Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most severe complications of colon carcinoma surgery. This study aims to investigate the related factors of AL and evaluate the independent risk factors in predicting AL after one-stage resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) for obstructive left colonic carcinoma (OLCC) patients. The demographic and clinical data, intra-operative indexes, pathologic characteristics, and ileocecal valve status shown on CT of the patients with OLCC who submitted to one-stage RPA were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into AL group and no AL group. All indexes of the two groups were compared and the independent risk factors for AL were investigated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to explore the ability of the statistically significant parameters to predict AL. A total of 141 patients (AL group, 15; no AL group, 126) were enrolled. There were no statistical differences in these indexes between the two groups except for BMI (P = 0.001), ALB (P = 0.020), lymphatic metastasis (P = 0.027), and ileocecal valve status (P < 0.001). BMI, ALB, and ileocecal valve status shown on CT were the independent risk factors for AL. A BMI and ALB cutoff value of 22.2 kg/m2 and 27.9 g/L showed the area under the curve (AUC 0.765; 95% CI 0.686-0.832 and 0.684; 95% CI 0.601-0.760) in predicting AL, separately. Higher BMI, lower ALB, and incontinent ileocecal valve shown on preoperative CT may indicate an increased risk of postoperative AL after one-stage RPA for OLCC patients.

Colonoscopy is an essential diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of colorectal disease. This review explores the recent advances of colonoscopy that have revolutionized patient care in the era of minimally invasive medicine. Key areas of focus include innovations in imaging, advanced endoscopic resection techniques, and nonsurgical management of strictures. Advances in therapeutic endoscopy are especially evident in inflammatory bowel disease. As the landscape of colonoscopy continues to evolve, it will continue to play a central role in modern medicine, shaping the future of patient care, and therapeutic interventions.

An ongoing debate exists regarding the feasibility of placing self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) within 5 cm of the anal verge. Traditionally, SEMS have been considered contraindicated for patients with a malignant rectal obstruction within this region due to potential impact on the anorectal ring or anal canal, which can cause incontinence, proctalgia, and tenesmus. However, in the case of a 63-year-old female who presented with distention, abdominal pain, and diminishing stool output, the rectal exam identified a bulky fixed mass. Imaging studies revealed large bowel obstruction and high-grade stricture, with a minuscule residual lumen. Endoscopy identified a bulky mass obscuring the lumen at 5 cm from the anal verge, and biopsy confirmed adenocarcinoma. Despite the traditionally held contraindication, a 2.5 cm × 9.0 cm colonic stent was successfully deployed, leading to brisk colonic decompression. This allowed the patient to promptly undergo chemoradiotherapy.

Colorectal carcinoma is common, particularly on the left side. In 20% of patients, obstruction and ileus may be the first clinical manifestations of a carcinoma that has advanced (stage II, III or even IV). Diagnosis is based on clinical presentation, plain abdominal radiogram, computed tomography (CT), CT colonography and positron emission tomography/CT. The best management strategy in terms of short-term operative or interventional and long-term oncological outcomes remains unknown. For the most common left-sided obstruction, the first choice should be either emergency surgery or endoscopic decompression by self-expendable metal stents or tubes. The operative plan should be either one-stage or two-stage resection. One-stage resection with on-table bowel decompression and irrigation can be accompanied or not accompanied by proximal defunctioning stoma (colostomy or ileostomy). Primary anastomosis is more convenient but has increased risks of anastomotic leakage and morbidity. Two-stage resection (Hartmann's procedure) is safer and the most widely used despite temporally affecting quality of life. Damage control surgery in high-risk frail patients is less frequently performed since it can be successfully substituted with endoscopic stenting or tubing. For the less common right-sided obstruction, one-stage surgical resection is more beneficial than endoscopic decompression. The role of minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic) is a subject of debate. Emergency laparoscopic-assisted management is advantageous to some extent but requires much expertise due to inherent difficulties in dissecting the distended colon and the risk of rupture and subsequent septic complications. The decompressing stent as a bridge to elective surgery more substantially decreases the risks of morbidity and mortality than emergency surgery for decompression and has equivalent medium-term overall survival and disease-free survival rates. Its combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiation may have a positive effect on long-term oncological outcomes. Management plans are crucial and must be individualized to better fit each case.

Large bowel obstruction is a serious event that occurs in approximately 25% of all intestinal obstructions. It is attributed to either benign, malignant, functional (pseudo-obstruction), or mechanical conditions. Benign etiologies of colonic obstructions include colon volvulus, anastomotic strictures, radiation injury, ischemia, inflammatory processes such as Crohn's disease, diverticulitis, bezoars, and intussusception.

