. Thermal damage scores were obtained by histopathologic analysis of the intestinal wall. The changes were categorized as physiological and structural. Damage scores were not different when 175-W light source was used with 5- and 10-mm laparoscopes. Intraluminal heat values most increased with 300 W plus 10-mm laparoscope and caused significant increase in damage scores. Structural damage indicating tissue necrosis was not observed with any of the combination in all groups. Video-laparoscopy systems did not cause significant tissue damage when used at low and moderate levels of xenon light source in the rabbit bowel intraoperatively.

Randomized controlled trial of colonic stent insertion in non-curable large bowel obstruction: a post hoc cost analysis

AIM

In view of the increasing burden on the healthcare system, this study aims to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of the management of incurable large bowel obstruction comparing the cost of a stent vs surgery.

METHOD

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at two major teaching hospitals in Australia between September 2006 and November 2011. Fifty-six patients with malignant incurable large bowel obstruction were randomized to stent insertion or surgical decompression, of whom 52 were included in the final analysis. Data were collected at all points during the patient journey and quality of life data were obtained by patient surveys. All data points were analysed and a cost-effectiveness study was performed to compare the costs between the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

Stenting as a procedure was significantly more expensive than surgery (A$4462.50 vs A$3251.50; P < 0.001). Post-procedure stay for stented patients was significantly lower (median 7 vs 11 days; P = 0.03). Combined costs of stent group ward stay, multidisciplinary team discussion and complication management were significantly lower (P = 0.013). Overall cost difference between the two treatment groups was A$3902.44 (P = 0.101). European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) scores for the first 4 weeks gave mean area under the curve adjusted weeks of 2.411 vs 2.271 for the stent and surgery groups respectively (P = 0.603). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between the surgery and the stent group was $22 955.53 in favour of stenting.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with stenting is cheaper than open surgery and provides quicker discharge from hospital.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Investigation of clinicopathological parameters in emergency colorectal cancer surgery: a study of 67 patients

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present study was to establish, having adjusted for case mix, the size of the differences in postoperative mortality and 5-year survival between patients presenting as an emergency with evidence of obstruction and perforation and the association of clinicopathological factors with mortality (bivariate analyses).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 67 patients who presented with colorectal cancer (CRC) between 2009 and 2013 in Iran. The mean age of the patients was 59.7 years. Of the 67 patients, 37 (55.22%) were male and 30 (44.77%) were female. Certain parameters that correlated with CRC and surgical treatment were investigated.

RESULTS

Our results showed that 46 (68.65%) patients had obstruction, while perforation was observed in 21 (31.34%) cases. Among the patients with obstruction, obstruction of the right colon was observed in 29 (43.28%) cases. There was no significant difference in mortality rate between right and left colonic obstruction. Based on the bivariate analyses, our findings showed that death of patients was significantly related to tumor grade (p = 0.02) and TNM staging (p = 0.026), but no association was found between other parameters and death, including age, sex, and tumor site.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with patients who undergo elective surgery for colon cancer, those who present as an emergency with evidence of obstruction or perforation have higher postoperative mortality rates and poorer cancer-specific survival. Also, colorectal cancer patients with emergency surgery showed aggressive histopathology and an advanced stage.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

The management of obstructive left colon cancer (OLCC) remains debatable with the single-stage procedure of primary colonic anastomosis after cancer resection and on-table intracolonic lavage now being supported.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with acute OLCC who were admitted between January 2008 and January 2015 were distributed into 5 different groups. Group ICI underwent emergency laparotomy for primary anastomosis following colonic resection and intraoperative colonic lavage; Group HP underwent emergency Hartmann's Procedure; Group CON consisted of patients treated by conservative management with subsequent elective open cancer resection; Group COL were colostomy patients; and Group INT consisted of patients who had interventional radiology followed by open elective colon cancer resection. The demographics of the patients and comorbidity, intraoperative data, and postoperative data were collected, with P < .05 as significant.

RESULTS

There were 4 deaths in 138 cases (2.90%). There was only 1 patient who had anastomotic leakage (5.56%) in Group ICI, compared with none in Group HP and Group COL, 1 case in Group INT (7.69%), and 2 cases in Group CON (6.06%) (P > .05). Group INT and Group CON, when compared to the three surgical groups, Groups ICI, Group COL, and Group HP, individually, were statistically significant for the duration of surgery (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary anastomosis following colonic resection after irrigation can be safely performed in selected patients, with the necessary surgical expertise, with no increased risk in mortality, anastomotic leakage, and other postoperative complications.

Should patients With obstructing colorectal cancer have proximal diversion?

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

[Long-term results of obstructing colonic cancer]

AIM

to compare long-term results after 2 types of stage management of obstructing colonic cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Main group included 105 patients after staged treatment with decompressive colostomy followed by radical surgery at the second stage. Control group consisted of 115 patients after obstructive colonic resection with colostomy as radical intervention at the first stage; the second stage included reconstructive intervention colostomy removal.

