Endoscopy or surgery for malignant GI outlet obstruction?

BACKGROUND: The treatment of gastroduodenal outflow obstruction (GOO) caused by malignant diseases represents a significant challenge. Open surgical gastrojejunostomy (GJ) has been the treatment of choice, but it has high morbidity and mortality rates. More recently, endoscopic placement of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) has been proposed and the results of small, preliminary studies are encouraging. This study compared technical and clinical success, morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay in patients undergoing endoscopic and surgical treatment of GOO. METHODS: Medical records of 60 consecutive patients with GOO seen between April 1997 and November 2002 were retrospectively reviewed. Because of extremely short life expectancy, 13 patients were treated by insertion of a double-lumen nasogastric-jejunal tube. The remaining 47 patients (28 men, 19 women; mean age 73.5 years, range 48-92 years) with unresectable pancreatic (33), gastric (7), metastatic lymph nodal (4), papillary (2), and biliary (1) tumors were treated by placement of a SEMS (24) or open surgical GJ (23). RESULTS: The technical success rates were similar, but clinical success was lower in the GJ group (92% vs. 56%, p = 0.0067). The SEMS group had a shorter length of hospital stay (3.0 [1.4] days vs. 24.1 [10.3], p < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was 30% in the GJ group, and 0% in the SEMS group ( p = 0.004). Morbidity was higher in the GJ compared with the SEMS group (61% vs. 17%, p = 0.0021). Mean survival was longer in the SEMS group (96.1 [9.6] days vs. 70.2 [36.2] days, p = 0.0165 for a single test of hypothesis; Bonferroni correction for a multiple testing removes this significance), consequently, out-of-hospital survival was longer for the SEMS group (93.2 [9.3] days vs. 46.0 [31.5] days, p < 0.001). None of the endoscopic procedures required the assistance of an anesthesiologist or the use of an operating room. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this retrospective study suggest that SEMS insertion is better than surgical GJ for palliation of patients with GOO in terms of clinical success, morbidity, and mortality. Technical success rates were similar. SEMS placement should be proposed as the first-line treatment for relief of GOO. However, a randomized, comparative, prospective study of SEMS vs. laparoscopic GJ is needed.     

What is the ideal stent as initial intervention for malignant gastric outlet obstruction?

BackgroundSelf-expandable metal stents are effective palliation for malignant gastric outlet obstruction. The aims of study were to evaluate efficacy and safety of double-layered Comvi, uncovered and covered stent to find out protocols which enhance stent patency.MethodsWe retrospectively analysed data from 224 patients who underwent endoscopic stent placement for malignant gastric outlet obstruction caused by stomach cancer from 2006 to 2011. Technical and clinical success rates were evaluated and clinical outcomes were compared according to stent types and chemotherapy.ResultsThe overall technical and clinical success rates were achieved in 99.6% and 80.4%, respectively without immediate complications. The clinical success rate was not significantly different between three groups. The median stent patency time was 156 days [interquartile range 66–279] without differences between groups. The 4-, 8-, and 12-week patency rates were 89.4%, 77.3%, and 61.2%, respectively with no differences between groups. The re-stenosis of stent frequently occurred in the case of the uncovered stents, while migration was more likely to be observed for the covered and Comvi stent. Chemotherapy significantly lowered re-intervention rates, especially in uncovered stents.ConclusionsPatency rates are significantly improved by combining the use of uncovered stent with follow-up chemotherapy treatment, which retains the advantages of the mechanical and chemical aspects of stent and chemotherapy, respectively.     

Metal or plastic stent for malignant biliary obstruction: what's got the most bang for your buck?

Malignant biliary obstruction is most commonly managed by the endoscopist. Various plastic and metal stents are currently available. It is important to be aware of the pros and cons of each. The identifying factors that determine the prognosis for the patient might also help determine which type of stent to place. This month's article by Moss et al., is a meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials analyzing the cost-effectiveness of plastic and metal stents. This meta-analysis helps guide the endoscopist in deciding what type of stent would be most beneficial and cost effective for their patients.     

Helicobacter pylori-related gastric outlet obstruction: is there a role for medical treatment?

The role of Helicobacter pylori in the pathogenesis of duodenal and gastric ulcer and ulcer recurrence is widely known. Bleeding, perforation, and gastric outlet obstruction represent the most serious, potentially life-threatening complications of ulcer disease. At present, the effect of H. pylori eradication on complicated ulcer disease has not been fully established. Case reports exist on the resolution of gastric outlet obstruction after eradication of H. pylori. We report the first case of H. pylori-related gastric outlet obstruction successfully treated with parenteral antibiotics.     

Acute abdominal obstruction: Colon stent or emergency surgery? An evidence-based review

According to the American Cancer Society and Colorectal Cancer Statistics 2017,colorectal cancer(CRC) is one of the most common malignancies in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death in the world in 2018.Previous studies demonstrated that 8%-29% of patients with primary CRC present malignant colonic obstruction(MCO). In the past, emergency surgery has been the primary treatment for MCO, although morbidity and surgical mortality rates are higher in these settings than in elective procedures. In the 1990 s, selfexpanding metal stents appeared and was a watershed in the treatment of patients in gastrointestinal surgical emergencies. The studies led to high expectations because the use of stents could prevent surgical intervention, such as colostomy, leading to lower morbidity and mortality, possibly resulting in higher quality of life. This review was designed to provide present evidence of the indication, technique, outcomes, benefits, and risks of these treatments in acute MCO through the analysis of previously published studies and current guidelines.     

CME or traditional surgery for right-sided colon cancer?

