Dolan Patrick T, Abelson Jonathan S, Symer Matthew, Nowels Molly, Sedrakyan Art, Yeo Heather L
Department of Surgery, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, 525 East 68th Street, Box 172, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
J Gastrointest Surg. 2021 Mar;25(3):809-817. doi: 10.1007/s11605-020-04790-5. Epub 2020 Sep 16.
There is controversy surrounding the efficacy and safety of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery compared with immediate resection in patients presenting with an acute malignant large bowel obstruction.
Retrospective longitudinal cohort study using the NYS SPARCS Database. Patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction who either had stent followed by elective surgery within 3 weeks (bridge to surgery) or underwent immediate resection between October 2009 and June 2016 in the state of New York were included. The primary outcome was rate of stoma creation at index resection. Secondary outcomes were 90-day readmission, reoperation, procedural complications, and discharge disposition.
A total of 3059 patients were included, n = 2917 (95.4%) underwent an immediate resection and n = 142 (4.6%) underwent bridge to surgery. We analyzed 139 patients in propensity score-matched groups. Patients in the bridge to surgery group were less likely than those in the immediate resection group to get a stoma at the time of surgery (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.60). They were also less likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility or require a home health aide upon discharge (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22-0.61). There were no differences in rates of 90-day readmission, reoperation, or procedural complications between groups.
Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery leads to less stoma creation, a significant quality of life advantage, compared with immediate resection. Patients should be counseled regarding these potential benefits when the technology is available.
对于急性恶性大肠梗阻患者,结肠支架作为手术桥梁与立即切除相比,其疗效和安全性存在争议。
使用纽约州SPARCS数据库进行回顾性纵向队列研究。纳入2009年10月至2016年6月期间在纽约州患有急性恶性大肠梗阻且在3周内接受支架置入后择期手术(手术桥梁)或立即切除的患者。主要结局是初次切除时造口形成率。次要结局是90天再入院率、再次手术率、手术并发症及出院处置情况。
共纳入3059例患者,n = 2917例(95.4%)接受了立即切除,n = 142例(4.6%)接受了手术桥梁治疗。我们分析了倾向评分匹配组中的139例患者。手术桥梁组患者在手术时造口的可能性低于立即切除组(比值比0.33,95%置信区间0.18 - 0.60)。他们出院时被送往康复机构或需要家庭健康护理的可能性也较小(比值比0.36,95%置信区间0.22 - 0.61)。两组之间90天再入院率、再次手术率或手术并发症发生率无差异。
与立即切除相比,结肠支架作为手术桥梁可减少造口形成,这是显著的生活质量优势。当有该技术时,应向患者咨询这些潜在益处。