Colonic stent versus emergency surgery as treatment of malignant colonic obstruction in the palliative setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Ribeiro Igor1,Bernardo Wanderley2,Martins Bruno1,de Moura Diogo1,Baba Elisa1,Josino Iatagan1,Miyajima Nelson1,Coronel Cordero Martin1,Visconti Thiago1,Ide Edson1,Sakai Paulo1,de Moura Eduardo1

Affiliation:

1. Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo – HC/FMUSP, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, São Paulo, Brazil

2. Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo – HC/FMUSP, Thoracic Surgery Department, São Paulo, Brazil

Abstract

Abstract Background and study aims Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy and the third leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Malignant colonic obstruction (MCO) due to CRC occurs in 8 % to 29 % of patients.The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing colonic SEMS versus emergency surgery (ES) for MCO in palliative patients. This was the first systematic review that included only randomized controlled trials in the palliative setting. Methods A literature search was performed according to the PRISMA method using online databases with no restriction regarding idiom or year of publication. Data were extracted by two authors according to a predefined data extraction form. Primary outcomes were: mean survival, 30-day adverse events, 30-day mortality and length of hospital stay. Stoma formation, length of stay on intensive care unit (ICU), technical success and clinical success were recorded for secondary outcomes. Technical success (TS) was defined as successful stent placement across the stricture and its deployment. Clinical success (CS) was defined as adequate bowel decompression within 48 h of stent insertion without need for re-intervention. Results We analyzed data from four RCT studies totaling 125 patients. The 30-day mortality was 6.3 % for SEMS-treated patients and 6.4 % for ES-treated patients, with no difference between groups (RD: – 0.00, 95 % CI [–0.10, 0.10], I2: 0 %). Mean survival was 279 days for SEMS and 244 days for ES, with no significant difference between groups (RD: 20.14, 95 % CI: [–42.92, 83.21], I2: 44 %). Clinical success was 96 % in the ES group and 86.1 % in the SEMS group (RD: – 0.13, 95 % CI [–0.23, – 0.02], I2: 51 %). Permanent stoma rate was 84 % in the ES group and 14.3 % in the SEMS group (RR: 0.19, 95 % CI: [0.11, 0.33], I2: 28 %). Length of hospital stay was shorter in SEMS group (RD: – 5.16, 95 % CI: [–6.71, – 3.61], I2: 56 %). There was no significant difference between groups regarding adverse events (RD 0.18, 95 % CI: [–0.19, 0.54;]) neither regarding ICU stay. (RD: – 0.01, 95 % CI: [–0.08, 0.05], I2: 7 %). The most common stent-related complication was perforation (42.8 % of all AE). Conclusion Mortality, mean survival, length of stay in the ICU and early complications of both methods were similar. SEMS may be an alternative to surgery with the advantage of early hospital discharge and lower risk of permanent stoma.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology,Medicine (miscellaneous)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3