Search

Colonic melanoma is a rarely detected aetiology of small bowel obstruction. This is a case of a male in his 80s with a history of treated stage IIIA melanoma on his trunk 7 years prior who presented with small bowel obstruction. He underwent urgent surgical intervention, where a partial colectomy was performed. Pathology revealed a 4.6 cm melanoma causing intussusception. This case highlights the insidious nature of metastatic melanomas and discusses an uncommon location of melanoma metastasis that evaded detection until a late stage., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Colon cancer obstruction is one of the most serious conditions in colorectal surgery. However, the use of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) has made it possible to avoid emergency surgery and stoma creation, therefore enabling minimally invasive surgery and one-stage operation. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether there is an optimal interval from SEMS to surgery for the best long-term oncologic outcomes., Methods: Obstructive colon cancer patients treated with SEMS insertion and received surgery were included in the study. Patient data were retrospectively reviewed in prospectively collected data. Using the ROC curve, the optimal interval to surgery after SEMS insertion was 10 days; the patients were divided into the early surgery group (≤10 days, ES) and the late surgery group (>10 days, LS). Factors contributing to the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed., Results: 83 patients were included in this study. Eight patients (9.6 %) had SEMS insertion failure, with 3 perforations and 5 failed expansions. There were no differences between the ES group and the LS group in terms of pathologic characteristics, incidence of stoma creation, and adjuvant chemotherapy. Twenty-six patients (31.3 %) had recurrences; local (Arnarson et al., 2023) [6], peritoneal seeding (Lee et al., 2013) [8], liver (Ho et al., 2017) [11], lung [7], bone (van Hooft et al., 2020) [2], and abdominal wall metastasis (Chen and Sheen-Chen, 2000) [1]. The 5-year DFS rate was significantly better in the ES group than the LS group (74.3 % vs. 55.01 %; p = 0.0394). The 5-year OS was slightly better in the ES group than the LS group (76.11 % vs. 58.75 %; p = 0.0901). In univariable analysis, the ES group showed a lower risk of recurrence than the LS group (OR: 0.447 [0.204-0.984], p = 0.0455), but this was not reproduced in the multivariable analysis., Conclusion: This study has shown that the long-term oncologic outcomes were better in patients who received surgery after SEMS within 10 days. Hence, we propose with caution that elective surgery might be suggested to take place within 10 days from SEMS insertion for better oncologic outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal treatment strategy for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction remains controversial. Emergency colonic resection has been the standard of care; however, self-expanding metallic stenting as a bridge to surgery may offer short-term advantages, although oncological concerns exist. Decompressing stoma may provide a valid alternative, with limited evidence., Objective: To perform a systematic review and Bayesian arm random-effects model network meta-analysis comparing the approaches for management of malignant left-sided colonic obstruction., Data Sources: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases was conducted from inception to August 22, 2023., Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies., Interventions: Emergency colonic resection, self-expanding metallic stent, and decompressing stoma., Main Outcome Measures: Oncologic efficacy, morbidity, successful minimally invasive surgery, primary anastomosis, and permanent stoma rates., Results: Nineteen of 5225 articles identified met our inclusion criteria. Stenting (risk ratio 0.57; 95% credible interval, 0.33-0.79) and decompressing stomas (risk ratio 0.46, 95% credible interval: 0.18-0.92) resulted in a significant reduction in the permanent stoma rate. Stenting facilitated minimally invasive surgery more frequently (risk ratio 4.10; 95% credible interval, 1.45-13.13) and had lower overall morbidity (risk ratio 0.58; 95% credible interval, 0.35-0.86). A pairwise analysis of primary anastomosis rates showed increased stenting (risk ratio 1.40; 95% credible interval, 1.31-1.49) compared with emergency resection. There was a significant decrease in the 90-day mortality with stenting (risk ratio 0.63; 95% credible interval, 0.41-0.95) compared with resection. There were no differences in disease-free and overall survival rates, respectively., Limitations: There is a lack of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matching data comparing short-term and long-term outcomes for diverting stomas compared to self-expanding metallic stents. Two trials compared self-expanding metallic stents and diverting stomas in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction., Conclusions: This study provides high-level evidence that a bridge-to-surgery strategy is safe for the management of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction and may facilitate minimally invasive surgery, increase primary anastomosis rates, and reduce permanent stoma rates and postoperative morbidity compared with emergency colonic resection., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2024.)

Background: For relief of bowel obstruction in left-sided obstructive colon cancer (LSOCC), a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) or decompressing stoma (DS) can be placed. In a curative setting, these two strategies have been extensively studied as a bridge to elective resection. Guidelines recommend SEMS as the preferred option in the palliative setting, but adherence in daily practice is unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to gain more insight into patients with LSOCC who received palliative treatment with SEMS or DS at a national level., Methods: A retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted in the Netherlands. Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) on all patients with LSOCC treated with DS or SEMS not followed by resection of the primary tumour between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, were analysed. Type of treatment (DS or SEMS) for different clinical scenarios, was the main outcome of this study, and was also evaluated over the years (2015-2019)., Results: Palliative treatment with SEMS or DS for LSOCC was performed in 1077 patients, of whom 79.2% had metastatic disease (M1). Patients without metastatic disease (M0) were older (≥ 80 years M0 67.4%, M1 25.3%, P < 0.001), had a worse clinical condition (ASA III 51.4% versus 36.37%, ASA IV-V 13.3% versus 4.0% P < 0.001) and presented with higher tumour stage (cT4 55.4% versus 33.5%, % P < 0.001). DS was performed in 91.5% of the patients and SEMS in 8.5%. The proportion of DS did not significantly differ between patients with M1 and M0 (91.8% vs. 90.2% respectively, P = 0.525). No increase in SEMS application was observed over the years, with a stable overall proportion of DS of 91-92% per year. In the multivariable analyses, ninety-day mortality and overall survival were not significantly different between SEMS and DS., Conclusions: This study revealed that DS was the primary treatment modality for palliative management of LSOCC in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2019, while the guidelines recommended SEMS as preferred treatment. For patients with LSOCC eligible for stenting in the palliative setting, SEMS placement should become more available and accessible as the preferred treatment option, to avoid a stoma in the terminal phase of life., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Traditionally, surgical treatment is recommended for right-sided colonic cancer obstruction (RCCO); however, the literature comparing surgical or non-surgical procedures is lacking., Methods: Patients included in this study were divided into two groups: one group received elective surgery after self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement, i.e., the bridge to surgery (BTS) group, and one group received emergency surgery (ES)., Results: Thirty-five patients were included in the BTS group and 60 patients underwent ES. The technical and clinical success rates for SEMS placement were 100% and 88.6%, respectively, while the short-term complication rates were 51.4% and 33.3% for the BTS and ES groups, respectively (p = 0.082). Overall, 2.9% and 3.3% of postoperative deaths occurred in the BTS and ES groups (p = 1.000). The 1-year overall survival (OS) rates were 91.4% and 88.3% (p = 0.840), 3-year OS rates were 85.7% and 81.7% (p = 0.860), and 5-year OS rates were 82.9% and 76.7% (p = 0.620) in the BTS and ES groups, respectively. No tumor recurrence was found in the BTS group but seven recurrences were found in the ES group (11.7%) [p = 0.091]. Laparoscopic surgery was chosen by 42.9% of patients in the BTS group and 26.7% of patients in the ES group (p = 0.104); however, the length of hospital stay (p = 0.001) was longer in the BTS group., Conclusions: In the two groups, no differences were found in terms of postoperative complications and mortality as well as OS. The BTS group preferred to perform laparoscopic surgery and the technical success rate of stenting was high, therefore SEMS for RCCO was considered safe and feasible., (© 2024. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Colonic lymphoma is a rare malignant gastrointestinal tumor that can be revealed by an exceptional and serious complication: intestinal obstruction. Treatment is based on surgery and chemotherapy. We here report a case of diffuse colonic large B-cell lymphoma revealed by occlusion and diagnosed based on the examination of surgical specimen in a 64-year-old man who was in complete remission after six courses of R-CHOP., Competing Interests: Les auteurs ne déclarent aucun conflit d'intérêts., (Copyright: Mohamed Zioui et al.)

