Oncologic Outcomes of Self-Expandable Metallic Stent as a Bridge to Surgery and Safety and Feasibility of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Acute Malignant Colonic Obstruction

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 2787-2796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung Yoon Yang ◽  
Youn Young Park ◽  
Yoon Dae Han ◽  
Min Soo Cho ◽  
Hyuk Hur ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Colonic Obstruction ◽  
Oncologic Outcomes ◽  
Metallic Stent ◽  
Bridge To Surgery ◽  
Expandable Metallic Stent ◽  
Malignant Colonic Obstruction

Systematic review of perioperative and oncologic outcomes of minimally-invasive surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 359-377
Author(s):  
Federica Cipriani ◽  
Francesca Ratti ◽  
Guido Fiorentini ◽  
Raffaella Reineke ◽  
Luca Aldrighetti
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma ◽  
Oncologic Outcomes

Minimally Invasive Surgery of Rectal Cancer: Current Evidence and Options

2012 ◽  
pp. 214-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atthaphorn Trakarnsanga ◽  
Martin R. Weiser
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Colon Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Oncologic Outcomes ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Invasive Approach

Overview: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of colorectal cancer has become more popular in the past two decades. Laparoscopic colectomy has been accepted as an alternative standard approach in colon cancer, with comparable oncologic outcomes and several better short-term outcomes compared to open surgery. Unlike the treatment for colon cancer, however, the minimally invasive approach in rectal cancer has not been established. In this article, we summarize the current status of MIS for rectal cancer and explore the various technical options.

scholarly journals Minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer: Does operative start time impact surgical and oncologic outcomes?

2014 ◽  
Vol 134 (2) ◽  
pp. 248-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina N. Slaughter ◽  
Michael Frumovitz ◽  
Kathleen M. Schmeler ◽  
Alpa M. Nick ◽  
Nicole D. Fleming ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Oncologic Outcomes ◽  
Start Time

scholarly journals Fluoroscopic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery versus Emergency Management for Malignant Obstruction of the Colon

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Fan Xue ◽  
Feng Lin ◽  
Jun Zhou ◽  
Ning Feng ◽  
You-Gang Cui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Surgery ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Colonic Obstruction ◽  
Laparoscopic Approach ◽  
Metallic Stent ◽  
Bridge To Surgery ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Clinicopathologic Characteristics ◽  
Sems Group ◽  
Malignant Colonic Obstruction

Aim. To investigate the feasibility of a SEMS (self-expandable metallic stent) as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 83 patients that were in accordance with inclusion criteria; of these, 33 patients that underwent fluoroscopy-guided SEMS placement followed by elective curative resection were classified as a SEMS group and 50 patients, who received emergency surgery (ES), were classified as an ES group. The clinicopathological characteristics, surgery-related parameters, complications, and three-year survival rate were compared between the two groups. Results. No significant differences between the two groups were observed in any of the clinicopathologic characteristics except for higher preoperative absolute neutrophil count in the ES group (P<0.001). Compared to the ES group, the SEMS group has significantly more cases, which featured a laparoscopic approach (72.7% vs. 14.0%, P<0.001), lower overall stoma rate (0% vs. 34.0%, P<0.001), and lower overall postoperative morbidity (27.3% vs. 56.0%, P=0.010). The oncological outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups in terms of three-year overall survival (P=0.125). The technical and clinical success rates of stent placement were 91.7% and 100%, respectively. Conclusion. Patients treated with the stent-surgery approach had significant short-term superiorities and similar long-term outcomes, compared to patients who had emergency surgery alone. The SEMS is, therefore, safe and feasible as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Insertion in Treating Right-Sided Colonic Obstruction: A Comparison between SEMS and Decompression Tube Placement and an Investigation of the Safety and Difficulties of SEMS Insertion in Right Colons

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rintaro Moroi ◽  
Katsuya Endo ◽  
Ryo Ichikawa ◽  
Hiroshi Nagai ◽  
Hirohiko Shinkai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Success ◽  
Colonic Obstruction ◽  
Clinical Success Rate ◽  
Technical Difficulty ◽  
Tube Placement ◽  
Stent Insertion ◽  
Metallic Stent ◽  
Expandable Metallic Stent ◽  
Malignant Colonic Obstruction ◽  
Decompression Tube

