Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background The aim of colonic stenting with self-expandable metallic stents in neoplastic colon obstruction is to avoid emergency surgery and thus potentially reduce morbidity, mortality, and need for a stoma. Concern has been raised, however, about the effect of colonic stenting on short-term complications and long-term survival. We compared morbidity rates after colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) versus emergency surgery (ES) in the management of left-sided malignant large-bowel obstruction. Methods This multicentre randomised controlled trial was designed with the endorsement of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. The study population was consecutive patients with acute, symptomatic malignant left-sided large-bowel obstruction localised between the splenic flexure and 15 cm from the anal margin. The primary outcome was overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery. Results Between March 2008 and November 2015, 144 patients were randomly assigned to undergo either SBTS or ES; 29/144 (13.9%) were excluded post-randomisation mainly because of wrong diagnosis at computed tomography examination. The remaining 115 patients (SBTS n  = 56, ES n  = 59) were deemed eligible for analysis. The complications rate within 60 days was 51.8% in the SBTS group and 57.6% in the ES group ( p  = 0.529). Although long-term follow-up is still ongoing, no statistically significant difference in 3-year overall survival ( p  = 0.998) and progression-free survival rates between the groups has been observed ( p  = 0.893). Eleven patients in the SBTS group and 23 in the ES group received a stoma ( p  = 0.031), with a reversal rate of 30% so far. Conclusions Our findings indicate that the two treatment strategies are equivalent. No difference in oncologic outcome was found at a median follow-up of 36 months. The significantly lower stoma rate noted in the SBTS group argues in favour of the SBTS procedure when performed in expert hands.

Background Current studies did not draw definitive conclusions on comparison of intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) in laparoscopic right colectomy. Whether the intraperitoneal contamination induced by ICA can result in higher risk of postoperative abdominal infection remains unclear. This study was aimed to compare the short-term outcomes, especially the risk of abdominal infection after ICA versus ECA. Methods This was an observational cohort study as a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (RCT)—RELARC trial (NCT02619942). The patients enrolled in the RELARC trial were diagnosed with primary colon adenocarcinoma without distant metastasis and underwent radical laparoscopic right colectomy between Jan 2016 and Dec 2019. In our study the patients who converted to open surgery in RELARC trial were excluded. The short-term outcomes were compared between ICA and ECA. The primary endpoint was abdominal infection. The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) was used for adjusting the potential confounders. Results This study enrolled 975 patients with 119 patients undergoing ICA and 856 patients undergoing ECA. The incidence of abdominal infection was higher in ICA group (9.2% versus 1.5%, RR from IPTW = 5.7 (95%CI: 2.6–12.6), P  < 0.001) as well as the incidence of wound infection (14.3% vs 3.3%, RR from IPTW = 5.0 (95%CI: 2.9–8.6), P  < 0.001). ICA was associated with higher incidence of Clavien–Dindo (CD) grade I and II complications (CD-I: 15.1% versus 6.8%, RR from IPTW = 2.4 (95%CI: 1.5–3.9), P  < 0.001; CD-II: 26.9% versus 8.2%, RR from IPTW = 3.6 (95%CI: 2.5–5.1), P  < 0.001) but similar incidence of CD-III ~ IV complications compared to ECA (3.4% vs 2.1%, RR from IPTW = 1.2 (95%CI: 0.4–4.0), P  = 0.73). In ICA group, choosing another incision rather than lengthening main port site decreased the incidence of wound infection although without statistical significance (17.3% (14/81) versus 7.9% (3/38), crude RR = 2.2 (95%CI: 0.7–7.2), P  = 0.17). Conclusion ICA is likely to be associated with higher risk of abdominal infection and CD-I ~ II complications.

