Bowel function following insertion of self-expanding metallic stents for palliation of colorectal cancer

The range and suitability of outcome measures used in the assessment of palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction, a complication of certain advanced cancers, causes severe symptoms which profoundly affect quality of life. Clinical management remains complex, and outcome assessment is inconsistent.

AIM

To identify outcomes evaluating palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction, as part of a four-phase study developing a core outcome set.

DESIGN

The review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA); PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019150648). Eligible studies included at least one subgroup with obstruction below the ligament of Treitz undergoing palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction. Study quality was not assessed because the review does not evaluate efficacy.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Database, CINAHL, PSYCinfo Caresearch, Open Grey and BASE were searched for trials and observational studies in October 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 4769 studies were screened, 290 full texts retrieved and 80 (13,898 participants) included in a narrative synthesis; 343 outcomes were extracted verbatim and pooled into 90 unique terms across six domains: physiological, nutrition, life impact, resource use, mortality and survival. Prevalent outcomes included adverse events (78% of studies), survival (54%), symptom control (39%) and mortality (31%). Key individual symptoms assessed were vomiting (41% of studies), nausea (34%) and pain (33%); 19% of studies assessed quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment focuses on survival, complications and overall symptom control. There is a need for definitions of treatment 'success' that are meaningful to patients, a more consistent approach to symptom assessment, and greater consideration of how to measure wellbeing in this population.

Definition of large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer: A systematic review

AIM

Controversies on therapeutic strategy for large bowel obstruction by primary colorectal cancer mainly concern acute conditions, being essentially different from subacute obstruction. Clearly defining acute obstruction is important for design and interpretation of studies as well as for guidelines and daily practice. This systematic review aimed to evaluate definitions of obstruction by colorectal cancer in prospective studies.

METHOD

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Eligibility criteria included randomized or prospective observational design, publication between 2000 and 2019, and the inclusion of patients with an obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. Provided definitions of obstruction were extracted with assessment of common elements.

RESULTS

A total of 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 99 prospective observational studies were included. Obstruction was specified as acute in 28 studies, complete/emergency in five, (sub)acute or similar terms in four and unspecified in 78. Five of 16 RCTs (31%) and 37 of 99 cohort studies (37%) provided a definition. The definitions included any combination of clinical symptoms, physical signs, endoscopic features and radiological imaging findings in 25 studies. The definition was only based on clinical symptoms in 11 and radiological imaging in six studies. Definitions included a radiological component in 100% of evaluable RCTs (5/5) vs. 54% of prospective observational studies (20/37, P = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review, the majority of prospective studies did not define obstruction by colorectal cancer and its urgency, whereas provided definitions varied hugely. Radiological confirmation seems to be an essential component in defining acute obstruction.

Factors related to difficult self-expandable metallic stent placement for malignant colonic obstruction: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter study across Japan

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Colorectal cancer patients often present with large bowel obstruction. Elective placement of a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) can relieve obstruction, but can be challenging. Previous studies have compared cases by outcomes only, but the present study investigated successful cases only to identify factors related to prolonged and difficult SEMS placement in patients with malignant colonic obstruction.

METHODS

A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter clinical trial conducted between March 2012 and October 2013 at 46 facilities across Japan (UMIN000007953) was carried out; 511 patients who required SEMS placement for acute colorectal obstruction or symptomatic stricture secondary to malignant neoplasm were enrolled. Technical success rates and procedure times were recorded. Clinical and interventional parameters were investigated for their potential effect on procedure time by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Technical success rate of SEMS placement was 98%. Median procedure time was 30 (range, 4-170) min. In 27% of patients, procedure time exceeded 45 min, indicating technically difficult placement. Multivariate analyses showed significant associations between technically difficult placement and a ColoRectal Obstruction Scoring System (CROSS) score of 0 before SEMS placement (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; P < 0.05), tumor site in the right colon (OR, 2.5; P < 0.0001), stricture length ≥5 cm (OR, 2.2; P < 0.001), peritoneal carcinomatosis (OR, 1.7; P < 0.05), and multiple SEMS placement (OR, 8.0; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians must anticipate technical challenges in cases with peritoneal carcinomatosis, a CROSS score of 0, or expansive strictures; such cases require experienced clinicians to carry out SEMS placement.

