Search tips
Search criteria

Results 1-25 (970485)

Clipboard (0)

Related Articles

1.  Colonic stent placement as a bridge to surgery in patients with left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction. An observational study 
Il Giornale di Chirurgia  2015;35(11-12):283-289.
Acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction is common in elderly patients, in which emergency surgery is related with high morbidity and mortality rates, and often necessitates a two-step resection. Although the use of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) in elderly patients has not been adequately described yet, there are almost two international important trials which are still in progress, the stenting technique is established to be, by the international literature, an useful treatment with low morbidity and mortality. It’s also a bridge to surgery, since the insertion of a SEMS can decompress the obstruction, making bowel and patient preparation possible and facilitating single-stage surgical resection. Palliative stenting can improve quality of life when compared to surgery in patients with metastasis or high co-morbidity.
The aim of this study is to analyze mortality, avoidance of stoma, short- and long-term survival in patient with malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction who underwent to stent placement in our Emergency Surgery Unit, which is operative since November 2010 in our city Hospital in Ferrara.
Patients and methods
Between November 2010 and December 2012 a total of 15 patients with acute left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction suitable for colonic stent application were admitted to Emergency Surgery Unit. Among these patients, 9 underwent to self-expanding metallic stent placement (group A), the other (group B) 6 patient underwent to emergency surgery.
In this observational not-randomized study we analyzed the efficacy and safety of SEMS placement for patients either as a bridge to surgery or as a palliation, beside the short term and long term outcomes, versus those patients operated straight.
Self-expanding metallic stents were successfully implanted in 9 of the 15 patients with acute left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction. No acute procedure-related complication was observed. All the patients in group A kept the stent in place for an average of 7,7 days, then everyone underwent to surgery. A large bowel resection with one-time recanalization was performed in 8 of the 9 patients. None Hartmann resection was necessary. Only one underwent again to surgery because of a dehiscence, a stoma was necessary.
Between the other 6 patients in group B who underwent directly to surgery, In one case was necessary an Hartmann resection, another one incurred in dehiscence of the anastomosis that required reoperation with stoma creation.
Placement of SEMS seems to be an useful alternative to emergent surgery in the management of acute left-sided bowel obstruction, both as a bridge to surgery and as a palliative procedure. SEMS can provide an effective and safe therapeutic option compared to emergency surgery, most of all in elderly patients, with a lower mortality rate, a significantly higher rate of primary anastomosis and the avoidance of stoma.
However, to fully determine their role for these indications, more data and more high level evidence is required.
PMCID: PMC4321507  PMID: 25644730
Colorectal cancer; Large bowel obstruction; Stent placement; Bridge to surgery
2.  The cost-effectiveness of colonic stenting as a bridge to curative surgery in patients with acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: A Canadian perspective 
Over the past several years, colonic stenting has been advocated as an alternative to the traditional surgical approach for relieving acute malignant left-sided colonic obstruction. The aim of the present study was to determine the most cost-effective strategy in a Canadian setting.
A decision analytical model was developed to compare three competing strategies: CS – emergent colonic stenting followed by elective resective surgery and reanastomosis; RS – emergent resective surgery followed by creation of either a diverting colostomy or primary reanastomosis; and DC – emergent diverting colostomy followed by elective resective surgery and reanastomosis. The costs were estimated from the perspective of the Manitoba provincial health plan.
The use of CS resulted in fewer total operative procedures per patient (mean CS 1.03, RS 1.32, DC 1.9), lower mortality rate (CS 5%, RS 11%, DC 13%) and lower likelihood of requiring a permanent stoma (CS 7%, RS 14%, DC 14%). CS is slightly more expensive than DC, but less costly than RS (DC $11,851, CS $13,164, RS $13,820). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with the use of CS versus DC is $1,415 to prevent a temporary stoma, $1,516 to prevent an additional operation and $15,734 to prevent an additional death.
Colonic stenting for patients with acute colonic obstruction secondary to a resectable colonic tumour is comparable in cost with surgical options, and reduces the likelihood of requiring both temporary and permanent stomas. Colonic stenting should be offered as the initial therapeutic modality for Canadian colorectal cancer patients presenting with acute obstruction as a bridge to definitive RS.
PMCID: PMC2660835  PMID: 17171197
Bowel obstruction; Colon cancer; Colonic stenting; Cost-effectiveness
3.  Surgical failure after colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery 
World Journal of Gastroenterology : WJG  2014;20(33):11826-11834.
AIM: To identify risk factors for surgical failure after colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.
METHODS: The medical records of patients who underwent stent insertion for malignant colonic obstruction between February 2004 and August 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with malignant colonic obstruction had overt clinical symptoms and signs of obstruction. Malignant colonic obstruction was diagnosed by computed tomography and colonoscopy. A total of 181 patients underwent stent insertion during the study period; of these, 68 consecutive patients were included in our study when they had undergone stent placement as a bridge to surgery in acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction due to primary colon cancer.
RESULTS: Out of 68 patients, forty-eight (70.6%) were male, and the mean age was 64.9 (range, 38-89) years. The technical and clinical success rates were 97.1% (66/68) and 88.2% (60/68), respectively. Overall, 85.3% (58/68) of patients underwent primary tumor resection and primary anastomosis. Surgically successful preoperative colonic stenting was achieved in 77.9% (53/68). The mean duration, defined as the time between the SEMS attempt and surgery, was 11.3 d (range, 0-26 d). The mean hospital stay after surgery was 12.5 d (range, 6-55 d). On multivariate analysis, the use of multiple self-expanding metal stents (OR = 28.872; 95%CI: 1.939-429.956, P = 0.015) was a significant independent risk factor for surgical failure of preoperative stenting as a bridge to surgery. Morbidity and mortality rates in surgery after stent insertion were 4.4% (3/68) and 1.5% (1/68), respectively.
CONCLUSION: The use of multiple self-expanding metal stents appears to be a risk factor for surgical failure.
PMCID: PMC4155374  PMID: 25206288
Colorectal neoplasms; Endoscopy; Intestinal obstruction; Risk factors; Stents
4.  Colon Stenting: A Review 
Up to 85% of patients who present with colonic obstruction have a colorectal cancer. Between 7% and 29% of these patients present with total or partial intestinal obstruction. Only 20% of these patients presenting with acute colonic obstruction due to malignancy survive 5 years. Emergent surgical intervention in patients with colonic obstruction is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates. Only 40% of patients with obstructive carcinoma of the left colon can be treated with surgical resection without the need for a colostomy. The use of a temporary or permanent colostomy has a significant impact on quality of life. The decompressive effect seen with colonic stenting is a durable, simple, and effective palliative treatment of patients with advanced disease. Stent deployment provides an effective solution to acute colonic obstruction and allows surgical treatment of the patient in an elective and more favorable condition. In addition, colonic stenting reduces costs and avoids the need for a colostomy.
