Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for acute obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective study

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.

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 efficacy of self-expandable metallic stents in colorectal obstructions caused by extracolonic malignancy and colorectal cancer

The current study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of self-expandable metallic stent placement among patients with extracolonic malignancy and those with colorectal cancer. Patient information, technical and clinical success rates and complication rates were compared between patients with colorectal cancer and extracolonic malignancy. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the time elapsed before the onset of complications. Risk factors for re-obstruction in patients with self-expandable metallic stents were evaluated by multivariate analysis. A total of 68 patients who underwent self-expandable metallic stent placement at Saiseikai Niigata Hospital between January 2012 and September 2019 were included. The clinical success rate was significantly different between the colorectal cancer (96.6%) and extracolonic malignancy (66.7%) groups (P=0.01). The incidence of complications was significantly higher in the extracolonic malignancy group (66.7%) than in the colorectal cancer group (25.4%; P=0.02). Additionally, the time elapsed before the onset of complications was shorter in the extracolonic malignancy group than in the colorectal cancer group (P=0.0008). Risk factors for re-obstruction were higher in the extracolonic malignancy group [odds ratio, 7.76 (1.02-57.2)] than in the palliative stent placement group [odds ratio, 5.45 (1.01-29.5); P=0.04]. In extracolonic malignancy, self-expandable metallic stent placement was associated with lower clinical success rates and increased risk of complications. The time elapsed before the onset of complications was short, and extracolonic malignancy was a risk factor for re-obstruction, suggesting that the placement of self-expandable metallic stents for malignant colorectal obstruction in extracolonic malignancy is not optimal.