Colonic perforation with intraluminal stents and bevacizumab in advanced colorectal cancer: retrospective case series and literature review

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are increasingly used in the treatment of malignant large bowel obstruction in the setting of inoperable colorectal cancer. Perforation is a well-known complication associated with these devices. The addition of the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor bevacizumab is suspected to increase the rate, but the extent of the increase is not known.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients receiving SEMS in tertiary hospitals in Calgary, Alta., between October 2001 and January 2012.

RESULTS

We reviewed the records of 87 patients with inoperable colorectal cancer who received SEMS during our study period. Nine perforations occurred in total: 4 of 30 (13%) patients who received no chemotherapy, 3 of 47 (6%) who received chemotherapy but no bevacizumab, and 2 of 10 (20%) who received chemotherapy and bevacizumab. These two patients received bevacizumab with FOLFIRI after SEMS placement, and they had peritoneal disease.

CONCLUSION

Our case series and other studies suggest that bevacizumab may increase the risk of colonic perforation in the setting of SEMS. Caution should be used when combining these therapies.

Photochemical tissue penetration via photosensitizer for effective drug penetration in a non-vascular tumor

To improve the tissue penetration efficiency (PE%) of hydrophilic-drugs in non-vascular drug eluting stents (DES), we designed photochemical tissue penetration (PTP) invested DES (PTP-DES). The PTP technology was applied to the stent as a covering membrane to generate singlet oxygen. Singlet oxygen damages the epithelial layer, so the PE% of released drugs could be improved. To prepare the PTP-DES membrane, chlorin e6 (Ce6, photosensitizer) was incorporated in a gemcitabine (GEM) eluting polyurethane (PU) membrane (Ce6-GEM-PU). Ce6-GEM-PU has smooth surface that is ∼40 μm thick. The photoactivity of Ce6 was maintained for 2 weeks (in vitro GEM releasing period). In a separate cell culture system, both 1.5 folds higher PE% and an improved tumor cell growth inhibition effect were shown after light exposure. Additionally, in tissue penetration experimental system, 2 folds increased in the PE% of GEM was induced by laser exposure at 80 J/cm2. Additionally, improved PE% of hydrophilic molecules (Fluorescein and GEM) was confirmed in colon tumor bearing mice. Consequentially, tumor growth, when implanted with Ce6-GEM-PU, was effectively inhibited without significant side effects. Based on these results, we believe that the PTP-DES system has great potential for improving the therapeutic effect of conventional DES.

Perforation in colorectal stenting: a meta-analysis and a search for risk factors

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that there is a substantial risk of perforation after colorectal stent placement.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for perforation from colonic stenting.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of 86 studies published between 2005 and 2011.

SETTING

Multicenter review.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent colorectal stent placement.

INTERVENTION

Colorectal stent placement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The occurrence of perforation with subgroup analyses for stent design, stricture etiology, stricture dilation, and concomitant chemotherapy, including the use of bevacizumab.

RESULTS

A total of 4086 patients underwent colorectal stent placement; perforation occurred in 207. Meta-analysis revealed an overall perforation rate of 7.4%. Of the 9 most frequently used stent types, the WallFlex, the Comvi, and the Niti-S D-type had a higher perforation rate (>10%). A lower perforation rate (<5%) was found for the Hanarostent and the Niti-S covered stent. Stenting benign strictures was associated with a significantly increased perforation rate of 18.4% compared with 7.5% for malignant strictures. Dilation did not increase the risk of perforation: 8.5% versus 8.5% without dilation. The subgroup of post-stent placement dilation had a significantly increased perforation risk of 20.4%. With a perforation rate of 12.5%, bevacizumab-based therapy was identified as a risk factor for perforation, whereas the risk for chemotherapy without bevacizumab was 7.0% and not increased compared with the group without concomitant therapies during stent therapy (9.0%).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity; a considerable proportion of data is unavailable for subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The perforation rate of colonic stenting is 7.4%. Stent design, benign etiology, and bevacizumab were identified as risk factors for perforation. Intraprocedural stricture dilation and concomitant chemotherapy were not associated with an increased risk of perforation.