Colonic stenting has had a significant positive impact on the management of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in terms of both palliative treatment and bridge-to-surgery (BTS). Notably, many studies have convincingly demonstrated the effectiveness of stenting as a BTS, resulting in improvements in short-term outcomes and quality of life, safety, and efficacy in subsequent curative surgery, and increased cost-effectiveness, whereas the safety of chemotherapy after stenting and the long-term outcomes of stenting as a BTS are controversial. Several studies have suggested an increased risk of perforation in patients receiving bevacizumab chemotherapy after colonic stenting. In addition, several pathological analyses have suggested a negative oncological impact of colonic stenting. In contrast, many recent studies have demonstrated that colonic stenting for OLCC does not negatively impact the safety of chemotherapy or long-term oncological outcomes. The updated version of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines released in 2020 included colonic stenting as a BTS for OLCC as a recommended treatment. It should be noted that the experience of endoscopists is involved in determining technical and clinical success rates and possibly oncological outcomes. This review discusses the positive and negative impacts of colonic stenting on OLCC treatment, particularly in terms of oncology.

Approximately 7%-29% of patients with colorectal cancer present with colonic obstruction. The concept of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery (BTS) is appealing. However, concerns on colonic stenting possibly impairing oncologic outcomes have been raised. This study aimed to review current evidence on the short- and long-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS insertion as BTS for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. For short-term outcomes, colonic stenting facilitates a laparoscopic approach, increases the likelihood of primary anastomosis without a stoma, and may decrease postoperative morbidity. However, SEMS-related perforation also increases local recurrence and impairs overall survival. Moreover, colonic stenting may cause negative oncologic outcomes even without perforation. SEMS can induce shear forces on the tumor, leading to increased circulating cancer cells and aggressive pathological characteristics, including perineural and lymphovascular invasion. The conflicting evidence has led to discordant guidelines. Well-designed collaborative studies that integrate both oncologic outcomes and data on basic research (e.g., alteration of circulating tumors) are needed to clarify the actual benefit of colonic stenting as BTS.

There has been increased use of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) in treating malignant colorectal obstruction (MCO). The aim of this study was to investigate factors that are associated with the outcomes of SEMS placement for MCO.Clinical data from patients who underwent SEMS placement for MCO at 6 hospitals in Honam province of South Korea between 2009 and 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Eight hundred two patients were identified and their data were analyzed. Technical success, clinical success, complications, and predictors of outcome were included as main outcome measures.Technical and clinical success rates were 98.8% (792/802) and 90.1% (723/802), respectively. Complications including stent migration, stent occlusion due to tumor ingrowth and outgrowth, perforation, bacteremia/fever, and bleeding occurred in 123 (15.3%) patients. In multivariate regression analyses, procedure time was significantly associated with the technical success of SEMS placement (P = .001). Longer length of obstruction, the use of covered stent, and longer procedure time were significant independent predictive factors for the clinical success of SEMS placement (odds ratio [OR] 0.974 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.950-0.990); P = .043, OR 0.255 (95% CI 0.138-0.471); P < .001, and OR 0.957 (95% CI 0.931-0.984); P = .002, respectively). Stage IV colorectal cancer and the use of covered stent were significant independent predictive factors for the development of complications after SEMS placement (OR 2.428 (95% CI 1.407-4.188); P = .001 and OR 3.329 (95% CI 2.060-5.378); P < .001, respectively).Longer length of obstruction, the use of covered stent, and longer procedure time were associated with lower clinical success rates. Having stage IV colorectal cancer and the use of covered stents were associated with an increased risk of complications.

For the 8-29% colorectal cancers that initially manifest with obstruction, emergency surgery (ES) was traditionally considered the only available therapy, despite high morbidity and mortality rates and the need for colostomy creation. More recently, malignant obstruction of the left colon can be temporized by endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), used as bridge to surgery (BTS), facilitating a laparoscopic approach and increasing the likelihood that a primary anastomosis instead of stoma would be used. Despite these attractive outcomes, the superiority of the BTS approach is not clearly established. Few authors have stressed the potential cancer risk associated with perforations that may occur during endoscopic stent placement, facilitating neoplastic spread and negatively impacting prognosis. For this reason, the current literature focuses on long-term oncologic outcomes such as disease-free survival, overall survival and recurrence rate that do seem not to differ between the ES and BTS approaches. This lack of consensus has spawned differing and sometimes discordant guidelines worldwide. In conclusion, 20 years after the first description of a colonic stent as BTS, the debate is still open, but the growing number of articles about the use of SEMS as a BTS signifies a great interest in the topic. We hope that these data will finally converge on a single set of recommendations supporting a management strategy with well-demonstrated superiority.