Background Endoscopic stenting with a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) is a widely accepted procedure for malignant colonic obstruction. The Colonic Stent Safe Procedure Research Group conducted the present prospective feasibility study. Methods Our objectives were to estimate the safety and feasibility of SEMS placement as a bridge to surgery (BTS) for malignant colorectal obstruction. We conducted a prospective, observational, single-arm, multicenter clinical trial from March 2012 to October 2013. Each patient was treated with an uncovered WallFlex enteral colonic stent. Patients were followed up until discharge after surgery. Results A total of 518 consecutive patients were enrolled in this study. The cohort intended for BTS consisted of 312 patients (61 %), and the stent could be released in 305 patients. Technical and clinical success rates were 98 and 92 %, respectively. Elective surgery was performed in 297 patients, and emergency surgery was performed in eight patients for the treatment of complications. The overall preoperative complication rate was 7.2 %. Major complications, including perforation, occurred in 1.6 %, persistent colonic obstruction occurred in 1.0 %, and stent migration occurred in 1.3 % patients. The median time from SEMS to surgery was 16 days. Silent perforations were observed in 1.3 %. Open and laparoscopic surgery was performed in 121 and 184 patients, respectively. The tumor could be resected in 297 patients. The primary anastomosis rate was 92 %. The rate of anastomotic leakage was 4 %, and the overall stoma creation rate was 10 %. The median duration of hospitalization following surgery was 12 days. Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were 16 and 0.7 %, respectively. Conclusions This largest, multicenter, prospective study demonstrates the feasibility of SEMS placement as a BTS for malignant colorectal obstruction. SEMS serves as a safe and effective BTS with acceptable stoma creation and complication rates in patients with acute malignant colonic obstruction.

Background For obstructive colon cancer, many studies have been conducted on the use of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery (BTS). However, there are currently no available prospective data on the impact of bridging period and there is a lack of research on the effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy during the bridging period. Objectives Patients who undergo successful SEMS placement for obstructive left-sided colon adenocarcinoma without metastases will be eligible for this study. Design This study is a multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized (1:1), open-label, controlled trial. Methods & analysis The patients assigned to the control group will undergo curative surgery within two weeks after successful SEMS placement. The patients assigned to the experimental group will undergo three cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFOX chemotherapy within two weeks after successful SEMS placement. Curative surgery will be performed within four weeks of the last administration of neoadjuvant FOLFOX. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) will be collected at specific time points. Discussion The optimal time interval for SEMS placement as a BTS can significantly impact long-term oncologic outcomes. In this study, our goal is to identify the optimal time interval for SEMS placement as a BTS. Recently, there has been interest in applying neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced colon cancer. In the context of early treatment for tumor dissemination following SEMS placement, neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be beneficial for delayed surgery after SEMS placement as a BTS. The results of this trial will be an important reference for the application of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced colon cancer. Additionally, researchers will investigate whether ctDNA can serve as a reliable indicator to guide decisions about the timing and type of subsequent treatment. Based on the results of this trial, a patient-tailored treatment strategy can be developed for obstructive colon cancer. Registration This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04889820, registered on May 17, 2021 in clinicaltrials.gov; Protocol ID: XC21MIDI0004.

Background and aimsAn opioid-sparing postoperative analgesic regimen following laparoscopic hemicolectomy is optimal to promote minimal postoperative pain, early mobilization, and improved quality of recovery. Various regional anesthesia techniques have been tested to improve postoperative pain management after laparoscopic hemicolectomy. In this study, we aimed to assess the effect of administering a preoperative bilateral ultrasound-guided anterior quadratus lumborum nerve block on postoperative opioid consumption after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery.MethodsIn this randomized, controlled, double-blinded trial, 69 patients undergoing laparoscopic hemicolectomy due to colon cancer were randomized to receive an anterior quadratus lumborum block with ropivacaine 0.375% 30 mL on each side or isotonic saline (placebo). The primary outcome measure was total opioid consumption during the first 24 hours postsurgery. The secondary outcome measures were pain scores, accumulated opioid consumption in 6-hour intervals, nausea and vomiting, ability of postoperative ambulation, time to first opioid, orthostatic hypotension or intolerance, postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 scores, surgical complications, length of hospital stay, and adverse events.ResultsThe total opioid consumption in the first 24 hours postsurgery was not significantly reduced in the ropivacaine group compared with the saline group (mean 129 mg (SD 88.4) vs mean 127.2 mg (SD 89.9), p=0.93). In addition, no secondary outcome measures showed any statistically significant intergroup differences.ConclusionThe administration of a preoperative bilateral anterior quadratus lumborum nerve block as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen for laparoscopic hemicolectomy did not significantly reduce opioid consumption 24 hours postsurgery. Trial registration number NCT03570541.

Colon cancer is a common malignant tumor that often leads to intestinal obstruction, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Early and accurate diagnosis of colon cancer and associated ileus is crucial for timely treatment and improved patient outcomes. Various diagnostic methods, including MSCT and MRI, are currently used in clinical practice. However, the optimal imaging approach for accurate diagnosis remains uncertain. To study the value and accuracy of multi-slice spiral CT (MSCT) combined with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing colon cancer obstruction. A retrospective analysis was performed on 100 cases of colon cancer and ileus patients admitted to the Hai'an Hospital of Chinese Medicine from January 2019 to July 2020. The cases were randomly divided into control and experimental groups, with 50 cases in each. The control group was diagnosed with MSCT, and the experimental group was diagnosed with MRI based on the control group. The positive and negative detection rates, test accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were compared between the 2 groups. The area under the curve (AUC), quality of life (QOL) score, and mental status scale in non-psychiatric settings (MSSNS) score were calculated with the receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) and compared between the 2 groups. The test accuracy, positive detection rate, negative detection rate, test specificity, sensitivity, and AUC of the experimental group were significantly higher than those of the control group, and the results were statistically significant (P < .05). There was no significant difference in the QOL and the MSSNS scores between the 2 groups (P > .05). MSCT combined with MRI has a high application value in diagnosing colon cancer obstruction patients, and can significantly improve the test's accuracy, specificity and sensitivity.

Purpose Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is a safe, effective, and promising analgesic procedure, but TAP block only cannot overcome postoperative pain. We conducted a prospective randomized study to evaluate postoperative pain control using multimodal analgesia (MA) combined with a single injection TAP block compared with epidural analgesia (EA) after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery. Methods Sixty-seven patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic colon cancer surgery were enrolled in this study and randomized into EA and MA groups. The primary endpoint was the frequency of additional analgesic use until postoperative day (POD) 2. The VAS score, blood pressure, time to bowel movement, time to mobilization, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay were also compared between the two groups. Results Sixty-four patients (EA group, n  = 33; MA group, n  = 31) were analyzed. The patient characteristics did not differ markedly between the two groups. The frequency of additional analgesic use was significantly lower in the MA group than in the EA group ( P  < 0.001), whereas the VAS score did not differ markedly between the two groups. The postoperative blood pressure on the day of surgery was significantly lower in the MA group than in the EA group ( P  = 0.016), whereas urinary retention was significantly higher in the EA group than in the MA group ( P  < 0.001). Conclusion MA combined with a single injection TAP block after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery may be comparable to EA in terms of analgesia and superior to EA in terms of urinary retention.

Introduction The best treatment therapy for gastrointestinal cancer patients is assessed by the improvement of health status and quality of life (QoL) after treatments. Malnutrition is related to loss of muscle strengths which leads to lower physical performance and emotional status. Thus, this study aimed to estimate the effects of nutritional interventions on the improvement of QoL among gastrointestinal patients undergoing chemotherapy in Vietnam. Methods A quasi‐experiment with intervention and control groups for pre‐ and post‐intervention assessment was carried out at the Department of Oncology and Palliative Care—Hanoi Medical University Hospital from 2016 to 2019. Sixty gastrointestinal cancer patients were recruited in each group. The intervention regimen consisted of nutritional counseling, a specific menu with a recommended amount of energy, protein, and formula milk used within 2 months. Nutritional status and QoL of patients were evaluated using The Scored Patient‐Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG‐SGA) and The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). The difference in differences (DiD) method was utilized to estimate the outcome between control and intervention groups. Results After the intervention, patients of the intervention group had better changes in scores of global health status (Coef =16.68; 95% CI =7.90; 25.46), physical (Coef =14.51; 95% CI =5.34; 23.70), and role functioning (Coef =14.67; 95% CI =1.63; 27.70) compared to the control group. Regarding symptom scales, the level of fatigue, pain, and insomnia symptoms significantly reduced between pre‐ and post‐intervention in the intervention group. In addition, living in urban areas, defined as malnourished and having low prealbumin levels, were positively associated with the lower global health status/QoL score. Conclusion Nutritional therapy with high protein was beneficial to the improvement in QoL, physical function and the reduction of negative symptoms among gastrointestinal cancer patients. Early individualized nutritional support in consultation with professional dietitians during chemotherapy plays an integral part in enhancing the QoL and better treatment prognosis. Clinical trial registration number: NCT04517708. Nutritional therapy with high‐protein and energy intake is beneficial to the improvement in quality of life (QoL) and physical function as well as the reduction of negative symptoms among gastrointestinal cancer patients. Early individualized nutritional support in consultation with professional dietitians during chemotherapy plays an integral part in enhancing the QoL and better treatment prognosis of the patients.

