Search

Background and study aims: The feasibility of endoscopic resection for synchronous early colon cancer after placement of self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) for malignant colorectal obstruction is unknown. Herein we evaluated 3 cases of endoscopic resection for synchronous early colorectal cancers after SEMS placement. Patient 1 was an 82-year-old man with obstructive sigmoid colon cancer. We curatively treated the synchronous descending colon cancer with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and the rectal cancer with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) after SEMS placement. This is the first reported case of a successful ESD for synchronous early colon cancer via the use of a colonic stent. Patient 2 was an 81-year-old man with obstructive ascending colon cancer. We resected the synchronous transverse colon cancer via ESD. Histologic findings indicated that the carcinoma cells had invaded the submucosal layer. Therefore, we immediately performed expanded right-hemicolectomy. Patient 3 was an 81-year-old man with obstructive sigmoid colon cancer. We curatively treated the synchronous transverse colon cancer with EMR after SEMS placement. There were no complications associated with the endoscopic treatments in any of the cases. Our results indicate that preoperative endoscopic resection combined with the ESD technique for synchronous colorectal cancer after SEMS placement could be effective as a surgical strategy for patients with malignant colorectal obstruction.

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.