Self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) for malignant colorectal obstruction is widely used as a bridge to elective surgery or palliative treatment. However, with the increasing use of SEMS for treatment, complication rates associated with stents have been raised as a concern. We experienced a rare migration-related complication that a stent partially migrated out of the anus with an incarceration. A 62-year-old man was admitted with sigmoid malignant obstruction. Due to multiple metastases, he refused to undergo colostomy, and an uncovered SEMS was placed. Subsequently, he started chemotherapy. Seven months after placement, the stent migrated into the rectum. After unsuccessful attempts to extract the stent, he sought our assistance. We observed that half of the stent was outside the anus, and a 15 mm lump of mucosa was embedded in the proximal end of the stent. After several attempts, we successfully removed the SEMS. Stent incarceration following migration is not a common occurrence, but it serves as a reminder that clinicians need to be more vigilant about complications that may arise after stent implantation. We describe this unusual complication and share our experience about the removal of the stent.

Chemotherapy offers a clear benefit in terms of survival rates of stage IV metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients, but this advantage might be mitigated by the theoretical risks of short- and mid-term complications in the cases of contextual self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) positioning, which might also affect survival rates.

We reviewed all available literature from Medline and Scopus databases to study the role of chemotherapy with or without the simultaneous administration of targeted therapy in increasing the risk of the complications after SEMS positioning and, eventually, in affecting the survival rates.

Thirteen retrospective studies and 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) were eligible for the present analysis. The study group consisted of a total of 682 patients. A total of 305 patients were treated with conventional chemotherapy, 212 with conventional chemotherapy also containing targeted therapy, and 165 with no chemotherapy administration. Chemotherapy administration did not increase the rate of SEMS-related complications and these complications did not affect the overall survival rates.

Chemotherapy administration is not associated with a higher risk of SEMS-related complications and a reduction in the survival rates.

Approximately 10% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) develop malignant large bowel obstruction (MLBO) at diagnosis. Furthermore, for 35% of patients with MLBO, curative primary tumor resection is unfeasible because of locally advanced disease and comorbidities. The practice of placing a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) has dramatically increased as an effective palliative treatment. Recent advances in systemic chemotherapy for metastatic CRC have significantly contributed to prolonging patients' prognosis and expanding the indications. However, the safety and efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in patients with SEMS have not been established. This review outlines the current status of this relatively new therapeutic strategy and future perspectives. Some reports on this topic have demonstrated that 1) systemic chemotherapy and the addition of molecular targeted agents contribute to prolonged survival in patients with SEMS; 2) delayed SEMS-related complications are a major concern, and this requires strict patient monitoring; however, primary tumor control by chemotherapy might result in decreased complications, especially regarding re-obstruction; and 3) using bevacizumab could be a risk factor for SEMS-related perforation, which may be lethal. Although this relatively new approach for unresectable stage IV obstructive CRC requires a well-planned clinical trial, this therapy could be promising for patients who are unideal candidates for emergency surgery and require immediate systemic chemotherapy.

It is not clear whether resection of the primary tumour (when there are metastases) alters survival and/or whether resection is associated with increased morbidity. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the prognostic value of primary tumour resection in patients presenting with metastatic colorectal cancer.

A systematic review of MEDLINE/PubMed was performed on 12 March 2016, with no language or date restrictions, for studies comparing primary tumour resection versus conservative treatment without primary tumour resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. The quality of the studies was assessed using the MINORS and STROBE criteria. Differences in survival, morbidity and mortality between groups were estimated using random-effects meta-analysis.

Of 37 412 initially screened articles, 56 retrospective studies with 148 151 patients met the inclusion criteria. Primary tumour resection led to an improvement in overall survival of 7·76 (95 per cent c.i. 5·96 to 9·56) months (risk ratio (RR) for overall survival 0·50, 95 per cent c.i. 0·47 to 0·53), but did not significantly reduce the risk of obstruction (RR 0·50, 95 per cent c.i. 0·16 to 1·53) or bleeding (RR 1·19, 0·48 to 2·97). Neither was the morbidity risk altered (RR 1·14, 0·77 to 1·68). Heterogeneity between the studies was high, with a calculated I² of more than 50 per cent for most outcomes.

Primary tumour resection may provide a modest survival advantage in patients presenting with metastatic colorectal cancer.

The use of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) has been considered an effective and safe alternative to emergency surgery as bridge to surgery or for palliation in advanced colorectal cancer even though more recent data have raised concerns on both early and long-term outcomes when patients are treated with bridge to surgery indications. Areas covered: A comprehensive literature review of articles on endoscopic management of malignant bowel obstruction was performed. Indication, technique, outcomes, benefits and risks of these treatments in acute malignant colonic obstruction were reviewed. The clinical effectiveness and safety of SEMS in obstructive colorectal cancer, as bridge to surgery or for palliation compared to surgery, is discussed. Expert commentary: SEMS placement, when performed in tertiary level center with appropriate expertise in colorectal stenting, may have several advantages over surgery avoiding the potential for surgical morbidity in a typically frail group of patients even though these advantages are to be carefully balanced over the risk of life-threatening, stent-related complications.

Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is an accepted palliative therapy for management of acute malignant bowel obstruction in advanced colorectal cancer. Nevertheless, data are lacking on the effects of systemic chemotherapy combined with colorectal SEMS. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of palliative chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer combined with colorectal SEMS placement.

This multicentre retrospective study included all consecutive advanced colorectal cancer patients who received first-line palliative chemotherapy combined with endoscopic stenting for colorectal cancer with obstruction. We analyzed the number of cycles and the type of combination used. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, response rate, grade 3-4 toxicity and the outcomes of SEMS for malignant colorectal obstruction.

A total of 38 patients were included. Among them, 25 patients received oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil combination chemotherapy. Objective response and stabilization occurred in 38 and 24% of patients, respectively. The median overall survival and progression-free survival from the start of chemotherapy were 18 and 5months, respectively. The objective response rate and overall disease control rate were 38 and 62%, respectively. Toxicity was generally acceptable. Major complications related to stenting included perforation (8%), stent migration (5%), and reobstruction secondary to tumor ingrowths (13%).

Chemotherapy combined with colonic stenting as a first-line treatment seems to be a valid option in advanced colorectal cancer patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.

The benefits of primary tumor resection in metastatic disease remains a matter of debate. Existing data are almost exclusively limited to results from retrospective analyses. Data from prospective, randomized trials are currently not available.

The results from two prospective observational studies involving gastric and rectal cancer patients are presented and discussed in the context of the available literature.

Based on data collected within the prospective quality assurance studies on gastric and rectal cancer conducted by the Institute for Quality Assurance in Surgery at Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany, the long-term outcome after palliative primary tumor resection in patients with International Union Against Cancer (UICC) stage IV rectal cancer (2005-2008, n = 2046) and metastatic gastric cancer (2007-2009, n = 687) was analyzed and compared to published data.

The median survival time following palliative primary tumor resection of UICC stage IV rectal cancer in the patients analyzed was 20 months. In patients with hepatic metastases undergoing metastasectomy the median survival was 38 months. This increased to 58 months for patients with lymph node negative primary tumors. In metastatic gastric cancer patients undergoing palliative (R2) gastric resection and also patients not undergoing surgery showed a prognostic benefit from palliative chemotherapy; however, the median survival time was significantly prolonged if palliative chemotherapy was preceded by resection of the primary tumor (11 versus 7 months, p < 0.001).

Together with previously published data, the results from the two observational studies on rectal and gastric cancer presented here suggest a prognostic benefit from palliative resection of the primary tumor in metastatic disease.

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) are increasingly used in the treatment of malignant large bowel obstruction in the setting of inoperable colorectal cancer. Perforation is a well-known complication associated with these devices. The addition of the vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor bevacizumab is suspected to increase the rate, but the extent of the increase is not known.

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients receiving SEMS in tertiary hospitals in Calgary, Alta., between October 2001 and January 2012.

We reviewed the records of 87 patients with inoperable colorectal cancer who received SEMS during our study period. Nine perforations occurred in total: 4 of 30 (13%) patients who received no chemotherapy, 3 of 47 (6%) who received chemotherapy but no bevacizumab, and 2 of 10 (20%) who received chemotherapy and bevacizumab. These two patients received bevacizumab with FOLFIRI after SEMS placement, and they had peritoneal disease.

Our case series and other studies suggest that bevacizumab may increase the risk of colonic perforation in the setting of SEMS. Caution should be used when combining these therapies.

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.

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.

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02314182.

Recent studies suggest that there is a substantial risk of perforation after colorectal stent placement.

To identify risk factors for perforation from colonic stenting.

A meta-analysis of 86 studies published between 2005 and 2011.

Multicenter review.

All patients who underwent colorectal stent placement.

Colorectal stent placement.

The occurrence of perforation with subgroup analyses for stent design, stricture etiology, stricture dilation, and concomitant chemotherapy, including the use of bevacizumab.

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%).

Heterogeneity; a considerable proportion of data is unavailable for subgroup analysis.

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.

Assess the surgical complications of primary tumor resection in stage IV colon cancer patients previously treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Between July 2001 and September 2010, 67 consecutive patients received preoperative chemotherapy. Clinical and surgical complications were obtained from the medical records. This study was retrospective in design.

All patients were affected with liver metastasis, and 29.8% had metastasis in additional organs. Three different schemes of preoperative chemotherapy were employed, based on FOLFIRI, XELOXIRI or XELOX plus cetuximab. Eighteen patients (26.8%) reported some side effects to the chemotherapy, without contraindicating any intervention. All patients underwent colon surgery and within those, eight patients (11.9%), underwent liver surgery simultaneously. Median hospital admission was 8 [3-29] days. The perioperative complication rate was 16.2%, when the estimated physiological and operative severity score for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (POSSUM) was 58.3%. There was not perioperative mortality, despite the mortality prediction for Portsmouth-POSSUM (P-POSSUM) being 5.07%. No differences were observed between the chemotherapy regimen (P=0.72) or the kind of the surgery-simple or combined (P=0.58).

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a systemic treatment for stage IV colon cancer does not indicate surgery contraindication nor increases postoperative morbimortality by a significant amount.

In asymptomatic patients with Stage IV colorectal cancer, the debate continues over the efficacy of primary resection compared to chemotherapy alone. The aim of this study was to define the optimal management for asymptomatic patients with colorectal cancer and unresectable liver metastases.

Patients receiving elective surgery (n = 17) were compared to patients receiving chemotherapy only (n = 31). Data concerning patients' demographics, location of primary tumor, comorbidities, performance status, Child-Pugh score, extension of liver metastases, size of primary, and other secondary locations were collected.

Thirty-day mortality after chemotherapy was lower than that after surgical resection (19.3% versus 29.4%; not significant). In patients with >75% hepatic involvement, mortality at 1 month was higher after receiving surgical treatment than after chemotherapy alone (50% versus 25%). In patients with <75% hepatic involvement, 30-day mortality was similar in both groups (not significant). Thirty-day mortality in patients with Stage T3 was lower in those receiving chemotherapy (16.7% versus 30%; not significant). Overall survival was similar in both groups. The risk of all-cause death after elective surgery (2.1) was significantly higher than in patients receiving chemotherapy only (P = 0.035).

This study demonstrated that in palliative treatment of asymptomatic unresectable Stage IV colorectal cancer, the overall risk of death was significantly higher after elective surgery compared to patients receiving chemotherapy alone. However, in the literature, there is no substantial difference between these treatments. New studies are required to better evaluate outcomes.

Management of patients with synchronous liver metastasis (SLM) is complex and the surgical decision process should be based on a comprehensive oncological strategy. The aim of the study was to compare outcome of single-center management of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and resectable SLM to those of referred patients for liver resection only after removal of their primary tumor (PT).

Between 2000 and 2007, 47 patients with CRC and SLM underwent resection of both the PT and metastases under our care (unicentric) and 32 were referred after resection of their PT.

The two groups were comparable for demographics, PT and metastatic disease data. In unicentric group, 23% received upfront chemotherapy with the PT in place, 53% had a combined CRC and SLM resection, 11% had a two-stage hepatectomy with resection of the primary during the first stage and 36% underwent delayed hepatectomy. The number of surgical interventions, the delay between diagnosis and liver resection (9 vs. 5 months, P < 0.001), the median number of cycles of chemotherapy before hepatectomy (12 vs. 6 months, P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the referred group. Postoperative morbidity was significantly higher in the referred group (75 vs. 47%, P = 0.023). The median follow-up was 43 months. OS and DFS were not significantly different between the two groups.

Although the survival benefit is not proven, single-center management of patients with CRC and resectable SLM reduces the number of interventions, the number of cycles of chemotherapy and postoperative morbidity.

Fifteen percent to twenty-five percent of patients affected by colorectal cancer presents with liver metastases at diagnosis. In resectable cases, surgery is the only potentially curative treatment and achieves survival rates up to 50% at 5 years. Management is complex, as colorectal resection, liver resection, chemotherapy, and, in locally advanced mid/low rectal tumors, radiotherapy have to be integrated. Modern medical practice usually relies on evidence-based protocols. Levels of evidence for synchronous metastases are poor: published studies include few recent prospective series and several retrospective analyses collecting a limited number of patients across long periods of time. Data are difficult to be generalized and are mainly representative of single centre's experience, biased by local recruitment, indications and surgical technique. In this context, surgeons have to renounce to "evidence-based medicine" and to adopt a sort of "experience-based medicine". Anyway, some suggestions are possible. Simultaneous colorectal and liver resection can be safely performed whenever minor hepatectomies are planned, while a case-by-case evaluation is mandatory in case of more complex procedures. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is preferentially scheduled for patients with advanced metastatic tumors to assess disease biology and to control lesions. It can be safely performed with primary tumor in situ, even planning simultaneous resection at its end. Locally advanced mid/low rectal tumor represents a further indication to neoadjuvant therapies, even if treatment's schedule is not yet standardized. In summary, several issues have to be solved, but every single HPB centre should define its proper strategy to optimize patient's selection, disease control and safety and completeness of surgery.

In a majority of patients with stage IV colorectal cancer, the metastatic disease is not resectable and the focus of management is on how best to palliate the patient. How to manage the primary tumour is an important part of palliation. A small proportion of these patients present with either obstructing or perforating cancers and require urgent surgical care. However, a majority are relatively asymptomatic from their primary cancer. Chemotherapy has been shown to prolong survival in this group of patients, and a majority of patients would be treated this way. Nonetheless, A recent meta-analysis (Stillwell 2010) suggests an improved overall survival and reduced requirement for emergency surgery in those patients who undergo primary tumour resection. This review was also able to quantify the mortality and morbidity associated with surgery to remove the primary.

To determine if there is an improvement in overall survival following resection of the primary cancer in patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer and an asymptomatic primary who are treated with chemo/radiotherapy.

In January 2012 we searched for published randomised and non-randomised controlled clinical trials without language restrictions using the following electronic databases: CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library (latest issue)), MEDLINE (1966 to date), EMBASE (1980 to date), Science Citation Index (1981 to date), ISI Proceedings (1990 to date), Current Controlled Trials MetaRegister (latest issue), Zetoc (latest issue) and CINAHL (1982 to date).

Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled studies evaluating the influence on overall survival of primary tumour resection versus no resection in asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer who are treated with palliative chemo/radiotherapy.

We conducted the review according to the recommendations of The Cochrane Collaboration and the Cochrane Colorectal Group. "Review Manager 5" software was used.

A total of 798 studies were identified following the initial search. No published or unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing primary tumour resection versus no resection in asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer who were treated with chemo/radiotherapy were identified. Seven non-randomised studies, potentially eligible for inclusion, were identified: 2 case-matched studies, 2 CCTs and 3 retrospective cohort studies. Overall, these trials included 1.086 patients (722 patients treated with primary tumour resection, and 364 patients managed first with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy).

Resection of the primary tumour in asymptomatic patients with unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer who are managed with chemo/radiotherapy is not associated with a consistent improvement in overall survival. In addition, resection does not significantly reduce the risk of complications from the primary tumour (i.e.  obstruction, perforation or bleeding). Yet there is enough doubt with regard to the published literature to justify further clinical trials in this area. The results from an ongoing high quality randomised controlled trial will help to answer this question.

The aim of this study was to compare survival in patients that underwent palliative resection treatment versus non-resection for incurable colorectal cancer (ICRC).

The case records of 201 patients with ICRC between January 2000 and December 2009 were reviewed. Demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, the location of the colon cancer, histology, metastasis, treatment options and median survival were analyzed retrospectively. We divided the patients into four groups according to the treatment modalities: resection alone, resection with post-operative chemotherapy, non-resection treatment by chemotherapy alone, and stent or bypass. Median survival times were compared according to each treatment option, and the survival rates were analyzed.

105 patients underwent palliative resection whereas 96 were treated with non-resection modalities. A palliative resection was performed in 44 cases for resection alone and in 61 cases for resection with post-operative chemotherapy. In patients treated with non-resection of the primary tumor, chemotherapy alone was done in 65 cases and stent or bypass in 31 cases. Multivariate analysis showed a median survival of 14 months in patients with palliative resections with post-operative chemotherapy, which was significantly higher than those for chemotherapy alone (8 months), primary tumor resection alone (5 months), and stent or bypass (5 months). Gender, age, ASA score, CEA level, the location of colon cancer, histology and the presence of multiple metastases were not independent factors in association with the median survival rate.

In the treatment of ICRC, palliative resection followed by post-operative chemotherapy shows the most favorable median survival compared to other treatment options.

The aim of the present observational study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 in patients with bowel obstruction.

One-hundred three patients admitted to an emergency unit with clinical and radiological signs of intestinal occlusion of unknown origin were prospectively studied. Patients submitted to emergency surgery were excluded. All patients underwent standard diagnostic procedures and serological assay of tumor markers.

Colorectal cancer was diagnosed in 22 patients (21.4%), while 81 patients (78.6%) presented a benign condition. The sensitivity of CEA, CA 19-9 and CA 72-4 for colorectal cancer was 36.4%, 31.8% and 9.1%, respectively. Marker specificity was 91.4%, 90.1% and 95.1%, respectively. The combination of CEA and CA 19-9 increased the sensitivity to 45.5% but decreased the specificity to 83.9%. The overall accuracy was 79.6%, 77.7% and 76.7%, respectively. All positive cancer cases had advanced disease. All patients with CEA levels >10 ng/mL or CA 19-9 >100 U/mL had colorectal cancer.

Even in a highly selected population, tumor marker sensitivity was rather low and specificity incomplete. However, elevated levels may guide the diagnostic and therapeutic course in patients with obstructing colorectal cancer.

Whether patients with stage IV colon cancer and unresectable distant metastases should be managed by primary colectomy followed by chemotherapy or immediate chemotherapy without resection of the primary tumor is still controversial.

This study aimed to evaluate predictive factors associated with survival in patients with stage IV colon cancer and unresectable distant metastases.

This large retrospective multicentric study included 6 academic hospitals.

This study was conducted at 6 Paris University Hospitals (Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris; Saint Antoine, Henri Mondor, Ambroise Paré, Hôpital Europeen Gorges Pompidou, Bichat, and Avicenne).

Between 1998 and 2007, 208 patients with good performance status and stage IV colon cancer with unresectable distant metastases received chemotherapy, either as initial management or after primary tumor resection.

Survival was estimated by use of the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors associated with survival were tested by means of a log-rank test. Results were expressed as median values with 95% confidence intervals. Factors independently related to survival were tested using a Cox regression model adjusted for a propensity score.

Of the 208 patients, 85 underwent colectomy before chemotherapy, whereas 123 were treated with use of primary chemotherapy with or without biotherapy. At univariate analysis, the following factors were significantly associated with survival: primary colectomy (P = .031), secondary curative surgery (P < .001), well-differentiated primary tumor (P < .001), exclusive liver metastases (P < .027), absence of need for colonic stent (P = .009), and addition of antiangiogenic (P = .001) or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (P = .013) drugs to chemotherapy. After Cox multivariate analysis and after adjusting for the propensity score, all of these factors, with the exception of two, colonic stent and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor drug, were found to be independently associated with overall survival.

This study was limited by its retrospective nature.

In a selected population of patients with colon cancer and unresectable synchronous distant metastases, immediate colectomy followed by chemotherapy in association with targeted therapy was associated with longer overall survival. This strategy appears to be the most appropriate, especially for those with good performance status, well-differentiated tumors, and synchronous liver metastases only.

To analyze short term results and to report survival rates in a series of patients after palliative emergency treatment for obstructive left sided colorectal cancer (CRC) with unresectable synchronous metastases.

From 2004 to 2008, 55 patients were included. Palliative management consisted of stenting to recover bowel patency and starting chemotherapy. Indications for surgery were perforation or failure of stenting. Early failure occurred when decompression after insertion was unsuccessful and late failure when obstruction occurred after successful decompression. Morbidity and mortality were analyzed for stenting and surgery and survival for resected and non-resected patients.

Stenting was scheduled in 49 patients.Morbidity and mortality occurred in 5 and 3 patients respectively. Early failure occurred in 4 patients and late failure in 11 patients. Surgery was indicated in 6 patients for peritonitis at diagnosis and in 11 patients for complications (1 case) or stenting failure (10 cases). Of the 17 operated patients, 12 cases were resected and 5 cases were not. Mortality occurred in 1 case. Resected patients received first-line (12 cases) and second-line (5 cases) systemic chemotherapy based on FOLFIRI or FOLFOX while stented and non-resected patients were similarly treated in 37 cases and 12 cases respectively. Overall survival at 2 years was 39.3% in resected patients and 1% in stented and non-resected patients (p = 0.008).

Stenting in palliative stage IV obstructive CRC patients may be less successful as previously thought. Prospective studies are needed to define the role of palliative resection.