Colonic endolumenal stenting devices and elective surgery versus emergency subtotal/total colectomy in the management of malignant obstructed left colon carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, left-sided acute bowel obstruction is treated by a staged procedure because immediate resection and anastomosis in a massive distended and unprepared colon carries a high complication rate. Total abdominal colectomy is a one-stage procedure that will remove synchronous proximal neoplasms, reduce the risk of subsequent metachronous tumor, and avoid stoma. Colorectal stents are being used for palliation and as a bridge to surgery in obstructing colorectal carcinoma, making elective surgery straightforward, enabling easily mobilization and resection of the colon with a possible trend toward reduction in postoperative complication rates compared to emergency surgery. The purpose of this work was to compare the procedures of endoscopic stenting followed by elective colectomy versus total abdominal colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis in the management of acute obstructed carcinoma of the left colon as regards feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes

METHODS

From January 2009 through May 2012, 60 patients were randomized to either emergency stenting followed by elective resection (ESER group) or total abdominal colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis (TACIR group).

RESULTS

Twenty nine patients (96.7 %) had successful stenting and underwent elective surgery 7-10 days later (ESER group). Postoperative complications were encountered in four patients in the ESER group compared to 15 patients in the TACIR group (p = 0.012). Anastomotic leakage was encountered in one patient (3.3 %) in the TACIR group. There were no operative mortalities in the present study. Within the first three postoperative months, the TACIR group patients had significantly more frequent bowel motions per day compared to the ESER group patients although (p = 0.013). In both study groups, the follow-up duration ranged from 6 to 40 months with a median of 18 months. Recurrent disease was encountered in five patients (17.2 %) in the ESER group compared to four patients (13.3 %) in the TACIR group (p = 0.228).

CONCLUSION

Both techniques are feasible, safe, and produce comparable oncological outcomes. However, endoscopic stenting followed by elective resection was associated with significantly less postoperative complications and bowel motions per day.

Management of intrahepatic stones: the role of subcutaneous hepaticojejunal access loop. A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with intrahepatic stones usually present with recurrent cholangitis, biliary sepsis and intrahepatic abscesses, may develop liver atrophy and may progress to cholangiocarcinoma. Treatment of intrahepatic stones is difficult and the disease progresses in most patients even after adequate treatment. Surgical removal of stones has been the standard management but residual stones and stone recurrence occur frequently whatever the technique. Because of the need for repeated biliary instrumentation, long-term access routes involving percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy (PTCSL), hepaticocutaneousjejunostomy (HCJ) and subparietal hepaticojejunal access loop to permit stone retrieval or stricture dilatation have been developed.

PURPOSE

The aim of this work was to evaluate the outcome of subcutaneous hepaticojejunal access loop in the management of intrahepatic stones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2009 and January 2013, 42 patients with intrahepatic stones underwent surgical treatment at the Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, Main Alexandria University Hospital. Demographic data, details of operative findings, follow up details, and treatment of recurrent stones were analyzed. After approval of local ethics committee, all patients included in the study were informed well about the procedure and an informed written consent was obtained from every patient before carrying the procedure.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients (17 males and 25 females) with intrahepatic stones underwent surgery with construction of a subcutaneous hepaticojejunal access loop. Stones were confined to the left lobe in 25 patients, the right lobe in 3 patients and bilobar in 14 patients. Associated extrahepatic stones were found in 33 patients. Twenty-two patients had associated intrahepatic duct strictures. Five patients with atrophy of segments II and III underwent hepatic resection at the time of access loop formation. The mean operation time was 4.9 h and mean blood loss was 440 mL. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 10 days. Wound infection was the commonest complication, occurring in 5 (12%) patients. There were no specific complications attributable to the construction of the access loop. The subcutaneous access loop was used to gain access to the biliary tree in 28 patients with residual or recurrent stones. A total of 55 procedures (range 1-5) were attempted with successful access achieved in all cases and successful stone clearance in 21 of the 28 patients, and all of them were symptom free for at least 12 months after the last procedure. Partial stone clearance was achieved in the remaining seven patients. These seven patients had different degrees of biliary strictures.

CONCLUSION

The subcutaneous access loop offers the advantage of permanent access for the successful management of retained or re-formed intrahepatic stones with minimal morbidity since it permitted easy access to intrahepatic ducts using the conventional forward-viewing endoscope or the choledochoscope, without the additional morbidity of a biliary-cutaneous fistula or transhepatic access.