PMCID: PMC3036228  PMID: 21331130
Colon cancer; intestinal obstruction; colonic stenting
5.  Clinical application of self-expanding metallic stent in the management of acute left-sided colorectal malignant obstruction 
AIM: To summarize our experience with the application of self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) in the management of acute left-sided colorectal malignant obstruction.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing placement of SEMS between April 2000 and January 2004 was performed.
RESULTS: Insertion of SEMS was attempted in 26 patients under fluoroscopic guidance with occasional endoscopic assistance. The sites of lesions were located in splenic flexure of two patients, left colon of seven patients, sigmoid colon of eight patients and rectum of nine patients. The intended uses of SEMS were for palliation in 7 patients and as a bridge to elective surgery in 19 patients. In the latter group, placement of SEMS allowed for preoperative systemic and bowel preparation and the following one-stage anastomosis. Successful stent placement was achieved in 22 (85%) of the 26 patients. The clinical bowel obstruction resolved 24 hours after successful stent placement in 21 (95%) patients. Three SEMS-related minor complications occurred, two stents migrated and one caused anal pain.
CONCLUSION: SEMS represents an effective and safe tool in the management of acute malignant colorectal obstruction. As a bridge to surgery, SEMS can provide time for systematic support and bowel preparation and obviate the need for fecal diversion or on-table lavage. As a palliative measure, SEMS can eliminate the need for emergent colostomy.
PMCID: PMC4066126  PMID: 16521189
SEMS; Acute left-sided colorectal malignant obstruction
6.  Emergency Management of Malignant Acute Left-Sided Colonic Obstruction 
The management of acute left-sided colonic obstruction still remains a challenging problem despite significant progress.
A literature search was undertaken using PubMed and the Cochrane Library regarding the options in emergency management of left-sided colonic obstruction focusing on outcomes such as mortality, morbidity, long-term prognosis and cost effectiveness.
Colonic stenting is the best option either for palliation or as a bridge to surgery. It reduces morbidity and mortality rate and the need for colostomy formation. Stenting is likely to be cost effective, but data are variable depending on the individual healthcare system. Nevertheless, surgical management remains relevant as colonic stenting has a small rate of failure, and it is not always available. There are various surgical options. One-stage primary resection and anastomosis is the preferred choice for low-risk patients. Intra-operative colonic irrigation has no proven benefit. Subtotal colectomy is useful in cases of proximal bowel damage or synchronous tumours. Hartmann's procedure should be reserved for high-risk patients. Simple colostomy has no role other than for use in very ill patients who are not fit for any other procedure.
PMCID: PMC2430461  PMID: 18430330
Colonic neoplasms; Intestinal obstruction; Stents; Colectomy; Hartmann's operation; Colonic irrigation
7.  Colonic stenting vs emergent surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis 
AIM: To investigate the effects of emergent preoperative self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) vs emergent surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.
METHODS: Two investigators independently searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as references of included studies to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared two or more surgical approaches for acute colonic obstruction. Summary risk ratios (RR) and 95% CI for colonic stenting and emergent surgery were calculated.
RESULTS: Eight studies met the selection criteria, involving 444 patients, of whom 219 underwent SEMS and 225 underwent emergent surgery. Seven studies reported difference of the one-stage stoma rates between the two groups (RR, 0.60; 95% CI: 0.48-0.76; P < 0.0001). Only three RCTs described the follow-up stoma rates, which showed no significant difference between the two groups (RR, 0.80; 95% CI: 0.59-1.08; P = 0.14). Difference was not significant in the mortality between the two groups (RR, 0.91; 95% CI: 0.50-1.66; P = 0.77), but there was significant difference (RR, 0.57; 95% CI: 0.44-0.74; P < 0.0001) in the overall morbidity. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the anastomotic leak rate (RR, 0.60; 95% CI: 0.28-1.28; P = 0.19), occurrence of abscesses, including peristomal abscess, intraperitoneal abscess and parietal abscess (RR, 0.83; 95% CI: 0.36-1.95; P = 0.68), and other abdominal complications (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.40-1.12; P = 0.13).
CONCLUSION: SEMS is not obviously more advantageous than emergent surgery for patients with acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.
PMCID: PMC3482649  PMID: 23112555
Acute obstruction; Colonic cancer; Self-expandable metallic stent; Stoma placement; Meta-analysis; Systematic review
8.  Enteral stents for the management of malignant colorectal obstruction 
World Journal of Gastroenterology : WJG  2014;20(37):13239-13245.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the 3rd most common cancer in the United States with more than 10000 new cases diagnosed annually. Approximately 20% of patients with CRC will have distant metastasis at time of diagnosis, making them poor candidates for primary surgical resection. Similarly, 8%-25% of patients with CRC will present with bowel obstruction and will require palliative therapy. Emergent surgical decompression has a high mortality and morbidity, and often leads to a colostomy which impairs the patient’s quality of life. In the last decade, there has been an increasing use of colonic stents for palliative therapy to relieve malignant colonic obstruction. Colonic stents have been shown to be effective and safe to treat obstruction from CRC, and are now the therapy of choice in this scenario. In the setting of an acute bowel obstruction in patients with potentially resectable colon cancer, stents may be used to delay surgery and thus allow for decompression, adequate bowel preparation, and optimization of the patient’s condition for curative surgical intervention. An overall complication rate (major and minor) of up to 25% has been associated with the procedure. Long term failure of stents may result from stent migration and tumor ingrowth. In the majority of cases, repeat stenting or surgical intervention can successfully overcome these adverse effects.
PMCID: PMC4188882  PMID: 25309061
Colorectal cancer; Colonic obstruction; Self expanding metal stents; Intestinal obstruction/etiology; Intestinal obstruction/mortality; Intestinal obstruction/surgery; Survival rate
9.  The Safety and Efficiency of Surgery with Colonic Stents in Left-Sided Malignant Colonic Obstruction: A Meta-Analysis 
Objective. This meta-analysis is aimed at assessing the safety and efficiency of colonic self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) used as a bridge to surgery in the management of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction (LMCO). Methods. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Knowledge, OVID, Google Scholar, CNKI, and WANGFANG for relevant randomized trials comparing colonic stenting used as a bridge in semielective surgery versus emergency surgery from January 2001 to September 2013. Result. Five published studies were included in this systematic review, including 273 patients (140 male/133 female). 136 patients received semielective surgery after SEMS installation while 137 patients underwent emergency surgery without SEMS. SEMS intervention resulted in significantly lower overall colostomy rate (41.9% versus 56.2%, P = 0.02), surgical site infection rate (10.2% versus 19.7%, P = 0.03), and overall complication rate (29.2% versus 60.5%, P = 0.05). There was no statistic difference for the rate of primary anastomosis, anastomotic leak and operation-related mortality between two groups. Conclusions. semielective surgery with SEMS as a bridge for proper patients of LMCO can lower the overall rate for colostomy, surgical site infection, and complications.
PMCID: PMC4053219  PMID: 24959174
10.  Acute endometrial bowel obstruction—A rare indication for colonic stenting 
Pelvic endometriosis is an extremely rare cause of large bowel obstruction and the management can be challenging. Urgent surgery for acute colonic obstruction is known to carry high morbidity and mortality, and operation may be made more difficult in extensive pelvic endometriosis. Less invasive alternatives in the acute situation may need to be considered.
