RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 A Bridge to Curative Surgery for Obstructive Colorectal Cancer: Self-expandable Metallic Stent <em>Versus</em> Decompression Tube
JF Anticancer Research
JO Anticancer Res
FD International Institute of Anticancer Research
SP 3427
OP 3441
DO 10.21873/anticanres.17163
VO 44
IS 8
A1 TAKAHASHI, HIROYUKI
A1 KOJIMA, DAIBO
A1 WADA, HIDEO
A1 HANAOKA, KATSUZO
A1 WATANABE, TOSHIFUMI
A1 NAGANO, HIDEKI
A1 YAMAKADO, JIN
A1 MATSUDA, AOI
A1 IRIE, HISATOSHI
A1 MAKI, TOSHIMITSU
A1 HAMAHATA, KEISUKE
A1 HAYASHI, TAKAOMI
A1 HIRANO, YOSUKE
A1 KAIDA, HIROKI
A1 KAWAMOTO, MAKOTO
A1 SHIBATA, RYOSUKE
A1 MIYASAKA, YOSHIHIRO
A1 HIGASHI, DAIJIRO
A1 WATANABE, MASATO
YR 2024
UL http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/44/8/3427.abstract
AB 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.