Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Maatweg 3, 3813TZ, Amersfoort, the Netherlands.
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Surg Endosc. 2017 Nov;31(11):4532-4541. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5512-2. Epub 2017 Apr 13.
Traditionally, all patients with a malignant obstruction of the proximal colon (MOPC) are treated with emergency resection. However, recent data suggest that Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement could lower mortality and morbidity rates. This study therefore aimed to compare SEMS placement with emergency resection as treatment options for MOPC.
All consecutive patients that underwent SEMS placement for MOPC in the period 2004-2015 at our institution were identified. SEMS placement was the standard of care for colonic obstructions at our institution in that period. All included SEMS patients were matched (1:4) on age (±5 years), gender, ASA-score, tumor location, surgical approach and pTNM-stage with patients treated by emergency resection. Controls were selected from a national database that prospectively registers all patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer in the Netherlands.
In total, 41 patients received SEMS placement for MOPC. In 19 patients SEMS served as a definite palliative measure and in 22 as bridge to surgery. Technical and clinical success rates of SEMS placement were 92.7% and 90.2%, respectively. No significant differences between the SEMS and emergency resection group were found regarding morbidity and mortality rates, the number of radical resections and the number of primary anastomoses. Patients treated with SEMS were, however, less likely to have a temporary stoma constructed (p = 0.04). No SEMS-related complications occurred in patients in whom SEMS was placed as bridge to surgery, whereas one stent-related perforation, three stent migrations, and five stent re-obstructions were observed in the palliative group. Three re-obstructions could be treated with re-stenting, but all other SEMS-related complications required surgical intervention. In the palliative group, SEMS complications necessitating surgery occurred in 31.6% of the patients (6/19).
SEMS placement for MOPC appears to be a relatively feasible and safe alternative for emergency resection in both the curative and palliative setting.
传统上,所有近端结肠恶性梗阻(MOPC)患者均接受急诊切除术治疗。然而,最近的数据表明,自膨式金属支架(SEMS)置入术可降低死亡率和发病率。因此,本研究旨在比较 SEMS 置入术与急诊切除术作为 MOPC 的治疗选择。
在我院,确定了 2004 年至 2015 年间所有接受 SEMS 置入术治疗 MOPC 的连续患者。在该时期,SEMS 置入术是我院治疗结肠梗阻的标准治疗方法。所有纳入的 SEMS 患者均按年龄(±5 岁)、性别、ASA 评分、肿瘤位置、手术入路和 pTNM 分期与接受急诊切除术治疗的患者进行 1:4 匹配。对照来自一个前瞻性登记荷兰所有接受结直肠癌手术的患者的国家数据库。
共有 41 例患者因 MOPC 接受 SEMS 置入术。19 例 SEMS 作为确定性姑息治疗,22 例作为手术桥接。SEMS 置入术的技术和临床成功率分别为 92.7%和 90.2%。SEMS 组和急诊切除术组在发病率和死亡率、根治性切除数和一期吻合数方面无显著差异。然而,接受 SEMS 治疗的患者更不可能构建临时造口(p=0.04)。在作为手术桥接的 SEMS 患者中,未发生 SEMS 相关并发症,而在姑息治疗组中,观察到 1 例支架穿孔、3 例支架移位和 5 例支架再梗阻。3 例再梗阻可通过再支架治疗,而所有其他 SEMS 相关并发症均需要手术干预。在姑息治疗组中,6/19(31.6%)的患者发生需要手术干预的 SEMS 并发症。
SEMS 置入术治疗 MOPC 在根治性和姑息性治疗中似乎是急诊切除术的一种相对可行和安全的替代方法。