The optimal time interval between the placement of self-expandable metallic stent and elective surgery in patients with obstructive colon cancer

Bong-Hyeon Kye, Ji-Hoon Kim, Hyung-Jin Kim, Yoon Suk Lee, In-Kyu Lee, Won Kyung Kang, Hyeon-Min Cho, Chang-Hyeok Ahn, Seong-Taek Oh, Bong-Hyeon Kye, Ji-Hoon Kim, Hyung-Jin Kim, Yoon Suk Lee, In-Kyu Lee, Won Kyung Kang, Hyeon-Min Cho, Chang-Hyeok Ahn, Seong-Taek Oh

Abstract

A bridge to surgery (BTS) after a colonic stent for obstructive colon cancer has not been accepted as a standard treatment strategy. Also, there is no consensus regarding the optimal time interval for BTS. We aimed to identify the optimal timing for BTS after stent placement to decrease the oncologic risk. We retrospectively collected data of 174 patients who underwent BTS after stent placement for stage II or III obstructive colon cancer from five hospitals. We divided the patients into three groups based on the time interval for BTS after stent placement: within 7 days (Group 1), from 8 to 14 days (Group 2), and after 14 days (Group 3). The primary outcome was to compare the oncologic outcomes including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rate (RR) among the three groups. Groups 1, 2, and 3 involved 75, 56, and 43 patients, respectively. Postoperative morbidity rates were 17.3%, 10.8%, and 9.3% in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.337). RRs were 16.0%, 35.7%, and 30.2% in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.029). In multivariate analysis, the time interval for BTS was an independent risk factor for DFS (P < 0.001; HR, 14.463; 95% CI, 1.458-3.255) and OS (P = 0.027; HR, 4.917; 95% CI, 1.071-3.059). In conclusion, the perioperative short-term outcome was not affected by the time interval of BTS. However, elective surgery within 7 days after colonic stent might be suggested to balance the short-term benefits and long-term oncologic risks.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Long-term oncologic outcomes including disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) based on the time interval between stent placement and definitive surgery. DFS and OS are significantly different among the three groups (P = 0.033 and P = 0.002). Comparing DFS between the pairs (Group 1 vs Group 2 and Group 1 vs Group 3), there were significant differences (P = 0.014 and P = 0.036). Comparing OS between the pairs (Group 1 vs Group 3 and Group 2 vs Group 3), there were significant differences (P = 0.002 and P = 0.002). P-values and CIs have been corrected for multiple testing (Bonferroni correction).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Long-term oncologic outcomes including disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) based on the time interval between stent placement and definitive surgery in stage II and stage III, respectively. (a) DFS curve in stage II, (b) OS in stage II, (c) DFS curve in stage III, and (d) OS in stage III. In both stage II and stage III, DFS in Group I is better than that in Group 2 or 3. In stage III, OS in Group 3 is significantly worse than that in Group 1 or 2. P-values and CIs have been corrected for multiple testing (Bonferroni correction).