RESULTS

Local recurrences were observed in 5.1% and 13.7% in the main and control groups respectively. Distant metastases occurred in 7.1% and 13.7% in both groups respectively. 5-year overall survival was 69.4% and 50.9% in the main and control groups respectively. Recurrence-free sirvival was 65.3% and 48.1% in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Decompressive colostomy and delayed radical surgery with intestinal integrity restoration improve long-term outcomes compared with emergency radical interventions.

Emergency management with resection versus proximal stoma or stent treatment and planned resection in malignant left-sided colon obstruction

Background

Emergency surgery for colon cancer, as a result of obstruction, has been vitiated by a high frequency of complications and poor survival. The concept of “bridge to surgery” includes either placement of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) or diverting stoma of an obstructing tumour and subsequent planned resection. The aim of this study was to compare acute resection with stoma or stent and later resection regarding surgical and oncological outcomes and total hospital stay.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study. All 2424 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer during 1997–2013 were reviewed. All whom underwent acute surgery with curative intention for left-sided malignant obstruction were included in the study.

Results

One hundred patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among them, 57 patients were treated with acute resection and 43 with planned resection after either acute diverting colostomy (n = 23) or stent placement (n = 20). The number of harvested lymph nodes in the resected specimen was higher in the planned resection group compared with acute resection group (21 vs. 8.7; p = 0.001). Fewer patients were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy in the acute resection group than in the stoma group (14 % (8/57 patients) vs. 43 %, (10/23 patients; p = 0.024)). Patients operated with acute resection had a higher 30-day mortality rate and were more frequently left with a permanent stoma.

Conclusions

Decompression of emergency obstructive left colon cancer with stent or stoma and subsequent curative resection appears safer and results in a higher yield of lymph node harvest, and fewer patients are left with a permanent stoma.

Right Versus Left-Sided Colectomies: A Comparison of Outcomes

Surgeons often consider that a right colectomy (RC) carries less risk than a left or sigmoid colectomy (L/SC). Our aim was to compare outcomes between RC and L/SC. Review of the Carolinas Medical Center National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data from 2013 to February 2015 was performed. Procedures were categorized as RC versus L/SC based on current procedural terminology codes for both open and laparoscopic colectomies. Demographics and minor and major complications were evaluated using standard statistical methods. A total of 164 RC and 211 L/SC were studied. RC patients were older (63.9 ± 14.2 vs 59.4 ± 13.0, P < 0.001). Patients undergoing RC had more comorbidities, and 64.6 per cent had an American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) Class III or above versus 51.7 per cent of those undergoing L/SC ( P = 0.02). RC had significantly higher rates of postop urinary tract infection (7.3% vs 2.8%, P = 0.04) and postop transfusions ( P = 0.01). Average length of stay was longer for RC (10.1 ± 8.6 days vs 8.3 ± 7.0 days, P < 0.01). After controlling for ASA class, preoperative hematocrit and surgical technique (lap versus open), multivariate analysis indicated that there were no longer any significant differences in outcomes between RC and L/SC. There were no differences between the group complications including superficial or deep surgical site infections, anastomotic leak, myocardial infarction (MI), pneumonia, or 30-day mortality. RC patients tended to be sicker and had more medical complications postop with initial evaluation of the data. However, when controlling for ASA, hematocrit, and techniques, there were no differences in complications when RC was compared to L/SC. The belief that L/SC has a higher rate of complications compared to RC is not supported.

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.

High mortality rates after nonelective colon cancer resection: results of a national audit

AIM

Colon cancer resection in a nonelective setting is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this retrospective study is to identify risk factors for overall mortality after colon cancer resection with a special focus on nonelective resection.

METHOD

Data were obtained from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Patients undergoing colon cancer resection in the Netherlands between January 2009 and December 2013 were included. Patient, treatment and tumour factors were analysed in relation to the urgency of surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality.

RESULTS

The study included 30 907 patients. A nonelective colon cancer resection was performed in 5934 (19.2%) patients. There was a 4.4% overall mortality rate, with significantly more deaths after nonelective surgery (8.5% vs 3.4%, P < 0.001). Older patients, male patients and patients with high comorbidity, advanced tumours, perforated tumours, a tumour in the right or transverse colon and postoperative anastomotic leakage were at risk of postoperative death. In nonelective resections, a right-sided tumour and postoperative anastomotic leakage were associated with high mortality.

CONCLUSION

Nonelective colon cancer resection is associated with high mortality. In particular, right-sided resections and patients with tumour perforation are at particularly high risk. The optimization of patients prior to surgery and expeditious operation after diagnosis might prevent the need for a nonelective resection.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Emergency right colectomy: which strategy when primary anastomosis is not feasible?