Presented is the case of a 35-year-old lady with obstructive bowel symptoms caused by an endometriotic upper rectal stricture. She was initially treated using radiologically guided stent insertion, as an acute intervention, prior to an elective bowel resection and hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy.
Colonic stenting is currently widely used in malignant obstruction. The use of self expanding metallic stents (SEMS) to treat benign conditions is controversial, however, due to associated long term complications. This case demonstrates that stenting can provide a bridge to major surgery in the rare event of acute endometriotic colonic obstruction. The initial acute treatment with stenting provides the advantage of time to involve the multi-disciplinary team, to medically optimise the patient and to better plan the definitive surgery.
The use of radiologically guided stents has a place in the treatment of benign recto-sigmoid obstruction due to endometriosis and therefore should be considered as a bridge to further surgical treatment.
PMCID: PMC3540235  PMID: 23276756
Colonic; Obstruction; Endometriosis; Radiological; Stenting
11.  Endovascular Repair of Descending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm 
Executive Summary
To conduct an assessment on endovascular repair of descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA).
Clinical Need
Aneurysm is the most common condition of the thoracic aorta requiring surgery. Aortic aneurysm is defined as a localized dilatation of the aorta. Most aneurysms of the thoracic aorta are asymptomatic and incidentally discovered. However, TAA tends to enlarge progressively and compress surrounding structures causing symptoms such as chest or back pain, dysphagia (difficulty swallowing), dyspnea (shortness of breath), cough, stridor (a harsh, high-pitched breath sound), and hoarseness. Significant aortic regurgitation causes symptoms of congestive heart failure. Embolization of the thrombus to the distal arterial circulation may occur and cause related symptoms. The aneurysm may eventually rupture and create a life-threatening condition.
The overall incidence rate of TAA is about 10 per 100,000 person-years. The descending aorta is involved in about 30% to 40% of these cases.
The prognosis of large untreated TAAs is poor, with a 3-year survival rate as low as 25%. Intervention is strongly recommended for any symptomatic TAA or any TAA that exceeds twice the diameter of a normal aorta or is 6 cm or larger. Open surgical treatment of TAA involves left thoracotomy and aortic graft replacement. Surgical treatment has been found to improve survival when compared with medical therapy. However, despite dramatic advances in surgical techniques for performing such complex operations, operative mortality from centres of excellence are between 8% and 20% for elective cases, and up to 50% in patients requiring emergency operations. In addition, survivors of open surgical repair of TAAs may suffer from severe complications. Postoperative or postprocedural complications of descending TAA repair include paraplegia, myocardial infarction, stroke, respiratory failure, renal failure, and intestinal ischemia.
The Technology
Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) using a stent graft, a procedure called endovascular stent-graft (ESG) placement, is a new alternative to the traditional surgical approach. It is less invasive, and initial results from several studies suggest that it may reduce mortality and morbidity associated with the repair of descending TAAs.
The goal in endovascular repair is to exclude the aneurysm from the systemic circulation and prevent it from rupturing, which is life-threatening. The endovascular placement of a stent graft eliminates the systemic pressure acting on the weakened wall of the aneurysm that may lead to the rupture. However, ESG placement has some specific complications, including endovascular leak (endoleak), graft migration, stent fracture, and mechanical damage to the access artery and aortic wall.
The Talent stent graft (manufactured by Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN) is licensed in Canada for the treatment of patients with TAA (Class 4; licence 36552). The design of this device has evolved since its clinical introduction. The current version has a more flexible delivery catheter than did the original system. The prosthesis is composed of nitinol stents between thin layers of polyester graft material. Each stent is secured with oversewn sutures to prevent migration.
Review Strategy
To compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ESG placement in the treatment of TAAs with a conventional surgical approach
To summarize the safety profile and effectiveness of ESG placement in the treatment of descending TAAs
Measures of Effectiveness
Primary Outcome
Mortality rates (30-day and longer term)
Secondary Outcomes
Technical success rate of introducing a stent graft and exclusion of the aneurysm sac from systemic circulation
Rate of reintervention (through surgical or endovascular approach)
Measures of Safety
Complications were categorized into 2 classes:
Those specific to the ESG procedure, including rates of aneurysm rupture, endoleak, graft migration, stent fracture, and kinking; and
Those due to the intervention, either surgical or endovascular. These include paraplegia, stroke, cardiovascular events, respiratory failure, real insufficiency, and intestinal ischemia.
Inclusion Criteria
Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of ESG treatment with surgical approaches
Studies reporting on the safety and effectiveness of the ESG procedure for the treatment of descending TAAs
Exclusion Criteria
Studies investigating the clinical effectiveness of ESG placement for other conditions such as aortic dissection, aortic ulcer, and traumatic injuries of the thoracic aorta
Studies investigating the aneurysms of the ascending and the arch of the aorta
Studies using custom-made grafts
Literature Search
The Medical Advisory Secretariat searched The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for health technology assessments. It also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, and Cochrane CENTRAL from January 1, 2000 to July 11, 2005 for studies on ESG procedures. The search was limited to English-language articles and human studies.
One health technology assessment from the United Kingdom was identified. This systematic review included all pathologies of the thoracic aorta; therefore, it did not match the inclusion criteria. The search yielded 435 citations; of these, 9 studies met inclusion criteria.
Summary of Findings
The results of a comparative study found that in-hospital mortality was not significantly different between ESG placement and surgery patients (2 [4.8%] for ESG vs. 6 [11.3%] for surgery).
Pooled data from case series with a mean follow-up ranging from 12 to 38 months showed a 30-day mortality and late mortality rate of 3.9% and 5.5%, respectively. These rates are lower than are those reported in the literature for surgical repair of TAA.
Case series showed that the most common cause of early death in patients undergoing endovascular repair is aortic rupture, and the most common causes of late death are cardiac events and aortoesophageal or aortobronchial fistula.
Technical Success Rate
Technical success rates reported by case series are 55% to 100% (100% and 94.4% in 2 studies with all elective cases, 89% in a study with 5% emergent cases, and 55% in a study with 42% emergent cases).
Surgical Reintervention
In the comparative study, 3 (7.1%) patients in the ESG group and 14 (26.5%) patients in the surgery group required surgical reintervention. In the ESG group, the reasons for surgical intervention were postoperative bleeding at the access site, paraplegia, and type 1 endoleak. In the surgical group, the reasons for surgery were duodenal perforation, persistent thoracic duct leakage, false aneurysm, and 11 cases of postoperative bleeding.
Pooled data from case series show that 9 (2.6%) patients required surgical intervention. The reasons for surgical intervention were endoleak (3 cases), aneurysm enlargement and suspected infection (1 case), aortic dissection (1 case), pseudoaneurysm of common femoral artery (1 case), evacuation of hematoma (1 case), graft migration (1 case), and injury to the access site (1 case).