72-year-old man who was diagnosed with transverse colon cancer cT3N1aM0, Stage Ⅲb, and underwent laparoscopic- assisted resection of the transverse colon. Postoperatively, the patient was discharged from the hospital after 24 days due to complications such as paralytic ileus and intra-abdominal abscess caused by prolonged intestinal congestion. On postoperative day 91, the patient developed abdominal pain and vomiting at home, and was rushed to our hospital on the same day. Abdominal CT showed that an internal hernia had formed in the mesenteric defect after resection of the transverse colon, which was suspected to have caused obstruction of the small intestine. After adequate preoperative decompression of the intestinal tract, a laparoscopic surgery was performed on the 9th day. The operative findings were that the jejunum(100- 160 cm from the Treitz ligament)had strayed into the mesenteric defect of the transverse colon, resulting in an internal hernia. After the internal hernia was repaired laparoscopically, the mesenteric defect was closed with a 3-0 V-Loc(non- absorbable). The patient had a good postoperative course and was discharged home 6 days after surgery.

Since the insurance coverage of colorectal stents for bowel obstruction due to colorectal cancer in 2012, the use of colorectal stenting for palliation has rapidly spread. We report a case of ascending colon cancer in which a colorectal stent was placed for palliation, but the stent was reimplanted due to obstruction, followed by radical resection. The patient was a 92- year-old woman who was brought to the emergency room at the age of 90 years with repeated vomiting and abdominal pain, and was diagnosed as colorectal cancer ileus caused by ascending colon cancer, and a colorectal stent was inserted. She received palliative care and had been asymptomatic for 1 year and 3 months, but due to in-stent stenosis, she had bowel obstruction and sent to emergency room, and another stent was installed. The patient had a good course, but 4 months after the second stenting, she was concerned about restenosis and referred to the department of surgery, then performed a radical resection. The indication for colorectal stents for palliative purposes should be considered on a case-by- case basis, including ADL, stage of the disease, and prognosis.

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. There are several causes of a mechanical left bowel obstructive but CRC accounts for approximately 50% of cases and in 10-30% of whom it is the presenting syndrome. In most cases, the left colon is involved. At present, the range of therapeutic alternatives in the management of obstructive left CRC in emergency conditions (primary resection vs. staged resection with applied self-expanding metallic stents) is broad, whereas internationally validated clinical recommendations in each condition are still lacking. This enormous variability affects the scientific evidence on both the immediate and long-term surgical and oncological outcomes., Methods: CROSCO-1 (Colonic Resection, Stoma or Self-expanding Metal Stents for Obstructive Left Colon Cancer) study is a national, multi-center, prospective observational study intending to compare the clinical results of all these therapeutic regimens in a cohort of patients treated for obstructive left-sided CRC., Results: The primary aim of the CROSCO-1 study is the 1-year stoma rate of patients undergoing primary emergency surgical resection (Hartmann procedure or primary resection and anastomosis) compared with patients undergoing staged resection. Secondary outcomes are 30-day and 90-day major morbidity and mortality, 1-year quality of life and the timing of chemotherapy initiation in the two groups. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies., Conclusions: The results of a large prospective cohort study which will analyze what really happens in the common clinical practice of managing patients with obstructive left CRC will have the aim of understanding which is the best strategy in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. Indeed, the CROSCO-1 study will analyze the early surgical outcomes for patients with obstructed left CRC. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies.

Introduction: Worldwide colonic cancer is the third most common cancer with up to 30% of cases presenting with large bowel obstruction. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been used as a bridge to surgery (BTS) in the treatment of this malignant obstruction. We review the outcomes of SEMS as a BTS across two high volume colorectal units., Methodology: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery was performed; outcomes were compared to previously published figures on emergency colonic resections. Inclusion criteria were adults (>18 years of age) undergoing colonic stenting for colonic obstruction with a view to elective resection. Patients undergoing stenting for palliation of symptoms were excluded., Results: 39 patients were identified across both trusts over a ten-year period. 90 day mortality following BTS was found to be 3.6% and there was an 82.1% (32/39) technical success rate. 46.4% proceeded to an elective resection which was started laparoscopically. Permanent stoma rate was observed at 14.3% for elective surgery., Conclusion: Stenting for relief of acute malignant obstruction as a bridge to surgery is a viable option in select patients. Further research is required to determine oncological safety and rate of local recurrences., (Copyright © 2024 Ulster Medical Society.)

Objectives: Stenting of malignant colon obstruction is used as a bridge to surgery or as an alternative to surgical colostomy in a palliative setting. Current guidelines recommend stent placement as the first line of treatment in colonic obstruction in both curative and palliative settings. However, it is unclear whether the location of the malignant obstruction influences the outcome of the stenting procedure. The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes of colonic stents between proximal and distal colonic strictures with regard to technical and clinical success and the risk of adverse events., Methods: A multi-center retrospective cohort was composed of patients who underwent a colonic stent placement at two tertiary hospitals between 2013 and 2021. The technical and clinical outcome, stent type used, duration of post-procedural hospital stay and complications were noted., Results: A total of 148 patients who underwent colonic stenting were identified. 41 patients underwent stent placement in the proximal colon and 107 patients underwent a distal stent placement. There was no difference in technical success (100% vs 96.3%, p  = 0.209), clinical success (97.0% vs 89.6%, p  = 0.199) or complications (24.4% vs 37.4%, p  = 0,135)., Conclusion: Technical success and clinical success rates are high and do not differ between stent locations. There is no significant difference in complication rates between proximal and distal colonic stents.

