Background Although self‐expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement as bridge to surgery (BTS) in patients with left‐sided obstructing colonic cancer has shown promising short‐term results, it is used infrequently owing to uncertainty about its oncological safety. This population study compared long‐term oncological outcomes between emergency resection and SEMS placement as BTS. Methods Through a national collaborative research project, long‐term outcome data were collected for all patients who underwent resection for left‐sided obstructing colonic cancer between 2009 and 2016 in 75 Dutch hospitals. Patients were identified from the Dutch Colorectal Audit database. SEMS as BTS was compared with emergency resection in the curative setting after 1 : 2 propensity score matching. Results Some 222 patients who had a stent placed were matched to 444 who underwent emergency resection. The overall SEMS‐related perforation rate was 7·7 per cent (17 of 222). Three‐year locoregional recurrence rates after SEMS insertion and emergency resection were 11·4 and 13·6 per cent (P = 0·457), disease‐free survival rates were 58·8 and 52·6 per cent (P = 0·175), and overall survival rates were 74·0 and 68·3 per cent (P = 0·231), respectively. SEMS placement resulted in significantly fewer permanent stomas (23·9 versus 45·3 per cent; P < 0·001), especially in elderly patients (29·0 versus 57·9 per cent; P < 0·001). For patients in the SEMS group with or without perforation, 3‐year locoregional recurrence rates were 18 and 11·0 per cent (P = 0·432), disease‐free survival rates were 49 and 59·6 per cent (P = 0·717), and overall survival rates 61 and 75·1 per cent (P = 0·529), respectively. Conclusion Overall, SEMS as BTS seems an oncologically safe alternative to emergency resection with fewer permanent stomas. Nevertheless, the risk of SEMS‐related perforation, as well as permanent stoma, might influence shared decision‐making for individual patients.
We demonstrate long-term pain relief in two-thirds of patients with chronic pain likely caused by adhesions, using cine-MRI and a shared decision-making process. Long-term improvement of pain was achieved in 80% of patients who underwent surgery with concurrent application of an anti-adhesion barrier.
Background Adhesions are a major cause of long-term postsurgical complications in abdominal and pelvic surgery. Existing adhesion scores primarily measure morphological characteristics of adhesions that do not necessarily correlate with morbidity. The aim of this study was to develop a clinical adhesion score (CLAS) measuring overall clinical morbidity of adhesion-related complications in abdominal and pelvic surgery. Methods An international Delphi study was performed to identify relevant score items for adhesion-related complications, including small bowel obstruction, female infertility, chronic abdominal or pelvic pain, and difficulties at reoperation. The CLAS includes clinical outcomes, related to morbidity of adhesions, and weight factors, to correct the outcome scores for the likelihood that symptoms are truly caused by adhesions. In a pilot study, two independent researchers retrospectively scored the CLAS in 51 patients to evaluate inter-observer reliability, by calculating the Intraclass correlation coefficient. During a feasibility assessment, we evaluated whether the CLAS completely covered different clinical scenarios of adhesion-related morbidity. Results Three Delphi rounds were performed. 43 experts agreed to participate, 38(88%) completed the first round, and 32 (74%) the third round. Consensus was reached on 83.4% of items. Inter-observer reliability for the CLAS was 0.95 (95% CI 0.91–0.97). During feasibility assessment, six items were included. As a result, the CLAS includes 22 outcomes and 23 weight factors. Conclusion The CLAS represents a promising scoring system to measure and monitor the clinical morbidity of adhesion-related complications. Further studies are needed to confirm its utility in clinical practice.
Background Colorectal cancer causes the majority of large bowel obstructions and surgical resection remains the gold standard for curative treatment. There is evidence that a deviating stoma as a bridge to surgery can reduce postoperative mortality rate; however, the optimal stoma type is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between ileostomy and colostomy as a bridge to surgery in left-sided obstructive colon cancer. Methods This was a national, retrospective population-based cohort study with 75 contributing hospitals. Patients with radiological left-sided obstructive colon cancer between 2009 and 2016, where a deviating stoma was used as a bridge to surgery, were included. Exclusion criteria were palliative treatment intent, perforation at presentation, emergency resection, and multivisceral resection. Results A total of 321 patients underwent a deviating stoma; 41 (12.7 per cent) ileostomies and 280 (87.2 per cent) colostomies. The ileostomy group had longer length of stay (median 13 (interquartile range (i.q.r.) 10–16) versus 9 (i.q.r. 6–14) days, P = 0.003) and more nutritional support during the bridging interval. Both groups showed similar complication rates in the bridging interval and after primary resection, including anastomotic leakage. Stoma reversal during resection was more common in the colostomy group (9 (22.0 per cent) versus 129 (46.1 per cent) for ileostomy and colostomy respectively, P = 0.006). Conclusion This study demonstrated that patients having a colostomy as a bridge to surgery in left-sided obstructive colon cancer had a shorter length of stay and lower need for nutritional support. No difference in postoperative complications were found.
Background Selected patients with adhesion-related chronic abdominal pain can be treated effectively by adhesiolysis with the application of adhesion barriers. These patients might also have an increased risk to develop adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO). It is unknown how frequently these patients develop ASBO, and how elective adhesiolysis for pain impacts the risk of ASBO. Methods Patients with adhesion-related chronic pain were included in this cohort study with long-term follow-up. The diagnosis of adhesions was confirmed using CineMRI. The decision for operative treatment of adhesions was made by shared agreement based on the correlation of complaints with CineMRI findings. The primary outcome was the 5-years incidence of readmission for ASBO. Incidence was compared between patients with elective adhesiolysis and those treated non-operatively and between patients with and without previous ASBO. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to identify predictive factors for ASBO. Secondary outcomes included reoperation for ASBO and self-reported pain and other abdominal symptoms. Results A total of 122 patients were included, 69 patients underwent elective adhesiolysis. Thirty patients in both groups had previous episodes of ASBO in history. During 5-year follow-up, the readmission rate for ASBO was 6.5% after elective adhesiolysis compared to 26.9% after non-operative treatment (p = 0.012). These percentages were 13.3% compared to 40% in the subgroup of patients with previous episodes of ASBO (p = 0.039). In multivariable analysis, elective adhesiolysis was associated with a decreased risk of readmission for ASBO with an odds ratio of 0.21 (95% CI 0.07–0.65), the risk was increased in patients with previous episodes with a odds ratio of 19.2 (95% CI 2.5–144.4). There was no difference between the groups in the prevalence of self-reported abdominal pain. However, in surgically treated patients the impact of pain on daily activities was lower, and the incidence of other symptoms was lower. Conclusion More than one in four patients with chronic adhesion-related pain develop episodes of ASBO when treated non-operatively. Elective adhesiolysis reduces the incidence of ASBO in patients with chronic adhesion-related symptoms, both in patients with and without previous episodes of ASBO in history. Trial registration The study was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov under NCT01236625.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.