Endovascular Revision
In the comparative study, 3 (7.1%) patients required endovascular revision due to persistent endoleak.
Pooled data from case series show that 19 (5.3%) patients required endovascular revision due to persistent endoleak.
Graft Migration
Two case series reported graft migration. In one study, 3 proximal and 4 component migrations were noted at 2-year follow-up (total of 5%). Another study reported 1 (3.7%) case of graft migration. Overall, the incidence of graft migration was 2.6%.
Aortic Rupture
In the comparative study, aortic rupture due to bare stent occurred in 1 case (2%). The pooled incidence of aortic rupture or dissection reported by case series was 1.4%.
Postprocedural Complications
In the comparative study, there were no statistically significant differences between the ESG and surgery groups in postprocedural complications, except for pneumonia. The rate of pneumonia was 9% for those who received an ESG and 28% for those who had surgery (P = .02). There were no cases of paraplegia in either group. The rate of other complications for ESG and surgery including stroke, cardiac, respiratory, and intestinal ischemia were all 5.1% for ESG placement and 10% for surgery. The rate for mild renal failure was 16% in the ESG group and 30% in the surgery group. The rate for severe renal failure was 11% for ESG placement and 10% for surgery.
Pooled data from case series show the following postprocedural complication rates in the ESG placement group: paraplegia (2.2%), stroke (3.9%), cardiac (2.9%), respiratory (8.7%), renal failure (2.8%), and intestinal ischemia (1%).
Time-Related Outcomes
The results of the comparative study show statistically significant differences between the ESG and surgery group for mean operative time (ESG, 2.7 hours; surgery, 5 hours), mean duration of intensive care unit stay (ESG, 11 days; surgery, 14 days), and mean length of hospital stay (ESG, 10 days; surgery, 30 days).
The mean duration of intensive care unit stay and hospital stay derived from case series is 1.6 and 7.8 days, respectively.
Ontario-Based Economic Analysis
In Ontario, the annual treatment figures for fiscal year 2004 include 17 cases of descending TAA repair procedures (source: Provincial Health Planning Database). Fourteen of these have been identified as “not ruptured” with a mean hospital length of stay of 9.23 days, and 3 cases have been identified as “ruptured,” with a mean hospital length of stay of 28 days. However, because one Canadian Classification of Health Interventions code was used for both procedures, it is not possible to determine how many were repaired with an EVAR procedure or with an open surgical procedure.
Hospitalization Costs
The current fiscal year forecast of in-hospital direct treatment costs for all in-province procedures of repair of descending TAAs is about $560,000 (Cdn). The forecast in-hospital total cost per year for in-province procedures is about $720,000 (Cdn). These costs include the device cost when the procedure is EVAR (source: Ontario Case Costing Initiative).
Professional (Ontario Health Insurance Plan) Costs
Professional costs per treated patient were calculated and include 2 preoperative thoracic surgery or EVAR consultations.
The professional costs of an EVAR include the fees paid to the surgeons, anesthetist, and surgical assistant (source: fee service codes). The procedure was calculated to take about 150 minutes.
The professional costs of an open surgical repair include the fees of the surgeon, anesthetist, and surgical assistant. Open surgical repair was estimated to take about 300 minutes.
Services provided by professionals in intensive care units were also taken into consideration, as were the costs of 2 postoperative consultations that the patients receive on average once they are discharged from the hospital. Therefore, total Ontario Health Insurance Plan costs per treated patient treated with EVAR are on average $2,956 (ruptured or not ruptured), as opposed to $5,824 for open surgical repair and $6,157 for open surgical repair when the aneurysm is ruptured.
Endovascular stent graft placement is a less invasive procedure for repair of TAA than is open surgical repair.
There is no high-quality evidence with long-term follow-up data to support the use of EVAR as the first choice of treatment for patients with TAA that are suitable candidates for surgical intervention.
However, short- and medium-term outcomes of ESG placement reported by several studies are satisfactory and comparable to surgical intervention; therefore, for patients at high risk of surgery, it is a practical option to consider. Short- and medium-term results show that the benefit of ESG placement over the surgical approach is a lower 30-day mortality and paraplegia rate; and shorter operative time, ICU stay, and hospital stay.
PMCID: PMC3382300  PMID: 23074469
12.  Self-expanding metal stents in malignant colonic obstruction: experiences from Sweden 
BMC Research Notes  2011;4:274.
Acute surgery in the management of malignant colonic obstruction is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The use of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) is an alternative method of decompressing colonic obstruction. SEMS may allow time to optimize the patient and to perform preoperative staging, converting acute surgery into elective. SEMS is also proposed as palliative treatment in patients with contraindications to open surgery. Aim: To review our experience of SEMS focusing on clinical outcome and complications. The method used was a review of 75 consecutive trials at SEMS on 71 patients based on stent-protocols and patient charts.
SEMS was used for palliation in 64 (85%) cases and as a bridge to surgery in 11 (15%) cases. The majority of obstructions, 53 (71%) cases, were located in the recto-sigmoid. Technical success was achieved in 65 (87%) cases and clinical decompression was achieved in 60 (80%) cases. Reasons for technical failure were inability to cannulate the stricture in 5 (7%) cases and suboptimal SEMS placement in 3 (4%) cases. Complications included 4 (5%) procedure-related bowel perforations of which 2 (3%) patients died in junction to post operative complications. Three cases of bleeding after SEMS occurred, none of which needed invasive treatment. Five of the SEMS occluded. Two cases of stent erosion were diagnosed at the time of surgery. Average survival after palliative SEMS treatment was 6 months.
Our results correspond well to previously published data and we conclude that SEMS is a relatively safe and effective method of treating malignant colonic obstruction although the risk of SEMS-related perforations has to be taken into account.
PMCID: PMC3163214  PMID: 21801447
13.  Safety and Efficacy of Metallic Stents in the Management of Colorectal Obstruction 
The use of self-expandable metallic stents in the management of obstructing colorectal cancer has been described with increasing frequency in the literature. Our goal was to evaluate the efficacy and associated morbidity of the use of self-expandable metallic stents to relieve colorectal obstruction at our institution.
A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent colorectal stent placement between December 2001 and December 2003 in a tertiary referral center was performed.
Stents were placed successfully in 17 of 21 patients (81%) with colorectal obstruction. Placement was achieved endoscopically in 13 patients and radiologically in 4. Ten self-expandable metallic stents were used as a bridge to surgery, and 7 were used for palliation. The obstructions were located in the sigmoid colon (11 patients), the rectosigmoid (3), the splenic flexure, the hepatic flexure, and the rectum. Malignant obstruction was noted in 14 patients. One patient with malignancy experienced a sigmoid perforation, and 2 patients with benign disease had complications (1 stent migration and 1 re-obstruction). Stent patency in obstruction secondary to colonic adenocarcinoma was 100% in our follow-up period (range, 5 to 15 months).