Rationale: Preoperative endoscopic intestinal stent placement can relieve the symptoms of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) pending investigations, staging, and surgery, but it is a technically challenging procedure. This paper presents a woman with MBO who successfully underwent intestinal stent implantation using a water injection device with carbon dioxide and a transparent cap., Patient Concerns: We reported a technique for endoscopic intestinal stent placement. A 60-year-old female patient was admitted for abdominal pain and poor bowel movement for 10 days. Computed tomography at a local hospital suggested local stenosis., Diagnoses: A transparent cap was placed in front of a gastroscope and was used to cross part of the stenotic segment, with water being injected to fill the intestinal cavity continuously. An angiographic catheter was sent along the yellow zebra guidewire passing through the stenotic segment. After exchanging for a colonoscope, a 12-cm intestinal stent was placed along the guidewire., Interventions: The physician used a single-person water injection-assisted colonoscopy technique in combination with a carbon dioxide gas pump to assist with the air insufflation for colonoscope insertion through the lumen and repeatedly injected water solution to ensure a transparent colonoscopic view., Outcomes: No intraoperative or postoperative complications were observed. One week after endoscopic intestinal stent placement, the patient underwent radical left hemicolectomy for colon cancer and release of bowel adhesion. The postoperative pathology revealed adenocarcinoma with perineural invasion. The patient recovered well after surgery., Lessons: Single-person intestinal stent implantation using a water injection device with carbon dioxide and a transparent cap can achieve endoscopic intestinal stent placement for MBO., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: This study aimed to conduct a case-control study of endoscopic and fluoroscopic metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open Hartmann's procedure in treating acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Additionally, the study aims to discuss the application value of endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction., Methods: From June 2011 to December 2019, 23 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent metal stent implantation combined with laparoscopic surgery under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy in Wenzhou Central Hospital were collected, and 20 patients with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction who underwent traditional emergency open Hartmann's surgery during the same period were selected as a control group. All patients were diagnosed with left colon obstruction by plain abdominal film and/or CT before the operation and colon adenocarcinoma by colonoscopic biopsy and/or postoperative pathology. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative anal exhaust time, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups., Results: This study showed a significant difference in the therapeutic effect between the two groups. Compared with the traditional Hartmann's operation group, the success rate of one-stage anastomosis in endoscopic and X-ray-guided metal stent placement combined with the laparoscopic operation group was significantly higher than that in the Hartmann's operation group (P < 0.05). The overall incidence of postoperative complications and hospital stay were significantly lower in the observation group than in the Hartmann's group (P < 0.05). Further subgroup analysis of the overall postoperative complication rate of the two groups showed that the traditional Hartmann's operation group was more likely to have an incomplete intestinal obstruction (P < 0.05). This study also showed no significant differences between the two groups in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, and postoperative anal exhaust time (all P > 0.05). This study also found no significant differences between the two groups in overall survival rates or recurrence-free survival rates (all P > 0.05)., Conclusions: The comparison of the therapeutic effects of the two groups verified the feasibility of endoscopy combined with X-ray fluoroscopy metal stent placement in combination with laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction. Compared with the traditional emergency open Hartmann's procedure, metal stent implantation under endoscopy and X-ray fluoroscopy combined with laparoscopic surgery is more minimally invasive, safe, and effective. It avoids the traditional second or even third surgical trauma to effectively improve the quality of life of patients, so that patients can recover quickly after surgery., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Medullary carcinoma of the colon is a rare subtype of colorectal cancer that has a unique, and sometimes varied, clinical and histologic profile. It usually presents in adult patients older than 50 years. Here, we report a unique case of young male patient who initially presented with abdominal pain followed by a large bowel obstruction., Case Presentation: A 40-year-old SriLankan male presented with right-sided abdominal pain and on examination, there was a palpable right iliac fossa mass. Colonoscopy and a computed tomography scan revealed cecal mass. Later, while waiting for elective resection, the patient developed symptoms and signs of a large bowel obstruction. He underwent a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with an uneventful postoperative course. The histopathologic evaluation of the resected specimens showed invasive carcinoma with syncytial growth pattern, foci of lymphoid host response, and dirty necrosis, in keeping with a medullary carcinoma pT4a pN2b. Unlike most reported medullary carcinoma cases, this patient was young and caudal-related homeobox transcription factor 2 positive., Conclusion: We have reported another case of medullary carcinoma of the colon in a young patient with unique histologic characteristics. Reporting such cases helps in refine understanding of the histologic and genetic, as well as clinical, phenotypes of medullary carcinoma of the colon., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Colorectal cancer stands as a prevalent cause of cancer-related mortality, necessitating effective treatment strategies. Acute colonic obstruction occurs in approximately 20% of patients and represents a surgical emergency with substantial morbidity and mortality. The optimal approach for managing left-sided colon cancer with acute colonic obstruction remains debatable, with no consensus on whether emergency resection or bridge-to-surgery, involving initial decompressing stoma and subsequent elective resection after recovery, should be employed. Current studies show a decrease in morbidity and short-term mortality for the bridge-to-surgery approach, yet it remains unclear if the long-term oncological outcome is equivalent to emergency resection., Methods: This prospective, randomized, multicenter trial aims to investigate the management of obstructive left-sided colon cancer in a comprehensive manner. The study will be conducted across 26 university hospitals and 40 academic hospitals in Germany. A total of 468 patients will be enrolled, providing a cohort of 420 evaluable patients, with an equal distribution of 210 patients in each treatment arm. Patients with left-sided colon cancer, defined as cancer between the left splenic flexure and > 12 cm ab ano and obstruction confirmed by X-ray or CT scan, are eligible. Randomization will be performed in a 1:1 ratio, assigning patients either to the oncological emergency resection group or the bridge-to-surgery group, wherein patients will undergo diverting stoma and subsequent elective oncological resection after recovery. The primary endpoint of this trial will be 120-day mortality, allowing for consideration of the time interval between diverting stoma and resection., Discussion: The findings derived from this trial possess the potential to reshape the current clinical approach of emergency resection for obstructive left-sided colon cancer by favoring the bridge-to-surgery practice, provided that a reduction in morbidity can be achieved without compromising the oncological long-term outcome., Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) under the identifier DRKS00031827. Registered on May 15, 2023., Protocol: 28.04.2023, protocol version 2.0F., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Colonic stenting reduces morbidity and stoma formation for left-sided colon cancer obstruction, and a prolonged interval between stenting and surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered might result in a lower stoma rate and tumor reduction., Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of elective surgery following colonic stenting compared with elective surgery following colonic stenting and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with left-sided colon cancer obstruction., Design: This is a prospective multicenter cohort study., Settings: This study was conducted at 5 medical centers., Patients: Patients ( n = 100) with acute left-sided colon cancer obstruction undergoing colonic stenting between December 2015 and December 2019 were included., Interventions: Patients were assigned to the stenting-alone or chemotherapy group., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcomes measured were laparoscopic surgery and stoma rate., Results: Of the 100 patients who underwent colonic stenting, 52 were assigned to the stenting group and 48 were assigned to the chemotherapy group. No statistically significant differences were detected in stent-related complications. The adverse events associated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were well tolerated. The level of hemoglobin (117.2 vs 107.6 g/L; p = 0.008), albumin (34.2 vs 31.5 g/L; p < 0.001), and prealbumin (0.19 vs 0.16 g/L; p = 0.001) was significantly increased, and the bowel wall thickness (1.09 vs 2.04 mm; p < 0.001) was significantly decreased preoperatively in the chemotherapy group compared with the stenting group. The number of mean harvested lymph nodes was greater in the chemotherapy group than in the stenting group (25.6 vs 21.8; p = 0.04). Laparoscopic surgery was performed more frequently (77.1% vs 40.4%; p < 0.001) and a stoma was created less frequently (10.4% vs 28.8%; p = 0.02) in the chemotherapy group than in the stenting group., Limitations: This trial was limited by the nonrandomized design and a short follow-up period., Conclusions: This study suggests that elective surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and colonic stenting is a safe, effective, and well-tolerated treatment approach with a high laparoscopic resection rate and a low stoma rate. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B980 ., Resultados a Corto Plazo De La Ciruga Electiva Seguido De Stent Metlico Autoexpandible Y Quimioterapia Neoadyuvante En Pacientes Con Obstruccin Por Cncer De Colon Izquierdo: ANTECEDENTES:La colocación de stents colónicos reduce la morbilidad y la formación de estomas por obstrucción por cáncer de colon izquierdo, y el intervalo prolongado entre la colocación de stents y la cirugía con quimioterapia neoadyuvante administrada podría resultar en una menor tasa de estomas y reducción del tumor.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los resultados a corto plazo de la cirugía electiva después de la colocación de stent en el colon en comparación con la cirugía electiva después de la colocación de stent en el colon y la quimioterapia neoadyuvante en pacientes con obstrucción por cáncer de colon izquierdo.DISEÑO:Estudio prospectivo de cohorte multicéntrico.ENTORNO CLINICO:Este estudio se realizó en 5 centros médicos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes (n=100) con obstrucción aguda por cáncer de colon izquierdo que se sometieron a colocación de stent colónico entre diciembre de 2015 y diciembre de 2019.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron asignados al grupo de stent solo o quimioterapia.MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO PRINCIPALES:Los resultados primarios medidos fueron la cirugía laparoscópica y la tasa de ostomía.RESULTADOS:De los 100 pacientes que se sometieron a la colocación de stent colónico, 52 fueron asignados al grupo de colocación de stent y 48 al grupo de quimioterapia. No se detectaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en las complicaciones relacionadas con el stent. Los eventos adversos asociados con la quimioterapia neoadyuvante fueron bien tolerados. Hemoglobina (117,2 g/l vs. 107,6 g/l; p = 0,008), albúmina (34,2 g/l vs. 31,5 g/l; p < 0,001) y prealbúmina (0,19 g/l vs. 0,16 g/l; p = 0,001) aumentaron significativamente y el grosor de la pared intestinal (1,09 mm vs. 2,04 mm; p < 0,001) disminuyó significativamente antes de la operación en el grupo de quimioterapia en comparación con el grupo de colocación de stent. El número medio de ganglios linfáticos extraídos fue mayor en el grupo de quimioterapia que en el grupo de stent (25,6 vs. 21,8; p = 0,04). La cirugía laparoscópica se realizó con mayor frecuencia (77,1 % vs. 40,4 %; p < 0,001) y se creó un estoma con menos frecuencia (10,4 % vs. 28,8 % ; p = 0,02) en el grupo de quimioterapia que en el grupo de colocación de stent.LIMITACIONES:Este ensayo estuvo limitado por el diseño no aleatorio y el corto período de seguimiento.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio sugiere que la cirugía electiva después de la quimioterapia neoadyuvante y la colocación de stent colónico es un tratamiento seguro, efectivo y bien tolerado, con una alta tasa de resección laparoscópica y una baja tasa de estoma. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B980 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon )., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2022.)

