Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes of Colonic Stent as “Bridge to Surgery” and Emergency Surgery for Malignant Large-Bowel Obstruction: A Meta-Analysis

Matsuda, Akihisa; Miyashita, Masao; Matsumoto, Satoshi; Matsutani, Takeshi; Sakurazawa, Nobuyuki; Takahashi, Goro; Kishi, Taro; Uchida, Eiji

doi:10.1245/s10434-014-3997-7

Cited by 143 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to a meta-analysis of 601 patients in eight comparative studies of SEMS insertion as a BTS in emergency surgery for acute obstructive colon cancer (SEMS group = 232; emergency surgery group = 369), the SEMS group had a shorter intensive care unit stay, a lower stoma creation rate, and a lower rate of postoperative complications (including leakage) [16]. However, there was no significant difference in mortality or long-term outcomes between the two groups [8,17]. We previously reported on the high success rate of colonic stents after confirming the safety and feasibility of stent insertion for obstructive colon cancer [9].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery after stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery after stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Matsuda showed with his meta-analytic study including 1136 patients of whom 432 (38%) underwent CS as BTS and 704 (62%) underwent ES that OS, DFS and recurrence did not differ significantly between the CS as BTS and ES groups [34] . Kavanagh conducted an observational comparative study to and B was 6.7 % (one patient) and 5.7% (five patients), respectively.…”

Section: Oncologic (Un)safety Of Sems: What Can Be Found In Literature?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perforation occurred for 5/58 patients treated with colonic stent. 4 with the Wallflex stent and one with D-type stent without statistically significant difference [34] . Van Halsema with a meta-analysis involving 4086 patients revealed an overall perforation rate of 7.4% and noted that of the 9 most frequently used stent types, the WallFlex, the Comvi, and the Niti-S D-type have a higher perforation rate (> 10%).…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

Colonic Stenting in the Management of Acute Left-sided Malignant Colonic Obstruction is Oncologically Safe?

Belinda

Catena

2017

Journal of Tumor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

stoma creation in comparison with emergency surgery, enhancing patients' quality of life, without differences in terms of mortality and morbidity rate. According to available data, at one year follow up time, the recurrence rate is higher in patients treated with stent, with no statistical difference in terms of disease free survival and overall survival. Endoscopist's experience, type of colic obstruction (partial or total), type of stent, insertion technique and timing of surgery are fundamental to reach CS technical and clinical success. Oncologic (un)-safety of colonic stenting has to be still investigated and confirmed by medium and long term follow up of large prospective studies and randomized controlled trials comparing SEMS as bridge to surgery and ES. CS can be strongly considered with palliative intent in patients with advanced neoplastic disease, to avoid stoma and health care costs related to stoma.

show abstract

“…This approach is now validated in the NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence) process [93,109,110]. Moreover, a recent meta-analysis showed that SEMS as a bridge to surgery was equivalent to emergency surgery with respect to overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence [111].…”

Section: Sems As a ''Bridge To Surgery''mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gastrointestinal stenting: Current status and imaging features

Malgras

Dico

Pautrat

et al. 2015

Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of stents in the gastrointestinal tract has been subjected to major changes. Initially, the use of stents was restricted to malignant strictures in patients with metastatic disease. But thanks to reduction of the morbidity and mortality rates, they are now used with curative intention and in patients with benign diseases after careful selection. However, for patients presenting with colon obstruction due to an advanced colon carcinoma, the mortality and morbidity are still high. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of indications, techniques and further developments of the stents in the gastrointestinal tract and to highlight the predominant role of multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) in the detection of potential complications.

show abstract

Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes of Colonic Stent as “Bridge to Surgery” and Emergency Surgery for Malignant Large-Bowel Obstruction: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract: Results of this meta-analysis on long-term as well as well-described short-term outcomes suggest that BTS could be a promising alternative strategy for MLBO patients.

Cited by 143 publications

References 39 publications

Open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery after stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

Open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery after stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

Colonic Stenting in the Management of Acute Left-sided Malignant Colonic Obstruction is Oncologically Safe?

Gastrointestinal stenting: Current status and imaging features

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About