Obstructive Left-sided Colorectal Cancer Research Articles

A Bridge to Curative Surgery for Obstructive Colorectal Cancer: Self-expandable Metallic Stent Versus Decompression Tube.

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is becoming the standard bridge-to-surgery (BTS) strategy for potentially curable left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC). The study objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of SEMS placement as a BTS strategy for both right- and left-sided OCRC. We retrospectively compared the short- and long-term outcomes of patients with OCRC who underwent placement of a SEMS versus a trans-nasal/anal decompression tube (DCT). The cohort comprised 57 patients with stage II/III right-sided OCRC (DCT, n=20; SEMS, n=8) or left-sided OCRC (DCT, n=9; SEMS, n=20). The short-term outcomes were the incidence of postoperative complications, rate of laparoscopic surgery, rate of stoma construction, and postoperative hospital stay; long-term outcomes were the 3-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). The SEMS group had a higher rate of laparoscopic surgery (85.7% vs. 6.9%, p<0.001), lower rate of stoma construction (10.7% vs. 34.5%, p=0.03), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (14 vs. 17 days, p=0.04) than the DCT group. Both groups had a similar incidence of postoperative complications. The 3-year OS and RFS were also similar in the DCT and SEMS groups for both right-sided OCRC (OS, 75.0% vs. 87.5%, HR=1.51, 95% CI=0.22-10.25, p=0.7; RFS, 65.0% vs. 50.0%, HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.28-3.36, p=0.9) and left-sided OCRC (OS, 88.8% vs. 90.0%, HR=1.19, 95% CI=0.10-14.29, p=0.9; RFS, 77.8% vs. 85.0%, HR=1.03, 95% CI=0.16-6.5, p=0.9). SEMS placement is a reasonable BTS strategy for left- and right-sided OCRC that achieves comparable short- and long-term outcomes to DCT insertion.

Safety of early surgery after self-expandable metallic stenting for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer.

Self-expanding metallic stenting (SEMS) is usual for the temporary resolution of obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (CRC) as a bridge to elective surgery. However, there is no consensus regarding adequate time intervals from stenting to radical surgery. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal time interval that results in favorable short- and long-term outcomes. Data on patients with obstructive left-sided CRC who underwent elective radical surgery after clinically successful SEMS deployment in five tertiary referral hospitals from 2004 to 2016 were analyzed, retrospectively. An inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analysis was used to minimize bias. Postoperative short- and long-term outcomes were compared between two groups: an early surgery (within 8days) group and delayed surgery (after 8days) group. Of 311 patients, 148 (47.6%) underwent early and 163 (52.4%) underwent delayed surgery. The median surgery interval was 9.0days. After adjustment, the groups had similar patient and tumor characteristics. In terms of short-term outcomes, there was no difference in hospitalization length or postoperative complications. No deaths were observed. With a median follow-up of 71.0months, no significant difference was observed between the groups in 5-year overall survival (early vs. delayed surgery: 79.6% vs. 71.3%, P = 0.370) and 5-year disease-free survival (early vs. delayed surgery: 59.1% vs. 60.4%, P = 0.970). In obstructive left-sided CRC, the time interval between SEMS and radical surgery did not significantly influence short- and long-term outcomes. Therefore, early surgery after SEMS could be suggested if there is no reason to postpone surgery for preoperative medical optimization.

Colonic stent for bridge to surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: A review of the literature after 2020

It has been found that 8%-29% of colorectal cancers are obstructive. The use of "stent as bridge to surgery" is one of the most debated topics in obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer management. The endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent as bridge to surgery (BTS) could turn an emergency surgery to an elective one, increasing the number of primary anastomoses instead of stoma and facilitating the laparoscopic approach instead of an open one. However, in recent years the possible risk of perforations and microperforations facilitating cancer spread related to the use of self-expanding metallic stent for BTS has been highlighted. Therefore, despite the useful short-term outcomes related to BTS, the recent literature has focused on long-term outcomes investigating the disease-free survival, the recurrence rate and the overall survival. Due to discordant data, international guidelines are still conflicting, and the debate is still open. There is not agreement about using self-expanding metallic stent for BTS as the gold standard.