Gemcitabine-releasing polymeric films for covered self-expandable metallic stent in treatment of gastrointestinal cancer

Non-vascular drug-eluting stents have been studied for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer and cancer-related stenosis. In this study, we designed and evaluated a gemcitabine (GEM)-eluting covered nonvascular stent. Polyurethane (PU)/polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) film was selected for the drug loading and eluting membrane. The membrane was fabricated by dip-coating on a Teflon bar (∅; 10mm), air-dried, peeled off and applied to a self-expanding Nitinol stent. Various amounts of poloxamer 407 (PL, Lutrol F127, BASF) (8%, 10%, or 12% of PU by weight) were added to control the release of GEM from membranes. The membrane containing 12% PL (GEM-PU-PL12%) showed the most favourable release properties; 70% of the loaded GEM released within 35 days, including the 35% released during the initial burst. The biological activities of GEM-PU-PL12% were evaluated using human cholangiocarcinoma cells (SK-ChA-1). GEM-PU-PL12% most efficiently inhibited the proliferation of cholangiocarcinoma cells and most highly induced pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-1β and IL-12) and p38 MAPKs in the cells. Subtumoural insertion of the GEM-PU-PL12% membrane more efficiently inhibited the growth of CT-26 colon cancer than other membranes. In this study, the GEM-eluting metal stents covered with PU-PL12% showed considerable feasibility for the treatment of malignant gastrointestinal cancer as well as cancer-related stenosis.

Use of a nitinol stent to palliate a colorectal neoplastic obstruction in a dog

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 12-year-old castrated male Labrador Retriever was evaluated for clinical signs associated with colorectal obstruction.

CLINICAL FINDINGS

The dog had a 2-week history of tenesmus and hematochezia. On rectal examination, an annular colorectal mass was palpable extending orad into the pelvic canal. The original diagnosis of the colorectal mass was a mucosal adenoma. The dog was maintained on a low-residue diet and fecal softeners for a period of 13 months after initial diagnosis. At that time, medical management was no longer effective.

TREATMENT AND OUTCOME

Placement of a colonic stent was chosen to palliate the clinical signs associated with colorectal obstruction. By use of fluoroscopic and colonoscopic guidance, a nitinol stent was placed intraluminally to open the obstructed region. Placement of the stent resulted in improvement of clinical signs, although tenesmus and obstipation occurred periodically after stent placement. At 212 days after stent placement, the patient had extensive improvement in clinical signs with minimal complications; however, clinical signs became severe at 238 days after stent placement, and the dog was euthanized. Histologic evaluation of the rectal tumor from samples obtained during necropsy revealed that the tumor had undergone malignant transformation to a carcinoma in situ.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A stent was successfully placed in the colon and rectum to relieve obstruction associated with a tumor originally diagnosed as a benign neoplasm. Placement of colorectal stents may be an option for the palliation of colorectal obstruction secondary to neoplastic disease; however, clinical signs may persist, and continuation of medical management may be necessary.

Colonic perforation after stent placement for malignant colorectal obstruction--causes and contributing factors

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are used to manage malignant colorectal obstruction. Colonic perforation is the most worrisome complication from colonic stenting. We reviewed causes and contributing factors of perforation with colonic stent placement in patients with malignant colorectal obstruction. Articles from both English and foreign language publications were identified from Medline. Data were collected on causes, timing, treatment and mortality related to perforation. A total of 2287 patients from 82 articles were included in this analysis, which showed an overall perforation rate of 4.9%. Perforation rates for palliation and bridge to surgery (BTS) were not significantly different (4.8% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.66); over 80% occurred within 30 days of stent placement (half during or within one day of the procedure). The mortality rate related to perforation was 0.8% per stented patient, but the mortality of patients experiencing perforation was 16.2%. There was no significant difference (p = 0.78) in the mortality rates between the palliation and the BTS group and concomitant chemotherapy, steroids, and radiotherapy are risk factors of perforation. The overall perforation related mortality is far less than that of patients undergoing emergency surgery for bowel obstruction.

Self expanding wall stents in malignant colorectal cancer: is complete obstruction a contraindication to stent placement?