One of the big controversies in colorectal cancer research is whether complete mesocolic excision (CME) offers a benefit for patients with carcinoma of the right colon or whether it might even harm these patients. A randomized trial to clarify this question has often been advocated. However, setting up such a trial is hampered by a major problem, which is mainly related to the difficulty of defining a standardized control group. First, there is no consensus of a standard non-CME hemicolectomy. Second, a surgeon who has been trained for CME will perform a “standard” right hemicolectomy differently than before. It won’t be the traditional hemicolectomy but a 5/6 CME-hemicolectomy, thus making it very difficult to detect a difference. Our approach to answering the question was a multicenter, non-randomized, registry-based trial with centralized assessment of the entire specimen. This trial has just closed recruitment after enrolling more than 1000 patients, so that long-term results can be expected in a few years.     

Malignant gastric outlet obstruction: Which is the best therapeutic option?

Malignant gastric outlet obstruction(MGOO) is a clinical condition characterized by the mechanical obstruction of the pylorus or the duodenum due to tumor compression/infiltration, with consequent reduction or impossibility of an adequate oral intake. MGOO is mainly secondary to advanced pancreatic or gastric cancers, and significantly impacts on patients' survival and quality of life.Patients suffering from this condition often present with intractable vomiting and severe malnutrition, which further compromise therapeutic chances. Currently,palliative strategies are based primarily on surgical gastrojejunostomy and endoscopic enteral stenting with self-expanding metal stents. Several studies have shown that surgical approach has the advantage of a more durable relief of symptoms and the need of fewer re-interventions, at the cost of higher procedure-related risks and longer hospital stay. On the other hand, enteral stenting provides rapid clinical improvement, but have the limit of higher stent dysfunction rate due to tumor ingrowth and a subsequent need of frequent reinterventions. Recently, a third way has come from interventional endoscopic ultrasound, through the development of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy technique with lumen-apposing metal stent. This new technique may ideally encompass the minimal invasiveness of an endoscopic procedure and the long-lasting effect of the surgical gastrojejunostomy, and brought encouraging results so far, even if prospective comparative trial are still lacking. In this Review, we described technical aspects and clinical outcomes of the above-cited therapeutic approaches, and discussed the open questions about the current management of MGOO.     

Metallic or plastic stent for bile duct obstruction in ampullary cancer?

Background and Aims  

Although ampullary cancer is a relatively uncommon malignancy, it is frequently associated with biliary obstruction. Endoscopic biliary drainage is regarded as a palliative treatment of choice for patients with inoperable ampullary cancer. However, there are no data concerning choice of stent in this patient population. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of metallic and plastic stents for biliary obstruction in patients with ampullary cancer.     

Which type of surgery should become the preferred procedure for malignant pleural mesothelioma: extrapleural pneumonectomy or extended pleurectomy?

Purposes

Since radiation and chemotherapy have limitations as therapies for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The type of surgery [extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP), extended pleurectomy (E/P), and pleurectomy/decortication (P/D)] remains controversial.

Methods

This study involves 76 consecutive patients. 58 of the cases were males (76%) with a median age of 53.17±10.93 years. EPP, E/P, and P/D were performed in 31, 20, and 25 cases, respectively.

Results

The median survival time was 20 months in all patients. Overall, five-year survival rate was 14.3%. The survival rate was significantly better in epithelioid mesothelioma (P=0.049). For EPP cases, the median survival rate was 17 months, and the three-to-five year survival rates were 21% and 17%, respectively. For E/P cases, the median survival rate was 27 months and the three-year and four-year survival rates were 34% and 30%, respectively. For P/D cases, the median survival rate was 15 months and the three-to-five year survival rate was 13% and 0%. There were no statistically significant differences between the three surgical techniques (P=0.088). A comparative analysis indicates only a statistically significant difference in the E/P and P/D comparison (P=0.032). Hospital mortality showed a higher trend in EPP group (EPP: 12.9%, E/P: 0% and P/D: 4%, P=0.145). N2 cases, there were no cases of two-year survival. The survival rate in N2 was comparatively much lower, which was statistically significant (P=0.005). In multivariate analysis, only P/D (OR 0.3, 95% CI: 0.1-0.9, P=0.049) and N2 (OR 1.6, 95% CI: 0.9-2.6, P=0.090) were found to be poor prognostic factors.

Conclusions

E/P could be encouraged to EPP with lower mortality rate and better survival trend in MPM. N2 diseases were negative prognostic factors in MPM.KEY WORDS : Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), multimodal therapy     

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography drainage for palliation of malignant hilar biliary obstruction — stent-in-stent or side-by-side? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUNDBiliary drainage, either by the stent-in-stent (SIS) or side-by-side (SBS) technique, is often required when treating a malignant hilar biliary obstruction (MHBO). Both methods differ from each other and have distinct advantages.AIMTo compare both techniques regarding their efficacy and safety in achieving drainage of MHBO.METHODSA comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIREME, Cochrane) was conducted and grey literature from their inception until December 2020 with no restrictions regarding the year of publication or language, since there was at least an abstract in English. The included studies compared SIS and SBS techniques through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Outcomes analyzed included technical and clinical success, early and late adverse events (AEs), stent patency, reintervention, and procedure-related mortality.RESULTSFour cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial evaluating a total of 250 patients (127 in the SIS group and 123 in the SBS group) were included in this study. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups concerning the evaluated outcomes, except for stent patency, which was higher in the SIS compared with the SBS technique [mean difference (d) = 33.31; 95% confidence interval: 9.73 to 56.90, I² = 45%, P = 0.006].CONCLUSIONThe SIS method showed superior stent patency when compared to SBS for achieving bilateral drainage in MHBO. Both techniques are equivalent in terms of technical success, clinical success, rates of both early and late AEs, reintervention, and procedure-related mortality.