Cargando…

Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic stenting is used to palliate malignant large bowel obstruction. A proportion of patients will develop recurrent obstruction due to tumour ingrowth and require reintervention. This study aimed to assess the outcome (clinical success and complication rates) of endoscopic reinter...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Clarke, L., Abbott, H., Sharma, P., Eglinton, T. W., Frizelle, F. A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5989957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29951623
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.34
_version_ 1783329543800487936
author Clarke, L.
Abbott, H.
Sharma, P.
Eglinton, T. W.
Frizelle, F. A.
author_facet Clarke, L.
Abbott, H.
Sharma, P.
Eglinton, T. W.
Frizelle, F. A.
author_sort Clarke, L.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Endoscopic stenting is used to palliate malignant large bowel obstruction. A proportion of patients will develop recurrent obstruction due to tumour ingrowth and require reintervention. This study aimed to assess the outcome (clinical success and complication rates) of endoscopic reintervention compared with surgical intervention in patients with stent obstruction due to tumour ingrowth. METHODS: This was an observational study using data from a database of patients who underwent palliative colonic stenting between January 1998 and March 2017 at Christchurch Public Hospital. RESULTS: A total of 190 patients underwent colonic stent insertion, for palliation in 182 cases. Reintervention was performed in 55 (30·2 per cent). Thirty‐one patients (17·0 per cent) developed obstruction within the stent at a median of 4·6 (i.q.r. 2·3–7·7) months after the procedure. Of these, 21 had endoscopic restenting and ten underwent surgery. Restenting had technical and clinical success rates of 100 per cent, and involved a significantly shorter length of stay compared with surgery (median 2 (i.q.r. 1–4) versus 11 (6–19) days respectively; P = 0·006). Seven of the 21 patients in the restented group underwent a third palliative intervention. The overall stoma rate in the restented group was significantly lower than that in the surgical group (4 of 21 versus 10 of 10; P < 0·001). There was no difference in complications or survival between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Among palliative patients who develop malignant stent obstruction, endoscopic restenting had a high chance of technical success. It resulted in a shorter hospital stay and lower stoma rate than those seen after surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5989957
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59899572018-06-27 Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth Clarke, L. Abbott, H. Sharma, P. Eglinton, T. W. Frizelle, F. A. BJS Open Original Articles BACKGROUND: Endoscopic stenting is used to palliate malignant large bowel obstruction. A proportion of patients will develop recurrent obstruction due to tumour ingrowth and require reintervention. This study aimed to assess the outcome (clinical success and complication rates) of endoscopic reintervention compared with surgical intervention in patients with stent obstruction due to tumour ingrowth. METHODS: This was an observational study using data from a database of patients who underwent palliative colonic stenting between January 1998 and March 2017 at Christchurch Public Hospital. RESULTS: A total of 190 patients underwent colonic stent insertion, for palliation in 182 cases. Reintervention was performed in 55 (30·2 per cent). Thirty‐one patients (17·0 per cent) developed obstruction within the stent at a median of 4·6 (i.q.r. 2·3–7·7) months after the procedure. Of these, 21 had endoscopic restenting and ten underwent surgery. Restenting had technical and clinical success rates of 100 per cent, and involved a significantly shorter length of stay compared with surgery (median 2 (i.q.r. 1–4) versus 11 (6–19) days respectively; P = 0·006). Seven of the 21 patients in the restented group underwent a third palliative intervention. The overall stoma rate in the restented group was significantly lower than that in the surgical group (4 of 21 versus 10 of 10; P < 0·001). There was no difference in complications or survival between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Among palliative patients who develop malignant stent obstruction, endoscopic restenting had a high chance of technical success. It resulted in a shorter hospital stay and lower stoma rate than those seen after surgery. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2018-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5989957/ /pubmed/29951623 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.34 Text en © 2018 The Authors. BJS Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJS Society Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Clarke, L.
Abbott, H.
Sharma, P.
Eglinton, T. W.
Frizelle, F. A.
Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth
title Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth
title_full Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth
title_fullStr Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth
title_full_unstemmed Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth
title_short Impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth
title_sort impact of restenting for recurrent colonic obstruction due to tumour ingrowth
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5989957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29951623
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.34
work_keys_str_mv AT clarkel impactofrestentingforrecurrentcolonicobstructionduetotumouringrowth
AT abbotth impactofrestentingforrecurrentcolonicobstructionduetotumouringrowth
AT sharmap impactofrestentingforrecurrentcolonicobstructionduetotumouringrowth
AT eglintontw impactofrestentingforrecurrentcolonicobstructionduetotumouringrowth
AT frizellefa impactofrestentingforrecurrentcolonicobstructionduetotumouringrowth