OBJECTIVE

Technical failures have previously been associated with complete clinical obstruction and complete block to the retrograde flow of gastrograffin is considered by some to be a contraindication to the procedure. We report on the technical and clinical success rates of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) in both complete and incomplete obstruction in a prospective series of malignant colorectal obstructions.

METHOD

A prospective study of all patients undergoing attempted palliative and bridge to surgery SEMS placement for malignant colorectal obstruction over a 7-year period (April 1999-October 2006) was undertaken.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients (49 males) with a mean age of 71 years (range 49-98) were included. Technical success was achieved in 27 of 32 patients (84%) with complete obstruction and 33 of 36 patients (92%) with incomplete obstruction, P < 0.46, Fishers exact test. Clinical success was achieved in 17 of 26 patients (65%) with complete obstruction and 24 of 33 patients (73%) with incomplete obstruction, P < 0.58, Fishers exact test. Although placed correctly in 89% cases, relief of symptoms occurred in only 71%, P = 0.002, matched pairs test. There were two colonic perforations in the series with one procedure related death.

CONCLUSION

Placement of SEMS for obstructing colorectal cancer is technically successful in a high proportion of cases. Complete radiological obstruction is not a contraindication to stent placement. The relief of obstructive symptoms following successful placement of a wall stent is less predictable.

Surgical management of malignant bowel obstruction: strategies toward palliation of patients with advanced cancer

The management of malignant bowel obstruction is a challenging problem because of the poor definition of malignant bowel obstruction compounded by its myriad clinical presentations. Surgeons are called upon to perform invasive procedures designed to alleviate symptoms or correct the underlying obstruction. Unfortunately, interventions may carry a high rate of morbidity and mortality. Balancing these risks and potential benefits is complicated, and there is a paucity of data to help guide these difficult decisions. The surgeon is further handicapped when he or she is not understanding of the patient's disease status, prognosis, or long-term goals. Diligent discussion with the primary team and frank discussions with the patient and his or her family are essential to formulate an appropriate plan. It is also essential that the surgeon have a thorough understanding of the surgical options to relieve or palliate malignant bowel obstruction as well as effective nonsurgical interventions. The best approach may be appropriate surgical intervention coupled with aggressive medical management.

Stents and stentability: treatment for malignant bowel obstruction

Colonic stents offer a palliative treatment for patients with malignant bowel obstruction otherwise requiring surgery and possible stoma, or as a bridge to surgery for potentially curative malignant disease. This article reviews the indications, risks and benefits of stent insertion.

Mechanical obstruction of the small bowel and colon

Mechanical obstruction of the small bowel and colon is moderately common, accounting for several hundred thousand admissions per year in the United States. Patients generally present with abdominal pain, nausea and emesis, abdominal distention, and progressive obstipation. Clinical findings of high fever, localized severe abdominal tenderness, rebound tenderness, severe leukocytosis, or metabolic acidosis suggest possible complications of bowel necrosis, bowel perforation, or generalized peritonitis. Differentiation of total mechanical obstruction from partial mechanical obstruction and pseudo-obstruction is important because total mechanical obstruction is generally treated surgically,whereas the other two entities are usually treated medically. Mechanical obstruction is usually suggested by plain abdominal radiographs, and confirmed by small bowel follow through,abdominal CT, or CT enteroclysis.

Self-expanding metallic stent insertion in the proximal colon

OBJECTIVE

Colonic obstruction may be relieved by the insertion of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), either for permanent palliative relief or as a bridge to surgery. Lesions proximal to the descending colon can be more difficult to intubate and stent [1]. SEMS placement in the more proximal colon lesions has been reported in only a few cases [2,4]. The aim of this study was to review the outcome of SEMS for obstruction at the splenic flexure and above.

METHOD

A study of all colonic stents inserted in one specialist unit was undertaken. Patients' demographics, site and aetiology of the underlying obstruction, success or other outcome of the procedures were collected. Thirty-day morbidity and mortality were documented.

RESULTS

Seven patients had proximal lesions: four in the transverse colon and three at the splenic flexure. Six patients had colorectal carcinoma and one had extrinsic compression from a gastric carcinoma. Six of the SEMS were inserted for permanent palliation, and one as a bridge to surgery. Stent placement was technically successful in six of the seven patients. In the seventh patient, there was a failure of expansion of the stent, after successful intubation of the lesion, which was in the distal transverse colon. One patient suffered from minor self-limiting abdominal pain in the first 24 h after the procedure. There was no other SEMS related morbidity or mortality. All of the successfully stented patients were discharged from the surgical ward within 3 days after the procedure. Median survival time was 4.3 months (range 3-12 months). Three patients are still alive.

CONCLUSION

The SEMS is a useful tool in managing acute bowel obstruction. Placement of colonic stents proximal to the descending colon is safe, feasible and effective.

Treatment of advanced colorectal cancer in the elderly

The recent improved survival in advanced colorectal cancer, owing in a large part to advances in adjuvant treatment, has mainly been reported in studies of younger patient groups. Less is known about outcome in elderly patients, the fastest growing cohort of cancer patients. The antimetabolite capecitabine used sequentially or concomitantly with the topoisomerase 1 inhibitor irinotecan or the DNA cross linking agent oxaliplatin are now considered to be the standard first line chemotherapy regime. The role of surgery in advanced colorectal cancer in the elderly is restricted to the relief of bowel obstruction and where appropriate resection of hepatic metastasis. Advanced chronological age has not been shown to be a contraindication to the consideration of these interventions. Indeed, chronological age alone does not provide sufficient guidance when considering the appropriateness of any palliative treatment regime in the elderly.

Palliation of colorectal cancer

Patients with advanced incurable colorectal cancer (CRC) face a grim prognosis. The goal of palliative intervention is directed at alleviating disease-related symptoms and improving quality of life. The provision of optimal palliative care for these patients is a compound and demanding process. This dilemma becomes more challenging when patients with advanced metastatic colorectal disease present with an incurable and asymptomatic primary lesion. Treatment options are numerous and include a variety of surgical and nonsurgical interventions. Most data regarding the role of surgery in palliation of CRC are from retrospective, nonrandomized case series. Surgical resection may provide good palliation of symptoms and prevent future tumor-related complications. Metal stents are also able to provide good palliative relief of obstruction and should be used when appropriate. The best palliative care will often require a multidisciplinary approach that involves input from surgical and nonsurgical teams, where treatment plans will be made in accordance with the wishes of the patient and family with a goal of decreasing morbidity and a focus on quality of life.

Colonic stenting: an alternative to surgery in the elderly

This case report describes the management of a frail older patient presenting with a rare case of an obstructing right-sided colonic lesion, combined with complex co-morbidities. The report briefly discusses use of colonic stenting in right colonic lesions as well as palliative management of colonic tumours in general.

Self-expanding metallic stents for relieving malignant colorectal obstruction: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) placement for the relief of malignant colorectal obstruction in comparison to surgical procedures through a systematic review of the literature.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Conventional therapies for relieving colorectal obstructions caused by cancer have high rates of morbidity and mortality, particularly when performed under emergency conditions, and palliative procedures resulting in colostomy creation can be a burden for patients and caregivers.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was used to retrieve relevant studies. Inclusion of papers was established through application of a predetermined protocol, independent assessment by 2 reviewers, and a final consensus decision. Eighty-eight articles, 15 of which were comparative, formed the evidence base for this review.

RESULTS

Little high-level evidence was available. However, the data suggested that SEMS placement was safe and effective in overcoming left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions, regardless of the indication for stent placement or the etiology of the obstruction. Additionally, SEMS placement had positive outcomes when compared with surgery, including overall shorter hospital stays, and a lower rate of serious adverse events. Postoperative mortality appeared comparable between the 2 interventions. Combining SEMS placement with elective surgery also appeared safer and more effective than emergency surgery, with higher rates of primary anastomosis, lower rates of colostomy, shorter hospital stays, and lower overall complication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Stenting appears to be a safe and effective addition to the armamentarium of treatment options for colorectal obstructions. However, the small sample sizes of the included studies limited the validity of the findings of this review. The results of additional comparative studies currently being undertaken will add to the certainty of the conclusions that can be drawn.

