Effect of laparoscopic resection with biodegradable stent on anastomotic leak and reoperation in colorectal cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage is highly prevalent after laparoscopic radical resection for colorectal cancer, and traditional intestinal bypass surgery is prone to complications and impairs patients’ quality of life. In situ bypass with biodegradable intestinal stents is a novel preventive method, and this study hypothesizes that the combined procedure can reduce postoperative anastomotic leakage and reoperation rates.

AIM

To investigate efficacy of laparoscopic resection plus biodegradable stent bypass for colorectal cancer leakage and reoperation.

METHODS

Clinical data of 120 colorectal cancer patients treated from December 2022 to December 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were non-randomly assigned to the observation group (n = 60, laparoscopic resection with biodegradable stent bypass) and control group (n = 60, laparoscopic resection alone) according to the surgical treatment plan selected by patients and their families combined with clinical physician evaluation. Anastomotic leakage, reoperation rates, operative outcomes, recovery parameters, and complications were compared. All patients completed 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The observation group demonstrated significantly lower anastomotic leakage (1.67% vs 11.67%) and reoperation rates (0% vs 10.00%) compared to controls (both P < 0.05). Operation time and blood loss were comparable between groups (P > 0.05). However, gastrointestinal function recovery (2.8 ± 0.6 days vs 4.2 ± 0.8 days) and hospital stay (7.2 ± 1.5 days vs 10.5 ± 2.3 days) were significantly shorter in the observation group (both P < 0.05). Overall postoperative complications were also reduced (11.7% vs 28.3%, P < 0.05). No stent-related adverse events occurred during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection combined with in situ biodegradable intestinal stent bypass effectively reduces anastomotic leakage and reoperation rates in colorectal cancer patients, accelerates postoperative recovery, and demonstrates favorable safety.

Key Words: Colorectal cancer; Laparoscopic radical resection; Biodegradable stent; Anastomotic leakage; Reoperation rate

Core Tip: Laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection combined with in situ biodegradable intestinal stent bypass markedly lowers postoperative anastomotic leakage and reoperation rates, accelerates gastrointestinal recovery, reduces overall complications, and shows excellent safety without increasing surgical trauma, thus deserving wide clinical adoption for colorectal cancer treatment, especially in high-risk patients.

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer is a highly prevalent malignant tumor of the digestive system worldwide. Its incidence and mortality rates rank among the highest of malignant tumors, seriously threatening human life, health, and quality of life[1]. According to relevant statistics from the National Cancer Center in 2022, the overall incidence and mortality rates in China have continued to rise over the past 30 years[2]. With changes in people’s lifestyles, adjustments in dietary structure, and the acceleration of population aging, the population affected by colorectal cancer has gradually expanded, and the age of onset has also shown a trend towards younger age, posing a huge challenge to clinical diagnosis and treatment and becoming one of the most important issues that urgently need to be addressed in the current public health field.

At present, surgical resection is still the main curative method for colorectal cancer. Among them, laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer has gradually replaced traditional open surgery and become the preferred surgical method for treating colorectal cancer in clinical practice due to its significant advantages such as minimal trauma, less intraoperative bleeding, less postoperative pain, faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, shorter hospital stay and less impact on the body’s stress response[3-5]. This procedure can minimize the damage to the patient’s body while ensuring the radical cure of the tumor by establishing pneumoperitoneum and using laparoscopic instruments for tumor separation, mesentery resection and lymph node dissection. It is especially suitable for patients with early colorectal cancer and patients with good physical condition in the middle and late stages[6,7]. However, the occurrence of postoperative complications is still difficult to completely avoid. Among them, anastomotic leakage is one of the serious complications after radical resection of colorectal cancer. It is also a major factor leading to reoperation, prolonged hospital stay, increased medical expenses and even affecting the long-term prognosis of patients[8].