Objectives.Self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) is widely used to treat malignant colonic obstruction. However, most reports about SEMS insertion have concentrated on the left colon. This study aimed to (1) investigate the effectiveness of SEMS insertion compared with conventional decompression tube for right-sided colonic obstruction and (2) compare the safety and technical success of SEMS insertion between left- and right-sided colonic obstructions.Methods.The data from thirty-seven patients who underwent SEMS or conventional decompression tube placement for malignant colonic obstruction in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively. Technical and clinical success, complications, and technical difficulties were analyzed. We compared the results between SEMS insertion and decompression tube placement in right colons and the outcomes of SEMS insertion between right- and left-sided colonic obstructions.Results.For right colons, the clinical success rate of SEMS insertion (100%) was significantly higher than that of decompression tube placement (55.9%). Concerning SEMS insertion, the technical difficulty and safety of SEMS insertion were similar between right- and left-sided colonic obstructions.Conclusion.SEMS insertion for right-sided colon is significantly more effective than conventional decompression tube placement, and this procedure was safer and less technically challenging than expected. SEMS insertion should be considered for treating right-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

scholarly journals Trends in Oncology: an Updated Review of Minimally Invasive Surgery vs. Traditional Open Surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 129-136
Author(s):  
Kyuwon Lee ◽  
Ahromi Wang
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Oncologic Outcomes ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Surgical Methods ◽  
Acceptable Method ◽  
Recent Trends

AbstractObjective: To review the recent trends in methodology for the most frequent oncological surgeries. More specifically, this paper will compare the minimally invasive methods to the conventional open method. It aims to find out whether minimally invasive surgeries are feasible treatments for certain types of cancers.Methods: A review of retrospective studies searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library etc. was used to identify the studies published on this topic within a period of 6 years. Oncologic outcomes, postoperative complications/outcomes, and intraoperative outcomes were the main variables in the comparison to the surgical methods under review.Conclusion: Despite the recent controversy with minimally invasive surgery being contraindicated for cervical cancer, it is still an acceptable method for other types of common cancers. However, there are limitations to the approach, and the surgeon should make a prudent selection between minimally invasive and open surgery depending on the type of tumor and patient characteristics. Further studies, especially with randomized control trials, must be conducted.

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive Surgery and Surgical Volume-Specific Survival and Perioperative Outcome: Unmet Need for Evidence in Gynecologic Malignancy

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (20) ◽  
pp. 4787
Author(s):  
Shinya Matsuzaki ◽  
Maximilian Klar ◽  
Erica J. Chang ◽  
Satoko Matsuzaki ◽  
Michihide Maeda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Oncologic Outcomes ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Surgical Volume ◽  
Gynecologic Malignancies ◽  
Surgical Morbidity ◽  
Volume Outcome

This study examined the effect of hospital surgical volume on oncologic outcomes in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gynecologic malignancies. The objectives were to assess survival outcomes related to hospital surgical volume and to evaluate perioperative outcomes and examine non-gynecologic malignancies. Literature available from the PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically reviewed. All surgical procedures including gynecologic surgery with hospital surgical volume information were eligible for analysis. Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, and nine gastro-intestinal studies, seven genitourinary studies, four gynecological studies, two hepatobiliary studies, and one thoracic study were reviewed. Of those, 11 showed a positive volume–outcome association for perioperative outcomes. A study on MIS for ovarian cancer reported lower surgical morbidity in high-volume centers. Two studies were on endometrial cancer, of which one showed lower treatment costs in high-volume centers and the other showed no association with perioperative morbidity. Another study examined robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer and found no volume–outcome association for surgical morbidity. There were no gynecologic studies examining the association between hospital surgical volume and oncologic outcomes in MIS. The volume–outcome association for oncologic outcome in gynecologic MIS is understudied. This lack of evidence calls for further studies to address this knowledge gap.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document