ReviewDigestive diseases and sciences2020
Obstructing Left-Sided Colonic Cancer: Is Endoscopic Stenting a Bridge to Surgery or a Bridge to Nowhere?
Review in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of safety between self-expanding metal stents as a bridge to surgery and emergency surgery based on pathology: a meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Risk and Management of Bowel Obstruction in Colorectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Immunotherapy: A Cross-Sectional Multicenter Study.ImmunoTargets and therapy · 2026Article
- Effect of stent placement on short term survival of left sided obstructive colorectal cancer: comparison of bridge-to-surgery versus emergency surgery approaches.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Risk factors for postoperative anastomotic leakage in obstructive left colonic carcinoma.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Relationship between prognosis and glucose transporter-1 and Ki-67 expression in obstructive colon cancer pre and post stent placement.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Circulating cell-free DNA and tumor DNA dynamics in obstructive colon cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy following stent placement.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Colonic stenting: is the bridge to surgery worth its cost? A cost-effectiveness analysis at a single Asian institution.Annals of coloproctology · 2024Article
- Management of obstructed colorectal carcinoma in an emergency setting: An update.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Review
- Current practice for the treatment of obstructive left-sided colon cancer in China: a nationwide cross-sectional survey.Surgery today · 2023Article
- Oncologic impact of colonic stents for obstructive left-sided colon cancer.World journal of clinical oncology · 2023Review
- Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery for obstructive colon cancer: is it safe in the long term?Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Is a small-caliber or large-caliber endoscope more suitable for colonic self-expandable metallic stent placement? A randomized controlled study.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Treatment outcome of laparoscopic surgery after self-expandable metallic stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer.International journal of clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Bridge to surgery using a self-expandable metallic stent for stages II-III obstructive colorectal cancer.BMC surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For the 8-29% colorectal cancers that initially manifest with obstruction, emergency surgery (ES) was traditionally considered the only available therapy, despite high morbidity and mortality rates and the need for colostomy creation. More recently, malignant obstruction of the left colon can be temporized by endoscopic placement of a self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS), used as bridge to surgery (BTS), facilitating a laparoscopic approach and increasing the likelihood that a primary anastomosis instead of stoma would be used. Despite these attractive outcomes, the superiority of the BTS approach is not clearly established. Few authors have stressed the potential cancer risk associated with perforations that may occur during endoscopic stent placement, facilitating neoplastic spread and negatively impacting prognosis. For this reason, the current literature focuses on long-term oncologic outcomes such as disease-free survival, overall survival and recurrence rate that do seem not to differ between the ES and BTS approaches. This lack of consensus has spawned differing and sometimes discordant guidelines worldwide. In conclusion, 20 years after the first description of a colonic stent as BTS, the debate is still open, but the growing number of articles about the use of SEMS as a BTS signifies a great interest in the topic. We hope that these data will finally converge on a single set of recommendations supporting a management strategy with well-demonstrated superiority.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32583222What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.