Background: Acute resection for left-sided obstructive colon carcinoma is thought to be associated with a higher mortality risk than a bridge-to-surgery approach using decompressing stoma or self-expandable metal stent, but prediction models are lacking., Objective: This study aimed to determine the influence of treatment strategy on mortality within 90 days from the first intervention in patients presenting with left-sided obstructive colon carcinoma., Design: This was a national multicenter cohort study that used data from a prospective national audit., Settings: The study was performed in 75 Dutch hospitals., Patients: Patients were included if they underwent resection with curative intent for left-sided obstructive colon carcinoma between 2009 and 2016., Interventions: First intervention was either acute resection, bridge to surgery with self-expandable metallic stent, or bridge to surgery with decompressing stoma., Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measure was 90-day mortality after the first intervention. Risk factors were identified using multivariable logistic analysis. Subsequently, a risk model was developed., Results: In total, 2395 patients were included, with the first intervention consisting of acute resection in 1848 patients (77%), stoma as bridge to surgery in 332 patients (14%), and stent as bridge to surgery in 215 patients (9%). Overall, 152 patients (6.3%) died within 90 days from the first intervention. A decompressing stoma was independently associated with lower 90-day mortality risk (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.094-0.62). Other independent predictors for mortality were age, ASA classification, tumor location, and index levels of serum creatinine and C-reactive protein. The constructed risk model had an area under the curve of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.81-0.87)., Limitations: Only patients who underwent surgical resection were included., Conclusions: Treatment strategy had a significant impact on 90-day mortality. A decompressing stoma considerably lowers the risk of mortality, especially in older and frail patients. The developed risk model needs further external validation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B975 .PREDICCIÓN DE LA MORTALIDAD A 90 DÍAS POSTERIORES A LA PRIMERA CIRUGÍA EN PACIENTES CON CÁNCER DE COLON OBSTRUCTIVO DEL LADO IZQUIERDOANTECEDENTES:Se cree que la resección aguda para el carcinoma de colon obstructivo del lado izquierdo está asociada con un mayor riesgo de mortalidad que un enfoque puente a la cirugía que utiliza un estoma de descompresión o un stent metálico autoexpandible, pero faltan modelos de predicción.OBJETIVO:Determinar la influencia de la estrategia de tratamiento sobre la mortalidad dentro de los 90 días desde la primera intervención utilizando un modelo de predicción en pacientes que presentan carcinoma de colon obstructivo del lado izquierdo.DISEÑO:Un estudio de cohorte multicéntrico nacional, utilizando datos de una auditoría nacional prospectiva.ENTORNO CLINICO:El estudio se realizó en 75 hospitales holandeses.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron los pacientes que se sometieron a una resección con intención curativa de un carcinoma de colon obstructivo del lado izquierdo entre 2009 y 2016.INTERVENCIONES:La primera intervención fue resección aguda, puente a cirugía con stent metálico autoexpandible o puente a cirugía con estoma descompresor.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:La principal medida de resultado fue la mortalidad a los 90 días después de la primera intervención. Los factores de riesgo se identificaron mediante análisis logístico multivariable. Posteriormente se desarrolló un modelo de riesgo.RESULTADOS:En total se incluyeron 2395 pacientes, siendo la primera intervención resección aguda en 1848 (77%) pacientes, estoma como puente a la cirugía en 332 (14%) pacientes y stent como puente a la cirugía en 215 (9%) pacientes. En general, 152 pacientes (6,3%) fallecieron dentro de los 90 días posteriores a la primera intervención. Un estoma de descompresión se asoció de forma independiente con un menor riesgo de mortalidad a los 90 días (HR: 0,27, IC: 0,094-0,62). Otros predictores independientes de mortalidad fueron la edad, la clasificación ASA, la ubicación del tumor y los niveles índice de creatinina sérica y proteína C reactiva. El modelo de riesgo construido tuvo un área bajo la curva de 0,84 (IC: 0,81-0,87).LIMITACIONES:Solo se incluyeron pacientes que se sometieron a resección quirúrgica.CONCLUSIONES:La estrategia de tratamiento tuvo un impacto significativo en la mortalidad a los 90 días. Un estoma descompresor reduce considerablemente el riesgo de mortalidad, especialmente en pacientes mayores y frágiles. Se desarrolló un modelo de riesgo, que necesita una mayor validación externa. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B975 . (Traducción-Dr. Ingrid Melo )., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2023.)

