Published online Dec 24, 2022. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v13.i12.943
Peer-review started: September 2, 2022
First decision: September 27, 2022
Revised: October 10, 2022
Accepted: December 8, 2022
Article in press: December 8, 2022
Published online: December 24, 2022
Processing time: 107 Days and 17.8 Hours
Approximately 7%-29% of patients with colorectal cancer present with colonic obstruction. The concept of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery (BTS) is appealing. However, concerns on colonic stenting possibly impairing oncologic outcomes have been raised. This study aimed to review current evidence on the short- and long-term oncologic outcomes of SEMS insertion as BTS for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. For short-term outcomes, colonic stenting facilitates a laparoscopic approach, increases the likelihood of primary anastomosis without a stoma, and may decrease postoperative morbidity. However, SEMS-related perforation also increases local recurrence and impairs overall survival. Moreover, colonic stenting may cause negative oncologic outcomes even without perforation. SEMS can induce shear forces on the tumor, leading to increased circulating cancer cells and aggressive pathological characteristics, including perineural and lymphovascular invasion. The conflicting evidence has led to discordant guidelines. Well-designed collaborative studies that integrate both oncologic outcomes and data on basic research (e.g., alteration of circulating tumors) are needed to clarify the actual benefit of colonic stenting as BTS.
Core Tip: Although the concept of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery in patients with left-sided malignant colonic obstruction is promising, there remain concerns of adverse oncologic outcomes. Nowadays, three possible mechanisms of tumor dissemination from SEMS have been proposed: (1) SEMS-related perforation; (2) increased circulating tumor cells; and (3) aggressive pathological features after SEMS placement. However, among these, only SEMS-related perforation clearly influences adverse oncologic outcomes. The other two mechanisms lack consistent clinical evidence for their association with decreased survival. Therefore, further collaborating studies are needed to validate the clinical impact of these hypotheses.