Laparoscopic resection after self-expanding stent insertion for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer: Clinicopathological features and outcomes

Laparoscopic resection for obstructive colon cancer (CC) after insertion of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) is reportedly difficult. However, this has not yet been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, we investigated the influence of SEMS insertion on laparoscopic resection. This retrospective comparative study included 87 patients with obstructive left-sided CC (December 2011-December 2019). Patients were assigned to two groups based on elective laparoscopic surgery for (1) obstructive CC necessitating emergent decompression with SEMS insertion (SEMS group) and (2) obstructive CC without emergent decompression (control group). The SEMS group had a longer operation time (283.3 ± 79.3 min vs 222.2 ± 79.4 min, P = 0.002) and greater blood loss (204.8 ± 417.6 mL vs 53.7 ± 166.1 mL, P = 0.029) on univariate analysis; however, in multiple linear regression analysis, SEMS was not an independent risk factor for both operation time (Δ operation time 25.5 min: P = 0.19) and blood loss (Δ blood loss 33.6 mL: P = 0.58). The complication rate based on Clavien-Dindo grade II did not differ significantly (17% vs 20%, P = 1.00), whereas the rates of conversion to laparotomy (17% vs 2%, P = 0.016) and stoma creation (26% vs 2%, P = 0.001) were higher in the SEMS group. In oncological outcomes, there was no intergroup difference in the 5-year disease-free survival (80.0% vs 72.2%, P = 0.76) and overall survival (100% vs 86.3%, P = 0.25). Laparoscopic surgery after SEMS for left-sided CC is demanding due to higher conversion rates to open surgery. However, this study also revealed that it is as safe as laparoscopic surgery for cases without SEMS because of comparable complication rate and long-term outcomes.

Outcomes of Patients with Left-Sided Obstructive Colorectal Cancer: Comparison between Self-Expandable Metallic Stent and Other Treatment Methods

Introduction: This multi-institutional retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement for patients with left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC). Methods: Overall, 520 consecutive patients who received treatment for OCRC were enrolled. Of these, the data of 253 patients who underwent primary tumour resection for left-sided OCRC were reviewed. The short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the SEMS group and other three groups: transanal decompression tube (TaDT), decompressing stoma (DS), and emergency resection (ER). Results: The SEMS group had a higher frequency of laparoscopic surgery (p < 0.001), lesser frequency of postoperative stoma (p < 0.001), and more dissected lymph nodes (p < 0.001) than the other groups. Moreover, the SEMS group had shorter postoperative hospital stays than the TaDT, DS, and ER groups (p = 0.005, p = 0.037, and p < 0.001, respectively). The Kaplan-Meier survival curves of recurrence-free survival and overall survival did not differ significantly between the SEMS group and the other three groups in patients with stage II and III diseases. Discussion/Conclusion: Elective surgery after SEMS placement may improve short-term outcomes compared to other treatment strategies, with similar long-term outcomes.

Prognostic factors of patients with left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer: post hoc analysis of a retrospective multicenter study by the Japan Colonic Stent Safe Procedure Research Group

BackgroundThere are many reports on the choice of treatment for and prognosis of left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer; however, few studies have focused on the prognostic factors of left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer. Therefore, we analyzed the prognostic factors using a post hoc analysis of a retrospective multicenter study in Japan.MethodsA total of 301 patients were enrolled in this study to investigate the prognostic factors for relapse-free survival. The relationships between sex, age, decompression for bridge to surgery, depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis, postoperative complications, adjuvant chemotherapy, carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19-9, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and relapse-free survival were examined.ResultsNo change in the decompression method, T3 cancer, negative postoperative complications (grades 0–1 of Clavien-Dindo classification), and adjuvant chemotherapy during Stage III indicated a significantly better prognosis in a Cox univariate analysis. Lymph node metastasis was not selected as a prognostic factor. Excluding patients with <12 harvested lymph nodes (possible stage migration), lymph node metastasis was determined as a prognostic factor. In a Cox multivariate analysis, change in the decompression method, depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis (excluding N0 cases with <12 harvested lymph nodes), and adjuvant chemotherapy were prognostic factors.ConclusionsSimilar to those in nonobstructive colorectal cancer, depth of invasion and lymph node metastasis were prognostic factors in left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer, and patients with <12 dissected lymph nodes experienced stage migration. Stage migration may result in disadvantages, such as not being able to receive adjuvant chemotherapy.