The use of stents as a bridge to surgery is associated with low morbidity, allows for bowel preparation, and thus avoids the need for a temporary colostomy. Long-term patency suggests that stents may allow for the avoidance of an operation in patients with metastatic disease and further defines their role in the palliation of malignant obstruction. Further prospective randomized studies are necessary to fully elucidate the use of stents in the management of colorectal cancer.
PMCID: PMC3015633  PMID: 16381366
Stent; Colorectal obstruction; Colorectal cancer; Surgery; Palliation
14.  A comparison of two methods of palliation of large bowel obstruction due to irremovable colon cancer. 
INTRODUCTION: Untreated malignant large bowel obstruction is rapidly fatal. Short-term palliation of symptoms can be achieved by formation of a stoma in those patients for whom resection surgery is inappropriate. In the final months of life, a stoma represents a significant burden for both patients and carers. Palliative endoluminal stenting may therefore be an attractive alternative option for this poor prognostic group. PATIENTS: Thirty-six patients were studied of whom 18 had obstructing left-sided colon cancer relieved by placement of endoluminal stents. These were compared with 18 historical controls with similar clinicopathological features that were treated more conventionally with palliative stoma formation in the same hospital. RESULTS: Patients in the two groups had similar sex distribution (P = 0.5); however, patients undergoing palliative stoma formation were significantly younger than patients being stented (P = 0.0065). As well as being older, there was a trend towards greater co-morbidities, stent patients having higher ASA grades (P = 0.01). Both groups of patients gained relief of obstructive symptoms. There were no differences in survival (P = 0.5) or in hospital mortality (2 in each group). The median length of palliation is 92 days (42-infinity days) for stenting and 121 days (89-281 days) for palliative stoma formation. Formation of a stoma required a significantly longer stay in ITU (P = 0.003) but total hospital stay was similar. CONCLUSIONS: As an alternative to palliative surgery, selected patients benefit from colonic endoluminal stenting with relief of obstructive symptoms and no adverse effect on survival. They may be spared the potential problems associated with palliative stoma formation and the morbidity of surgery. Stenting can be offered to the very frail patient who would otherwise be managed conservatively.
PMCID: PMC1964159  PMID: 15005927
15.  Colonic Stent as Bridge to Surgery in Patients with Obstructive Left-Sided Colon Cancer 
We assessed the optimal time interval between endoscopic stenting and subsequent surgery in patients with obstructive left-sided colon cancer.
We reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent endoscopic colonic stenting for obstructive left-sided colon cancer between January 2009 and January 2012. Patients who had successful endoscopic intervention as a bridge to surgery were included in the study. Other variables studied were the duration between endoscopic stenting and surgery, the reobstruction rate, the stoma creation rate, the anastomotic leak rate, and the in-hospital mortality rate.
The medical records of 53 patients who underwent endoscopic stenting for obstructive left-sided colon cancer were reviewed, and 43 were included in the study. The median duration between endoscopic stenting and surgery was 7 days (range, 5–33).
A median duration of 7 to 9 days after endoscopic stenting in patients with obstructive left-sided colon cancer is enough time to subsequently perform a safe surgical procedure. Extending this duration may expose the patient to the risk of reobstruction and emergency surgery.
PMCID: PMC4232405  PMID: 25408602
Large bowel obstruction; Endoscopic stenting; Bridge to surgery; Emergency colorectal surgery
16.  Guidelenines in the management of obstructing cancer of the left colon: consensus conference of the world society of emergency surgery (WSES) and peritoneum and surgery (PnS) society 
Obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) is a challenging matter in terms of obstruction release as well of oncological issues. Several options are available and no guidelines are established. The paper aims to generate evidenced based recommendations on management of OLCC.
The PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were queried for publications focusing on OLCC published prior to April 2010. A extensive retrieval, analyses, and grading of the literature was undertaken. The findings of the research were presented and largely discussed among panellist and audience at the Consensus Conference of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and Peritoneum and Surgery (PnS) Society held in Bologna July 2010. Comparisons of techniques are presented and final committee recommendation are enounced.
Hartmann's procedure should be preferred to loop colostomy (Grade 2B). Hartmann's procedure offers no survival benefit compared to segmental colonic resection with primary anastomosis (Grade 2C+); Hartmann's procedure should be considered in patients with high surgical risk (Grade 2C). Total colectomy and segmental colectomy with intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity, however total colectomy is associated with higher rates impaired bowel function (Grade 1A). Segmental resection and primary anastomosis either with manual decompression or intraoperative colonic irrigation are associated with same mortality/morbidity rate (Grade 1A). In palliation stent placement is associated with similar mortality/morbidity rates and shorter hospital stay (Grade 2B). Stents as a bridge to surgery seems associated with lower mortality rate, shorter hospital stay, and a lower colostomy formation rate (Grade 1B).
Loop colostomy and staged procedure should be adopted in case of dramatic scenario, when neoadjuvant therapy could be expected. Hartmann's procedure should be performed in case of high risk of anastomotic dehiscence. Subtotal and total colectomy should be attempted when cecal perforation or in case of synchronous colonic neoplasm. Primary resection and anastomosis with manual decompression seems the procedure of choice. Colonic stents represent the best option when skills are available. The literature power is relatively poor and the existing RCT are often not sufficiently robust in design thus, among 6 possible treatment modalities, only 2 reached the Grade A.
PMCID: PMC3022691  PMID: 21189148
17.  Primary colon resection or Hartmann's procedure in malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction? The use of stents as a bridge to surgery 
There is still significant debate regarding the best surgical treatment for malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction. Primary resection and anastomosis offers the advantages of a definite procedure without need for further surgery. Its main disadvantages are related to the increased technical challenge and to the potential higher risk of anastomotic leakage that occurs in the emergency setting. Primary resection with end colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure) is considered the safer option. Tan et al compared in a systematic review and meta-analysis the use of self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) as a bridge to surgery vs emergency surgery in the management of acute malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction. The authors concluded that the technical and clinical success rates for stenting were lower than expected. SEMS was associated with a high incidence of clinical and silent perforation. Stenting instead of loop colostomy can be recommended only if the appropriate expertise is available in the hospital. The goal of stenting, a decrease of the stoma rate, may be advocated only if the complication rates of stenting are lower than those of stoma creation in the emergency situation. Until now, this was not demonstrated in a prospective randomized trial.
PMCID: PMC3600563  PMID: 23515179
Left-sided large bowel obstruction; Hartmann’s procedure; Primary anastomosis; Bowel stent; Emergency treatment
18.  Stenting for Large Bowel Obstruction – Evolution of a Service in a District General Hospital 
Stenting for obstructing large bowel malignancy is a technique that is gradually increasing in popularity. The two main indications are for palliation and as a ‘bridge to surgery’. Some of the proposed advantages of colonic stenting are safety, reduced morbidity and mortality, avoidance of a stoma and shorter hospital stay.
This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients who had self-expanding metal stents deployed between February 2001 and June 2006. Data were collected from the MEDITECH electronic integrated healthcare information support system and case note review. Data concerning demographics, primary diagnosis, and location of malignant stricture, indication for stenting, method of stenting, outcome, complications and mortality rates were obtained and analysed on Microsoft Excel.
Colonic stenting was first performed in the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2001. Thirty-two procedures have been performed since then. The median age was 80 years and the majority of cases were palliative (28 of 32), with three of the remaining cases successfully stented as a ‘bridge to surgery’. Initially, this was performed as a radiological procedure; however, the success rate was noted to be better if a surgical endoscopist was also involved. We recorded a 57% clinical success rate in the group of patients that had the colonic stent inserted radiologically; however, the group where this was inserted as a combined radiological and endoscopic procedure yielded a clinical success rate of 78%. We experienced stent-migration in four patients (13%) and rectal perforation in one patient (3%). There was no tumour re-obstruction or stent-related mortality.
A colonic stenting service can be introduced into a district general hospital with low morbidity and mortality. A well-motivated team is required and combined endoscopic and radiological approach in our hands appears to offer the best results.
PMCID: PMC2752245  PMID: 19126335
Self-expanding metal stent; Large bowel obstruction; Stent
19.  Self-Expanding Metallic Stents for Palliation and as a Bridge to Minimally Invasive Surgery in Colorectal Obstruction 
Self-expanding metallic stents are effective for the palliation of malignant obstruction. This study indicates that stents for bowel obstruction may allow for minimally invasive surgical intervention with a shorter hospital stay, lower stoma rate, and earlier chemotherapy administration.
Background and Objectives:
Acute colorectal obstruction is a potentially life-threatening emergency that requires immediate surgical treatment. Emergency procedures had an associated mortality rate of 10% to 30%. This encouraged development of other options, most notably self-expanding metallic stents. The primary endpoint of this study to is to report our group's experience.
We performed a retrospective review of 37 patients who underwent self-expanding metallic stent placement for colorectal obstruction between July 2000 and May 2012. Data collected were age, comorbidities, diagnosis, intent of intervention (palliative vs bridge to surgery), complications, and follow-up.
The study comprised 21 men (56.76%) and 16 women (43.24%), with a mean age of 67 years. The intent of the procedure was definitive treatment in 22 patients (59.46%) and bridge to surgery in 15 (40.54%). The highest technical success rate was at the rectosigmoid junction (100%). The causes of technical failure were inability of the guidewire to traverse the stricture and bowel perforation related to stenting. The mean follow-up period was 9.67 months. Pain and constipation were the most common postprocedure complications.
The use of a self-expanding metallic stent has been shown to be effective for palliation of malignant obstruction. It is associated with a lower incidence of intensive care unit admission, shorter hospital stay, lower stoma rate, and earlier chemotherapy administration. Laparoscopic or robotic surgery can then be performed in an elective setting on a prepared bowel. Therefore the patient benefits from advantages of the combination of 2 minimally invasive procedures in a nonemergent situation. Further large-scale prospective studies are necessary.
PMCID: PMC3771786  PMID: 23925013
Colon obstruction; Self-expandable metallic stents; SEMS; Intraluminal stents
20.  Endoluminal stenting of obstructed colorectal tumours. 
A series of patients were selected to evaluate the clinical efficacy of a new self expanding metallic endoprosthesis in the management of left-sided colonic obstruction. The aim was to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with the surgical management of patients with distal colonic obstruction. Six patients with complete sigmoid colon obstruction were managed with the Wallstent Enteral Endoprosthesis [Schneider (USA) Inc.]. Four underwent subsequent elective colonic resection, while two were placed for palliation. Stent placement was successful in all cases with resulting bowel decompression and there were no procedural complications. All four patients with resectable tumours avoided emergency surgery. Stenting allowed time for medical improvement and staging investigations in this group. Two patients with advanced metastatic colonic carcinoma were successfully palliated. We found the Wallstent Enteral Endoprosthesis to be safe and effective in relieving obstruction in patients with resectable colonic tumours, permitting elective surgery and avoiding a temporary stoma. It can also be used to palliate those patients with advanced disease.
PMCID: PMC2503259  PMID: 10615192
21.  Intravascular Ultrasound to Guide Percutaneous Coronary Interventions 
Executive Summary
The objective of this health technology policy assessment was to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) as an adjunctive imaging tool to coronary angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary interventions.
Intravascular Ultrasound
Intravascular ultrasound is a procedure that uses high frequency sound waves to acquire 3-dimensional images from the lumen of a blood vessel. The equipment for performing IVUS consists of a percutaneous transducer catheter and a console for reconstructing images. IVUS has been used to study the structure of the arterial wall and nature of atherosclerotic plaques, and obtain measurements of the vessel lumen. Its role in guiding stent placement is also being investigated. IVUS is presently not an insured health service in Ontario.
Clinical Need
Coronary artery disease accounts for approximately 55% of cardiovascular deaths, the leading cause of death in Canada. In Ontario, the annual mortality rate due to ischemic heart disease was 141.8 per 100,000 population between 1995 and 1997. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a less invasive approach to treating coronary artery disease, is used more frequently than coronary bypass surgery in Ontario. The number of percutaneous coronary intervention procedures funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-term Care is expected to increase from approximately 17, 780 in 2004/2005 to 22,355 in 2006/2007 (an increase of 26%), with about 95% requiring the placement of one or more stents. Restenosis following percutaneous coronary interventions involving bare metal stents occurs in 15% to 30% of the cases, mainly because of smooth muscle proliferation and migration, and production of extracellular matrix. In-stent restenosis has been linked to suboptimal stent expansion and inadequate lesion coverage, while stent thrombosis has been attributed to incomplete stent-to-vessel wall apposition. Since coronary angiography (the imaging tool used to guide stent placement) has been shown to be inaccurate in assessing optimal stent placement, and IVUS can provide better views of the vessel lumen, the clinical utility of IVUS as an imaging tool adjunctive to coronary angiography in coronary intervention procedures has been explored in clinical studies.
A systematic review was conducted to answer the following questions:
What are the procedure-related complications associated with IVUS?
Does IVUS used in conjunction with angiography to guide percutaneous interventions improve patient outcomes compared to angiographic guidance without IVUS?
Who would benefit most in terms of clinical outcomes from the use of IVUS adjunctive to coronary angiography in guiding PCIs?
What is the effectiveness of IVUS guidance in the context of drug-eluting stents?
What is the cost-effectiveness ratio and budget impact of adjunctive IVUS in PCIs in Ontario?
A systematic search of databases OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, The Cochrane Library, and the International Agency for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) database for the period beginning in May 2001 until the day of the search, November 4, 2005 yielded 2 systematic reviews, 1 meta-analysis, 6 randomized controlled trials, and 2 non-randomized studies on left main coronary arteries. The quality of the studies ranged from moderate to high. These reports were combined with reports from a previous systematic review for analysis. In addition to qualitative synthesis, pooled analyses of data from randomized controlled studies using a random effect model in the Cochrane Review Manager 4.2 software were conducted when possible.
Findings of Literature Review & Analysis
Intravascular ultrasound appears to be a safe tool when used in coronary interventions. Periprocedural complications associated with the use of IVUS in coronary interventions ranged from 0.5% in the largest study to 4%. Coronary rupture was reported in 1 study (1/54). Other complications included prolonged spasms of the artery after stenting, dissection, and femoral aneurysm.
