Transanal drainage tubes vs metallic stents for acute malignant left-sided bowel obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Management of obstructed colorectal carcinoma in an emergency setting: An update

Colorectal carcinoma is common, particularly on the left side. In 20% of patients, obstruction and ileus may be the first clinical manifestations of a carcinoma that has advanced (stage II, III or even IV). Diagnosis is based on clinical presentation, plain abdominal radiogram, computed tomography (CT), CT colonography and positron emission tomography/CT. The best management strategy in terms of short-term operative or interventional and long-term oncological outcomes remains unknown. For the most common left-sided obstruction, the first choice should be either emergency surgery or endoscopic decompression by self-expendable metal stents or tubes. The operative plan should be either one-stage or two-stage resection. One-stage resection with on-table bowel decompression and irrigation can be accompanied or not accompanied by proximal defunctioning stoma (colostomy or ileostomy). Primary anastomosis is more convenient but has increased risks of anastomotic leakage and morbidity. Two-stage resection (Hartmann's procedure) is safer and the most widely used despite temporally affecting quality of life. Damage control surgery in high-risk frail patients is less frequently performed since it can be successfully substituted with endoscopic stenting or tubing. For the less common right-sided obstruction, one-stage surgical resection is more beneficial than endoscopic decompression. The role of minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic) is a subject of debate. Emergency laparoscopic-assisted management is advantageous to some extent but requires much expertise due to inherent difficulties in dissecting the distended colon and the risk of rupture and subsequent septic complications. The decompressing stent as a bridge to elective surgery more substantially decreases the risks of morbidity and mortality than emergency surgery for decompression and has equivalent medium-term overall survival and disease-free survival rates. Its combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiation may have a positive effect on long-term oncological outcomes. Management plans are crucial and must be individualized to better fit each case.

Self-expanding metal stents versus decompression tubes as a bridge to surgery for patients with obstruction caused by colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) and decompression tubes (DT) as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) treatment may avoid emergency operations for patients with colorectal cancer-caused obstructions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the two approaches.

METHODS

We systematically retrieved literature from January 1, 2000, to May 30, 2023, from the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang Data, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies of SEMS versus DT as BTS in colorectal cancer obstruction were selected. Risks of bias were assessed for RCTs and cohort studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2 and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions. Certainty of evidence was determined using the Graded Recommendation Assessment. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used to analyze measurement data.

RESULTS

We included eight RCTs and eighteen cohort studies involving 2,061 patients (SEMS, 1,044; DT, 1,017). Pooled RCT and cohort data indicated the SEMS group had a significantly higher clinical success rate than the DT group (OR = 1.99, 95% CI 1.04, 3.81, P = 0.04), but no significant difference regarding technical success (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.56, 2.96, P = 0.55). SEMS had a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays (MD = - 4.47, 95% CI - 6.26, - 2.69, P < 0.00001), a lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain (OR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.05, 0.50, P = 0.002), intraoperative bleeding (MD = - 37.67, 95% CI - 62.73, - 12.60, P = 0.003), stoma creation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.23, 0.73, P = 0.002) and long-term tumor recurrence rate than DT (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 0.99, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

SEMS and DT are both safe as BTS to avoid emergency surgery for patients with colorectal cancer obstruction. SEMS is preferable because of higher clinical success rates, lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain, intraoperative bleeding, stoma creation, and long-term tumor recurrence, as well as a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays. Trial registration CRD42022365951 .

Transanal decompression tube is superior to self-expandable metallic colonic stent for malignant colorectal obstruction: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recently, self-expandable metallic colonic stent (SEMS) and transanal decompression tube (TDT) used as a 'bridge to surgery' (BTS) have been widely used. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and oncological safety of SEMS and TDT as BTS to transform MLBO into elective surgery.

METHODS

Between February 2013 and March 2019, 62 patients with MLBO received SEMS (n = 32) or TDT (n = 30), and elective one-stage surgery later. We evaluated decompression efficiency and oncological safety in selective operation in TDT and SEMS groups, including preoperative preparation time, surgical approach, number of lymphatic dissection and vascular invasion, ulcer formation and histopathological findings of resected specimens.

RESULTS

The preoperative preparation time in the SEMS group was shorter than that of the TDT group (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the groups in postoperative length of hospital stay (P > 0.05). The number of vascular invasions in the TDT group was less than that in the SEMS group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the risk of wound abscess and ulcer formation in the TDT group was significantly lower than that in the SEMS group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that SEMS is associated with a relatively poor oncological outcome and the placement of TDT as BTS in MLBO patients may be a better alternation.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Supplementary Information

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

Endoscopic Decompression in Colonic Distension

Background

Acute colonic distension is a medical emergency with high morbidity and mortality. Clinically important causes of colonic distension are acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, colonic volvulus, and malignant obstruction. Endoscopic decompression is one established therapeutic strategy.

Summary

This therapeutic review will give an overview of possible therapeutic strategies based on the recently published literature, focusing on endoscopic decompression and summarizing the other therapeutic possibilities. The review discusses separately the therapeutic options of acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, colonic volvulus, and malignant obstruction, providing an evidence-based orientation for clinical use.

Key Messages

Endoscopic decompression of colonic distension is an established therapy with high clinical success. The technique and its position in the therapy sequence differ depending on the medical condition, the trigger of the colonic distension, and the local expertise.