Background: Right-sided obstructing colon cancer is most often treated with acute resection. Recent studies on right-sided obstructing colon cancer report higher mortality and morbidity rates than those in patients without obstruction. The aim of this study is to retrospectively analyse whether it is possible to optimise the health condition of patients with acute right-sided obstructing colon cancer, prior to surgery, and whether this improves postoperative outcomes., Method: All consecutive patients with high suspicion of, or histologically proven, right-sided obstructing colon cancer, treated with curative intent between March 2013 and December 2019, were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups: optimised group and non-optimised group. Pre-operative optimisation included additional nutrition, physiotherapy, and, if needed, bowel decompression., Results: In total, 54 patients were analysed in this study. Twenty-four patients received optimisation before elective surgery, and thirty patients received emergency surgery, without optimisation. Scheduled surgery was performed after a median of eight days (IQR 7-12). Postoperative complications were found in twelve (50%) patients in the optimised group, compared to twenty-three (77%) patients in the non-optimised group (p = 0.051). Major complications were diagnosed in three (13%) patients with optimisation, compared to ten (33%) patients without optimisation (p = 0.111). Postoperative in-hospital stay, 30-day mortality, as well as primary anastomosis were comparable in both groups., Conclusion: This pilot study suggests that pre-operative optimisation of patients with obstructing right sided colonic cancer may be feasible and safe but is associated with longer in-patient stay., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Jeske R.E. Boeding reports financial support was provided by Wetenschapsfonds Amphia., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Even if the use of stent as bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colon cancer was described long ago, there is still much controversy on their use. Patient recovery before surgery and colonic desobstruction are just some of the reasons to defend this management that can be found in several available articles., Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study, including patients with obstructive colon cancer treated between 2010 and 2020. The primary aim of this study is to compare medium-term oncological outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival) between stent as BTS and ES groups. The secondary aims are to compare perioperative results (in terms of approach, morbidity and mortality, and rate of anastomosis/stomas) between both groups and, within the BTS group, analyze whether there are any factors that may influence oncological outcomes., Results: A total of 251 patients were included. Patients belonging to the BTS cohort presented a higher rate of laparoscopic approach, required less intensive care management, less reintervention, and less permanent stoma rate, when comparing with patients who underwent urgent surgery (US). There were not significant differences in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival between the two groups. Lymphovascular invasion negatively affected oncological results but was not related with stent placement., Conclusion: The stent as a bridge to surgery is a good alternative to urgent surgery, which leads to a decrease in postoperative morbidity and mortality without significantly worsening oncological outcomes., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: A considerable number of patients with colon cancer present with a colonic obstruction. The use of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) in potential curative patients with left-sided colonic cancer obstruction remains debatable. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the 5-year oncological outcomes of using a SEMS as a BTS., Methods: All patients with left-sided malignant colon obstruction who underwent curative surgery with no metastasis upon presentation between March 2009 and May 2013 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed., Results: A total of 45 patients were included, 28 patients underwent upfront surgery, and 17 patients had a stent as a bridge to surgery. T4 stage was statistically significantly higher in patients who had a SEMS as a BTS (35.3% vs. 10.7%) (p-value 0.043). The mean duration in days of the SEMS to surgery was 13.76 (SD 10.08). TNM stage 3 was a prognostic factor toward distant metastasis (HR 5.05). When comparing patients who had upfront surgery to those who had a SEMS as a BTS, higher 5-year disease-free survival (75% vs. 72%) and 5-year overall survival (89% vs. 82%) were seen in patients who had upfront surgery. However, both were statistically insignificant., Conclusion: Using self-expanding metallic stents as a bridge to surgery yields comparable 5-year survival and disease-free survival rates to upfront emergency surgery. The decision to use SEMS versus opting for emergency surgery should be made after careful patient selection and with the assistance of experienced endoscopists., Trial Registration: N/A., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Emergency resection is common for malignant right-sided obstructive colon cancer. As there is evidence showing a potential benefit of self-expandable metal stents as a bridge to surgery, a new debate has been initiated., Objective: The aim of this study was to compare self-expandable metal stents with emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer., Data Source: A systematic search was conducted accessing Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews., Study Selection: Studies reporting either emergency surgery or stent placement in right-sided obstructive colon cancer were included., Intervention: Stent or emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer., Main Outcome Measures: Morbidity rate, mortality rate, stoma rate, laparoscopic resection rate, anastomotic insufficiency rate, success rate of stent., Results: A total of 6343 patients from 16 publications were analyzed. The stent success rate was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87 to 0.95) with perforation of 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06). Emergency resection was performed laparoscopically at a rate of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.24). Primary anastomosis rate in emergency resection was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91 to 0.97) with an anastomotic insufficiency rate of 0.07 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.11). The mortality rate after emergency resection was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.09). Primary anastomosis and anastomotic insufficiency rate were similar between the two groups (RR: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.1; p = 0.56 and RR: 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.93; p = 0.33). The mortality rate in emergency resection was higher compared to stent (RR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 10.89, p = 0.016)., Limitation: No randomized controlled trials are available., Conclusion: Stent is a safe and successful alternative to emergency resection and may increase the rate of minimally invasive surgery. Emergency resection, however, remains safe and did not result in higher rate of anastomotic insufficiency. Further high-quality comparative studies are warranted to assess long-term outcomes., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Signet-ring cell adenocarcinoma of the colon is well-recognized in adult patients who are extremely rare and not well-documented in children. Our study aims to raise awareness about this rare disease and its long-term outcomes., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients with signet-ring cell colon adenocarcinoma., Results: Six patients, three boys and three girls, with a mean age of 14.83 (range, 13-17 years), presented with signs of intesti-nal obstruction and were diagnosed with signet-ring cell colon adenocarcinoma. All patients had air-fluid levels on abdominal X-ray. Abdominal ultrasonography of all patients revealed subileus. Abdominal computed tomography was performed in five patients, and pre-operative colonoscopy was conducted in two patients before the emergency intervention. All of the patients underwent emergent exploratory laparotomy with the preliminary diagnosis of acute abdomen. In two patients, debulking surgery followed by a stoma was performed. The remaining four patients were treated with anastomosis following intestinal resection. All girls had metastases on the ovary. One of the patients died due to the burden of multiple metastases in the early period, and three died in the sixth post-operative year. We have been following the remaining two patients since then., Conclusion: Although signet-ring cell carcinomas (SRCCs) are rare, they should be considered in the differential diagnosis of acute abdomen and intestinal obstruction in pediatric patients. Despite early diagnosis and treatment, SRCC has a poor prognosis in the pediatric population.

Background: Splenic flexure tumours (SFC) are uncommon and present at more advanced disease stages. The optimal surgical technique for SFC remains controversial. We sought to compare the short-term outcomes of a left hemicolectomy (LHC) versus an extended resection (subtotal colectomy, STC) for SFCs., Methods: A retrospective analysis using the Binational Colorectal Cancer Audit (BCCA) registry was performed. All patients with SFC who underwent elective or emergency surgery for a SFC between 2010 and 2021 were included. Primary outcomes included short-term inpatient complications. Secondary outcomes included survival outcomes., Results: Six hundred and ninety-nine patients underwent resections for SFCs. A LHC was more common, performed in 64.1%. Patients having a LHC were significantly older, with proportionally more LHCs done laparoscopically. Overall grade III/IV complications were similar between both operations. Prolonged ileus and return to theatre were significantly higher in patients undergoing a STC. On multivariate analysis, anastomotic leak and overall grade III/IV complications were not independently associated with the type of operation. There was no difference in medial survival based on type of operation. Higher tumour stage (Stage III/IV) were independently associated with worse survival., Conclusion: Segmental and extended resections are both oncologically sound procedures for SFCs. Segmental resections are associated with lower rates of prolonged ileus., (© 2023 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.)

