ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06338332OCCBRIGHTUpdated Mar 29, 2024

Obstructive Colon Cancer, a Bridge to Surgery in Right Sided Obstructive Colon Cancer

An observational study in Colonic Neoplasms Malignant, sponsored by Amphia Hospital. Recruiting at 1 site in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-03-29.

Sponsored by Amphia Hospital · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Jan 2025, 1 year 10 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started Jan 2024; still recruiting 2 years 10 months later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
110
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Rationale: Approximately 13% (range 10-28%) of all colorectal cancer patients (CRC) present with an acute obstruction. Postoperative mortality after an emergency resection is known for its high risk of morbidity and mortality. Different options can be considered in the management of obstructing right sided CRC: 1) primary resection, simultaneous treatment of obstruction and tumour resection, or 2) staged treatment of the obstruction with secondary resection of the tumour. Currently, in the Netherlands, an emergency resection has been judged to be inferior to postponing surgery. Patients who present with right sided obstructive colon cancer at one of the participating hospitals are subjected to a bridge to surgery (BTS) protocol.

Objective: The primary objective of this study is to determine the feasibility of BTS protocols in right sided obstructive colon cancer and reduce mortality- and morbidity (stoma rates, major- and minor complications) rates in potentially curable patients presenting with acute obstructing colon cancer.

Study design: This is a multicentre, prospective registration study Study population: All patients presenting with high clinical suspicion or histologically proven right sided colon cancer and signs of obstruction of the large bowel.

Intervention: Prospective registration of the implementation of bridge to surgery protocols in patients with (acute) malignant right sided obstruction of the colon, without suspicion of perforation (tumour perforation or blow out) in order to optimize patients preoperatively. The BTS approach encompasses the utilization of either ileostomy creation, stent placement or nasogastric tube for decompression, which is subsequently followed by definitive surgical treatment at a later stage. BTS also involves pre-optimization, prior to the surgical procedure, with the following approach: optimizing the nutritional health status improving the physical health status of the patient.

Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary endpoint is complication-free survival (CFS) at 90 days after hospitalization. Complication is defined here as mortality and/or development of a major complication (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3). With a total follow up of three years. Secondary endpoints: overall mortality, morbidity (stoma rates, minor complications), in hospital stay, oncologic quality of resection and other occurring adverse events.

Read the detailed description

Approximately 13% (range 8-28%) presents with acute obstructing colorectal cancer (CRC). It's known that patients with acute obstructing CRC have increased mortality and morbidity compared to patients without acute obstructing CRC. Postoperative mortality ranges from 12 to 30%, which can raise to 41% in elderly patients with two or more additional risk factors. Morbidity rates until 78% are described in older patients undergoing emergency resection for obstructing CRC.

Different treatment options have been evaluated over the years. The two main options are; 1) emergency resection, simultaneous treatment of obstruction and tumour resection, 2) staged treatment of the obstruction with secondary resection of the tumour. Postoperative mortality after an emergency resection is known for its high risk of morbidity and mortality. From the Dutch audits it is know that the risk is high, not only for left sided obstruction, but also for right sided obstruction. Until recently, an acute emergency resection was the standard treatment for patients presenting with a small bowl ileus caused by a right sided colon cancer. However, more evidence has emerged that postponing surgery with a bridge tot surgery protocol can be beneficial to the patients. The bridge to surgery approach encompasses the utilization of either ileostomy creation or stent placement for colonic decompression, which is subsequently followed by definitive surgical treatment at a later stage. Alternatively, BTS may involve the introduction of a pause, also known as preoptimization, prior to the surgical procedure. The three main options for staged surgery all have its own up- and downsides. All forms of staged treatment appears to lead to fewer morbidity and mortality.