Based on pooled analyses of data from randomized controlled studies, the use of intravascular ultrasound adjunctive to coronary intervention in percutaneous coronary interventions using bare metal stents yielded the following findings:
For lesions predominantly at low risk of restenosis:
There were no significant differences in preintervention angiographic minimal lumen diameter between the IVUS-guided and angiography-guided groups.
IVUS guidance resulted in a significantly larger mean postintervention angiographic minimal lumen diameter (weighted mean difference of 0.11 mm, P = .0003) compared to angiographic guidance alone.
The benefit in angiographic minimal lumen diameter from IVUS guidance was not maintained at 6-month follow-up, when no significant difference in angiographic minimal lumen diameter could be detected between the two arms (weighted mean difference 0.08, P = .13).
There were no statistically significant differences in angiographic binary restenosis rates between IVUS-guidance and no IVUS guidance (Odds ratio [OR] 0.87 in favour of IVUS, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] [0.64–1.18], P = 0.37).
IVUS guidance resulted in a reduction in the odds of target lesion revascularization (repeat percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary bypass graft) compared to angiographic guidance alone. The reduction was statistically significant at a follow-up period of 6 months to 1 year, and at a follow-up period of 18 month to 2 years (OR 0.52 in favour of IVUS, 95% CI [0.33–0.81], P = .004).
Total revascularization rate (either target lesion or target vessel revascularization) was significantly lower for IVUS-guided patients at 18 months to 2.5 years after intervention (OR 0.43 in favour of IVUS, 95% CI [0.29–0.63], p < .0001).
There were no statistically significant differences in the odds of death (OR 1.36 in favour of no IVUS, P =0.65) or myocardial infarction (OR 0.95 in favour of IVUS, P = 0.93) between IVUS-guidance and angiographic guidance alone at up to 2.5 years of follow-up
The odds of having a major cardiac event (defined as death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion or target vessel revascularization) were significantly lower for patients with IVUS guidance compared to angiographic guidance alone during follow-up periods of up to 2.5 years (OR 0.53, 95% CI [0.36–0.78], P = 0.001). Since there were no significant reductions in the odds of death or myocardial infarction, the reduction in the odds of combined events reflected mainly the reduction in revascularization rates.
For lesions at High Risk of Restenosis:
There is evidence from one small, randomized controlled trial (n=150) that IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in long de novo lesions (>20 mm) of native coronary arteries resulted in statistically significant larger minimal lumen Diameter, and statistically significant lower 6-month angiographic binary restenosis rate. Target vessel revascularization rate and the rate of combined events were also significantly reduced at 12 months.
A small subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial reported no benefit in clinical or angiographic outcomes for IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with diabetes compared to those guided by angiography. However, due to the nature and size of the analysis, no firm conclusions could be reached.
Based on 2 small, prospective, non-randomized controlled studies, IVUS guidance in percutaneous coronary interventions of left main coronary lesions using bare metal stents or drug-eluting stents did not result in any benefits in angiographic or clinical outcomes. These findings need to be confirmed.
Interventions Using Drug-Eluting Stents
There is presently no evidence on whether the addition of IVUS guidance during the implantation of drug-eluting stents would reduce incomplete stent apposition, or improve the angiographic or clinical outcomes of patients.
Ontario-Based Economic Analysis
Cost-effectiveness analysis showed that PCIs using IVUS guidance would likely be less costly and more effective than PCIs without IVUS guidance. The upfront cost of adjunctive use of IVUS in PCIs ranged from $1.56 million at 6% uptake to $13.04 million at 50% uptake. Taking into consideration cost avoidance from reduction in revascularization associated with the use of IVUS, a net saving of $0.63 million to $5.2 million is expected. However, since it is uncertain whether the reduction in revascularization rate resulting from the use of IVUS can be generalized to clinical settings in Ontario, further analysis on the budget impact and cost-effectiveness need to be conducted once Ontario-specific revascularization rates are verified.
Factors to be Considered in the Ontario Context
Applicability of Findings to Ontario
The interim analysis of an Ontario field evaluation that compared drug-eluting stents to bare metal stents showed that the revascularization rates in low-risk patients with bare metal stents were much lower in Ontario compared to rates reported in randomized controlled trials (7.2% vs >17 %). Even though IVUS is presently not routinely used in the stenting of low-risk patients in Ontario, the revascularization rates in these patients in Ontario were shown to be lower than those reported for the IVUS groups reported in published studies. Based on this information and previous findings from the Ontario field evaluation on stenting, it is uncertain whether the reduction in revascularization rates from IVUS guidance can be generalized to Ontario. In light of the above findings, it is advisable to validate the reported benefits of IVUS guidance in percutaneous coronary interventions involving bare metal stents in the Ontario context.
Licensing Status
As of January 16, 2006, Health Canada has licensed 10 intravascular ultrasound imaging systems/catheters for transluminal intervention procedures, most as class 4 medical devices.
Current Funding
IVUS is presently not an insured procedure under the Ontario Health Insurance Plan and there are no professional fees for this procedure. All costs related to the use of IVUS are covered within hospitals’ global budgets. A single use IVUS catheter costs approximately $900CDN and the procedure adds approximately 20 minutes to 30 minutes to a percutaneous coronary intervention procedure.
According to an expert consultant, current use of IVUS in coronary interventions in Ontario is probably limited to high-risk cases such as interventions in long lesions, small vessels, and bifurcated lesions for which images from coronary angiography are indeterminate. It was estimated that IVUS is being used in about 6% of all percutaneous coronary interventions at a large Ontario cardiac centre.
Expert Opinion
IVUS greatly enhances the cardiac interventionists’ ability to visualize and assess high-risk lesions such as long lesions, narrow lesions, and bifurcated lesions that may have indeterminate angiographic images. Information from IVUS in these cases facilitates the choice of the most appropriate approach for the intervention.
The use of adjunctive IVUS in PCIs using bare metal stents in lesions predominantly at low risk for restenosis had no significant impact on survival, myocardial infarction, or angiographic restenosis rates up to 2.5 years after intervention.
The use of IVUS adjunctive to coronary angiography in percutaneous coronary interventions using bare metal stents in lesions predominantly at low risk for restenosis significantly reduced the target lesion and target vessel revascularization at a follow-up period of 18 months to 2.5 years.
One small study suggests that adjunctive IVUS in PCIs using bare metal stents in long lesions (>20 mm) significantly improved the 6-month angiographic restenosis rate and one-year target lesion revascularization rate. These results need to be confirmed with large randomized controlled trials.
Based on information from the Ontario field evaluation on stenting, it is uncertain whether the reduction in revascularization rate resulting from the use of IVUS in the placement of bare metal stents can be generalized to clinical settings in Ontario.
There is presently insufficient evidence available to determine the impact of adjunctive IVUS in percutaneous interventions in high-risk lesions (other than long lesions) or in PCIs using drug-eluting stents.
