Acute Treatment of Malignant Colorectal Occlusion: Real Life Practice

• Main Author: Fernandes, D
• Publication Date: 2016
• Other Authors: Domingues, S, Gonçalves, BM, Bastos, P, Ferreira, A, Rodrigues, A, Gonçalves, R, Lopes, L, Rolanda, C
• Format: Article
• Language: eng
• Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
• Download full: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.23/1203
• topic: Neoplasias Colorrectais; Obstrução Intestinal; Stents

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer presents itself as acute bowel occlusion in 10-40% of patients. There are two main therapeutic approaches: urgent surgery and endoluminal placement self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS). AIMS AND METHODS: This study intended to better clarify the risk/benefit ratio of the above-mentioned approaches. We conducted a retrospective longitudinal multicenter study, including 189 patients with acute malignant colorectal occlusion, diagnosed between January 2005 and March 2013. RESULTS: Globally (85 patients - 35 bridge-to-surgery and 50 palliative), SEMS's technical success was of 94%. Palliative SEMS had limited clinical success (60%) and were associated with 40% of complications. SEMS occlusion (19%) was the most frequent complication, followed by migration (9%) and bowel perforation (7%). Elective surgery after stenting was associated with a higher frequency of primary anastomosis (94% vs. 76%; p = 0.038), and a lower rate of colostomy (26% vs. 55%; p = 0.004) and overall mortality (31% vs. 57%; p = 0.02). However, no significant differences were identified concerning postoperative complications. Regarding palliative treatment, no difference was found in the complications rate and overall mortality between SEMS and decompressive colostomy/ileostomy. In this SEMS subgroup, we found a higher rate of reinterventions (40% vs. 5%; p = 0.004) and a longer hospital stay (14, nine vs. seven, three days; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: SEMS placement as a bridge-to-surgery should be considered in the acute treatment of colorectal malignant occlusion, since it displays advantages regarding primary anastomosis, colostomy rate and overall mortality. In contrast, in this study, palliative SEMS did not appear to present significant advantages when compared to decompressive colostomy.