Background and Aims: The relative utility of self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) insertion for malignant colon obstruction (MCO) due to extra-colonic malignancy (ECM) versus intra-colonic malignancy (ICM) is understudied., Methods: A systematic search was done from inception-April 2021 to identify reports of safety and efficacy of SEMS insertion for the treatment of MCO-ECM versus MCO-ICM. A meta-analysis of proportions, comparative meta-analysis to compute relative risks (RR), and mean differences (MD) was performed. Subgroup analyses and influence analyses were conducted. The certainty in estimates of effect(s) was assessed using the GRADE approach., Results: Eight non-randomized studies were identified; 46% (39-53%) and 63% (59-67%) of patients in the ECM and ICM groups were male. Most obstructions were in the rectosigmoid colon in both ECM and ICM groups. SEMS insertion in MCO-ECM was associated with an increased risk of technical failure compared to MCO-ICM (RR 2.92; 1.13-7.54; Certainty: Very Low). Risk of clinical failure of SEMS was higher in MCO-ECM compared to MCO-ICM (RR 2.88; 1.58-2.52; Certainty: Very Low). The risk of clinical failure remained significant throughout the influence analysis, as well as on subgroup analysis. There was no significant difference in the risk of adverse events or luminal perforation with SEMS insertion among patients with MCO-ECM and MCO-ICM. On influence analysis, removal of one study unveiled a significant increase in the risk of luminal perforation in MCO-ECM (RR 3.22; 1.44-7.19; p = 0.004)., Conclusion: SEMS for MCO-ECM may have a technical success rate comparable to or questionably worse than MCO-ICM, with low certainty in estimate of effects. SEMS deployment in MCO-ECM carries a higher risk of clinical failure, with a questionably higher risk of luminal perforation., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Postoperative mortality and morbidity rates are high in patients with obstructing colon cancer (OCC). Different treatment options have been evaluated over the years, mainly for left sided OCC. Optimising the preoperative health condition in elective colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment shows promising results. The aim of this study is to determine whether preoptimisation is feasible in patients with OCC, with a special interest/focus on right-sided OCC, and if, ultimately, optimisation reduces mortality and morbidity (stoma rates, major and minor complications) rates in OCC., Methods: This is a prospective registration study including all patients presenting with OCC in our hospital. Patients with OCC, treated with curative intent, will be screened for eligibility to receive preoptimisation before surgery. The preoptimisation protocol includes; decompression of the small bowel with a NG-tube for right sided obstruction and SEMS or decompressing ileostomy or colostomy, proximal to the site of obstruction, for left sided colonic obstructions. For the additional work-up, additional nutrition by means of parenteral feeding (for patients who are dependent on a NG tube) or oral/enteral nutrition (in case the obstruction is relieved) is provided. Physiotherapy with attention to both cardio and muscle training prior surgical resection is provided. The primary endpoint is complication-free survival (CFS) at the 90 day period after hospitalisation. Secondary outcomes include pre- and postoperative complications, patient- and tumour characteristics, surgical procedures, total in hospital stay, creation of decompressing and/or permanent ileo- or colostomy and long-term (oncological) outcomes., Discussion: Preoptimisation is expected to improve the preoperative health condition of patients and thereby reduce postoperative complications., Trial Registration: Trial Registry: NL8266 date of registration: 06-jan-2020., Study Status: Open for inclusion., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: This study surveyed the current practice of surgical treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in China., Methods: All colorectal surgery departments at tertiary or secondary hospitals in China were invited to complete a web-based questionnaire between August 27 and September 2, 2020., Results: Overall, completed questionnaire were received from 357 hospitals. Emergency surgery was the mainstay of treatment for OLCC, with the open approach accounting for up to 61.62%. The stoma rate of emergency surgery was up to 80%, mainly due to inadequate bowel preparation and severe edema of colon walls. Hartmann's procedure (61.62%) was the most preferred operation. A total of 243 hospitals (68.7%) reported that they would consider the use of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge for elective surgery. More than 50% of the hospitals participating in this study reported the success rate of SEMS placement, as well as the resolution rate of obstruction more than 80%, and the stent-related perforation rate was < 5%. A total of 126 hospitals considered carrying out a strategy of SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to elective surgery and believed that it might further improve treatment outcomes., Conclusions: SEMS is a feasible option for the treatment of OLCC in addition to traditional emergency surgery, and its clinical benefits have been preliminarily recognized., (© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.)

Purpose: Left hemicolectomy is the standard surgical operation for a variety of colonic diseases, both benign and malignant. When colonic resection is extended, relocation of the small bowel loops can be difficult. Several techniques have been described to reposition the small intestine. Welti's technique consists in the passage of the entire small bowel to the left side of the abdomen, below the descending colon that is positioned on the right side. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 23 patients who underwent extended left hemicolectomy and reconstruction according to the Welti's technique at our hospital. We assessed the recovery of intestinal function and the length of hospital stay; in the mid-term follow-up we searched for episodes of acute or chronic intestinal obstruction. Results: Median operative time was 215 minutes; median resumption of gas and stool emission were, respectively, 3 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 2-6) and 4 days (IQR: 2-9) after surgery. Median hospital stay was 8 (IQR: 5-37) day. After a median follow-up of 15 months (IQR: 3-132) we did not observe any episode of acute or chronic bowel obstruction. Conclusions: Welti's technique is safe and does not cause a delay in resumption of bowel functions or a delayed hospital discharge; it is a useful technique that the colorectal surgeon can use when needed.

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) are frequently used to decompress malignant large bowel obstruction (LBO) and avoid emergent surgery with often permanent colostomy creation. However, limited data are available on the use and outcomes of SEMS in patients with nonmalignant LBO. We present a case series of 4 patients who were found to have nonmalignant LBO for which they underwent emergent colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery following interdisciplinary discussion between gastroenterology, colorectal surgery, and radiology. Through each patient vignette, we illustrate the use of SEMSs as a potential alternative to emergent surgery. 2 of 4 patients avoided stoma creation at the time of surgery, and 1 patient avoided surgery altogether; overall, however, the outcomes of this approach were mixed in this series, indicating a need for further investigation to better identify the patient population that would benefit most from initial SEMS placement for decompression of nonmalignant LBO., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Aim: To evaluate the operative and oncological results after colonic stent bridging for left-sided malignant large bowel intestinal obstruction and the risk factors for survival and recurrence after definitive surgery., Methodology: Consecutive patients who underwent colonic stenting for malignant left-sided colonic obstruction were included. Patients for palliative stenting or emergency surgery, patient with low rectal tumour or peritoneal metastasis were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included stent success rate, stenting related complications, rate of stoma formation and long-term oncological outcome including recurrence rate and recurrence free survival rate., Results: From June 2011 to June 2021, a total of 222 patients underwent colonic stenting. 112 patients were bridged to surgery after initial stenting, but 7 patients dropped out. Overall survival was 35 months (IQR = 17.75-75.25 months) in the early operation group, 30 months (IQR = 17.5-49.5 months) in the delayed surgery group HR 0.981 (95%CI 0.70-1.395, p = 0.907). Sensitivity analysis performed by excluding stent complications and emergency surgery yielded the same conclusion. Overall stenting complications rate was 17.1%. 11 patients (10.4%) required emergency surgery., Conclusion: There was no difference between early and delayed surgery groups (>4weeks) in the overall survival and recurrence in patients who had stent-bridge to surgery for malignant left colonic obstruction. It is safe to defer definitive surgery to optimize patients and allow better recovery from initial obstruction after colonic stenting before definitive surgery without adversely affecting the oncological outcomes., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Given the risks associated with urgent colectomy for large bowel obstruction, preoperative colonic stenting has been utilized for decompression and optimization prior to surgery. This study examined national trends in the use of colonic stenting as a bridge to resection for malignant large bowel obstruction and evaluated outcomes relative to immediate colectomy., Methods: Adults undergoing colonic stenting or colectomy for malignant, left/sigmoid large bowel obstruction were identified in the 2010-2016 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients were classified as immediate resection (IR) or delayed resection (DR) if undergoing colonic stenting prior to colectomy. Generalized linear models were used to evaluate the impact of resection strategy on ostomy creation, in-hospital mortality, and complications., Results: Among 9,706 patients, 9.7% underwent colonic stenting, which increased from 7.7 to 16.4% from 2010 to 2016 (p < 0.001). Compared to IR, the DR group was younger (63.9 vs 65.9 years, p = 0.04), had fewer comorbidities (Elixhauser Index 3.5 vs 3.9, p = 0.001), and was more commonly managed at high-volume centers (89.4% vs 68.1%, p < 0.001). Laparoscopic resections were more frequent among the DR group (33.1% vs 13.0%, p < 0.001), while ostomy rates were significantly lower (21.5% vs 53.0%, p < 0.001). After risk adjustment, colonic stenting was associated with reduced odds of ostomy creation (0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.46), but similar odds of mortality and complications., Conclusion: Colonic stenting is increasingly utilized for malignant, left-sided bowel obstructions, and associated with lower ostomy rates but comparable clinical outcomes. These findings suggest the relative safety of colonic stenting for malignant large bowel obstruction when clinically appropriate., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) and trans-anal colorectal tube (TCT) are alternative treatments to conventional emergency surgery for non-right-sided obstructive colon cancer (NROCC). However, the one with better short- and long-term outcomes remains controversial. Thus, this multicenter case-control study aimed to analyze and compare SEMS and TCT for NROCC., Methods: Patients with stage II/III NROCC who underwent surgery between January 2010 and December 2019 at either of the eight selected Japanese affiliate hospitals were, retrospectively, reviewed. Baseline characteristics between the SEMS and TCT groups were adjusted by propensity score (PS) matching., Results: Among 239 reviewed patients (SEMS: 76, TCT: 163), 180 were finally included in two well-balanced cohorts through PS: SEMS group (65 patients) and TCT group (115 patients). Technical success, clinical success, morbidity, and short-term mortality were not significantly different between the two groups. SEMS placement achieved significantly higher rates for primary resection/anastomosis without stoma (SEMS: 90.8% vs. TCT: 77.4%, p < 0.001) and laparoscopic surgery (SEMS: 64.6% vs. TCT: 43.5%, p < 0.001) than TCT placement. However, 5-year overall survival (SEMS: 83.7% vs. TCT: 86.4%; p = 0.822) and 5-year relapse-free survival (SEMS: 64.7% vs. TCT: 66.4%; p = 0.854) showed no significant differences between these groups., Conclusions: Both SEMS and TCT revealed similar long-term outcomes, but SEMS placement was better in achieving primary resection/anastomosis and laparoscopic surgery in patients with stage II/III NROCC., (© 2023. Japanese Society of Gastroenterology.)

Background/aims: The optimal treatment for acute malignant obstruction of the proximal colon (MOPC, proximal to the splenic flexure) remains challenging. Emergency resection, the traditional modality for MOPC, has shown significantly high mortality and morbidity rates, according to recent studies. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of stent vs stoma as a bridge to curative surgery for MOPC., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 72 patients who underwent endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) or loop ileostomy for MOPC at six referral centers between January 2011 and July 2021. Clinical and pathological characteristics, procedure-related complications, and long-term mortality rates after curative surgery were analyzed., Results: During a mean follow-up period of 32 months, 30 patients (41.7%) underwent ileostomy preferentially for more proximal cancer, complete obstruction, and advanced tumor stage compared to the SEMS group. No difference was found in procedure-related complications, but five deaths were observed after ileostomy. Survival analysis for 5-year mortality after curative surgery showed no significant difference between the bridge modalities (log-rank p = 0.253)., Conclusion: In this study, SEMS as a bridge to surgery showed relatively safe results in terms of post-procedural mortality. However, these results should be considered when performing ileostomy in patients with more advanced malignant obstruction.

The efficacy and safety of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to elective surgery versus emergency surgery to treat malignant colonic obstruction is debated. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients with malignant colonic obstruction treated using different procedure. Subjects admitted to the authors' department with colonic obstruction (n = 87) were studied. They underwent colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery (SEMS group: n = 14) or emergency surgery (ES group: n = 22).Their demographic characteristics, stoma rate, laparoscopy rate and postoperative complications were analyzed, and the potential risk factors of postoperative complications and the optimal time interval from SEMS implantation to elective surgery were explored. The stoma rate was 15.4% in the SEMS group versus 60.0% in the ES group (P = 0.015), and the postoperative complication rate was 7.7% in the SEMS group versus 40.0% in the ES group (P = 0.042). The proportion of patients undergoing laparoscopy in SEMS group was significantly higher than that in ES group (69.2% vs. 15.0%; P = 0.003).The effect of ASA grade on postoperative complications was statistically significant (OR = 24.565; P = 0.008). The Receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve could not determine the optimal time interval between SEMS implantation and elective surgery (AUC = 0.466). SEMS implantation has the advantages of lower temporary stoma rate, less postoperative complications and higher laparoscopy rate compared with ES in the treatment of left malignant intestinal obstruction. ASA grade is a risk factor for postoperative complications. However, larger sample size prospective randomized controlled trials (RCT) are still needed to confirm long-term oncological outcomes., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Obstructive colorectal cancer is a common malignant bowel obstruction. Colostomy or colostomy following tumor resection may be the first choice for emergency surgery. The intestinal and systemic conditions of patients undergoing emergency surgery are often poor, and patients need to undergo multiple operations, which increase the surgical risk and economic burden and reduce the quality of life of patients. Poor intraoperative visualization may also affect the radical operation of emergency surgery. Transanal decompression tube (TDT) can rapidly decompress and drain the obstructed bowel, effectively relieve obstruction symptoms, and improve the success rate of primary radical resection. The TDT squeeze the tumor lightly, causing no spread of tumor cells, and is cheap, but the cavity of transanal decompression tube is small and easily blocked, and requires tedious flushing or regular replacement. Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) can relieve intestinal obstruction effectively, provide sufficient preparation time for preoperative examination and improvement of nutritional status. By improving patient's tolerance to radical surgery, SEMS might be used as an important treatment strategy choice for obstructive colorectal cancer. However, SEMS may squeeze the tumor, leading to the spread of tumor cells, increase the recurrence rate and metastasis rate, and reduce the survival rate. Moreover, intestinal wall edema still existed during the operation following SEMS, and the rate of ostomy after anastomosis was as high as 34%. We hypothesized that prolonging the interval between stent insertion and surgery to 2 months, with neoadjuvant chemotherapy administered during this interval (SEMS-neoadjuvant chemotherapy strategy), would help improve outcomes. The SEMS-neoadjuvant chemotherapy strategy is a safe, effective, and well tolerated treatment approach with a high laparoscopic resection rate, low stoma formation rate and improvement in the overall survival for patients with left-sided colon cancer obstruction. The patient physical status is improved, the primary tumor is downstaged, and intestinal wall edema is relieved during the relatively longer interval between SEMS placement and surgery. The SEMS-neoadjuvant chemotherapy strategy may be a preferred therapeutic strategy for obstructive left colon cancer.

Large bowel obstruction is caused by colorectal cancer, diverticular disease or volvulus. The latter is caused by rotation of the intestinal loop on its own mesenteric axis, and occurs in the sigmoid colon (80%) and in the cecum (15-20%) Its management includes devolution by colonoscopy or surgery. Malignant bowel obstruction is the initial presentation in 7-29% of colorectal cancer, and its optimal treatment is controversial. We describe a clinical case of a double obstructive lesion and its surgical approach, an unusual presentation that poses a diagnostic and medical-surgical management challenge., (Copyright: © 2023 Permanyer.)

