Diverting ostomy prior to neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer should be used selectively: A retrospective single-center cohort study.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Scandinavian Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-15 DOI:10.1177/14574969241252481
Valentinus Valdimarsson, Eihab Munshi, Marie-Louise Lydrup, Henrik Jutesten, Carolina Samuelsson, Pamela Buchwald
{"title":"Diverting ostomy prior to neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer should be used selectively: A retrospective single-center cohort study.","authors":"Valentinus Valdimarsson, Eihab Munshi, Marie-Louise Lydrup, Henrik Jutesten, Carolina Samuelsson, Pamela Buchwald","doi":"10.1177/14574969241252481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rectal cancer patients commonly benefit from neoadjuvant therapy before resection surgery. For these patients, an elective ostomy diversion is frequently considered, despite the absence of conclusive evidence when a diversion is advantageous. This is a retrospective observational single-center study on a 4-year consecutive rectal cancer cohort undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, aiming at improving the understanding of risks and benefits associated with ostomy diversion.</p><p><strong>Material and method: </strong>Baseline characteristics, tumor-specific data, clinical events, and outcomes were collected using the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and medical records.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-two (30.2%) of the 106 included patients presented with endoscopic impassable tumors at diagnosis, of which 18 (56.2%) had diverting ostomy. Three out of 14 with impassable tumor and no diversion developed a bowel obstruction. None of the patients with an endoscopically passable tumor at diagnosis (n = 74) experienced a bowel obstruction. The elective diversions (n = 40) were not associated with serious complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ⩾ 3b). Patients with a diverting ostomy (n = 30) had similar time intervals from diagnosis to neoadjuvant treatment and to definite tumor resection as those without diversion but experienced more complex primary tumor resections in terms of blood loss and operation time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An elective diverting ostomy is a relatively safe procedure in rectal cancer patients requiring neoadjuvant therapy. More than one out of five non-diverted patients with endoscopically impassable rectal tumors developed bowel obstruction and would potentially have benefited from an elective diversion.</p>","PeriodicalId":49566,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"197-201"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14574969241252481","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Rectal cancer patients commonly benefit from neoadjuvant therapy before resection surgery. For these patients, an elective ostomy diversion is frequently considered, despite the absence of conclusive evidence when a diversion is advantageous. This is a retrospective observational single-center study on a 4-year consecutive rectal cancer cohort undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, aiming at improving the understanding of risks and benefits associated with ostomy diversion.

Material and method: Baseline characteristics, tumor-specific data, clinical events, and outcomes were collected using the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and medical records.

Results: Thirty-two (30.2%) of the 106 included patients presented with endoscopic impassable tumors at diagnosis, of which 18 (56.2%) had diverting ostomy. Three out of 14 with impassable tumor and no diversion developed a bowel obstruction. None of the patients with an endoscopically passable tumor at diagnosis (n = 74) experienced a bowel obstruction. The elective diversions (n = 40) were not associated with serious complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ⩾ 3b). Patients with a diverting ostomy (n = 30) had similar time intervals from diagnosis to neoadjuvant treatment and to definite tumor resection as those without diversion but experienced more complex primary tumor resections in terms of blood loss and operation time.

Conclusion: An elective diverting ostomy is a relatively safe procedure in rectal cancer patients requiring neoadjuvant therapy. More than one out of five non-diverted patients with endoscopically impassable rectal tumors developed bowel obstruction and would potentially have benefited from an elective diversion.

直肠癌新辅助治疗前应选择性使用分流造口术:一项回顾性单中心队列研究。
背景:直肠癌患者通常可从切除手术前的新辅助治疗中获益。对于这些患者,尽管目前尚无确凿证据表明转移造口对他们有利,但他们经常会考虑选择性转移造口。这是一项单中心回顾性观察研究,研究对象是接受新辅助治疗的4年连续直肠癌队列,旨在加深对造口改道相关风险和益处的理解:通过瑞典结直肠癌登记处和医疗记录收集基线特征、肿瘤特异性数据、临床事件和结果:结果:106 例患者中有 32 例(30.2%)在确诊时患有内镜下无法通过的肿瘤,其中 18 例(56.2%)进行了造口转流。14名肿瘤无法通过且未进行分流的患者中有3名出现了肠梗阻。诊断时内镜下可通过肿瘤的患者(n = 74)无一发生肠梗阻。选择性转流(n = 40)与严重并发症(Clavien-Dindo ⩾3b级)无关。从诊断到接受新辅助治疗和明确的肿瘤切除术,使用分流造口术的患者(30 人)与未使用分流造口术的患者时间间隔相似,但就失血量和手术时间而言,原发性肿瘤切除术更为复杂:结论:对于需要接受新辅助治疗的直肠癌患者而言,选择性分流造口术是一种相对安全的手术。五分之一以上内镜下无法通过直肠肿瘤的非转流患者会出现肠梗阻,选择性转流手术可能会使他们受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
37
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Surgery (SJS) is the official peer reviewed journal of the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society. It publishes original and review articles from all surgical fields and specialties to reflect the interests of our diverse and international readership that consists of surgeons from all specialties and continents.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信