Emergency surgery Emergency resection is associated with a high risk of mortality and morbidity. Besides that, stoma creations after emergency surgery are higher than in patients treated electively. In case of a Hartmann's procedure, (resection of a left-sided tumour and creation of a colostomy) second surgical procedure is needed to restore continuity. Continuity restore has a mean mortality of 1% (range 0-7.4%) and morbidity of 16% (range 3-50%). Alternatively, emergency resection with primary anastomosis, which has the advantage to be a definite procedure, is performed. However, this treatment can be complicated with anastomotic leakage (AL). Anastomotic leakage is higher in patients treated for obstructing CRC in comparison with staged or electively treatment. Besides that, mortality rates after anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery varies between 5-19%. Therefore, this intervention does not align with existing treatment strategies.

Bridge to surgery Stoma creation for colonic decompression followed by definite surgical treatment in a later stadium for patients with obstructing right sided CRC is an alternative. Postoperative mortality between patients treated with emergency resection, stent or stoma followed by resection showed no differences. However, high mortality rates in elderly patients (30%) after acute resection, stress the need for alternative strategies. For right-sided colon cancer, postoperative complications for patients treated with decompressing stoma before resection are lower in comparison with acute resection. However, the creation of an ileostomy leads to a longer hospital stay. Secondly, stenting as a bridge to surgery (BTS) creates time before definite surgical treatment. However, the use of stents as a bridge to surgery has controversial results. Stents as a BTS is associated with complications like perforation, stent migration, higher recurrence rate and re-obstruction. Furthermore, three prospective trials are closed prematurely because of high morbidity rates or a high number of technical failure of the self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) However, several studies and one meta-analysis show promising short-term outcomes for the use of stents as BTS. Besides that, promising long-term outcomes, such as oncological safety, after stents as BTS are shown. Finally, transtumoral intubation for decompression of the colon, before initial can be considered to prevent stoma creation. Thirdly, a bridge to surgery may involve the introduction of a pause, also known as preoptimization, prior the surgical procedure. This previously presented as PRE-OCC, this approach appears feasible and safe. Deteriorating physical condition caused by poor intake, vomiting, changes in electrolyte status and weight loss often results in a decreased nutritional status. Nutritional status and thereby the patients preoperative health status seems to influence the mortality risk for patients with (obstructing) colorectal cancer. Creating a pause, before surgery provides a chance to optimise the patients' medical condition, perform a complete pre-operative screening of the patient's health status and examine possible concomitant illnesses. Besides nutritional status, also the functional capacity of the patient seems to be an important factor in postoperative mortality and morbidity. Studies, in elective colorectal surgery, show promising results after improving the functional capacity of patients (prehabilitation) on the recovery after colorectal surgery. However, this third option of bridge to surgery also has some disadvantages. Preoptimization leads to an prolonged duration of stay prior to surgery in a semi acute setting, with a central venous line and potentially insufficient decompression.

This study aims to determine whether implementation of bridge to surgery protocols is feasible and reduces mortality- and morbidity (stoma rates, major- and minor complications) rates in potentially curable patients presenting with acute obstructing CRC. By prospectively collecting the data, the feasibility of the protocols will be reported and the decrease in mortality and morbidity rates can be evaluated.

02

Conditions studied

  • Colonic Neoplasms Malignant

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Right-sided
  • Bridge-to-surgery
  • Obstructive
03

In context

Colonic Neoplasms

2,457 studies on the registry are indexed under Colonic Neoplasms; 458 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 110 is below the median of 227 across 555 observational studies indexed under Colonic Neoplasms.

Browse Colonic Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Amphia Hospital is the lead sponsor of 13 studies on the registry; 3 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

All patients admitted with high clinical suspicion of malignant obstruction of the right sided large bowel.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients age is 18 years or older
  • Patients presenting with symptoms of obstruction (including cecum, ascending colon, hepatic flexure, transverse colon, splenic flexure, descending colon, sigmoid colon) caused by (high suspicion or proven) colonic cancer.
  • Patient presenting with symptoms of partial obstruction (abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea) confirmed by the presence of a dilated colon or ileum with a computed tomography (CT-scan).
  • Treatment with curative intent.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Obstruction of the colon pathologically caused by benign disease.
  • Obstruction of the colon caused by an extra-colonic .
  • Suspicion of emergency complications caused by peritonitis due to perforation (tumour or blow out) or sepsis.
  • Patients with advanced disease who will undergo a palliative trajectory.
  • Rectal cancer
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Histologically or cytologically confirmed

The diagnosis was confirmed by looking at a sample under a microscope: tissue from a biopsy or surgery (histology), or cells from a fluid or needle sample (cytology).

