Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31913422›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2020

Comparison of Decompressing Stoma vs Stent as a Bridge to Surgery for Left-Sided Obstructive Colon Cancer.

Joyce V Veld, Femke J Amelung, Wernard A A Borstlap, Emo E van Halsema, Esther C J Consten, Peter D Siersema, Frank Ter Borg, Edwin S van der Zaag, Johannes H W de Wilt, Paul Fockens and 4 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 52 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Decision-making in emergency colorectal surgery for cancer.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Contemporary Management of Malignant Bowel Obstruction.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2025
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Joyce V VeldDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Femke J AmelungDepartment of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, the Netherlands.
Wernard A A BorstlapDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Emo E van HalsemaCancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Esther C J ConstenDepartment of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, the Netherlands.
Peter D SiersemaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Frank Ter BorgDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, the Netherlands.
Edwin S van der ZaagDepartment of Surgery, Gelre Hospital, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands.
Johannes H W de WiltDepartment of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Paul FockensCancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Wilhelmus A BemelmanDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Jeanin E van HooftCancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Pieter J TanisDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Dutch Snapshot Research Group
University of Amsterdam · NLMeander Medisch Centrum · NLDeventer Ziekenhuis · NLGelre Hospitals · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Bridge to elective surgery using self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement is a debated alternative to emergency resection for patients with left-sided obstructive colon cancer because of oncologic concerns. A decompressing stoma (DS) might be a valid alternative, but relevant studies are scarce. Objective: To compare DS with SEMS as a bridge to surgery for nonlocally advanced left-sided obstructive colon cancer using propensity score matching. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national, population-based cohort study was performed at 75 of 77 hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 4216 patients with left-sided obstructive colon cancer treated from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2016, were identified from the Dutch Colorectal Audit and 3153 patients were studied. Additional procedural and intermediate-term outcome data were retrospectively collected from individual patient files, resulting in a median follow-up of 32 months (interquartile range, 15-57 months). Data were analyzed from April 7 to October 28, 2019. Exposures: Decompressing stoma vs SEMS as a bridge to surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary anastomosis rate, postresection presence of a stoma, complications, additional interventions, permanent stoma, locoregional recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Propensity score matching was performed according to age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, prior abdominal surgery, tumor location, pN stage, cM stage, length of stenosis, and year of resection. Results: A total of 3153 of the eligible 4216 patients were included in the study (mean [SD] age, 69.7 [11.8] years; 1741 [55.2%] male); after exclusions, 443 patients underwent bridge to surgery (240 undergoing DS and 203 undergoing SEMS). Propensity score matching led to 2 groups of 121 patients each. Patients undergoing DS had more primary anastomoses (104 of 121 [86.0%] vs 90 of 120 [75.0%], P = .02), more postresection stomas (81 of 121 [66.9%] vs 34 of 117 [29.1%], P < .001), fewer major complications (7 of 121 [5.8%] vs 18 of 118 [15.3%], P = .02), and more subsequent interventions, including stoma reversal (65 of 113 [57.5%] vs 33 of 117 [28.2%], P < .001). After DS and SEMS, the 3-year locoregional recurrence rates were 11.7% for DS and 18.8% for SEMS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.30-1.28; P = .20), the 3-year disease-free survival rates were 64.0% for DS and 56.9% for SEMS (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.61-1.33; P = .60), and the 3-year overall survival rates were 78.0% for DS and 71.8% for SEMS (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.48-1.22; P = .26). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that DS as bridge to resection of left-sided obstructive colon cancer is associated with advantages and disadvantages compared with SEMS, with similar intermediate-term oncologic outcomes. The existing equipoise indicates the need for a randomized clinical trial that compares the 2 bridging techniques.

Indexed as

Self Expandable Metallic StentsSurgical StomasAgedAged, 80 and overColonic DiseasesColonic NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIntestinal ObstructionMaleMiddle AgedPreoperative PeriodPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesSurvival Rate

Identifiers

PMID31913422
PMCPMC6990965
OpenAlexW2999319234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.