Comparison of short-term outcome between diverting colostomy and colonic stent as a bridge to surgery for left colonic malignant obstruction

Management of left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions with curative intent: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several management options exist for colonic decompression in the setting of malignant large bowel obstruction, including oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and SEMS as a bridge-to-surgery. Consensus has yet to be reached on optimal treatment pathways. The aim of the present study was to perform a network meta-analysis comparing short-term postoperative morbidity and long-term oncologic outcomes between oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction with curative intent.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were systematically searched. Articles were included if they compared two or more of the following in patients presenting with curative left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: (1) emergent oncologic resection; (2) surgical diversion; and/or (3) SEMS. The primary outcome was overall 90-day postoperative morbidity. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed with inverse variance random effects. Random-effect Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

From 1277 citations, 53 studies with 9493 patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection, 1273 patients undergoing surgical diversion, and 2548 patients undergoing SEMS were included. Network meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in 90-day postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing SEMS compared to urgent oncologic resection (OR0.34, 95%CrI0.01-0.98). Insufficient RCT data pertaining to overall survival (OS) precluded network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis demonstrated decreased five-year OS for patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection compared to surgical diversion (OR0.44, 95%CI0.28-0.71, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bridge-to-surgery interventions may offer short- and long-term benefits compared to urgent oncologic resection for malignant colorectal obstruction and should be increasingly considered in this patient population. Further prospective study comparing surgical diversion and SEMS is needed.

Outcomes according to treatment modalities as a bridge to curative surgery for malignant obstruction of the proximal colon: stent versus stoma

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The optimal treatment for acute malignant obstruction of the proximal colon (MOPC, proximal to the splenic flexure) remains challenging. Emergency resection, the traditional modality for MOPC, has shown significantly high mortality and morbidity rates, according to recent studies. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of stent vs stoma as a bridge to curative surgery for MOPC.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 72 patients who underwent endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) or loop ileostomy for MOPC at six referral centers between January 2011 and July 2021. Clinical and pathological characteristics, procedure-related complications, and long-term mortality rates after curative surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up period of 32 months, 30 patients (41.7%) underwent ileostomy preferentially for more proximal cancer, complete obstruction, and advanced tumor stage compared to the SEMS group. No difference was found in procedure-related complications, but five deaths were observed after ileostomy. Survival analysis for 5-year mortality after curative surgery showed no significant difference between the bridge modalities (log-rank p = 0.253).

CONCLUSION

In this study, SEMS as a bridge to surgery showed relatively safe results in terms of post-procedural mortality. However, these results should be considered when performing ileostomy in patients with more advanced malignant obstruction.

Current practice for the treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer in China: a nationwide cross-sectional survey

PURPOSE

This study surveyed the current practice of surgical treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in China.

METHODS

All colorectal surgery departments at tertiary or secondary hospitals in China were invited to complete a web-based questionnaire between August 27 and September 2, 2020.

RESULTS

Overall, completed questionnaire were received from 357 hospitals. Emergency surgery was the mainstay of treatment for OLCC, with the open approach accounting for up to 61.62%. The stoma rate of emergency surgery was up to 80%, mainly due to inadequate bowel preparation and severe edema of colon walls. Hartmann's procedure (61.62%) was the most preferred operation. A total of 243 hospitals (68.7%) reported that they would consider the use of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge for elective surgery. More than 50% of the hospitals participating in this study reported the success rate of SEMS placement, as well as the resolution rate of obstruction more than 80%, and the stent-related perforation rate was < 5%. A total of 126 hospitals considered carrying out a strategy of SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery and believed that it might further improve treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS is a feasible option for the treatment of OLCC in addition to traditional emergency surgery, and its clinical benefits have been preliminarily recognized.

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.

Endoscopic stent versus diverting stoma as a bridge to surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), an alternative to diverting stoma (DS), has been used as a "bridge to surgery" (BTS) to decompress acute obstruction of colorectal cancer (CRC) for decades. However, whether SEMS is a safe technique for obstruction of CRC without compromising the long-term survival of patients remains unidentified compared to those of DS. The aim of the present study was to elucidate the safety and survival outcomes of SEMS and DS.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and Medline were searched for qualified studies published until October, 2020, in which SEMS or DS was performed as a BTS without resection at the same stage. The last search was on December 5th, 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of included studies. The major complication rate, mortality, 3-year overall survival (OS), and permanent stoma rate were estimated as outcomes.

