ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Stent as a bridge to surgery for malignant colonic obstruction: a retrospective study on survival and outcomes.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Colonic Stenting as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Resection in Obstructive Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review of Surgical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- After stent placement in patient with left colon cancer with intestinal obstruction safety and efficacy analysis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn cases of malignant colonic obstruction (MCO), self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) are used as a bridge to surgery, offering an alternative to emergency surgery. However, the long-term oncologic outcomes remain debated, particularly in developing countries where the cost of SEMS is a concern. This study aimed to evaluate overall survival (OS) and outcomes associated with SEMS as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) compared to direct emergency surgery (ES) in patients with acute MCO.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted, including patients with potentially curable obstructed colon cancer who were treated with either SBTS or ES at a university hospital in Thailand from 2015 to 2022. We compared OS, 5-year OS rate, disease-free survival (DFS), postoperative morbidity, and complications between the SBTS and the ES groups.
resultsA total of 106 patients were eligible, 29 underwent SBTS, and 77 underwent ES. Baseline characteristics were similar except for ASA classification and chemotherapy rates. The median OS was 56.1 months, with no significant differences in OS (51.4 vs. 61.0 months, p = 0.67) or 5-year DFS (53.8% vs. 59.9%, p = 0.32) between the two groups. The SBTS group had higher rates of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) (65.5% vs. 16.9%, p < 0.001) and shorter postoperative stays (POS) (7 vs. 9 days, p = 0.026). Stage IV cancer and low serum albumin were poor prognostic factors for OS.
conclusionSEMS placement as a bridge to surgery had no significant impact on OS compared to ES, but it was associated with shorter hospital stays and higher rates of MIS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.