Palliation of malignant rectal obstruction from invasive prostate cancer with multiple overlapping self-expanding metal stents

Colorectal Stenting for Obstruction due to Retrorectal Tumor in a Patient Unsuitable for Surgery

Fund of knowledge on palliative treatment of unresectable retrorectal tumors is scare. Here, we reported a non-surgical treatment of a huge retrorectal malignant tumor in an aged and debilitated patient complicated with colorectal obstruction. An 86-year-old male with severe comorbidities was admitted with acute colorectal obstruction owing to an untreated retrorectal malign epithelial tumor. There was a lobulated retrorectal mass, 20 cm × 15 cm at largest size, extending to the superior iliac bifurcation level, caused an obstruction of the rectal lumen. He was not suitable for surgical excision because of the severe comorbidities. Rectal obstruction was palliated by two self-expandable metallic stents. He tolerated the procedures well and post-procedural course was uneventful. After four months, stents were patent and the patient was continent. Stenting for colorectal obstruction owing to a retrorectal tumor can be feasible in patients who are not suitable for surgery (aged, debilitated, advanced tumor). It avoided the surgical trauma to a high-risk patient and ensured the continuity of continence. As far as we know, this was the first report on colorectal stenting for a retrorectal tumor.

Management of large bowel obstruction with self-expanding metal stents. A multicentre retrospective study of factors determining outcome

AIM

UK cancer guidelines recommend patients with colonic obstruction due to suspected malignancy be considered for stenting with a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS). Considerable variation in practice exists due to a lack of expertise, technical difficulties and other, as yet ill-defined features. This retrospective multi-centre study aims to determine the outcome following colonic stenting for large bowel obstruction and identify factors associated with successful intervention.

METHOD

A regional programme of colonic stenting for large bowel obstruction, in five UK centres from 2005 to 2010 was evaluated for outcome including technical and clinical success, survival, complications and reoperation.

RESULTS

A SEMS was inserted in 334 patients, including 264 (79.0%) for palliation and 52 (15.6%) as a bridge to surgery. Technical success was achieved in 292 (87.4%) patients, with 46 (13.8%) experiencing a complication or technical failure. Reoperation was required in 39 (14.8%) patients stented for palliation of colorectal cancer of whom 16 (6.1%) subsequently required a colostomy. A one-stage primary anastomosis was achieved in 35 (67.3%) of the 52 patients undergoing stenting as a bridge to resection. Technical success did not vary by indication or site of obstruction (P = 0.60) but was higher for operators who had performed more than 10 procedures (OR 3.34, P = 0.001). ASA grade ≥3 predicted a worse clinical outcome (OR 0.43, P = 0.04). The through-the-scope (TTS) endoscopy technique was more successful than radiological placement alone (90.3% vs 74.8%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Experienced operators using a TTS technique achieved a better outcome for the emergency management of large bowel obstruction. Older, sicker patients and those with extracolonic and benign strictures fared less well.

Factors associated with the survival of prostate cancer patients with rectal involvement

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer patients with rectal involvement are rare, and the factors associated with the survival of these patients are yet to be elucidated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We collected data on patients who were admitted to our hospital for prostate cancer in the last thirteen years and of those in studies in the literature. The associations of clinical characteristics with survival were evaluated using Cox regression models.

RESULTS

This study included 94 patients (5 admitted to our hospital and 89 from studies in the literature) of prostate cancer with rectal involvement. 11 patients in the group of synchronous rectal involvement at first cancer diagnosis (n = 58) and 23 patients in the group of metachronous diagnosis of rectal involvement (n = 29) died at the latest follow up. The estimated overall survival rate (% ± SE) at 1, 3, and 5 years were 68.3 ± 5.3%, 54.4 ± 7.2%, and 38.1 ± 11.1%, respectively. In the Cox univariate analysis, Asian prostate cancer (p = 0.001) was associated with better survival, while rectal bleeding (p = 0.043), metachronous presentation of development of rectal involvement (p = 0.000), prior hormonal therapy (p = 0.000) and extrarectal metastases (p = 0.054) were associated with poor survival. In multivariate analysis, prior hormone therapy (HR = 14.540, p = 0.000) and rectal bleeding (HR = 2.195, p = 0.041) retained independent poor prognostic values. There were 13 patients survived for more than 3 years, the longest survival time was 96 months. Total pelvic extenteration (TPE) combined with hormonal therapy in 12 hormone-untreated prostate cancer give us six of thirteen long-term survivors for more than 3 years in this series.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that rectal involvement does not necessarily predict a worse outcome when presenting as a previously hormone-untreated disease and that the prognosis was worse when presenting as a hormone relapsed disease. Prior hormone therapy and rectal bleeding were associated independently with a significantly poor overall survival in prostate cancer patients with rectal involvement. TPE combined with hormonal therapy appears to confer better overall survival in hormonally untreated patients.

VIRTUAL SLIDES

The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/1604504118106105.

Colonic stenting: a practical update

Colonic stenting is part of the UK service provision guidelines for colorectal cancer. However, there are issues about availability and expertise within the UK, and controversies remain regarding various clinical and technical aspects of the technique. Based on the current evidence, this article will provide a practical update on the indications, the clinical and technical considerations and the remaining unanswered questions regarding colonic stenting.

Update on the indications and use of colonic stents

Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is a minimally invasive option for achieving acute colonic decompression in obstructed colorectal cancer. Colorectal stenting offers nonoperative, immediate, and effective colon decompression and allows bowel preparation for an elective oncologic resection. Patients who benefit the most are high-risk surgical patients and candidates for laparoscopic resection with complete obstruction, because emergency surgery can be avoided in more than 90% of patients. Colonic stent placement also offers effective palliation of malignant colonic obstruction, although it carries risks of delayed complications. When performed by experienced endoscopists, the technical success rate is high with a low procedural complication rate. Despite concerns of tumor seeding following endoscopic colorectal stent placement, no difference exists in oncologic long-term survival between patients who undergo stent placement followed by elective resection and those undergoing emergency bowel resection. Colorectal stents have also been used in selected patients with benign colonic strictures. Uncovered metal stents should be avoided in these patients, and fully covered stents are associated with high risk of migration. Patients with benign colonic stricture with acute colonic obstruction who are at high risk for emergency surgery can gain temporary relief of obstruction after SEMS placement; the stent can be removed en bloc with the colon specimen at surgery. This article reviews the techniques and indications of SEMS placement for benign and malignant colorectal obstructions.