Dataset Information

Colonic Stenting With Elective Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery in the Management of Acute Malignant Colonic Obstruction

ABSTRACT: The use of colonic stenting with elective surgery has been suggested as an alternative management for acute malignant colonic obstruction, as emergency surgery has a high risk of morbidity and mortality. However, the available body of literature addressing their benefit in this setting is contradictory. The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of colonic stenting with elective surgery versus emergency surgery in the management of acute malignant colonic obstruction.

DISEASE(S): Acute Malignant Colonic Obstruction,Colonic Obstruction,Colorectal Cancer,Colorectal Neoplasms,Intestinal Obstruction

PROVIDER: 2155828 | ecrin-mdr-crc |

REPOSITORIES: ECRIN MDR

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Colorectal cancer is the fourth most common cancer in China. Up to 30% of patients with colorectal cancer present with an emergency obstruction of the large bowel at the time of diagnosis, and 70% of all malignant obstruction occurs in the left-sided colon. Patients with obstruction are associated with worse oncologic outcomes compared with those having nonobstructive tumors. Conventionally, patients with malignant large bowel obstruction receive emergency surgery, with morbidity rates of 30%-60% and mortality rates of 7-22%, and about two-thirds of such patients end up with a permanent stoma. Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) haven been used as a bridge to surgery (to relieve obstruction prior to elective surgery) in patients with potentially resectable colorectal cancer. Several clinical trials demonstrate that SEMS as a bridge to surgery may be superior to emergency surgery considering the short-term outcomes. SEMS is associated with lower morbidity and mortality rate, increased primary anastomosis rate, and decreased stoma creation rate. Although about half of patients can achieve primary anastomosis after stent placement, the primary anastomosis rate is still significantly lower compared with nonobstructing elective surgery. The interval between stent placement and surgery may be not long enough that bowel decompression is insufficient at the time of operation. Furthermore，the long-term oncologic results regarding SEMS as a bridge to surgery are still limited and contradictory. Sabbagh et al. suggest worse overall survival of patients with SEMS insertion compared with emergency surgery, the 5-year cancer-specific mortality was significantly higher in the SEMS group (48% vs 21%, respectively, P=0.02). One interpretation is that tumor cells may disseminate during the procedure of colonic stenting placement. We hypothesis that immediate chemotherapy after stenting may improve overall survival by eradicating micrometastasis. Moreover, neoadjuvant chemotherapy prolongs the interval between stent placement and surgery, and the time for bowel decompression is more sufficient, which may increase the success rate of primary anastomosis and decrease risk of stoma formation.

Project description:Patients with obstruction are associated with worse oncologic outcomes compared with those having nonobstructive tumors. Conventionally, patients with malignant large bowel obstruction receive emergency surgery, with morbidity rates of 30%-60% and mortality rates of 7-22%, and about two-thirds of such patients end up with a permanent stoma. Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) haven been used as a bridge to surgery (to relieve obstruction prior to elective surgery) in patients with potentially resectable colorectal cancer. Several clinical trials demonstrate that SEMS as a bridge to surgery may be superior to emergency surgery considering the short-term outcomes. SEMS is associated with lower morbidity and mortality rate, increased primary anastomosis rate, and decreased stoma creation rate. Although about half of patients can achieve primary anastomosis after stent placement, the primary anastomosis rate is still significantly lower compared with nonobstructing elective surgery. The interval between stent placement and surgery may be not long enough that bowel decompression is insufficient at the time of operation. Furthermore#the long-term oncologic results regarding SEMS as a bridge to surgery are still limited and contradictory. Sabbagh et al. suggest worse overall survival of patients with SEMS insertion compared with emergency surgery, the 5-year cancer-specific mortality was significantly higher in the SEMS group (48% vs 21%, respectively, P=0.02). One interpretation is that tumor cells may disseminate during the procedure of colonic stenting placement. Immunotherapy has proven to be highly effective as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). And immunotherapy also has emerged as a neoadjuvant approach, possibly changing treatment strategy for both primary resectable and metastatic CRC. We hypothesis that, regardless of the MSI state, immunotherapy (Camrelizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody) combined with chemotherapy after stenting may improve overall survival by eradicating micrometastasis. Moreover, immunotherapy (Camrelizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody) combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy prolongs the interval between stent placement and surgery, and the time for bowel decompression is more sufficient, which may increase the success rate of primary anastomosis and decrease risk of stoma formation, and furthermore, improve OS and PFS.

Dataset Information

Colonic Stenting With Elective Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery in the Management of Acute Malignant Colonic Obstruction

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets