|
1
|
Yilmaz S, Aryal K, King J, Bischof JJ, Hong AS, Wood N, Gould Rothberg BE, Hudson MF, Heinert SW, Wattana MK, Coyne CJ, Reyes-Gibby C, Todd K, Lyman G, Klotz A, Abar B, Grudzen C, Bastani A, Baugh CW, Henning DJ, Bernstein S, Rico JF, Ryan RJ, Yeung SCJ, Qdaisat A, Padela A, Madsen TE, Liu R, Adler D. Understanding oncologic emergencies and related emergency department visits and hospitalizations: a systematic review. BMC Emerg Med 2025; 25:40. [PMID: 40045233 PMCID: PMC11883922 DOI: 10.1186/s12873-025-01183-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2024] [Accepted: 02/07/2025] [Indexed: 03/09/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with cancer frequently visit the emergency department (ED) and are at high risk for hospitalization due to severe illness from cancer progression or treatment side effects. With an aging population and rising cancer incidence rates worldwide, it is crucial to understand how EDs and other acute care venues manage oncologic emergencies. Insights from other nations and health systems may inform resources necessary for optimal ED management and novel care delivery pathways. We described clinical management of oncologic emergencies and their contribution to ED visits and hospitalizations worldwide. METHODS We performed a systematic review of peer-reviewed original research studies published in the English language between January 1st, 2003, to December 31st, 2022, garnered from PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE. We included all studies investigating adult (≥ 18 years) cancer patients with emergency visits. We examined chief complaints or predictors of ED use that explicitly defined oncologic emergencies. RESULTS The search strategy yielded 49 articles addressing cancer-related emergency visits. Most publications reported single-site studies (n = 34/49), with approximately even distribution across clinical settings- ED (n = 22/49) and acute care hospital/ICU (n = 27/49). The number of patient observations varied widely among the published studies (range: 9 - 87,555 patients), with most studies not specifying the cancer type (n = 33/49), stage (n = 41/49), or treatment type (n = 36/49). Most studies (n = 31/49) examined patients aged ≥ 60 years. Infection was the most common oncologic emergency documented (n = 22/49), followed by pain (n = 20/49), dyspnea (n = 19/49), and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (n = 17/49). Interventions within the ED or hospital ranged from pharmacological management with opioids (n = 11/49), antibiotics (n = 9/49), corticosteroids (n = 5/49), and invasive procedures (e.g., palliative stenting; n = 13/49) or surgical interventions (n = 2/49). CONCLUSION Limited research specifically addresses oncologic emergencies despite the international prevalence of ED presentations among cancer patients. Patients with cancer presenting to the ED appear to have a variety of complaints which could result from their cancers and thus may require tailored diagnostic and intervention pathways to provide optimal acute care. Further acute geriatric oncology research may clarify the optimal management strategies to improve the outcomes for this vulnerable patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sule Yilmaz
- Division of Palliative Care, Department of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, 265 Crittenden Blvd., Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
| | | | - Jasmine King
- The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Jason J Bischof
- Department of Emergency Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Arthur S Hong
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, DallasTexas, USA
| | - Nancy Wood
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
| | - Bonnie E Gould Rothberg
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
| | | | - Sara W Heinert
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Jersey, USA
| | - Monica K Wattana
- Department of Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Christopher J Coyne
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Cielito Reyes-Gibby
- Department of Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Knox Todd
- Department of Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gary Lyman
- Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Adam Klotz
- Emergency Care Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Beau Abar
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
| | - Corita Grudzen
- Emergency Care Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Aveh Bastani
- Department of Emergency Medicine, William Beaumont Hospital, Troy, MI, USA
| | - Christopher W Baugh
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Daniel J Henning
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Steven Bernstein
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Juan Felipe Rico
- Pediatrics and Emergency Medicine, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Richard J Ryan
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Sai-Ching Jim Yeung
- Department of Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Aiham Qdaisat
- Department of Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Aasim Padela
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Troy E Madsen
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Intermountain Health Park City Hospital, Park City, UT, USA
| | - Raymond Liu
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
- Department of Medical Oncology, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - David Adler