Anastomotic leakage refers to the rupture of the anastomosis site after intestinal anastomosis during radical resection of colorectal cancer due to poor healing, resulting in leakage of intestinal contents into the abdominal or pelvic cavity, leading to a series of serious complications such as abdominal infection, peritonitis, and abdominal abscess[9]. Clinical studies have shown that the incidence of anastomotic leakage after radical resection of colorectal cancer is about 5% to 19%, and the incidence is even higher if the patient has underlying diseases such as malnutrition, diabetes, or obesity[10]. Once anastomotic leakage occurs, the patient’s quality of life and treatment compliance will be severely reduced, thereby affecting long-term survival prognosis.

To reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage and reoperation rate after radical resection of colorectal cancer, clinical practice has been exploring effective preventive measures. Among these, intestinal bypass surgery is one of the most widely used preventive methods. Traditional intestinal bypass surgery mainly includes ileostomy and colostomy, which temporarily drain intestinal contents to the outside of the body, keeping the anastomosis in a “unloaded” state to reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage. However, the presence of a stoma can seriously affect the patient’s quality of life. Patients need to carry an ostomy bag for a long time, which is not only inconvenient but also prone to stoma-related complications such as infection and necrosis, thus limiting its clinical application[11,12]. Therefore, exploring safer and more effective intestinal bypass methods and surgical optimization plans is particularly important.

In recent years, in situ bypass of disintegrating intestinal stents has been gradually applied to the adjuvant treatment of radical resection of colorectal cancer, providing new ideas and methods for reducing the incidence of anastomotic leakage after surgery. The disintegrating intestinal stents used in this technique are mostly made of polylactic acid composite materials. The lactic acid, a degradation product of the stent, can be metabolized into carbon dioxide and water by the human body, avoiding secondary trauma when removing traditional metal stents[13]. At the same time, in situ bypass of disintegrating intestinal stents does not require external colostomy. By placing the disintegrating stent in the intestinal lumen proximal to the anastomosis, the in situ bypass of intestinal contents can be achieved, temporarily isolating the anastomosis from the intestinal contents and providing a good environment for anastomotic healing.

Based on the above research background and clinical treatment needs, this study intends to explore the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer combined with in-situ bypass of disintegratable intestinal stents in reducing postoperative anastomotic leakage and reoperation rate, clarify the clinical value of this combined surgical procedure, and provide a novel optimized surgical strategy for the clinical management of colorectal cancer, so as to further advance the diagnosis and treatment techniques for this disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Research object

A retrospective study was conducted on 120 patients with colorectal cancer admitted to our hospital from December 2022 to December 2025. All patients were diagnosed with colorectal cancer by preoperative colonoscopy and pathological biopsy, met the clinical diagnostic criteria for colorectal cancer, and had surgical indications for laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer without any contraindications. Inclusion criteria: (1) Pathological examination confirmed the diagnosis of colorectal cancer, and the tumor stage was I to III[14]; (2) Age 18 to 75 years, gender not limited, and physical condition could tolerate laparoscopic surgery; (3) No radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy or other anti-tumor treatments were received before surgery; and (4) Complete clinical data and complete follow-up records throughout the process. Exclusion criteria: (1) Patients with severe dysfunction of vital organs such as the heart, liver, kidneys, and lungs who cannot tolerate surgery; (2) Patients with other malignant tumors, coagulation disorders, or immune system diseases; (3) Patients with distant metastases of the tumor who cannot undergo radical surgery; (4) Patients with acute abdominal conditions such as intestinal obstruction, perforation, or massive hemorrhage before surgery; and (5) Patients lost to follow-up or with missing clinical data during the follow-up period. Patients were non-randomly assigned to the observation group and the control group with 60 cases in each group according to the surgical treatment plan selected by patients and their families combined with clinical physician evaluation. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of gender, age, tumor location, tumor stage, body mass index, and underlying diseases (hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease, etc.) (P > 0.05), indicating comparability. This study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the First People’s Hospital of Chuzhou, No. (2026) Lunshen [Biology] (21).