Short- and long-term outcomes of a self-expandable metallic stent versus a transanal decompression tube for pathological stage II and III left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective observational study.

Few studies have investigated the long-term oncological outcomes of the self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC). We conducted this study to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of the SEMS with those of the traditional transanal decompression tube (TDT) in patients with stage II and III left-sided OCRC. The subjects of this retrospective study were 78 patients with pathological stage II and III left-sided OCRC who underwent radical surgery after SEMS or TDT placement, between April, 2005 and September, 2019. We compared perioperative data, including decompression success rates and 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS), between the SEMS and TDT groups. A SEMS was placed in 60 (76.9%) patients and a TDT was placed in 18 (23.1%) patients, achieving a clinical success rate of decompression of 98.3% in the SEMS group and 77.8% in the TDT group (P = 0.009). The 3-year RFS of the overall cohort was better in the SEMS group than in the TDT group (74.9% vs. 40.9%, respectively; P = 0.003). Decompression using a SEMS as the BTS may improve oncological outcomes over those achieved by a TDT in patients with left-sided stage II and III OCRC.

Oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery after metallic stent insertion for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer: a multicenter comparative study.

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) are used as a bridge to surgery in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. However, the role of laparoscopic resection after successful stent deployment is not well established. We aimed to compare the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open surgery after successful colonic stent deployment in patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer. In this multicenter study, 179 (97 laparoscopy, 82 open surgery) patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer who underwent radical resection with curative intent after successful stent deployment were retrospectively reviewed. To minimize bias, we used inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analysis. The short- and long-term outcomes between the groups were compared. Both groups had similar demographic and tumor characteristics. The operation time was longer, but the degree of blood loss was lower in the laparoscopy than in the open surgery group. There were nine (9.3%) open conversions. After adjustment, the groups showed similar patient and tumor characteristics. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (laparoscopic vs open: 68.7% vs 48.5%, p = 0.230) and overall survival (OS) (laparoscopic vs open: 79.1% vs 69.0%, p = 0.200) estimates did not differ significantly across a median follow-up duration of 50.5months. Advanced stage disease (DFS: hazard ratio [HR] 1.825, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.072-3.107; OS: HR 2.441, 95% CI 1.216-4.903) and post-operative chemotherapy omission (DFS: HR 2.529, 95% CI 1.481-4.319; OS: HR 2.666, 95% CI 1.370-5.191) were associated with relatively worse long-term outcomes. Stent insertion followed by laparoscopy with curative intent is safe and feasible; the addition of post-operative chemotherapy should be considered after successful treatment.

Comparison of survival and perioperative outcome of the colonic stent and the transanal decompression tube placement and emergency surgery for left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer: a retrospective multi-center observational study \u201cThe CODOMO study\u201d

PurposeAdvances in endoscopic technology have led to the reevaluation of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) in patients with obstructive colorectal cancer. In Japan, after inclusion of SEMS placement as a BTS in the medical insurance coverage in 2012, this procedure has been increasingly performed. However, a transanal decompression tube (TADT) placement has been used as a BTS. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the optimal strategy for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (OLCRC) by comparing SEMS and TADT placement with emergency surgery.MethodsWe included 301 patients with stage II and III OLCRC from 27 institutions. The study patients were divided into Surgery group (emergency surgery, n = 103), SEMS group (BTS by SEMS, n = 113), and TADT group (BTS by TADT, n = 85). We compared the survival and perioperative outcomes of patients in the Surgery group as a standard treatment with those in the SEMS and TADT groups.ResultsThe 3-year relapse-free survival rate in patients in the Surgery group was 74.8%, while that in patients in the SEMS group and TADT group were 69.0% (p = 0.39) and 55.3% (p = 0.006), respectively. The technical success rate was not statistically different, but the clinical success rate was significantly higher in the SEMS group than in the TADT group (p = 0.0040). With regard to postoperative complications after curative surgery, the SEMS group had significantly lower of complications (≥ grade 2) than the Surgery group (p = 0.022).ConclusionPatients who underwent SEMS placement for OLCRC had similar oncological outcomes to patients who underwent emergency surgery.