Background

Primary anastomosis is considered the standard strategy after right emergency colectomy. The present study aimed to evaluate alternative treatment strategies when primary anastomosis is not possible to prevent definitive ostomy.

Methods

This retrospective study included all consecutive patients who underwent right emergency colectomy between July 2006 and June 2013. Demographics, surgical data, and postoperative outcomes were entered in an anonymized database. Comparative analysis was performed between patients with primary anastomosis (PA group) and those where alternative strategies were employed (no-PA group). Outcomes were 30 days complications rate and rate of bowel continuity restoration.

Results

One hundred forty-eight patients (57 % male) with a median age of 65 years (15–96) were included. One hundred and sixteen patients underwent PA (78 %) and 32 were in the no-PA group (22 %). No-PA group patients had more comorbidities (Carlson comorbidity index >3: 98 % vs. 54, p < 0.001). Major complications rate (Dindo-Clavien III to IV) was 24 % in PA group, 88 % in no-PA group (p < 0.001). The 30-day mortality rate was 6 % (n = 7) in PA group versus 25 % (n = 8) in no-PA group (p = 0.004). Fourteen patients in the no-PA group had a split stoma and 18 had a two-staged procedure. Five patients had continuity restoration after initial split stoma (36 %) compared to 10 after a two-staged procedure (55 %; p = 0.265). Anastomotic leak occurred in 10 patients of the PA group (9 %) versus 0 in the no-PA group, where 15 out of 32 patients (47 %) had continuity restoration.

Conclusion

Eighty percent of patients requiring emergency right colectomy were anastomosed primarily. For the remaining a two-staged procedure might facilitate bowel continuity restoration in the long-term.

Evidence-based Clinical Management of Acute Malignant Colorectal Obstruction

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

Urgent surgery after emergency presentation for colorectal cancer has no impact on overall and disease-free survival: a propensity score analysis

Background

It remains a matter of debate whether colorectal cancer resection in an emergency setting negatively impacts on survival. Our objective was therefore to assess the impact of urgent versus elective operation on overall and disease-free survival in patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer by using propensity score adjusted analysis.

Methods

In a single-center study patients operated for colorectal cancer between 1989 and 2013 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Median follow-up was 44 months. Patients with neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. The impact of urgent operation on overall and disease-free survival was assessed using both Cox regression and propensity score analyses.

Results

Of 747 patients with colorectal cancer, 84 (11 %) had urgent and 663 elective cancer resection. The propensity score revealed strongly biased patient characteristics (0.22 ± 0.16 vs. 0.10 ± 0.09; P < 0.001). In unadjusted analysis urgent operation was associated with a 35 % increased risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio(HR) of death = 1.35, 95 % confidence interval(CI):1.02–1.78, P = 0.045). In risk-adjusted Cox regression analysis urgent operation was not associated with poor overall (HR = 1.08, 95 %CI:0.79–1.48; P = 0.629) or disease-free survival (HR = 1.02, 95 %CI:0.76–1.38; P = 0.877). Similarly in propensity score analysis urgent operation did not influence overall (HR = 0.98, 95 % CI:0.74–1.29), P = 0.872) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.89, 95 %CI:0.68 to 1.16, P = 0.387).

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that worse oncologic outcomes after urgent operation for colorectal cancer are caused by clinical circumstances and not due to the urgent operation itself. Urgent operation is not a risk factor for colorectal cancer resection.

Day and night surgery: is there any influence in the patient postoperative period of urgent colorectal intervention?

BACKGROUND

Medical activity performed outside regular work hours may increase risk for patients and professionals. There is few data with respect to urgent colorectal surgery. The aim of this work was to evaluate the impact of daytime versus nighttime surgery on postoperative period of patients with acute colorectal disease.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in a sample of patients with acute colorectal disease who underwent urgent surgery at the General Surgery Unit of Braga Hospital, between January 2005 and March 2013. Patients were stratified by operative time of day into a daytime group (surgery between 8:00 and 20:59) and the nighttime group (21:00-7:59) and compared for clinical and surgical parameters. A questionnaire was distributed to surgeons, covering aspects related to the practice of urgent colorectal surgery and fatigue.

RESULTS

A total of 330 patients were included, with 214 (64.8%) in the daytime group and 116 (35.2%) in the nighttime group. Colorectal cancer was the most frequent pathology. Waiting time (p < 0.001) and total length of hospital stay (p = 0.008) were significantly longer in the daytime group. There were no significant differences with respect to early or late complications. However, 100% of surgeons reported that they are less proficient during nighttime.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with acute colorectal disease subjected to urgent surgery, there was no significant association between nighttime surgery and the presence of postoperative medical and surgical morbidities. Patients who were subjected to daytime surgery had longer length of stay at the hospital.