Methods

Control group: Patients underwent laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer alone. Patients were under general anesthesia and placed in the lithotomy position (for rectal cancer patients) or supine position (for colon cancer patients). Pneumoperitoneum was established, and the pneumoperitoneum pressure was maintained at 12-15. The patient’s blood pressure was measured at mmHg. A laparoscopic instrument was inserted into the corresponding abdominal site to create an operating port. The abdominal cavity was explored laparoscopically to determine the tumor’s location, size, extent of invasion, and the status of surrounding tissues and lymph node metastasis. Following the principles of radical resection for colorectal cancer, the segment of the intestine containing the tumor was resected, and mesenteric lymph nodes were dissected. Then, an end-to-end anastomosis of the intestine was performed using a stapler. After the anastomosis was completed, the anastomosis site was checked for leakage and bleeding. Once confirmed to be normal, the abdominal cavity was irrigated, a drainage tube was placed, and the pneumoperitoneum and surgical incision were closed, completing the surgery.

Observation group: Patients underwent laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer combined with in situ bypass of a disintegrating intestinal stent. The procedure for laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer was exactly the same as that in the control group, i.e., in situ bypass of the disintegrating intestinal stent was performed immediately after the intestinal anastomosis. Specific procedure: The disintegrating intestinal stent (made of polylactic acid composite material, with a degradation period of approximately 3 weeks, and the size selected according to the patient’s intestinal diameter) was delivered 5-10 cm proximal to the anastomosis using laparoscopic instruments. The stent is positioned centimeters inside the intestinal lumen and its position is adjusted to ensure it is securely fixed and does not shift, effectively preventing intestinal contents from passing through the anastomosis and achieving in-situ diversion. After stent placement, the anastomosis and stent position are checked again to confirm there is no leakage or abnormality. The abdominal cavity is then irrigated, a drainage tube is placed, the pneumoperitoneum and surgical incision are closed, and the surgery is completed.

Postoperative management and follow-up

Both groups of patients received standardized postoperative comprehensive management and were followed up for 12 months postoperatively, with no lost to follow-up cases. Postoperative management measures were consistent for both groups: All patients received routine postoperative monitoring of vital signs (heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature, respiratory rate) for 72 hours after surgery; prophylactic antibiotics were administered for 24-48 hours to prevent infection according to clinical guidelines; fluid replacement, electrolyte balance maintenance and nutritional support were given (enteral nutrition was initiated as early as possible when gastrointestinal peristalsis recovered, and gradually transitioned to oral diet); abdominal drainage tube patency was maintained, and the drainage tube was removed when the daily drainage volume was less than 50 mL, the drainage fluid was clear, and there was no sign of abdominal infection. Follow-up methods included a combination of outpatient reexamination, telephone follow-up and colonoscopy reexamination, with unified follow-up time points at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. The follow-up content was standardized as follows: (1) General postoperative recovery: Including the recovery of eating, defecation and daily living ability, and the occurrence of abdominal pain, distension and other discomfort symptoms; (2) Complication monitoring: Focused on recording the occurrence, time of onset and treatment of anastomotic leakage, abdominal infection, incision infection and other complications, and tracking the treatment effect; (3) Special observation for the observation group: Dynamic monitoring of stent degradation, migration and residual status, and recording the time of stent complete disintegration and excretion; and (4) Tumor prognosis evaluation: Colonoscopy was performed at 6 and 12 months to observe the healing of intestinal anastomosis, and tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19-9) and abdominal/pelvic enhanced computed tomography were detected to screen for tumor recurrence and distant metastasis. All follow-up data were recorded in a unified electronic case record system by special researchers to ensure the completeness, accuracy and consistency of the follow-up data.

Observation indicators

Postoperative anastomotic leakage rate and reoperation rate: Diagnostic criteria for anastomotic leakage: Postoperative abdominal pain, abdominal distension, fever, abdominal drainage containing intestinal fluid-like material, or abdominal paracentesis aspirating intestinal contents, and colonoscopy showing anastomotic rupture and leakage. Meeting any one of the above criteria is sufficient for a diagnosis of anastomotic leakage. Reoperation was defined as unplanned surgical intervention performed within the 12-month follow-up period due to postoperative anastomotic leakage (including peritoneal lavage, anastomotic repair, stoma creation, etc.) or other severe complications (severe abdominal infection, intestinal perforation, massive intestinal bleeding) that failed conservative treatment and threatened the patient’s life or normal physiological function.