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Recuenco CB, Septiem JG, Díaz JA, Vasallo IJT, de la Madriz AA, Carneros VJ, Rodríguez JLR, Navalón JMJ, Miramón FJJ. Effect of self-expandable metal stent on morbidity and mortality and oncological prognosis in malignant colonic obstruction: retrospective analysis of its use as curative and palliative treatment. Int J Colorectal Dis 2022; 37:475-484. [PMID: 35066617 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-04081-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/08/2021] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Acute gastrointestinal obstruction due to colorectal cancer occurs in 7-30% of cases and is an abdominal emergency that requires urgent decompression. The safety and oncological effect of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) in these patients remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate its impact on these variables and compare it with that of emergency surgery (ES). METHODS Descriptive, retrospective and single-centre study, performed between 2008 and 2015, with follow-up until 2017. One hundred eleven patients with diagnosis of left malignant colonic obstruction were included and divided according to the treatment received: stent as bridge to surgery (SBTS group: 39), palliative stent (PS group: 30) and emergency surgery with curative (ECS group: 34) or palliative intent (EPS group: 8). Treatment was decided by the attending surgeon in charge. RESULTS Technical and clinical general success rates for colorectal SEMS were 95.7% and 91.3%, respectively, with an associated morbimortality of 23.2%, which was higher in the PS group (p = 0.002). The SBTS group presented a higher laparoscopic approach and primary anastomosis (p < 0.001), as well as a lower colostomy rate than the ECS group (12.8% vs. 40%; p = 0.023). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were significantly lower in the SBTS group compared to the ECS group (41% vs. 67.6%; p = 0.025). Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were similar between the analysed groups. CONCLUSION Colonic stent placement is a safe and effective therapeutic alternative to emergency surgery in the management of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction in both curative and palliative fields. It presents a lower postoperative morbimortality and a similar oncological prognosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlos Bustamante Recuenco
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora del Prado, Talavera de la Reina, Spain.
| | - Javier García Septiem
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Hospital Universitario La Princesa, Madrid, Spain
| | - Javier Arias Díaz
- Faculty of Medicine, General Surgery, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Controversies of colonic stenting in obstructive left colorectal cancer: a critical analysis with meta-analysis and meta-regression. Int J Colorectal Dis 2021; 36:689-700. [PMID: 33495871 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-03834-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/05/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE After almost three decades since the first description of colonic stents, the controversies of its safe application continue to impede the readiness of adoption by clinicians for malignant left bowel obstruction. This review seeks to address some of the controversial aspects of stenting and its impact on surgical and oncological outcomes. METHODS Medline, Embase, and CNKI were searched for articles employing SEMS for left colonic obstruction. Outcomes analyzed include success rates, complications, and long-term survival. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated. RESULTS 36 studies were included with 2002 patients across seven randomized controlled trials and 29 observational studies. High technical (92%) and clinical (82%) success rates, and low rates of complications, including perforation (5%), were found. Those with > 8% perforation rates had poorer technical success rates than those with ≤ 8%, but there were no significant differences in 90-day in-hospital mortality and three and 5-year overall and disease-free survival. A significant increase was found in technical (RR = 1.094; CI, 1.041-1.149; p < 0.001) and clinical (RR = 1.158; CI, 1.064-1.259; p = 0.001) success rates when the duration between stenting and surgery was ≥ 2 weeks compared to < 2 weeks, but there were no significant differences in perforation rates, 90-day in-hospital mortality, and long-term survival. CONCLUSIONS Colonic stenting is safe and effective with high success rates and low complication rates. However, outcomes of higher perforation rates and optimal timing from stent till surgery remain unclear, with only a few studies reporting on these outcomes, leaving areas for future research.
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Simillis C, Kalakouti E, Afxentiou T, Kontovounisios C, Smith JJ, Cunningham D, Adamina M, Tekkis PP. Primary Tumor Resection in Patients with Incurable Localized or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. World J Surg 2019; 43:1829-1840. [DOI: 10.1007/s00268-019-04984-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
|
|
5
|
Urgent Management of Obstructing Colorectal Cancer: Divert, Stent, or Resect? J Gastrointest Surg 2019; 23:425-432. [PMID: 30284201 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-018-3990-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2017] [Accepted: 09/20/2018] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
Despite the availability of effective colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies, up to 10% of CRC patients present with obstructive symptoms as the first sign of disease. For patients with acute or subacute malignant obstruction that requires urgent intervention, treatment options include endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery, one-stage surgical resection and anastomosis, or diverting ostomy which may or may not be followed by later tumor resection and stoma closure. However, to date, there is no consensus guideline for the optimal approach to manage malignant colorectal obstruction. This article aims to illustrate clinical scenarios in palliative, curative, and potentially curative settings, and delineate the key factors to be considered when making an individualized decision in order to determine the optimal treatment.
