<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">TAKAHASHI, HIROYUKI</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">KOJIMA, DAIBO</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">WADA, HIDEO</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">HANAOKA, KATSUZO</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">WATANABE, TOSHIFUMI</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">NAGANO, HIDEKI</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">YAMAKADO, JIN</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MATSUDA, AOI</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IRIE, HISATOSHI</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MAKI, TOSHIMITSU</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">HAMAHATA, KEISUKE</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">HAYASHI, TAKAOMI</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">HIRANO, YOSUKE</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">KAIDA, HIROKI</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">KAWAMOTO, MAKOTO</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SHIBATA, RYOSUKE</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MIYASAKA, YOSHIHIRO</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">HIGASHI, DAIJIRO</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">WATANABE, MASATO</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Bridge to Curative Surgery for Obstructive Colorectal Cancer: Self-expandable Metallic Stent &lt;em&gt;Versus&lt;/em&gt; Decompression Tube</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anticancer Research</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2024</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2024-08-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3427-3441</style></pages><doi><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.21873/anticanres.17163</style></doi><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">44</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Background/Aim: Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement is becoming the standard bridge-to-surgery (BTS) strategy for potentially curable left-sided obstructive colorectal cancer (OCRC). The study objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of SEMS placement as a BTS strategy for both right- and left-sided OCRC. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively compared the short- and long-term outcomes of patients with OCRC who underwent placement of a SEMS versus a trans-nasal/anal decompression tube (DCT). The cohort comprised 57 patients with stage II/III right-sided OCRC (DCT, n=20; SEMS, n=8) or left-sided OCRC (DCT, n=9; SEMS, n=20). The short-term outcomes were the incidence of postoperative complications, rate of laparoscopic surgery, rate of stoma construction, and postoperative hospital stay; long-term outcomes were the 3-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). Results: The SEMS group had a higher rate of laparoscopic surgery (85.7% vs. 6.9%, p&lt;0.001), lower rate of stoma construction (10.7% vs. 34.5%, p=0.03), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (14 vs. 17 days, p=0.04) than the DCT group. Both groups had a similar incidence of postoperative complications. The 3-year OS and RFS were also similar in the DCT and SEMS groups for both right-sided OCRC (OS, 75.0% vs. 87.5%, HR=1.51, 95% CI=0.22-10.25, p=0.7; RFS, 65.0% vs. 50.0%, HR=0.97, 95% CI=0.28-3.36, p=0.9) and left-sided OCRC (OS, 88.8% vs. 90.0%, HR=1.19, 95% CI=0.10-14.29, p=0.9; RFS, 77.8% vs. 85.0%, HR=1.03, 95% CI=0.16-6.5, p=0.9). Conclusion: SEMS placement is a reasonable BTS strategy for left- and right-sided OCRC that achieves comparable short- and long-term outcomes to DCT insertion.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>