Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Surgery Today
Erschienen in: Surgery Today 9/2019

23.02.2019 | Review Article

Short-term outcomes of a self-expandable metallic stent as a bridge to surgery vs. a transanal decompression tube for malignant large-bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis

verfasst von: Akihisa Matsuda, Takeshi Yamada, Satoshi Matsumoto, Nobuyuki Sakurazawa, Youichi Kawano, Kumiko Sekiguchi, Takeshi Matsutani, Masao Miyashita, Hiroshi Yoshida

Erschienen in: Surgery Today | Ausgabe 9/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Preoperative intestinal decompression, using either a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS) or a transanal decompression tube (TDT), provides an alternative to emergency surgery for malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO). We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the short-term outcomes of SEMS placement as a BTS vs. TDT placement for MLBO.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive electronic search of literature published up to March, 2018, to identify studies comparing the short-term outcomes of BTS vs. TDT. Decompression device-related and surgery-related variables were evaluated and a meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models to calculate odd ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

Results

We analyzed 14 nonrandomized studies with a collective total of 581 patients: 307 (52.8%) who underwent SEMS placement as a BTS and 274 (47.2%) who underwent TDT placement. The meta-analyses showed that the BTS strategy conferred significantly better technical and clinical success, helped to maintain quality of life by allowing free food intake and temporal discharge, promoted laparoscopic one-stage surgery without stoma creation, and had equivalent morbidity and mortality to TDT placement.

Conclusions

Although the long-term outcomes are as yet undetermined, the BTS strategy using SEMS placement could be a new standard of care for preoperative decompression to manage MLBO.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Deans GT, Krukowski ZH, Irwin ST. Malignant obstruction of the left colon. Br J Surg. 1994;81(9):1270–6.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Yeo HL, Lee SW. Colorectal emergencies: review and controversies in the management of large bowel obstruction. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17(11):2007–12.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Barillari P, Aurello P, De Angelis R, Valabrega S, Ramacciato G, D’Angelo F, et al. Management and survival of patients affected with obstructive colorectal cancer. Int Surg. 1992;77(4):251–5.PubMed
4.
Tekkis PP, Kinsman R, Thompson MR, Stamatakis JD. Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain I. The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland study of large bowel obstruction caused by colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2004;240(1):76–81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Pearce NW, Scott SD, Karran SJ. Timing and method of reversal of Hartmann’s procedure. Br J Surg. 1992;79(8):839–41.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Xu M, Zhong Y, Yao L, Xu J, Zhou P, Wang P, et al. Endoscopic decompression using a transanal drainage tube for acute obstruction of the rectum and left colon as a bridge to curative surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2009;11(4):405–9.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Yamada T, Shimura T, Sakamoto E, Kurumiya Y, Komatsu S, Iwasaki H, et al. Preoperative drainage using a transanal tube enables elective laparoscopic colectomy for obstructive distal colorectal cancer. Endoscopy. 2013;45(4):265–71.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Shigeta K, Baba H, Yamafuji K, Kaneda H, Katsura H, Kubochi K. Outcomes for patients with obstructing colorectal cancers treated with one-stage surgery using transanal drainage tubes. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(8):1507–13.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Shingu Y, Hasegawa H, Sakamoto E, Komatsu S, Kurumiya Y, Norimizu S, et al. Clinical and oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery for obstructive left colorectal cancer following transanal endoscopic tube decompression. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(9):3359–63.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Xu YS, Song T, Guo YT, Shao GQ, Du HT, Li DC, et al. Placement of the decompression tube as a bridge to surgery for acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(12):2243–8.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Wells G, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, Tugwell P, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2009.
13.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–88.CrossRefPubMed
15.
16.
Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50(4):1088–101.CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
19.
Fukami Y, Watanabe S, Yasuda K, Kaneshiro M, Takaura K, Asakawa T, et al. A comparative study of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) and transanal drainage tube (TDT) in management of malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO). Prog Dig Endosc. 2015;86(1):66–9.CrossRef
20.
Ishigooka S, Suetani K, Sasaki D, Nakatsu S, Hiraishi T, Morita N, et al. A comparative study on the safety and usefulness of transanal drainage tubes and self-expandable metallic stents for malignant colorectal stenosis. St Marianna Med J. 2017;45:95–104.
21.
Kawachi J, Kashiwagi H, Shimoyama R, Isogai N, Fukai R, Miyake K, et al. Comparison of efficacies of the self-expandable metallic stent versus transanal drainage tube and emergency surgery for malignant left-sided colon obstruction. Asian J Surg. 2018;41:498–505.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kiriyama S, Yamamoto N, Suzaki N, Yamade N. A comparative study of self-expandable metallic stents and transanal drainage tube for malignant colorectal obstruction before surgery. J Wakayama Med Soc. 2016;67(4):134–8.
23.
Li CY, Guo SB, Wang NF. Decompression of acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: comparing transanal drainage tube with metallic stent. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2014;48(5):e37–42.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Matsuda A, Miyashita M, Matsumoto S, Sakurazawa N, Takahashi G, Matsutani T, et al. Comparison between metallic stent and transanal decompression tube for malignant large-bowel obstruction. J Surg Res. 2016;205(2):474–81.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Moroi R, Endo K, Ichikawa R, Nagai H, Shinkai H, Kimura T, et al. The effectiveness of self-expandable metallic stent insertion in treating right-sided colonic obstruction: a comparison between SEMS and decompression tube placement and an investigation of the safety and difficulties of SEMS insertion in right colons. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2014;2014:372918.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Nakano Y, Okitsu H, Masuda Y, Kuramoto S, Matsumoto T, Tomibayashi A, et al. A study on the usefulness of metallic stents for malignant colorectal stenosis compared to that of transanal ileus tube. Tokushima Red Cross Hosp Med J. 2014;19(1):13–6.
27.
Nakano Y, Terashima H, Hiyama K, Sumi Y, Furukawa K, Imamura F, et al. Colorectal stenting for obstructive colorectal cancer as a bridge to surgery: evaluations of short-term benefits. Jpn J Gastroenterol Surg. 2016;49(9):834–41.CrossRef
28.
Narahashi K, Niito S, Yoshino M, Sawada T, Okada R, Nagashima T, et al. The feasibility of colonic stent for malignant colonic obstruction: the comparision with transanal decompression tube. J Saitama M S. 2012;48(1):92–5.
29.
Shimizu Y, Tominaga H, Yamashita S, Kimura Y, Odagiri K, Kurokawa T, et al. Usefulness of metallic stent for left-sided obstructive colon cancer. Jpn J Cancer Chemother. 2015;42(12):2236–8.
30.
Takahashi G, Yamada T, Iwai T, Takeda K, Koizumi M, Shinji S, et al. oncological assessment of stent placement for obstructive colorectal cancer from circulating cell-free DNA and circulating tumor DNA dynamics. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(3):737–44.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Takeyama H, Kitani K, Wakasa T, Tsujie M, Fujiwara Y, Mizuno S, et al. Self-expanding metallic stent improves histopathologic edema compared with transanal drainage tube for malignant colorectal obstruction. Dig Endosc. 2016;28:456–64.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Yamana D, Kasajima H, Tohyama S, Kagiya T, Tsunetoshi Y, Ohashi M, et al. Efficacy of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) for obstructive colorectal cancer. Jpn J Gastroenterol Surg. 2015;48(9):729–38.CrossRef
33.
Matsuda A, Miyashita M, Matsumoto S, Matsutani T, Sakurazawa N, Takahashi G, et al. Comparison of long-term outcomes of colonic stent as “bridge to surgery” and emergency surgery for malignant large-bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(2):497–504.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Kim SJ, Kim HW, Park SB, Kang DH, Choi CW, Song BJ, et al. Colonic perforation either during or after stent insertion as a bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction increases the risk of peritoneal seeding. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(12):3499–506.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Sloothaak DA, van den Berg MW, Dijkgraaf MG, Fockens P, Tanis PJ, van Hooft JE, et al. Oncological outcome of malignant colonic obstruction in the Dutch Stent-In 2 trial. Br J Surg. 2014;101(13):1751–7.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Tominaga K, Maetani I, Sato K, Shigoka H, Omuta S, Ito S, et al. Favorable long-term clinical outcome of uncovered D-weave stent placement as definitive palliative treatment for malignant colorectal obstruction. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012;55(9):983–9.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Yoshida S, Watabe H, Isayama H, Kogure H, Nakai Y, Yamamoto N, et al. Feasibility of a new self-expandable metallic stent for patients with malignant colorectal obstruction. Dig Endosc. 2013;25(2):160–6.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Sabbagh C, Browet F, Diouf M, Cosse C, Brehant O, Bartoli E, et al. Is stenting as “a bridge to surgery” an oncologically safe strategy for the management of acute, left-sided, malignant, colonic obstruction? A comparative study with a propensity score analysis. Ann Surg. 2013;258(1):107–15.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Sabbagh C, Chatelain D, Trouillet N, Mauvais F, Bendjaballah S, Browet F, et al. Does use of a metallic colon stent as a bridge to surgery modify the pathology data in patients with colonic obstruction? A case-matched study. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(10):3622–31.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Kagami S, Funahashi K, Ushigome M, Koike J, Kaneko T, Koda T, et al. Comprative study between colonic metallic stent and anal tube decompression for Japanese patients with left-sided maignant large bowel obstruction. World J Surg Onocol. 2018;18:210.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Short-term outcomes of a self-expandable metallic stent as a bridge to surgery vs. a transanal decompression tube for malignant large-bowel obstruction: a meta-analysis
verfasst von
Akihisa Matsuda
Takeshi Yamada
Satoshi Matsumoto
Nobuyuki Sakurazawa
Youichi Kawano
Kumiko Sekiguchi
Takeshi Matsutani
Masao Miyashita
Hiroshi Yoshida
Publikationsdatum
23.02.2019
Verlag
Springer Singapore
Erschienen in
Surgery Today / Ausgabe 9/2019
Print ISSN: 0941-1291
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-2813
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-019-01784-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2019

Surgery Today 9/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Original Article

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal metastases using sustained release formula of cisplatin-incorporated gelatin hydrogel granules

Original Article

Preservation of physiological passage through the remnant stomach prevents postoperative malnutrition after proximal gastrectomy with double tract reconstruction

Original Article

Surgical outcomes of pulmonary metastasis from hepatopancreatobiliary carcinomas: a comparison with pulmonary metastasis from colorectal carcinomas

Original Article

Prognostic predictions based on pathological findings of peritoneal dissemination in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer without residual disease (R0 status)

Original Article

Development and validation of a nomogram predicting postoperative pneumonia after major abdominal surgery

Review Article

The roles played by the MYCN, Trk, and ALK genes in neuroblastoma and neural development

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

23.04.2024 | Ablationstherapie | Nachrichten

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 | Appendizitis | Nachrichten

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 | Operationsvorbereitung | Nachrichten

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

19.04.2024 | EAU 2024 | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich
weitere anzeigen

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.