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Harji DP, Vallance A, Selgimann J, Bach S, Mohamed F, Brown J, Fearnhead N. A systematic analysis highlighting deficiencies in reported outcomes for patients with stage IV colorectal cancer undergoing palliative resection of the primary tumour. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2018; 44:1469-1478. [PMID: 30007475 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.06.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2018] [Revised: 05/24/2018] [Accepted: 06/11/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Management of the primary tumour in the presence of unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is controversial. The role of primary tumour resection (PTR) has been investigated by a number of retrospective cohort studies, with a number on going randomised controlled trials. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical and patient-reported outcomes currently reported in studies that evaluate the role of PTR in mCRC. METHODS Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE (via OvidSP) (1966-June 2017), EMBASE (via OvidSP) and the Cochrane Library using terms related to colorectal cancer and primary tumour resection. All studies documenting outcomes following palliative PTR were included. Eligible articles were assessed using the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomised Studies of Intervention (ROBINS-I) tool. RESULTS Of 11,209 studies screened, 59 non-randomised studies reporting outcomes on 331,157 patients were included. Patient characteristics regarding performance status and co-morbidity were recorded in 26 (44.1%) and 17 (28.8%) studies. The chemotherapy regime used was reported in 27 (45.8%) studies. The operative setting and the operative approach was reported in 42 (71%) and 14 (23.7%) studies. Post-operative mortality and morbidity were reported in 33 (55.9%) and 35 (59.3%) studies. Overall survival was reported in 49 (83.1%) studies, with 5 different definitions identified. Quality of life was only reported in 1 (1.7%) study. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates significant heterogeneity in the selection and definition of outcomes reported following PTR in mCRC. There is significant heterogeneity with a significant under-reporting of important outcomes such as treatment related adverse events and patient reported outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deena P Harji
- Newcastle Centre of Bowel Disease, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, UK.
| | - Abigail Vallance
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons, London, UK
| | - Jenny Selgimann
- Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Simon Bach
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Faheez Mohamed
- Peritoneal Malignancy Institute, North Hampshire Hospital, Hampshire Hospital Foundation Trust, Basingstoke, UK
| | - Julia Brown
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, UK
| | - Nicola Fearnhead
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Biondo S, Frago R, Kreisler E, Espin-Basany E. Impact of resection versus no resection of the primary tumor on survival in patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous unresectable metastases: protocol for a randomized multicenter study (CR4). Int J Colorectal Dis 2017; 32:1085-1090. [PMID: 28497402 DOI: 10.1007/s00384-017-2827-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/27/2017] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer and synchronous unresectable metastases (stage IV) can benefit from resection of the primary tumor in terms of an improvement in cancer-specific survival. METHODS Stage IV colorectal cancer patients are eligible for inclusion in a randomized multicenter study carried out in 22 hospitals throughout Spain. Exclusion criteria are rectal tumors below 12 cm from the anal verge or locally advanced tumors, multiple bone or central nervous system metastases, and history of another primary cancer. The parallel design of the trial includes an arm of systemic chemotherapy alone versus an arm of resection of the primary tumor plus systemic chemotherapy after surgery. The primary endpoint of the study is cancer-specific survival that is assessed with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Secondary endpoints are postoperative morbidity and mortality associated with resection of the primary tumor, complications and need of surgery in patients treated with systemic chemotherapy only, safety of systemic chemotherapy in both treatment strategies, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS Confirmation of a survival benefit of surgical resection of the primary tumor in stage IV colorectal cancer patients not amenable to curative therapy is very relevant from a clinical and societal perspective, particularly considering the increase in the incidence and prevalence of colorectal cancer in developed countries. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02015923.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sebastiano Biondo
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Bellvitge University Hospital, University of Barcelona and IDIBELL, C/ Feixa Llarga s/n, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08907, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Ricardo Frago
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Bellvitge University Hospital, University of Barcelona and IDIBELL, C/ Feixa Llarga s/n, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08907, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Esther Kreisler
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Bellvitge University Hospital, University of Barcelona and IDIBELL, C/ Feixa Llarga s/n, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, 08907, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Eloy Espin-Basany
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Autonomic University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
't Lam-Boer J, Van der Geest LG, Verhoef C, Elferink ME, Koopman M, de Wilt JH. Palliative resection of the primary tumor is associated with improved overall survival in incurable stage IV colorectal cancer: A nationwide population-based propensity-score adjusted study in the Netherlands. Int J Cancer 2016; 139:2082-94. [DOI: 10.1002/ijc.30240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2016] [Revised: 05/04/2016] [Accepted: 05/10/2016] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jorine 't Lam-Boer
- Department of Surgery; Radboud University Medical Center; Nijmegen The Netherlands
| | | | - Cees Verhoef
- Department of Surgery; Erasmus Medical Center; Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | | | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology; University Medical Center Utrecht; Utrecht The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H. de Wilt
- Department of Surgery; Radboud University Medical Center; Nijmegen The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Abstract
Acute malignant colorectal obstruction (AMCO) is an emergency associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). Emergency surgery is standard therapy for AMCO, and 1-stage surgery without colostomy is preferable, but it is occasionally difficult in the emergency setting. A self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) enables noninvasive colonic decompression and subsequent 1-stage surgery, which has been widely applied for CRC with AMCO. However, recent accumulation of high-quality evidence has highlighted some problems and the limited efficacy of SEMS for AMCO. In palliative settings, SEMS placement reduces hospital stay and short-term complication rates, whereas it increases the frequency of long-term complications, such as delayed perforation. SEMS placement does not seem compatible with recent standard chemotherapy including bevacizumab. As a bridge to surgery, while SEMS placement provides a lower clinical success rate than emergency surgery, it can facilitate primary anastomosis without stoma. However, evidence regarding long-term survival outcomes with SEMS in both palliative and bridge to surgery settings is lacking. The efficacy of transanal colorectal tube placement, another endoscopic treatment, has been reported, but its clinical evidence level is low due to the limited number of studies. This review article comprehensively summarizes the current knowledge about surgical and endoscopic management of CRC with AMCO.
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Cotte E, Villeneuve L, Passot G, Boschetti G, Bin-Dorel S, Francois Y, Glehen O, The French Research Group of Rectal Cancer Surgery (GRECCAR). GRECCAR 8: impact on survival of the primary tumor resection in rectal cancer with unresectable synchronous metastasis: a randomized multicentre study. BMC Cancer 2015; 15:47. [PMID: 25849254 PMCID: PMC4327953 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1060-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2014] [Accepted: 01/29/2015] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A majority of patients with rectal cancer and metastasis are not eligible to curative treatment because of an extensive and unresectable metastatic disease. Primary tumor resection is still debated in this situation. Rectal surgery treats or prevents the symptoms and avoids the risk of acute complications related to the primary tumor. Several studies on colorectal cancers seem to show interesting results in terms of survival in favor to the resection of the primary tumor. To date, no randomized trial or even a prospective study has assessed the impact of primary tumor resection on overall survival in patients with colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis. All published studies were retrospective and included colon and rectal cancers. Rectal cancer is associated with specific problems related to the rectal surgery. Surgery is more complex, and may be source of more morbidity and postoperative functional dysfunctions (stoma, digestive, sexual, urinary) than colic surgery. On the other hand, symptoms related to the progression of rectal tumor are often very disabling: pain, rectal syndrome. METHODS/DESIGN GRECCAR 8 is a multicentre randomized open-label controlled trial aimed to evaluate the impact on survival of the primary tumor resection in rectal cancer with unresectable synchronous metastasis. Patients must undergo upfront systemic chemotherapy for at least 4 courses before inclusion. Patients with progressive metastatic disease during upfront chemotherapy will be excluded from the study. Patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to Arm A: primary tumor resection followed by systemic chemotherapy versus Arm B: systemic chemotherapy alone. Primary endpoint will be overall survival measured from the date of randomization to the date of death or to the end of follow-up (2 years). Secondary endpoints will include progression-free survival, quality of life, toxicity of chemotherapy, response of the primary tumor and metastatic disease to chemotherapy, postoperative morbidity and mortality, rate of patient not eligible for postoperative chemotherapy (arm A), primary tumor related complications and rate of emergency surgery (arm B). The number of patients needed is 290. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02314182.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eddy Cotte
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
- Université Lyon 1, EMR 3738, Lyon-Sud/Charles Mérieux Medical University, Oullins, France
| | - Laurent Villeneuve
- Université Lyon 1, EMR 3738, Lyon-Sud/Charles Mérieux Medical University, Oullins, France
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Unité de Recherche Clinique, Pôle IMER, Lyon, France
| | - Guillaume Passot
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
- Université Lyon 1, EMR 3738, Lyon-Sud/Charles Mérieux Medical University, Oullins, France
| | - Gilles Boschetti
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - Sylvie Bin-Dorel
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Unité de Recherche Clinique, Pôle IMER, Lyon, France
| | - Yves Francois
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
- Université Lyon 1, EMR 3738, Lyon-Sud/Charles Mérieux Medical University, Oullins, France
| | - Olivier Glehen
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
- Université Lyon 1, EMR 3738, Lyon-Sud/Charles Mérieux Medical University, Oullins, France
| | - The French Research Group of Rectal Cancer Surgery (GRECCAR)
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
- Université Lyon 1, EMR 3738, Lyon-Sud/Charles Mérieux Medical University, Oullins, France
- Hospices Civils de Lyon, Unité de Recherche Clinique, Pôle IMER, Lyon, France
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
van den Berg MW, Ledeboer M, Dijkgraaf MGW, Fockens P, ter Borg F, van Hooft JE. Long-term results of palliative stent placement for acute malignant colonic obstruction. Surg Endosc 2014; 29:1580-5. [DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-3845-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2014] [Accepted: 08/19/2014] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
|
12
|
Costi R, Leonardi F, Zanoni D, Violi V, Roncoroni L. Palliative care and end-stage colorectal cancer management: The surgeon meets the oncologist. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20:7602-7621. [PMID: 24976699 PMCID: PMC4069290 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i24.7602] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2013] [Accepted: 04/09/2014] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a common neoplasia in the Western countries, with considerable morbidity and mortality. Every fifth patient with CRC presents with metastatic disease, which is not curable with radical intent in roughly 80% of cases. Traditionally approached surgically, by resection of the primitive tumor or stoma, the management to incurable stage IV CRC patients has significantly changed over the last three decades and is nowadays multidisciplinary, with a pivotal role played by chemotherapy (CHT). This latter have allowed for a dramatic increase in survival, whereas the role of colonic and liver surgery is nowadays matter of debate. Although any generalization is difficult, two main situations are considered, asymptomatic (or minimally symptomatic) and severely symptomatic patients needing aggressive management, including emergency cases. In asymptomatic patients, new CHT regimens allow today long survival in selected patients, also exceeding two years. The role of colonic resection in this group has been challenged in recent years, as it is not clear whether the resection of primary CRC may imply a further increase in survival, thus justifying surgery-related morbidity/mortality in such a class of short-living patients. Secondary surgery of liver metastasis is gaining acceptance since, under new generation CHT regimens, an increasing amount of patients with distant metastasis initially considered non resectable become resectable, with a significant increase in long term survival. The management of CRC emergency patients still represents a major issue in Western countries, and is associated to high morbidity/mortality. Obstruction is traditionally approached surgically by colonic resection, stoma or internal by-pass, although nowadays CRC stenting is a feasible option. Nevertheless, CRC stent has peculiar contraindications and complications, and its long-term cost-effectiveness is questionable, especially in the light of recently increased survival. Perforation is associated with the highest mortality and remains mostly matter for surgeons, by abdominal lavage/drainage, colonic resection and/or stoma. Bleeding and other CRC-related symptoms (pain, tenesmus, etc.) may be managed by several mini-invasive approaches, including radiotherapy, laser therapy and other transanal procedures.
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Mestier LD, Manceau G, Neuzillet C, Bachet JB, Spano JP, Kianmanesh R, Vaillant JC, Bouché O, Hannoun L, Karoui M. Primary tumor resection in colorectal cancer with unresectable synchronous metastases: A review. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2014; 6:156-69. [PMID: 24936226 PMCID: PMC4058723 DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v6.i6.156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2013] [Revised: 04/08/2014] [Accepted: 05/13/2014] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
At the time of diagnosis, 25% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with synchronous metastases, which are unresectable in the majority of patients. Whether primary tumor resection (PTR) followed by chemotherapy or immediate chemotherapy without PTR is the best therapeutic option in patients with asymptomatic CRC and unresectable metastases is a major issue, although unanswered to date. The aim of this study was to review all published data on whether PTR should be performed in patients with CRC and unresectable synchronous metastases. All aspects of the management of CRC were taken into account, especially prognostic factors in patients with CRC and unresectable metastases. The impact of PTR on survival and quality of life were reviewed, in addition to the characteristics of patients that could benefit from PTR and the possible underlying mechanisms. The risks of both approaches are reported. As no randomized study has been performed to date, we finally discussed how a therapeutic strategy's trial should be designed to provide answer to this issue.
Collapse
|
|
14
|
van Halsema EE, van Hooft JE, Small AJ, Baron TH, García-Cano J, Cheon JH, Lee MS, Kwon SH, Mucci-Hennekinne S, Fockens P, Dijkgraaf MGW, Repici A. Perforation in colorectal stenting: a meta-analysis and a search for risk factors. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79:970-82.e7; quiz 983.e2, 983.e5. [PMID: 24650852 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.11.038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 104] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2013] [Accepted: 11/25/2013] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent studies suggest that there is a substantial risk of perforation after colorectal stent placement. OBJECTIVE To identify risk factors for perforation from colonic stenting. DESIGN A meta-analysis of 86 studies published between 2005 and 2011. SETTING Multicenter review. PATIENTS All patients who underwent colorectal stent placement. INTERVENTION Colorectal stent placement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS The occurrence of perforation with subgroup analyses for stent design, stricture etiology, stricture dilation, and concomitant chemotherapy, including the use of bevacizumab. RESULTS A total of 4086 patients underwent colorectal stent placement; perforation occurred in 207. Meta-analysis revealed an overall perforation rate of 7.4%. Of the 9 most frequently used stent types, the WallFlex, the Comvi, and the Niti-S D-type had a higher perforation rate (>10%). A lower perforation rate (<5%) was found for the Hanarostent and the Niti-S covered stent. Stenting benign strictures was associated with a significantly increased perforation rate of 18.4% compared with 7.5% for malignant strictures. Dilation did not increase the risk of perforation: 8.5% versus 8.5% without dilation. The subgroup of post-stent placement dilation had a significantly increased perforation risk of 20.4%. With a perforation rate of 12.5%, bevacizumab-based therapy was identified as a risk factor for perforation, whereas the risk for chemotherapy without bevacizumab was 7.0% and not increased compared with the group without concomitant therapies during stent therapy (9.0%). LIMITATIONS Heterogeneity; a considerable proportion of data is unavailable for subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS The perforation rate of colonic stenting is 7.4%. Stent design, benign etiology, and bevacizumab were identified as risk factors for perforation. Intraprocedural stricture dilation and concomitant chemotherapy were not associated with an increased risk of perforation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emo E van Halsema
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jeanin E van Hooft
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Aaron J Small
- Division of Gastroenterology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Todd H Baron
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Jesús García-Cano
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Virgen de la Luz, Cuenca, Spain
| | - Jae Hee Cheon
- Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei Institute of Gastroenterology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Moon Sung Lee
- Department of Internal Medicine, Soon Chun Hyang University Bucheon Hospital, Bucheon, Korea
| | - Se Hwan Kwon
- Department of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | | | - Paul Fockens
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Alessandro Repici
- Department of Digestive Endoscopy, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Maitra RK, Maxwell-Armstrong CA. Surgical management of obstructed and perforated colorectal cancer: still debating and unresolved issues. COLORECTAL CANCER 2013. [DOI: 10.2217/crc.13.68] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
SUMMARY Emergency surgery for obstruction and perforation from colorectal cancer (CRC) predicts poorer outcomes compared with elective surgery. For obstructed cancers, the evidence suggests significantly poorer outcomes with multistaged procedures compared with single-stage procedures in this group. Stenting remains an attractive option as a ‘bridge-to-surgery’, with multiple single-center studies demonstrating excellent short-term outcomes. However, contradictory evidence from three randomized trials casts doubts on stenting as the preferred modality for initial management of all curative obstructed CRCs. Results from a UK multicenter randomized controlled trial are still awaited. Palliative stenting shows predominantly positive results and is a valuable option for nonresectable or incurable CRCs. All authors agree on emergency surgery as the primary modality of treatment for perforated malignancies. Short-term outcomes are markedly poorer than the elective surgery group and correlate with the degree of peritoneal contamination. Long-term outcomes are comparable to elective surgery when perioperative deaths are excluded.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rudra K Maitra
- Department of Digestive Diseases & Thoracics Directorate, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, E Floor, West Block, NG7 2UH, UK
| | - Charles A Maxwell-Armstrong
- Department of Digestive Diseases & Thoracics Directorate, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, E Floor, West Block, NG7 2UH, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Arbman G, Påhlman L, Glimelius B. The rise and fall of a longed for clinical trial in patients with generalized colorectal cancer. Acta Oncol 2013; 52:1779-82. [PMID: 23826848 DOI: 10.3109/0284186x.2013.812794] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Gunnar Arbman
- Department of Surgery VHN, Vrinnevi Hospital, County Council of Östergötland , Norrköping , Sweden
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Current management of acute malignant large bowel obstruction: a systematic review. Am J Surg 2013; 207:127-38. [PMID: 24124659 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.07.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 123] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2013] [Revised: 07/11/2013] [Accepted: 07/18/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The management of colonic obstruction has changed in recent years. In distal obstruction, optimal treatment remains controversial, particularly after the appearance and use of colonic endoluminal stents. The purpose of this study was to review the current treatment of acute malignant large bowel obstruction according to the level of evidence of the available literature. METHODS A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar for articles published through January 2013 to identify studies of large bowel obstruction and colorectal cancer. Included studies were randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials, reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis. RESULTS After a literature search of 1,768 titles and abstracts, 218 were selected for full-text assessment; 59 studies were ultimately included. Twenty-five studies of the diagnosis and treatment of obstruction and 34 studies of the use of stents were assessed. CONCLUSIONS In view of the various alternatives and the lack of high-grade evidence, the treatment of distal colonic obstruction should be individually tailored to each patient.
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Ahmed S, Shahid R, Leis A, Haider K, Kanthan S, Reeder B, Pahwa P. Should noncurative resection of the primary tumour be performed in patients with stage iv colorectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Oncol 2013; 20:e420-41. [PMID: 24155639 PMCID: PMC3805411 DOI: 10.3747/co.20.1469] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Surgical resection of the primary tumour in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (crc) remains controversial. This review compares survival in patients with advanced crc who underwent surgical resection of the primary tumour with that in patients not undergoing resection, and determines rates of post-operative mortality and nonfatal complications, the primary tumour complication rate, the non-resection surgical procedures rate, and quality of life (qol). METHODS Reports in the central, medline, and embase databases were searched for relevant studies, which were selected using pre-specified eligibility criteria. The search was also restricted to publication dates from 1980 onward, the English language, and studies involving human subjects. Screening, evaluation of relevant articles, and data abstraction were performed in duplicate, and agreement between the abstractors was assessed. Articles that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were collected and synthesized per protocol. RESULTS From among the 3379 reports located, fifteen retrospective observational studies were selected. Of the 12,416 patients in the selected studies, 8620 (69%) underwent surgery. Median survival was 15.2 months (range: 10-30.7 months) in the resection group and 11.4 months (range: 3-22 months) in the non-resection group. Hazard ratio for survival was 0.69 [95% confidence interval (ci): 0.61 to 0.79] favouring surgical resection. Mean rates of postoperative mortality and nonfatal complications were 4.9% (95% ci: 0% to 9.7%) and 25.9% (95%ci: 20.1% to 31.6%) respectively. The mean primary tumour complication rate was 29.7% (95% ci: 18.5% to 41.0%), and the non-resection surgical procedures rate in the non-resection group was 27.6% (95 ci: 15.4% to 39.9%). No study provided qol data. CONCLUSIONS Although this review supports primary tumour resection in advanced crc, the results have significant biases. Randomized trials are warranted to confirm the findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S. Ahmed
- Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
- Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
- Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
| | - R.K. Shahid
- Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
- Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
| | - A. Leis
- Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
| | - K. Haider
- Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
- Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
| | - S. Kanthan
- Department of Surgery, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
| | - B. Reeder
- Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
| | - P. Pahwa
- Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK
| |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Biondo S, Frago R. [Value of tumour resection in colorectal cancer with unresectable metastases]. Cir Esp 2013; 91:349-51. [PMID: 23726476 DOI: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2013.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2013] [Accepted: 05/08/2013] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
|
20
|
Verhoef C, de Wilt JH, Burger JWA, Verheul HMW, Koopman M. Surgery of the primary in stage IV colorectal cancer with unresectable metastases. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47 Suppl 3:S61-6. [PMID: 21944031 DOI: 10.1016/s0959-8049(11)70148-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
UNLABELLED Surgery plays an important role in the treatment of patients with limited metastatic disease of colorectal cancer (CRC). Long term survival and cure is reported in 20-50% of highly selected patients with oligometastatic disease who underwent surgery. This paper describes the role of surgery of the primary tumour in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer. Owing to the increased efficacy of chemotherapeutic regimens in stage IV colorectal cancer, complications from unresected primary tumours are relatively infrequent. The risk of emergency surgical intervention is less than 15% in patients with synchronous metastatic disease who are treated with chemotherapy. Therefore, there is a tendency among surgeons not to resect the primary tumour in case of unresectable metastases. However, it is suggested that resection of the primary tumour in case of unresectable metastatic disease might influence overall survival. All studies described in the literature (n = 24) are non-randomised and the majority is single-centre and retrospective of nature. Most studies are in favour of resection of the primary tumour in patients with symptomatic lesions. In asymptomatic patients the results are less clear, although median overall survival seems to be improved in resected patients in the majority of studies. The major drawback of all these studies is that primarily patients with a better performance status and better prognosis (less metastatic sites involved) are being operated on. Another limitation of these studies is that few if any data on the use of systemic therapy are presented, which makes it difficult to assess the relative contribution of resection on outcome. Prospective studies on this topic are warranted, and are currently being planned. CONCLUSION Surgery of the primary tumour in patients with synchronous metastasised CRC is controversial, although data from the literature suggest that resection might be a positive prognostic factor for survival. Therefore prospective studies on the value of resection in this setting are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Comelis Verhoef
- Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Venderbosch S, de Wilt JH, Teerenstra S, Loosveld OJ, van Bochove A, Sinnige HA, Creemers GJM, Tesselaar ME, Mol L, Punt CJA, Koopman M. Prognostic value of resection of primary tumor in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer: retrospective analysis of two randomized studies and a review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol 2011; 18:3252-60. [PMID: 21822557 PMCID: PMC3192274 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-1951-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 135] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2011] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Background In patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with an asymptomatic primary tumor, there is no consensus on the indication for resection of the primary tumor. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on the outcome of stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with or without resection of the primary tumor treated in the phase III CAIRO and CAIRO2 studies. A review of the literature was performed. Results In the CAIRO and CAIRO2 studies, 258 and 289 patients had undergone a primary tumor resection and 141 and 159 patients had not, respectively. In the CAIRO study, a significantly better median overall survival and progression-free survival was observed for the resection compared to the nonresection group, with 16.7 vs. 11.4 months [P < 0.0001, hazard ratio (HR) 0.61], and 6.7 vs. 5.9 months (P = 0.004; HR 0.74), respectively. In the CAIRO2 study, median overall survival and progression-free survival were also significantly better for the resection compared to the nonresection group, with 20.7 vs. 13.4 months (P < 0.0001; HR 0.65) and 10.5 vs. 7.8 months (P = 0.014; HR 0.78), respectively. These differences remained significant in multivariate analyses. Our review identified 22 nonrandomized studies, most of which showed improved survival for mCRC patients who underwent resection of the primary tumor. Conclusions Our results as well as data from literature indicate that resection of the primary tumor is a prognostic factor for survival in stage IV CRC patients. The potential bias of these results warrants prospective studies on the value of resection of primary tumor in this setting; such studies are currently being planned.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sabine Venderbosch
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Frago R, Kreisler E, Biondo S, Alba E, Domínguez J, Golda T, Fraccalvieri D, Millán M, Trenti L. Complicaciones del tratamiento de la oclusión del colon distal con prótesis endoluminales. Cir Esp 2011; 89:448-55. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2011.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2011] [Revised: 04/08/2011] [Accepted: 04/09/2011] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
|
|
23
|
Frago R, Biondo S, Millan M, Kreisler E, Golda T, Fraccalvieri D, Miguel B, Jaurrieta E. Differences between proximal and distal obstructing colonic cancer after curative surgery. Colorectal Dis 2011; 13:e116-22. [PMID: 21564463 DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02549.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM To study any possible differences in morbidity, mortality and overall survival rate after curative surgery for obstructive colon cancer according to tumour location. METHOD From January 1994 to December 2006, patients with colonic cancer presenting as obstruction were analysed. The two groups were defined as proximal and distal according to the tumour location with respect to the splenic flexure. In relation to the surgeon specialization, patients were operated on by a colorectal surgeon and by a general surgeon. Postoperative morbidity and mortality and cancer-related survival at 3 years were analysed. RESULTS Of the 377 patients included in the study, there were 173 patients (45.9%) in the proximal group and 204 patients (54.1%) in the distal group. The global morbidity was 54.9% without differences in postoperative morbidity except for anastomotic leakage, which was higher in the proximal group (P < 0.014). No differences in postoperative mortality were observed. After patients were stratified by the tumour node metastasis system, the differences between the groups, with respect to 3-year overall survival, cancer-related survival and probability of being free from recurrence, did not reach statistical significance. The overall survival after radical surgery for colonic obstruction was 57.6%. CONCLUSION Mortality and morbidity after emergency surgery for obstructing colon cancer are high. Specialization in colorectal surgery influences postoperative results in terms of lower anastomotic dehiscence rate after emergency proximal colon resection. After radical surgery, tumour location does not appear to influence the prognosis of obstructive colon cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Frago
- Department of Surgery, Colorectal Unit, Bellvitge University Hospital, University of Barcelona and IDIBELL, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|