Endoluminal insertion of colonic stents

For patients with obstructing colonic tumours endoluminal stents provide an alternative to surgical decompression. Used either as permanent palliation, or as a bridge to surgery, colonic stents have been shown to be effective, safe, and cost effective.

Self-expanding metallic stents for relieving malignant colorectal obstruction: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) placement for the relief of malignant colorectal obstruction in comparison to surgical procedures through a systematic review of the literature.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Conventional therapies for relieving colorectal obstructions caused by cancer have high rates of morbidity and mortality, particularly when performed under emergency conditions, and palliative procedures resulting in colostomy creation can be a burden for patients and caregivers.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was used to retrieve relevant studies. Inclusion of papers was established through application of a predetermined protocol, independent assessment by 2 reviewers, and a final consensus decision. Eighty-eight articles, 15 of which were comparative, formed the evidence base for this review.

RESULTS

Little high-level evidence was available. However, the data suggested that SEMS placement was safe and effective in overcoming left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions, regardless of the indication for stent placement or the etiology of the obstruction. Additionally, SEMS placement had positive outcomes when compared with surgery, including overall shorter hospital stays, and a lower rate of serious adverse events. Postoperative mortality appeared comparable between the 2 interventions. Combining SEMS placement with elective surgery also appeared safer and more effective than emergency surgery, with higher rates of primary anastomosis, lower rates of colostomy, shorter hospital stays, and lower overall complication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Stenting appears to be a safe and effective addition to the armamentarium of treatment options for colorectal obstructions. However, the small sample sizes of the included studies limited the validity of the findings of this review. The results of additional comparative studies currently being undertaken will add to the certainty of the conclusions that can be drawn.

Operative colonoscopy in cancer patients

Gastrointestinal endoscopy has experienced tremendous developments in technology and equipment over the past decades. It is not only a diagnostic tool, but it also allows some interventional treatments in benign and malignant digestive diseases. Operative colonoscopy has been used to perform curative treatment of various kinds of polyps, flat and carpet-like adenomas and early colorectal carcinomas. Endoscopic palliative treatment strategies, such as the placement of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS), laser ablation, photodynamic therapy (PDT), argon plasma coagulation (APC), electrocoagulation, and injection therapy, have been proved to effectively alleviate advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) associated symptoms and maintain or improve the quality of the patient's remaining life.

Management of complications in surgery of the colon

BACKGROUND

General surgeons are frequently confronted with colorectal diseases in their daily practice, whereby colorectal cancer is the second most common malignant tumour, with almost 5000 new cases every year in Austria. The incidence of benign colon disorders requiring surgery (e.g. colon polyps, sigmoid diverticulitis) is also increasing. The first aim in colon surgery should be to avoid complications and if they occur to treat them properly.

METHODS

We basically distinguish between general and special complications. As general complications, prevention of malnutrition and support of the immune system should receive special attention. As the number of elderly patients increases, so does the risk not only of thrombembolic complications but also of critical cardiocirculatory situations, and renal and hepatic failure. Special complications depend either on the type of surgery (laparoscopic assisted, conventional open surgery) or the techniques employed (stapled, hand sutured). Handling of the tissue also plays a major role (e.g. dry versus wet pads).

RESULTS

Shortening of the postoperative stay decreases both hospital costs and the incidence of infections, meaning that minimally invasive surgery and postoperative "fast track nutrition" should be promoted. Emergency operations should be avoided (e.g. bridging through colonic stents), as morbidity and mortality are clearly increased in comparison to (semi-) elective operations. During the operation itself, new equipment and techniques (such as Ultracision®, Ligasure®) as well as a well coordinated team help to reduce complications and duration of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

To avoid is better than to repair. If complications do occur, appropriate surgical and intensive - care measures should be taken immediately.

Colonic stenting: technique, technology, and outcomes for malignant and benign disease

Self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) have gained acceptance for use in the gastrointestinal tract to relieve malignant lumenal obstruction. In the colon, SEMS are used to avoid permanent or temporary colostomy during palliation and as a bridge to surgery for left-sided colonic obstruction. Limited data exist on their use for benign disease. This article reviews the latest in stent technology and the outcomes after their placement for benign and malignant disease.