RESULTS

The present study was registered on INPLASY (No. 2020100079). Seven eligible studies were included, involving 646 and 712 patients who underwent SEMS and DS treatments, respectively. The Clavien-Dindo I/II grade complication rate was significantly lower in the SEMS group than in the DS group (8.68 vs. 16.85%; RR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.84; P = 0.004). The Clavien-Dindo III/IV grade complication rate was comparable in two groups (7.69 vs. 8.79%; RR, 0.82; 95% CI 0.54-1.27; P = 0.37). There were no statistical differences in the short-term mortality (5.16 vs. 4.53%; RR, 1.25; 95% CI 0.75-2.08; P = 0.39), 3-year OS (71.91 vs. 76.60%; RR, 0.93; 95% CI 0.86-1.01; P = 0.10), and permanent stoma rate (22.08 vs. 27.54%; RR, 0.84; 95% CI 0.67-1.06; P = 0.14) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

To some extent, SEMS is a safe BTS technique for acute obstructive CRC, without significant adverse effect on the survival of patients. Given the advantage of minimal invasion, SEMS may be a better alternative to DS for obstructive CRC. However, the conclusions remain to be discussed because of lacking high-quality randomized controlled trails.

Comparative analysis of modified Bacon operation and double stapler operation in the treatment of rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy of modified Bacon operation and double stapler operation in treating lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

A total of 73 patients with lower rectal cancer admitted to the general surgery department of our hospital from March 2016 to March 2017 were selected for the study. According to different operation methods, the patients were divided into an observation group and a control group. Modified Bacon operation was used in the observation group (39 cases), while double stapler operation was adopted for the control group (34 cases). The intraoperative and postoperative conditions and 3-year survival rates were observed.

RESULTS

The bleeding volume and anal exhaust time in the observation group were better than those in the control group, the difference being statistically significant (P<0.05). No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of the operation time, abdominal drainage volume, anal extubation time, or the number of lymph node dissection (P>0.05). The anal function of the two groups was evaluated one month and six months after operation respectively, and no significant difference was found between the function of the two groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications, local recurrence, and distant metastasis between the two groups (P>0.05). The 3-year survival rate was 89.74% in the observation group and 91.18% in the control group. Our analysis found no significant difference in the cumulative survival rates between the two groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Modified Bacon operation and double stapler operation are effective treatment for lower rectal cancer, and the survival benefit of patients is obvious. The methods are worthy of clinical promotion.

Propensity score-matched comparison of stenting as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction

Background

Bridge to elective surgery (BTS) using self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) is a common alternative to emergency surgery (ES) for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction (AMLCO). However, studies regarding the long-term impact of BTS are limited and have reported unclear results.

Methods

A multicenter observational study was performed at three hospitals from April 2012 to December 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was introduced to minimize selection bias. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The secondary endpoints included surgical approaches, primary resection types, total stent-related adverse effects (AEs), surgical AEs, length of hospital stay, 30-day mortality and tumor recurrence.

Results

Forty-nine patients in both the BTS and ES groups were matched. Patients in the BTS group more often underwent laparoscopic resection [31 (63.3%) vs. 8 (16.3%), p < 0.001], were less likely to have a primary stoma [13 (26.5%) vs. 26 (53.1%), p = 0.007] and more often had perineural invasion [25 (51.0 %) vs. 13 (26.5 %), p = 0.013]. The median overall survival was significantly lower in patients with stent insertion (41 vs. 65 months, p = 0.041). The 3-year overall survival (53.0 vs. 77.2%, p = 0.039) and 5-year overall survival (30.6 vs. 55.0%, p = 0.025) were significantly less favorable in the BTS group. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, stenting (hazard ratio(HR) = 2.309(1.052–5.066), p = 0.037), surgical AEs (HR = 1.394 (1.053–1.845), p = 0.020) and pTNM stage (HR = 1.706 (1.116–2.607), p = 0.014) were positively correlated with overall survival in matched patients.

Conclusions

Self-expanding metal stents as “a bridge to surgery” are associated with more perineural invasion, a higher recurrence rate and worse overall survival in patients with acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction compared with emergency surgery.