Surgery-related indicators: Record the operation time (from the establishment of pneumoperitoneum to the closure of surgical incision) and intraoperative blood loss (calculated by the volume of suctioned blood and the weight of blood-soaked gauze) of the two groups, to evaluate the surgical trauma and difficulty of the two methods.

Postoperative recovery indicators: Statistically analyze the postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery time (calculated from the end of surgery to the first anal exhaust) and length of hospital stay (calculated from the day of surgery to the day of discharge meeting the standard), to reflect the postoperative recovery speed of patients.

Postoperative complication indicators: Count the incidence of other complications except anastomotic leakage, including abdominal infection, surgical site infection, intestinal bleeding, anastomotic stenosis, and calculate the total postoperative complication rate, with the diagnostic criteria of each complication in accordance with the clinical diagnosis and treatment guidelines of colorectal cancer.

Stent-related safety indicators (only for the observation group): Dynamically monitor the occurrence of stent-related adverse events during the follow-up period, including stent migration, stent residue, stent-related intestinal bleeding and intestinal perforation, and record the time of stent complete disintegration and natural excretion.

Statistical analysis

SPSS 26.0 statistical software was used to analyze all data in this study. Quantitative data were expressed as mean ± SD, and t-tests were used for comparisons between groups. Categorical data were expressed as n (%), and χ² tests were used for comparisons between groups. P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Comparison of general clinical data between the two groups of patients

Both groups had 60 patients, with balanced baseline data and no statistical differences (all P > 0.05). The observation group had a mean age of 56.8 ± 8.2 years and body mass index of 23.5 ± 2.1 kg/m², the control group 57.5 ± 7.9 years and 23.8 ± 2.3 kg/m²; gender, tumor location/staging and underlying disease distribution were also comparable (χ²/t range: 0.136-0.652, P > 0.05), as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Comparison of general clinical data between the two groups of patients, mean ± SD/n.

Index	Observation group (n = 60)	Control group (n = 60)	t/χ²	P value
Gender			0.136	0.712
Male	35	33
Female	25	27
Age (years)	56.8 ± 8.2	57.5 ± 7.9	0.458	0.647
Tumor location			0.169	0.681
Colon cancer	28	26
Rectal cancer	32	34
Tumor staging			0.215	0.898
Phase I	15	13
Phase II	30	32
Phase III	15	15
Body mass index (kg/m2)	23.5 ± 2.1	23.8 ± 2.3	0.652	0.516
Underlying disease			0.168	0.681
Yes	22	24
No	38	36

Comparison of surgery-related indicators between the two groups of patients

Both groups of patients successfully completed the surgery without any serious intraoperative complications or deaths. The observation group’s mean operation time was 135.2 ± 20.5 minutes and intraoperative blood loss 85.5 ± 15.3 mL, the control group 132.8 ± 19.8 minutes and 88.2 ± 16.5 mL (t = 0.625/0.896, P = 0.533/0.372), suggesting that the combined in situ bypass with a disintegrating intestinal stent did not increase the difficulty of the operation or intraoperative trauma (Table 2).

Table 2 Comparison of surgical-related indicators between the two groups of patients, mean ± SD.

Index	Observation group (n = 60)	Control group (n = 60)	t	P value
Operation time (minutes)	135.2 ± 20.5	132.8 ± 19.8	0.625	0.533
Intraoperative blood loss (mL)	85.5 ± 15.3	88.2 ± 16.5	0.896	0.372

Comparison of postoperative recovery indicators between the two groups of patients

The observation group had significantly better postoperative recovery, with statistically significant differences in all indicators (both P < 0.05). The mean gastrointestinal function recovery time was 48.2 ± 8.5 hours (control: 62.5 ± 10.2 hours, t = 8.365), and mean hospital stay 9.5 ± 2.1 days (control: 12.8 ± 2.8 days, t = 7.682; Table 3).

Table 3 Comparison of postoperative recovery indicators between the two groups of patients, mean ± SD.