References

    1. Ohman U. Prognosis in patients with obstructing colorectal carcinoma. Am. J. Surg. 1982;143:742–747. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(82)90050-2.
    1. Setti Carraro PG, Segala M, Cesana B, Tiberio G. Obstructing colonic cancer: failure and survival patterns over a ten-year follow-up after one-stage curative surgery. Dis. Colon. Rectum. 2001;44:243–250. doi: 10.1007/BF02234300.
    1. Carty N, Corder AP. Which surgeons avoid a stoma in treating left-sided colonic obstruction? Results of a postal questionnaire. Ann. Coll. Surg. Engl. 1992;74:391–394.
    1. Kye BH, et al. Comparison of long-term outcomes between emergency surgery and bridge to surgery for malignant obstruction in right-sided colon cancer: a multicenter retrospective study. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2016;23:1867–1874. doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-5053-7.
    1. Huang X, Lv B, Zhang S, Meng L. Preoperative colonic stents versus emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a meta-analysis. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2014;18:584–591. doi: 10.1007/s11605-013-2344-9.
    1. Erichsen R, et al. Long-term mortality and recurrence after colorectal cancer surgery with preoperative stenting: a Danish nationwide cohort study. Endoscopy. 2015;47:517–24. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1391333.
    1. Matsuda A, et al. Comparison of long-term outcomes of colonic stent as “bridge to surgery” and emergency surgery for malignant large-bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2015;22:497–504. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3997-7.
    1. Sloothaak DA, et al. Oncological outcome of malignant colonic obstruction in the Dutch Stent-In 2 trial. Br. J. Surg. 2014;101:1751–1757. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9645.
    1. van Hooft JE, et al. Self-expandable metal stents for obstructing colonic and extracolonic cancer: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy. 2014;46:990–1053. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1390700.
    1. Sabbagh. C, et al. Is stenting as “a bridge to surgery” an oncologically safe strategy for the management of acute, left-sided, malignant, colonic obstruction? A comparative study with a propensity score analysis. Ann. Surg. 2013;258:107–115. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827e30ce.
    1. Dohmoto M, Rupp KD, Hohlbach G. Endoscopically-implanted prosthesis in rectal carcinoma. Dtsh Med Wochenschr. 1990;115:915.
    1. Keen RR, Orsay CP. Rectosigmoid stent for obstructing colonic neoplasms. Dis. Colon. Rectum. 1992;35:912–913. doi: 10.1007/BF02047883.
    1. Lee GJ, et al. Comparison of short-term outcomes after elective surgery following endoscopic stent insertion and emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer. Int. J. Surg. 2013;11:442–446. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.04.010.
    1. van Hooft JE, et al. Colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute left sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:344–352. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70035-3.
    1. Matsuda A, et al. Optimal Interval From Placement of a Self-expandable Metallic Stent to Surgery in Patients With Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction: A Preliminary Study. Surg. Laparosc. Endosc. Percutan. Tech. 2018;28:239–244.
    1. Gianotti L, et al. A prospective evaluation of short-term and long-term results from colonic stenting for palliation or as a bridge to elective operation versus immediate surgery for large-bowel obstruction. Surg. Endosc. 2013;27:832–842. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2520-0.
    1. Tung KL, Cheung HY, Ng LW, Chung CC, Li MK. Endo-laparoscopic approach versus conventional open surgery in the treatment of obstructing left-sided colon cancer: long-term follow-up of a randomized trial. Asian. J. Endosc. 2013;6:78–81. doi: 10.1111/ases.12030.
    1. Alcantara M, et al. Prospective, controlled, randomized study of intraoperative colonic lavage versus stent placement in obstructive left-sided colonic cancer. World. J. Surg. 2011;35:1904–1910. doi: 10.1007/s00268-011-1139-y.
    1. Maruthanchalam K, Lash GE, Shenton BK, Horgan AF. Tumour cell dissemination following endoscopic stent insertion. Br. J. Surg. 2007;94:1151–1154. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5790.
    1. Broholm M, Kobborg M, Frostberg E, Jeppesen M, Gögenür I. Delay of surgery after stent placement for resectable malignant colorectal obstruction is associated with higher risk of recurrence. Int. J. Colorectal. Dis. 2017;32:513–516. doi: 10.1007/s00384-016-2705-4.
    1. Nitta T, et al. Clinical outcomes of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as palliative treatment for malignant colorectal obstruction: A single-center study from Japan. Ann. Med. Surg. 2017;19:33–36. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2017.05.008.
    1. Kim MK, et al. Outcome of bridge to surgery stenting for obstructive left colon cancer. ANZ. J. Surg. 2017;87:E245–E250. doi: 10.1111/ans.13525.
    1. Dindo D, Dermartines N, Calvien P-A. Classification of surgical complications; a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann. Surg. 2004;240:205–213. doi: 10.1097/.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner