Long-Term Oncological Outcomes of Endoscopic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery for Malignant Colorectal Obstruction: A Comparative Study.

AIM: With consideration of the theoretical link between the stent insertion and the increased risk of tumor cells spillaged, which may lead to distant metastases, there is a concern about long-term clinical outcomes after the usage of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a "bridge to surgery" in the malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO) treatment. This cohort study aimed to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of SEMS as a bridge to surgery (SEMS group) with those of emergency surgery (ES group) for MCO. METHODS: Twenty-seven patients who underwent semielective curative resection after endoscopic SEMS insertion were included from October 2007 to December 2012 in the SEMS group were compared with 33 patients who underwent emergency curative surgery for MCO during the same period in the ES group. The clinical pathologic characteristics and the overall survival (OS) rate were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographics, tumor stage, location, and histology between the SEMS and ES groups. The median OS times were 37 months for the SEMS group and 23 months for the ES group. The proportions of patients who received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were comparable (SEMS group versus ES group, 70.4% versus 45.5%; P = .138). There were no significant differences in terms of the long-term oncological outcome between two groups in the 3-year OS rate (55.6% versus 39.4%; P = .2119) and the 5-year OS rate (48.1% versus 36.4%; P = .3570). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term oncological outcomes of the SEMS group were comparable to those of the ES group.

Lower rate of colonoscopic perforation: 110,785 patients of colonoscopy performed by colorectal surgeons in a large teaching hospital in China.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopic perforation (CP) has a low incidence rate. However, with the extensive use of colonoscopy, even low incidence rates should be evaluated to identify and address risks. Information on CP is quite limited in China. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to determine the frequency of CP in colonoscopies performed by surgeons at a large teaching hospital in China over a 12-year period. METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records was performed for all patients who had CPs from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2012. Iatrogenic perforations were identified mainly by abdominal X-ray or computed tomography scan. Follow-up information of adverse events post-colonoscopy was identified from the colorectal surgery database of our hospital. Patients' demographic data, colonoscopy procedure information, location of perforation, treatment, and outcome were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 110,785 diagnostic and therapeutic colonoscopy procedures were performed (86,800 diagnostic cases and 23,985 therapeutic cases) within the 12-year study period. A total of 14 incidents (0.012%) of CP were reported (seven males and seven females), of which nine cases occurred during diagnostic colonoscopy (0.01%) and five after therapeutic colonoscopy (three polypectomy cases, one endoscopic mucosal resection, and one endoscopic mucosal dissection). Mean patient age was 67.14 years. One case of CP (7.14%) after colonoscopy polypectomy was treated using curative colonoscopy endoclips. Other patients underwent operations: six cases (46.15%) of primary repair, four cases (28.57%) of resection with anastomosis, and two cases (15.38%) of resection without anastomosis. No obvious perforation was found in one patient (7.69%). Surgeons attempted to treat one case laparoscopically but eventually resorted to open surgery. The postoperative course was uncomplicated in eight cases (57.14%) and complicated in six cases (42.86%) but without mortality. CONCLUSION: CP is a serious but rare complication of colonoscopy. A perforation risk of 0.012% was found in our study. The optimal management of CP remains controversial. Treatment for CP should be individualized according to the patient's condition, related devices, and surgical skills of endoscopists or surgeons. Selective measures such as colonoscopy without intravenous sedation and decrease of loop formation can effectively reduce rates of perforation.