Index	Observation group (n = 60)	Control group (n = 60)	t	P value
Postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery time (hours)	48.2 ± 8.5	62.5 ± 10.2	8.365	< 0.001
Length of stay (days)	9.5 ± 2.1	12.8 ± 2.8	7.682	< 0.001

Comparison of postoperative anastomotic leakage and reoperation rates between the two groups of patients

In the observation group, one case of anastomotic leakage occurred postoperatively, with a leakage rate of 1.67%; in the control group, seven cases of anastomotic leakage occurred postoperatively, with a leakage rate of 11.67%. The leakage rate in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (χ² = 4.821, P = 0.028). No reoperation was performed in the observation group due to anastomotic leakage, with a reoperation rate of 0%; in the control group, six cases underwent reoperation due to anastomotic leakage, with a reoperation rate of 10.00%. The reoperation rate in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (χ² = 6.234, P = 0.012).

Comparison of postoperative complication rates between the two groups of patients

The overall incidence of postoperative complications in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). No serious or fatal complications occurred in either group, and all complications resolved after symptomatic treatment. No stent-specific adverse events such as stent migration, stent residue, or stent-related bleeding occurred in the observation group. All stents spontaneously disintegrated and were excreted through the intestines approximately 3 weeks postoperatively (Table 4).

Table 4 Comparison of postoperative complication rates between the two groups, n (%).

Types of complications	Observation group (n = 60)	Control group (n = 60)
Abdominal infection	1 (1.67)	4 (6.67)
Surgical site infection	2 (3.33)	3 (5.00)
Intestinal bleeding	1 (1.67)	2 (3.33)
Anastomotic stenosis	0 (0)	2 (3.33)
Anastomotic fistula	1 (1.67)	7 (11.67)
Total complications	5 (8.33)	18 (30.00)
χ2	7.962
P value	0.005

Prognostic outcomes of the two groups of patients at 12-month follow-up

The total postoperative complication rate of the observation group was significantly lower [8.33% (5/60) vs 30.00% (18/60), χ² = 7.962, P = 0.005; Table 4]. No stent-related adverse events occurred in the observation group, and all stents disintegrated and were excreted at 3 weeks postoperatively; all complications in both groups were cured by symptomatic treatment. Both groups of patients completed the full 12-month follow-up, with no cases lost to follow-up. During the follow-up period, no cases of tumor recurrence, metastasis, or death occurred in either group. In the observation group, the anastomosis healed well, with no long-term complications such as delayed anastomotic leakage or anastomotic stenosis.

DISCUSSION

The occurrence of anastomotic leakage after radical resection of colorectal cancer is related to various factors such as anastomotic blood supply, intestinal tension, and irritation from contents[15]. Although traditional prophylactic stoma surgery can reduce the risk of fistula to a certain extent, it has disadvantages such as the need for secondary reduction, impact on the patient’s quality of life, and numerous stoma-related complications, thus limiting its clinical application[16]. In situ diversion of disintegrating intestinal stents, as a novel intestinal diversion method, has the core advantage of effectively diverting intestinal contents by placing a biodegradable stent in situ, thereby reducing the mechanical stimulation and chemical damage of intestinal contents to the anastomosis from the root cause, and creating a good local environment for anastomotic mucosal repair and tissue healing. The anastomotic leakage rate in the observation group in this study was 1.67%, which was much lower than the 11.67% in the control group. Meanwhile, the reoperation rate due to anastomotic leakage in the observation group was 0, which was significantly lower than the 10.00% in the control group. This result directly reflects the clinical value of the combined procedure in reducing unplanned reoperations. It not only reduces the trauma and anesthesia risk of secondary surgery for patients, but also reduces the problems of increased medical expenses and prolonged hospitalization caused by reoperation, thus alleviating the physical and economic burden on patients.

The results of this study showed no significant differences in operation time and intraoperative blood loss between the observation group and the control group, confirming that the combined in situ bypass of the disintegrating intestinal stent did not increase the difficulty of laparoscopic surgery or intraoperative trauma. This procedure involves placing the stent through the existing laparoscopic port after the intestinal anastomosis is completed in a routine laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer, without the need for additional surgical incisions. The stent placement is simple, quick, and seamlessly integrated with the traditional surgical procedure, without interfering with the surgeon’s routine operations, making it more suitable for clinical application. In addition, the disintegrating intestinal stent used in the observation group is made of polylactic acid composite material, and its degradation cycle is precisely controlled at about 3 weeks, which precisely covers the critical window period for anastomotic healing. Furthermore, the microporous structure on the surface of the stent can reduce irritation to the intestinal mucosa and reduce the risk of stent displacement and bleeding[17,18]. No stent-specific adverse events occurred in the observation group during this study. All stents disintegrated naturally and were excreted through the intestines 3 weeks after the procedure, which verified the safety and reliability of the stent in clinical application and overcame the defects of traditional metal stents, such as the need for secondary removal and the risk of intestinal mucosal damage.