Purpose This study aims to evaluate the role of colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery in acutely obstructed left-sided colon cancer. Methods Patients with acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction with no evidence of peritonitis were recruited. After informed consent, patients were randomized to colonic stenting followed by elective surgery or immediate emergency surgery. Patients who had successful colonic stenting underwent elective surgery 1 to 2 weeks later, while the other group had emergency surgery. Patients in whom stenting was unsuccessful also underwent emergency surgery. Results Twenty patients were randomized to stenting and 19 to emergency surgery. Fourteen patients (70%) had successful stenting and underwent elective surgery at a median of 10 days later; the rest underwent emergency surgery. Technical stent failure occurred in five patients (25%). One patient failed to decompress after successful stent deployment. All patients underwent definitive colonic resection with primary anastomosis. Two of 20 patients in the stenting group required defunctioning stomas compared to 6 of 19 in emergency surgery group, p  = 0.127. Overall complication rate was 35% versus 58% ( p  = 0.152) and mortality was 0% versus 16% ( p  = 0.106) in the stenting group and emergency surgery group, respectively. Postoperatively, the stenting group was discharged from hospital earlier (median of 6 versus 8 days, p  = 0.028) than the emergency surgery group. Conclusion Colonic stenting followed by interval elective surgery may be safer, with a trend towards lower morbidity and mortality when compared with the current practice of emergency surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

Background Fatigue is a major problem of cancer patients. Thirty percent of cancer survivors report serious fatigue three years after finishing treatment. There is evidence that physical exercise during cancer treatment reduces fatigue. This may also lead to an improvement of quality of life. Such findings may result in a decrease of healthcare related expenditures and societal costs due to sick leave. However, no studies are known that investigated these hypotheses. Therefore, the primary aim of our study is to assess the effect of exercise during cancer treatment on reducing complaints of fatigue and on reducing health service utilisation and sick leave. Methods/Design The Physical Activity during Cancer Treatment study is a multicentre randomised controlled trial in 150 breast and 150 colon cancer patients undergoing cancer treatment. Participants will be randomised to an exercise or a control group. In addition to the usual care, the exercise group will participate in an 18-week supervised group exercise programme. The control group will be asked to maintain their habitual physical activity pattern. Study endpoints will be assessed after 18 weeks (short term) and after 9 months (long term). Validated questionnaires will be used. Primary outcome: fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory and Fatigue Quality List) and cost-effectiveness, health service utilisation and sick leave. Secondary outcome: health related quality of life (European Organisation Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life questionnaire-C30, Short Form 36 healthy survey), impact on functioning and autonomy (Impact on functioning and autonomy questionnaire), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), physical fitness (aerobic peak capacity, muscle strength), body composition and cognitive-behavioural aspects. To register health service utilisation and sick leave, participants will keep diaries including the EuroQuol-5D. Physical activity level will be measured using the Short Questionnaire to Assess Health-Enhancing Physical Activity and will be monitored with an exercise log and a pedometer. Discussion This study investigates the (cost)-effectiveness of exercise during adjuvant treatment of patients with breast or colon cancer. If early physical exercise proves to be (cost) effective, establishing standardised physical exercise programmes during cancer treatment will be planned. Trial registration Current Controlled trials ISRCTN43801571, Dutch Trial Register NTR2138