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.