Safety evaluation of preoperative stent insertion and clinical analysis on comparison of outcomes between preoperative stent insertion and emergency surgery in the treatment of obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer.

Objective:To evaluate the safety of preoperative stent insertion and compare the short- and long-term outcomes between preoperative stent insertion and emergency surgery in the treatment of obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer.Methods:The clinical data of 302 patients who underwent surgery for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer from January 2009 to May 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into two groups according to whether to receive stenting for the success rate and complications of stent insertion in colonic lumen by colonoscope, and the number of cases of primary resection and anastomosis, and short-term complications such as incision infection, anastomotic leakage, spleen tear and abdominal abscess as well as mortality and survival rate during hospitalization were compared.Results:The success rate of endoscopic nitinol alloy memorial stent insertion in colonic lumen was 97.62%, and the overall incidence of complications was 14.5%, of which the incidence of serious complications (perforation, stent migration) was 4.76%. The primary anastomosis rate was significantly higher in the stent insertion group (85.71%) than that in the emergency surgery group (36.24%). The overall complication rate in the stent insertion group (14 cases) was significantly lower than that in the emergency surgery group (102 cases). There was no significant difference between survival curves (P>0.05).Conclusion:Preoperative stent insertion in colonic lumen by colonoscope for decompression is an ideal auxiliary method in the treatment of obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer, and may increase primary anastomosis rate, avoid neostomy, reduce short-term complications, and improve the long-term survival compared to emergency surgery.

Do Self-Expanding Metal Stents as a Bridge to Surgery Benefit All Patients with Obstructive Left-Side Colorectal Cancers?

Background Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been increasingly used in patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (OLCC); however, stent-specific complications (e.g., perforations) might worsen the long-term survival outcome. Strict indication needed to be identified to confirm the benefit subgroups. This study was designed to explore the indication for emergency surgery (ES) and SEMS in patients with OLCC and to suggest optimal strategies for individuals. Methods After propensity score matching, 36 pairs were included. Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes (3-year overall survival (OS) and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS)) were compared between the ES and SEMS groups. Independent risk factors were evaluated among subgroups. Stratification survival analysis was performed to identify subgroups that would benefit from SEMS placement or ES. Results The perioperative outcomes were similar between the SEMS and ES groups. The 3-year OS was comparable between the SEMS (73.5%) and ES (60.0%) groups, and the 3-year DFS in the SEMS group (69.7%) was similar to that in the ES group (57.1%). The pT stage was an independent risk factor for 3-year DFS (p = 0.014) and 3-year OS (p = 0.010) in the SEMS group. The comorbidity status (p = 0.049) independently affected 3-year DFS in the ES group. The 3-year OS rate was influenced by the cM stage (p = 0.003). Patients with non-pT4 stages in the SEMS group showed obviously better 3-year OS (95.0%) than the other subgroups. The 3-year OS rate was 36.4% in the ES group when patients had a worse comorbidity status than their counterparts. Conclusion SEMS might be preferred for patients of obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer in the “high-operative risk group” with existing comorbidities or those without locally advanced invasion, such as the non-pT4-stage status.