PMCID: PMC3379536  PMID: 23074482
22.  Factors associated with mortality risk for malignant colonic obstruction in elderly patients 
BMC Gastroenterology  2014;14:76.
Acute colonic obstruction is the most common complication of colorectal cancer (CRC) in elderly patients. Medical treatment has been associated with higher perioperative morbidity and mortality rates. There is a need for identification of elderly CRC patients who will do poorly so that results can be improved. The purpose of this study is to assess the 30-day outcome of elderly patients undergoing malignant colonic obstruction procedures and identify the associated factors of mortality.
A review of 233 elderly patients who received medical procedures for malignant colonic obstruction between April 2000 and April 2012 was conducted. Data regarding clinical variables, surgical procedures and outcomes, complications, and mortality were studied. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were performed on mortality risk factors.
Patients had a mean age of 78.2 years (range 70–95). A total of 126 (54.1%) patients were classified ASA III and above. Eighty (34.3%) patients had right-sided colonic obstruction. In the 153 (65.7%) patients with left-sided colonic obstruction, 40 patients received self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) treatment and 193 patients received surgery. A total of 62.2% (n = 145) patients had post operation complications. The overall 30-day mortality was 24.5% (n = 57). ASA grading, peritonitis and Dukes staging were independent risk factors for mortality.
Medical procedures in elderly patients with malignant colonic obstruction are associated with significant complications and mortality. Identifying these high-risk patients and treating promptly may improve outcomes. SEMS treatment provides a useful alternative to surgical intervention.
PMCID: PMC3998070  PMID: 24735084
23.  Antiplatelet treatment with cilostazol after stent implantation 
Heart  1998;80(4):393-396.
Objectives—To evaluate the efficacy of cilostazol, a new synthetic inhibitor of phosphodiesterase, in preventing stent thrombosis after successful implantation.
Design—Preliminary prospective study.
Setting—A single coronary care unit in Japan.
Patients—Elective, bailout, or primary stents were implanted in 85 consecutive patients with 93 lesions. Primary stent implantation was performed in 18 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Patients received 200 mg cilostazol and 243 mg aspirin after stenting.
Main outcome measures—Stent thrombosis, major and minor complications, and side effects were assessed in the six months after stenting.
Results—Gianturco-Roubin stents were implanted in 37 lesions, Wiktor stents in 55, and Palmaz-Schatz stents in 27. Multiple stents were used in 26 lesions. There was no mortality, stent thrombosis related Q wave myocardial infarction, emergency bypass surgery, repeat intervention, or vascular complications in the six months of follow up. Acute or subacute closure did not occur after stenting. There were no serious side effects such as leucopenia and/or abnormal liver function for three months. Cilostazol was withdrawn in one patient because of skin rash. Patients who underwent primary stenting had no clinical events, such as acute or subacute thrombosis, or side effects.
Conclusions—Cilostazol is an effective antiplatelet agent with minimum side effects after elective, bailout, or primary stent implantation.

 Keywords: antiplatelet treatment;  stents;  stent thrombosis;  cilostazol
PMCID: PMC1728799  PMID: 9875121
24.  Outcomes after stenting for malignant large bowel obstruction without radiologist support 
AIM: To assess outcomes after colonic stent insertion for obstructing colorectal malignancies performed by an endoscopist without radiologist support.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study of all stents inserted by a single surgeon in a District General Hospital over an eight year period. All stents were inserted for patients with acute large bowel obstruction secondary to a malignant colorectal pathology either for palliation or as a bridge to surgery. Procedures were performed by a single surgeon endoscopically with fluoroscopic control in the X-ray department but without the support of an interventional radiologist. Data was collected prospectively on a pre-designed database.
RESULTS: The indication for all stent procedures was an obstructing colorectal malignancy. Out of 53 patients, the overall success rate was 90.6%. Eight patients had a stent intended as a bridge to surgery and 45 as a palliative procedure. Technical success was achieved in 50 out of 53 procedures (94.3%) and clinical success in 48 of those remaining 50 (96.0%). Those with unsuccessful technical or clinical procedures went on to have defunctioning stomas to treat their obstruction. There were six complications from the technically successful stents (12.0%). These included one migration, one persisting obstructive symptoms and four cases of tumour overgrowth of the stents at a later date. Haemorrhagic complications, perforation or mortality were not observed in our series. Our results are comparable to several other studies assessing stent outcomes for obstructing bowel cancer.
CONCLUSION: Our data suggests that colorectal stents can be inserted without radiologist support by an adequately trained individual with good outcomes.
PMCID: PMC4033469  PMID: 24876752
Self-expanding colonic stents; Colorectal cancer; Palliation; Interventional radiology; Endoscopy
25.  Endoscopic stenting versus surgical colostomy for the management of malignant colonic obstruction: comparison of hospital costs and clinical outcomes 
Surgical Endoscopy  2011;25(7):2203-2209.
Although stent placement is increasingly performed, colostomy still is considered the gold standard for emergent relief of malignant colonic obstruction (MCO). This study aimed to compare hospital costs and clinical outcomes between patients undergoing colostomy and those undergoing stenting for the management of MCO.
A retrospective claims analysis of the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR) data set was conducted to identify inpatient hospitalizations for colostomy or stent placement for the treatment of colon cancer (2007–2008). The outcomes evaluated using MedPAR compared the total length of hospital stay (LOS) and the costs associated with both techniques. Because MedPAR is a claims data set that does not provide outcomes at a patient level, a single-institution retrospective case–control study was conducted in which each stent placement patient was matched with two colostomy patients during the same period. Outcome measures (institutional data) were used to compare rates of treatment success, postprocedure LOS, and reinterventions between the two cohorts.
The MedPAR data evaluated 778 stent placements and 5,868 colostomy hospitalizations. There were no differences in gender, age distribution, or comorbidity between the two groups. Compared with colostomy, the median LOS (8 vs. 12 days; p < 0.0001) and the median cost ($15,071 vs. $24,695; p < 0.001) per claim were significantly less for stent placement. Stent placement was more commonly performed at urban versus rural hospitals (84% vs. 16%; p < 0.0001), teaching versus nonteaching hospitals (56% vs. 44%; p = 0.0058) and larger versus smaller institutions (mean bed capacity, 331 vs. 227; p < 0.0001). The institution data included 12 patients who underwent stent placement and 24 who underwent colostomy. Although both methods were technically successful, the median postprocedure LOS (2.17 vs. 10.58 days; p = 0.0004) and the rate of readmissions for complications (0% vs. 25%; p = 0.01) were significantly lower for stent placement.
Although the technical and clinical outcomes for colostomy and stent placement appear comparable, stent placement is less costly and associated with shorter LOS and fewer complications. Dissemination of stent placement beyond large teaching hospitals located in urban areas as a treatment for MCO is important given its implications for patient care and resource use.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00464-010-1523-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
PMCID: PMC3116133  PMID: 21293882
Colonic stenting; Colostomy; Costs; Health resources

Results 1-25 (970485)