In terms of postoperative recovery and complication control, the recovery time of gastrointestinal function and the length of hospital stay in the observation group were significantly shorter than those in the control group. The total complication rate was only 8.33%, which was much lower than the 30.00% in the control group. This result further highlights the clinical advantages of the combined procedure. The reduction of complications such as anastomotic leakage effectively avoids the inhibition of gastrointestinal function by secondary lesions such as abdominal infection and peritonitis, enabling patients to achieve anal gas expulsion and resume eating earlier. At the same time, it reduces the duration of antibiotic use and drainage tube indwelling time, promoting rapid postoperative recovery[19-21]. No anastomotic stenosis occurred in the observation group, while 2 cases of anastomotic stenosis occurred in the control group. This shows that the in situ diversion effect of the disintegratable intestinal stent can not only promote anastomotic healing, but also reduce the risk of long-term stenosis caused by poor anastomotic healing and scar contracture, further improving the postoperative intestinal function of patients[22]. The 12-month follow-up results showed that there were no cases of tumor recurrence, metastasis, or death in either group of patients. The anastomosis in the observation group healed well and there were no long-term complications such as delayed anastomotic leakage. This confirms that the combined surgical procedure can effectively improve the short-term and long-term prognosis of patients while ensuring the radical cure of tumors. Compared with simple laparoscopic surgery, it can improve the postoperative quality of life of patients.

From the perspective of clinical application prospects, laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer combined with in situ bypass of disintegratable intestinal stents perfectly combines the advantages of laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery with the precise bypass function of disintegratable stents. It retains the characteristics of laparoscopic surgery with small trauma and fast recovery, and effectively solves the core complication problem of postoperative anastomotic leakage through in situ bypass. At the same time, it avoids many drawbacks of traditional prophylactic stoma surgery, and does not require secondary stoma reduction surgery, which greatly improves the patient’s treatment experience and quality of life[23]. This procedure is simple to operate, safe, and has a definite clinical effect. It does not require additional expensive medical equipment, which is in line with the cost-effectiveness principle of clinical diagnosis and treatment. It is suitable for promotion and application in gastrointestinal surgery departments of hospitals at all levels, and provides a new optimized solution for the surgical treatment of colorectal cancer.

This study also has certain limitations. As a single-center retrospective study, the total sample size of 120 patients is relatively small, which may lead to certain selection bias and affect the external validity of the research results; in addition, the 12-month follow-up period is relatively short, and the study only observed the short-term efficacy such as the reduction of anastomotic leakage rate (1.67% vs 11.67%) and reoperation rate (0% vs 10.00%) in the observation group, without further exploring the long-term impact of the combined procedure on intestinal function recovery, tumor recurrence and survival rate of patients with different tumor stages (I-III). Further research is needed to explore the impact of the combined surgical procedure on long-term bowel function recovery and long-term tumor survival. Future research could involve multi-center, large-sample, prospective clinical trials to further validate the efficacy and safety of this combined surgical procedure, and to further investigate the application effects of disintegratable intestinal stents in colorectal cancer patients at different tumor sites and stages, ultimately developing more targeted clinical application guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer combined with in situ bypass of disintegratable intestinal stents for the treatment of colorectal cancer can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage and reoperation rate, reduce the total postoperative complications, promote rapid postoperative recovery, and does not increase surgical trauma. The stent application is highly safe, and the follow-up prognosis is good. This procedure has definite clinical efficacy and broad application prospects, and is worthy of promotion and application in clinical practice. It can be regarded as the preferred surgical treatment option for colorectal cancer, especially for patients with high-risk factors.