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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

COMPASS: deCOMPressing stomA and two-Stage elective resection vs. emergency reSection in patients with left-sided obstructive colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer stands as a prevalent cause of cancer-related mortality, necessitating effective treatment strategies. Acute colonic obstruction occurs in approximately 20% of patients and represents a surgical emergency with substantial morbidity and mortality. The optimal approach for managing left-sided colon cancer with acute colonic obstruction remains debatable, with no consensus on whether emergency resection or bridge-to-surgery, involving initial decompressing stoma and subsequent elective resection after recovery, should be employed. Current studies show a decrease in morbidity and short-term mortality for the bridge-to-surgery approach, yet it remains unclear if the long-term oncological outcome is equivalent to emergency resection.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, multicenter trial aims to investigate the management of obstructive left-sided colon cancer in a comprehensive manner. The study will be conducted across 26 university hospitals and 40 academic hospitals in Germany. A total of 468 patients will be enrolled, providing a cohort of 420 evaluable patients, with an equal distribution of 210 patients in each treatment arm. Patients with left-sided colon cancer, defined as cancer between the left splenic flexure and > 12 cm ab ano and obstruction confirmed by X-ray or CT scan, are eligible. Randomization will be performed in a 1:1 ratio, assigning patients either to the oncological emergency resection group or the bridge-to-surgery group, wherein patients will undergo diverting stoma and subsequent elective oncological resection after recovery. The primary endpoint of this trial will be 120-day mortality, allowing for consideration of the time interval between diverting stoma and resection.

DISCUSSION

The findings derived from this trial possess the potential to reshape the current clinical approach of emergency resection for obstructive left-sided colon cancer by favoring the bridge-to-surgery practice, provided that a reduction in morbidity can be achieved without compromising the oncological long-term outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) under the identifier DRKS00031827. Registered on May 15, 2023.

PROTOCOL

28.04.2023, protocol version 2.0F.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Oncologic impact of colonic stents for obstructive left-sided colon cancer

Colonic stenting has had a significant positive impact on the management of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in terms of both palliative treatment and bridge-to-surgery (BTS). Notably, many studies have convincingly demonstrated the effectiveness of stenting as a BTS, resulting in improvements in short-term outcomes and quality of life, safety, and efficacy in subsequent curative surgery, and increased cost-effectiveness, whereas the safety of chemotherapy after stenting and the long-term outcomes of stenting as a BTS are controversial. Several studies have suggested an increased risk of perforation in patients receiving bevacizumab chemotherapy after colonic stenting. In addition, several pathological analyses have suggested a negative oncological impact of colonic stenting. In contrast, many recent studies have demonstrated that colonic stenting for OLCC does not negatively impact the safety of chemotherapy or long-term oncological outcomes. The updated version of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines released in 2020 included colonic stenting as a BTS for OLCC as a recommended treatment. It should be noted that the experience of endoscopists is involved in determining technical and clinical success rates and possibly oncological outcomes. This review discusses the positive and negative impacts of colonic stenting on OLCC treatment, particularly in terms of oncology.

Safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a surgical bridge for acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

For colorectal cancer, preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy is more effective than postoperative chemotherapy because it not only eradicates micrometastases more effectively but also reduces the risk of incomplete intraoperative resection and tumor cell shedding. For the treatment of acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction, colorectal stents as well as stoma are being used to relieve the obstructive colorectal cancer, and as a bridge to surgery, allowing easy mobilization and resection of the colon. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with decompressing stoma (DS) can be used as a bridge to elective surgery (BTS) as an alternative to emergency surgery in patients with acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction, but its benefit is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a bridge to surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction.

METHODS

Data from patients who were admitted with acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction between January 2012 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed, and patients with gastrointestinal perforation or peritonitis were excluded. We performed one-to-two propensity score matching to compare the stoma requirement, postoperative complications, and other short-term oncological outcomes between the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and surgery group.

RESULTS

There were no differences in intraoperative blood loss, operative time, one-year postoperative mortality, and postoperative tumor markers between the two groups. The 1-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates of neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and surgery group were 96.8 and 91.3% (p = 0.562). The neoadjuvant chemotherapy group was able to reduce stoma rate 1 year after surgery (p = 0.047). Besides, the neoadjuvant group significantly reduced postoperative bowel function time (p < 0.001), postoperative hospital stay (p < 0.001), total hospital stay (p = 0.002), postoperative complications (p = 0.017), reduction in need to stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a bridge to elective surgery in patients with acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction is safe and has many advantages. Prospective multicenter studies with large samples are needed to further evaluate the feasibility of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Supplementary Information

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

Survey Regarding Gastrointestinal Stoma Construction and Closure in Japan

Background and Aim

In Japan, the actual number of stoma constructions and stoma closures is not known. The aim of this study was to conduct a survey to determine the number of gastrointestinal stoma constructions and closures in Japan.

Methods

Enrolled participants comprised patients undergoing selected gastrointestinal surgeries who were recorded in the National Clinical Database. This database uses the "Common Items for Gastrointestinal Surgeons." These procedures were formulated by the Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery during 2013-2018.

Results

According to the National Clinical Database, a total of 154,323 gastrointestinal stomas were constructed between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2018. By procedure, there were 78,723 cases of stoma construction, 39,653 of abdominoperineal resection, 2470 total pelvic exenteration procedures, and 33,572 Hartmann's procedures. The ratio of stoma closures to stoma constructions increased annually in patients under 70 y of age but not in older patients. Approximately 35% of total colectomies, 60% of proctocolectomies, and 20% of low anterior resections were accompanied by stoma construction. The number of patients with rectal cancer who underwent colostomy increased gradually during the study period and the number who underwent stoma construction increased among older patients.

Conclusion

The number of cases of gastrointestinal stoma construction has increased gradually in Japan, and the proportion of older patients is increasing each year. The purposes and surgical techniques for stoma construction are diverse and are expected to increase in Japan, a super-aged society.

Management of obstructive colon cancer: Current status, obstacles, and future directions

Approximately 10%–18% of patients with colon cancer present with obstruction at the initial diagnosis. Despite active screening efforts, the incidence of obstructive colon cancer remains stable. Traditionally, emergency surgery has been indicated to treat patients with obstructive colon cancer. However, compared to patients undergoing elective surgery, the morbidity and mortality rates of patients requiring emergency surgery for obstructive colon cancer are high. With the advancement of colonoscopic techniques and equipment, a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) was introduced to relieve obstructive symptoms, allowing the patient’s general condition to be restored and for them undergo elective surgery. As the use of SEMS placement is growing, controversies about its application in potentially curable diseases have been raised. In this review, the short- and long-term outcomes of different treatment strategies, particularly emergency surgery vs SEMS placement followed by elective surgery in resectable, locally advanced obstructive colon cancer, are described based on the location of the obstructive cancer lesion. Controversies regarding each treatment strategy are discussed. To overcome current obstacles, a potential diagnostic method using circulating tumor DNA and further research directions incorporating neoadjuvant chemotherapy are introduced.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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