Purpose: To analyze if perioperative and oncologic outcomes with stenting as a bridge to surgery (SEMS-BS) and interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons for left-sided occlusive colonic neoplasms (LSCON) are non-inferior to those obtained by colorectal surgeons for non-occlusive tumors of the same location in the full-elective context., Methods: From January 2011 to January 2021, patients with LSCON at University Regional Hospital in Málaga (Spain) were directed to a SEMS-BS strategy with an interval colectomy performed by acute care surgeons and included in the study group (SEMS-BS). The control group was formed with patients from the Colorectal Division elective surgical activity dataset, matching by ASA, stage, location and year of surgery on a ratio 1:2. Stages IV or palliative stenting were excluded. Software SPSS 23.0 was used to analyze perioperative and oncologic (defined by overall -OS- and disease free -DFS-survival) outcomes., Results: SEMS-BS and control group included 56 and 98 patients, respectively. In SEMS-BS group, rates of technical/clinical failure and perforation were 5.35% (3/56), 3.57% (2/56) and 3.57% (2/56). Surgery was performed with a median interval time of 11 days (9-16). No differences between groups were observed in perioperative outcomes (laparoscopic approach, primary anastomosis rate, morbidity or mortality). As well, no statistically significant differences were observed in OS and DFS between groups, both compared globally (OS:p < 0.94; DFS:p < 0.67, respectively) or by stages I-II (OS:p < 0.78; DFS:p < 0.17) and III (OS:p < 0.86; DFS:p < 0.70)., Conclusion: Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of a strategy with SEMS-BS for LSCON are non-inferior to those obtained in the elective setting for non-occlusive neoplasms in the same location. Technical and oncologic safety of interval colectomy performed on a semi-scheduled situation by acute care surgeons is absolutely warranted., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

Background: Colonic stenting has emerged as preferred palliative treatment for left sided malignant obstructions. It shortens hospital stays, decreases healthcare cost, reduces permanent stoma rates, and expedites the start of chemotherapy. The role of stenting as a bridge-to-surgery remains unsettled., Data Source: For this paper the recommendations of the American and European society of gastroenterology and colorectal surgery were reviewed. We will discuss the benefits and risks of stenting in palliative setting and as bridge-to-surgery. Quality of life, hospital stay, and health care cost will also be considered., Conclusion: Non-traversable colon masses during endoscopy are considered a risk factor of development of intestinal obstruction but preventive stent placement in patients without obstructive symptoms is not recommended. The risk of technical or clinical failure is significant at 25%. If stent placement allows neoadjuvant chemotherapy, it may increase the rate of R0 resections. Perforations may raise local recurrence and mortality rates., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Oncological outcomes of self-expanding metallic stent used as a bridge to surgery in potential curative patients with left-sided colonic cancer obstruction remain unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate perioperative and mid-term oncological outcomes of 2 of the currently most commonly performed treatments in left-sided colonic cancer obstruction., Methods: This is a retrospective multicenter study including patients with left-sided colonic cancer obstruction treated with curative intent between 2013 and 2017. The presence of metastasis at diagnosis was an exclusion criterion. The primary outcome was to evaluate the noninferiority, in terms of overall survival, of bridge to surgery strategy compared with emergency colonic resection. The secondary outcomes were perioperative morbimortality, disease free survival, local recurrence, and distant recurrence., Results: A total of 564 patients were included, 320 in the emergency colonic resection group and 244 in the bridge to surgery group. Twenty-seven patients of the bridge-to-surgery group needed urgent operation. Postoperative morbidity rates were statistically higher in the emergency colonic resection group (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.37 [0.24-0.55], P < .001). There was no difference in 90-day mortality between groups (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.85 [0.36-1.99], P = .702). The median follow-up was 3.80 years (2.29-4.92). The results show the noninferiority of bridge to surgery versus emergency colonic resection in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval) 0.78 [0.56-1.07], P = .127). There were no differences in disease free survival, distant recurrence, and local recurrence rates between bridge to surgery and emergency colonic resection groups., Conclusion: Self-expanding metallic stent as bridge to surgery might not lead to a negative impact on the long-term prognosis of the tumor compared with emergency colonic resection in expert hands and selected patients., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The key priority for obstructed colon cancer (OCC) is urgent resolution of the large bowel obstruction with ideally no compromise of oncological outcomes and low initial and permanent ostomy rates. Proactive management is pivotal to decrease the risk of perforation and septic shock. Staged procedures have an important place to provide optimal treatment and offer similar treatment and outcomes as in the elective setting. The approach is tailored to the patient's condition, the oncological situation and expertise of the available surgical team. This overview concludes by proposing a comprehensive treatment algorithm for individualized treatment of OCC., Competing Interests: Les auteurs n’ont déclaré aucun conflit d’intérêts en relation avec cet article.

Background: Whether the timing of stoma reversal after emergency diversion for obstructive left-sided colon cancer affects patient outcomes is unknown. Our study compared the short- and long-term outcomes of two- and three-stage operations for obstructive left-sided colon cancer., Methods: Patients with obstructive left-sided colon cancer who underwent staged resection at a referral hospital between January 2002 and December 2015 were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics and outcomes were analysed and compared between the two groups. Statistical significance was set as p < 0.05., Results: A total of 191 patients were reviewed. The overall complication rate was higher for two-stage surgery than for three-stage surgery (57.1% versus 36.0%, p < 0.01). Surgical site infection and/or wound dehiscence were the most common complications. Other complications, including anastomotic leakage, ileus, and bowel obstruction, were not significantly different between the two groups. The five-year overall survival and disease-free survival in stage II and III patients were comparable., Conclusion: Among patients with obstructive left-sided colon cancer who underwent staged resection, two-stage surgery was associated with a higher complication rate, especially for surgical site infection and/or wound dehiscence, which could be managed by local treatment. The timing of stoma reversal was not associated with survival differences in patients with stage II and III disease. However, issues such as the location of the tumour and diverting stoma, along with the need to resect other upper abdominal organs, should all be considered when deciding between two- and three-stage surgeries., (© 2022 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.)

Background: The placement of a self-expanding metal stent in patients with obstructive colon cancer is used as a bridge to surgery. However, due to a lack of consensus and insufficient data, the long-term oncologic outcomes after colonic SEMS placement remain unclear. We assessed the long-term oncologic outcomes and adverse effects of colonic stenting for malignant colonic obstruction., Methods: We included 198 patients admitted to Korea University Anam Hospital between 2006 and 2014 for obstructive colon cancer, of whom 98 underwent SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery and 100 underwent direct surgery without stenting. The clinicopathologic characteristics, overall survival, and disease-free survival were compared., Results: There were no significant differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between the two groups. The median follow-up durations were 61.55 and 58.64 months in the SEMS and DS groups, respectively. There were also no significant differences in the 5-year OS (77.4% vs. 74.2%, p = 0.691) and 5-year DFS (61.7% vs. 71.0%, p = 0.194) rates between the groups. However, the DS group had significantly more early postoperative complications (p = 0.002)., Conclusions: Colonic SEMS deployment as a bridge to surgery did not negatively affect long-term oncologic outcomes when compared with DS. In addition, colonic stenting decreased early postoperative complications and reduced the time for patients to return to normal daily activities., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)