The Role of Stents as Bridge to Surgery for Acute Left-Sided Obstructive Colorectal Cancer: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

The role of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery for acute left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer has remained controversial. To study the efficacy of this approach, we performed a meta-analysis at the gastrointestinal surgery center of Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital (Eastern Hospital). Two PubMed and science-direct electronic databases were searched up to December 30, 2017. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We selected 8 RCTs articles, which included 497 cases. The directly stoma rates were significantly lower in the stent group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.46, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] = 0.30-0.70, p = 0.0003). The successful primary anastomosis rates were significantly higher in the stent group (OR = 2.29, 95% CIs = 1.52-3.45, p < 0.0001). The post-procedural complication rates were significantly lower in the stent group (OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.18-0.82, p = 0.01). However, tumor recurrence rates were significantly higher in the stent group (OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.09-2.93, p = 0.02). Conclusions This meta-analysis confirms that SEMS placement could reduce direct stoma rate and increases the successful primary anastomosis rate; however, it was associated with a seemingly higher incidence of tumor recurrence.

Benefits of using a self-expandable metallic stent as a bridge to surgery for right- and left-sided obstructive colorectal cancers.

To assess the benefit of placing a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC) according to the tumor site. The subjects of this retrospective multicenter cohort study were 201 patients with OCRC, but without initial bowel perforation, who were treated either with a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (n = 109) or with primary surgery (PS; n = 92) between 2014 and 2016. The cohort consisted of 68 patients with right-sided and 133 left-sided OCRC. We evaluated the short-term surgical outcomes for each side. The SEMS group of patients with left-sided OCRC had significantly higher rates of primary resection, primary resection with anastomosis, stoma-free surgery, and laparoscopic surgery than the PS group of patients with left-sided OCRC. In contrast, the SEMS group of patients with right-sided OCRC had only a significantly higher rate of laparoscopic surgery than the PS group of patients with right-sided OCRC, but they had a longer overall hospital stay. There were no significant differences between the two treatment groups in the rates of morbidity or mortality, for either right-sided or left-sided OCRC. The benefit of a SEMS as a bridge to surgery may be less for right-sided than for left-sided obstructions in colon cancer patients.

Second-look surgery following Hartmann's procedure for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer.

The aim of the present study was to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing second-look surgery following Hartmann's procedure for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (LSCC). All patients included in the present study had undergone radical surgery with Hartmann's procedure for obstructive LSCC. Adjuvant chemotherapy was recommended for all patients, and patients with no signs of recurrence following six months of surveillance were planned to undergo second-look surgery. The aim of second-look surgery was early detection of local recurrence and determination of the efficacy of laparoscopic Hartmann procedure reversal. A total of 15 patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer were included in the study. Three patients exhibited peritoneal dissemination at the time of laparoscopic Hartmann procedure reversal and underwent partial peritonectomy. Following adjuvant chemotherapy treatment, laparoscopic Hartmann procedure reversal was performed in all patients. However, two patients underwent colo-anal anastomosis, and two patients underwent right-sided colon or ileum reconstruction. Regarding the oncological outcomes, two of three patients in whom peritoneal dissemination was identified during laparoscopic Hartmann procedure reversal were eventually in remission following the initial surgery and the second-look surgery with partial peritonectomy. Favorable long-term outcomes were observed in 12/15 patients due to no recurrence, which may be due to the surgical techniques used and the timing of the second-look surgery following Hartmann's procedure for the treatment of obstructive LSCC.

Treatment strategy for obstructive colorectal cancer.

741 Background: The number of patients with colorectal cancer has been increasing in all over the world. Approximately 10 percent of CRC is complicated by obstructive symptoms at the time of their diagnosis. Obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC) could be a fatal because of perforation peritonitis or sepsis, and it is necessary to immediate treatment. The aim of this study was to explore the treatment strategies for patients with OCRC. Methods: Between April 2008 and December 2014, six hundred seventy two patients underwent surgery in out institute. The numbers of OCRC were 82 cases (12.2%). We evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of our treatments for OCRC. Results: Treatment strategies were adopted according to the location of CRC. For patients with right-sided OCRC, we performed one-stage surgery. They underwent primary tumor resection and anastomosis at the same time. For left-sided OCRC, patients were treated by two-stage surgery. At first, they were managed by decompression of their colon with colostomy or transanal ileus tube, and then, underwent colectomy. The cases of right-side OCRC were 23 cases, and all of them underwent one-stage surgery. We could find no cases of anastomotic leakage in these cases. The cases of left-side OCRC were 59 cases, and 50 patients (86%) of them were treated two-stage surgery. Stage IV OCRC patients tended to undergo colostomy only. Conclusions: One-stage surgery was feasible for patients with right-sided OCRC. For left-sided OCRC cases, two-stage surgery was effective to prevent perioperative complications.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open surgery in a three-stage operation for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer

BackgroundTreatment for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer (OLCC) typically consists of a three-staged procedure. During the first stage, the obstruction is managed with diversion colostomy. Traditionally in the second stage, we perform open resection for the primary tumor. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of laparoscopic resection of OLCC with diversion colostomy in terms of operative results and short-term outcomes. MethodsA total of 20 patients underwent laparoscopic resection for OLCC (study group), 48 patients underwent open resection for OLCC (control group 1), and 53 patients underwent laparoscopic resection for non-OLCC (control group 2). Afterwards, results from the procedures were obtained and clinical data were analyzed. ResultsThe operative time was significantly longer in the study group than in the control group 1 (153 minutes vs. 126 minutes, p = 0.041), and the length of hospitalization was shorter in the study group than in the control group 1 (5.3 days vs. 7.6 days, p = 0.032). Regarding the operative results and short-term outcomes, there were no significant differences between the study group and control group 2. Colostomy retraction was a specific morbidity which occurred in two patients of the study group. ConclusionLaparoscopic resection of OLCC with diversion colostomy is feasible. Abdominal cavity adhesion is only limited. We strongly recommend that laparoscopic resection should be performed at least 2 weeks after diversion colostomy, and the plastic rod should be left in place during the pneumoperitoneum to reduce the risk of colostomy retraction.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery after insertion of self-expandable metallic stent as a “bridge to surgery” for left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer.

643 Background: Safety and validity of performing laparoscopic surgery after preoperative lavege using the self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) for left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer were examined. We evaluated the short-term outcome of SEMS insertion compared with laparoscopic surgery without SEMS. Methods: Patients with left-sided colorectal cancer treated by either laparoscopic surgery with stent placement (n = 8) or laparoscopic surgery only (n = 42) in our hospital between April, 2012 and January, 2013 were registered. Short-term outcomes were compared with the two groups about patient characteristics (sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status, body mass index, prior abdominal surgery), pathological data of patients (tumor location, size of tumor , tumor differentiation, number of harvested lymph nodes, pTNM classification, UICC pathological stage), and operative and post operative results (procedures, conversion, operative time, blood loss, morbidity, solid food intake, postoperative hospital stay, total hospital stay). Results: Except for tumor size in the patient characteristic parameters, there were no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Conversion rate to laparotomy was higher in the stent group (2 versus 1, p = 0.013). There was no difference in operation time, blood loss and postoperative complications between the two groups. Conclusions: Although the long-term oncological result requires further investigation, laparoscopic surgery after self-expandable metallic stent is a safe and feasible treatment as a “brige to surgery” for left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer.

Higher rate of perineural invasion in stent–laparoscopic approach in comparison to emergent open resection for obstructing left-sided colon cancer

We compared oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic surgery following self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) insertion with one-stage emergency surgical treatment of obstructive left-sided colon and rectal cancers. From April 1996 to October 2007, 95 consecutive patients with left-sided obstructive colorectal cancers were included: 25 underwent preoperative stenting and elective laparoscopic surgery (SLAP) and 70 underwent emergency open surgery with intraoperative colon lavage (OLAV). Long-term oncologic outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics of patients between groups. Perineural invasion of the primary tumor was more frequent with SLAP (76 vs. 51.4 %, p = 0.033). The median follow-up was 51 months (range, 4-139 months). There were no significant differences between groups in 5-year overall survival rates (SLAP vs. OLAV, 67.2 vs. 61.6 %, p = 0.385). Five-year disease-free survival rates were also similar between groups (SLAP vs. OLAV, 61.2 vs. 60.0 %, p = 0.932). Laparoscopic surgery after SEMS was feasible and safe for patients with obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer, and oncologic outcomes were comparable to emergency open surgery with intraoperative colon lavage. These results support the continued use of SLAP in this setting. Further large-scale study is needed to investigate any clinical impact attached to the higher rates of perineural invasion observed in SLAP.

Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

The use of a colonic stent as a bridge to surgery aims to provide patients with elective one-stage surgical resection while reducing stoma creation and postoperative complications. This study used meta-analytic techniques to compare the outcomes of stent use as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery in the management of obstructive colorectal cancer. A literature search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane controlled trials registry, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database was performed on all studies comparing stent as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer. A meta-analysis of the included studies was carried out to identify the differences in outcomes between the two procedures. Eight studies matched the criteria for inclusion and reported on the outcomes of 601 patients, of whom 232 (38.6%) underwent stent insertion and 369 (61.4%) underwent emergency surgery. Fewer patients in the stent group needed intensive care (risk ratio [RR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.93; p=0.03) and stoma creation (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.99; p=0.04). The primary anastomosis rate in the stent group was higher (RR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.21-2.16; p=0.001). Overall complications (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24-0.71; p=0.001), including anastomotic leakage (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.69; p=0.004), were reduced by stent insertion. Stent placement before elective surgery did not adversely affect mortality and long-term survival. The use of a stent as a bridge to surgery for obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer could increase the chance of primary anastomosis and reduce the need for stoma creation and postprocedural complications. Stent insertion before subsequent surgery has no effect on perioperative mortality and long-term survival.

Colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicentre randomised trial

Colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery is an alternative for emergency surgery in patients with acute malignant colonic obstruction, but its benefits are uncertain. We aimed to establish whether colonic stenting has better health outcomes than does emergency surgery. Patients with acute obstructive left-sided colorectal cancer were enrolled from 25 hospitals in the Netherlands and randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery or emergency surgery. The randomisation sequence was computer generated with permuted blocks and was stratified by centre; treatment allocation was concealed by use of a web-based application. Investigators and patients were unmasked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was mean global health status during a 6-month follow-up, which was assessed with the QL2 subscale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN46462267. Between March 9, 2007, and Aug 27, 2009, 98 patients were assigned to receive colonic stenting (n=47 patients) or emergency surgery (n=51). Two successive interim analyses showed increased 30-day morbidity in the colonic stenting group, with an absolute risk increase of 0.19 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.41) in analysis of the first 60 patients (14 of 28 patients receiving colonic stenting vs 10 of 32 receiving emergency surgery), and an absolute risk increase of 0.19 (-0.01 to 0.37) in analysis of the first 90 patients (23 of 47 patients vs 13 of 43). In accordance with the advice of the data safety monitoring committee, the study was suspended on Sept 18, 2009, and ended on March 12, 2010. At the final analysis of 98 patients, mean global health status during follow-up was 63.0 (SD 23.8) in the colonic stenting group and 61.4 (SD 21.9) in the emergency surgery group; after adjustment for baseline values, mean global health status did not differ between treatment groups (-4.7, 95% CI -14.8 to 5.5, p=0.36). No difference was recorded between treatment groups in 30-day mortality (absolute risk difference -0.01, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.12, p=0.89), overall mortality (-0.02, -0.17 to 0.14, p=0.84), morbidity (-0.08, -0.27 to 0.11, p=0.43), and stoma rates at latest follow-up (0.09, -0.10 to 0.27, p=0.35). However, the emergency surgery group had an increased stoma rate directly after initial intervention (0.23, 0.04 to 0.40, p=0.016) and a reduced frequency of stoma-related problems (between-group difference -12.0, -23.7 to -0.2, p=0.046). The most common serious adverse events were abscess (three in the colonic stenting group vs four in the emergency surgery group), perforations (six vs none), and anastomotic leakage (five vs one), and the most common adverse events were pneumonia (three vs one) and wound infection (one vs three). Colonic stenting has no decisive clinical advantages to emergency surgery. It could be used as an alternative treatment in as yet undefined subsets of patients, although with caution because of concerns about tumour spread caused by perforations. None.