Your pathology report is the document that shows this.

Cancer (malignancy)

Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.

Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
110 participants (estimated)
Target follow-up
3 Years
Patient registry
Yes

Groups and cohorts

  • Nasogastric tube

    Patients with right sided obstructive colon cancer will receive non-surgical decompression with a nasogastric probe. Prior to the definitive oncological resection, patients undergo preoperative optimisation which involves the engagement of a dietician and physiotherapist. Patients eligible for elective resection will have their resection 7-10 days after initial decompression.

  • Ileostomy

    Patients with right sided obstructive colon cancer will receive a ileostomy. Prior to the definitive oncological resection, patients undergo preoperative optimisation which involves the engagement of a dietician and physiotherapist. Patients eligible for elective resection will be operated at least 7 days after initial decompression and no later than 4 weeks after initial presentation.

  • Right-sided stent

    Patients with right sided obstructive colon cancer will receive a right-sided stent. Prior to the definitive oncological resection, patients undergo preoperative optimisation which involves the engagement of a dietician and physiotherapist. Patients eligible for elective resection will be operated at least 7 days after initial decompression and no later than 4 weeks after initial presentation.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Complication-free survival

    The primary endpoint is complication-free survival (CFS) at 90 days after hospitalization. Complication is defined here as mortality and/or development of a major complication (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3).

    Time frame: 90 days after hospitalization

Secondary outcomes

  1. Complications overall

    All complications (following Clavien-Dindo classification) within 90 days after hospitalisation

    Time frame: 90 days after hospitalization

  2. Type of surgical intervention

    Type of surgical intervention

    Time frame: Day of surgery

  3. Time till surgery

    Days from admission untill day of surgery

    Time frame: Days from admission untill day of surgery (up to 100 days)

  4. Resection

    Creation of primary anastomosis or stoma creation

    Time frame: Day of the surgery

  5. TNM

    Cancer stage (clinical and pathological) according to the tumour node metastasis (TNM) classification of the American Joint Committee

    Time frame: Day of the surgery

  6. Hospital stay

    Total hospital stay (in total, after resection or reoperation) (days)

    Time frame: Days between surgery and moment of discharge (up to 100 days)

  7. One year stoma rate

    One year stoma rate, patients with a stoma after one year

    Time frame: One year postoperative

  8. One year survival rates

    One year survival rates

    Time frame: One years postoperative

  9. Disease free survival rates one year

    Rate of patients with disease free survical one year postoperative based on radiological assessment

    Time frame: One years postoperative

  10. Disease free survival rates three years

    Rate of patients with disease free survical three year postoperative based on radiological assessment

    Time frame: Three years postoperative

  11. Three year survival rates

    Three year survival rates

    Time frame: Three years postoperative

  12. Tumour type (obstructing, not obstructing),

    Was there an obstructive tumor?

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  13. Metastasis preoperative

    Presence of metastases at the time of diagnosis

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  14. Pre-operative diagnostics

    Endoscopy, CT-scan, ultrasound and/or MRI

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  15. Type of bridge-to-surgery

    Ileostomy, stent or nasogastric tube for decompression

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  16. Nutrition (TPN/extra nutrition)

    Did the patient received additional nutrition?

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 100 days)

  17. Consultation of other specialist

    Consultation of other specialist during hospital stay

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 100 days)

Other outcomes

  1. Gender

    male/female

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  2. Age at surgery

    Age at surgery (years, min 18years-max 120 years)

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  3. ASA

    American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score (I-V)

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  4. Bodyweight

    Bodyweight at hospital presentation (kilograms, min 30 - max 150)

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  5. Height

    Height (centimeters, min 120cm - max 230cm)

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  6. Concomitant and previous therapy

    Concomitant and previous therapy for this tumour (chemotherapy/radiation)

    Time frame: At time of diagnosis

  7. C-reactive protein

    C-reactive protein (CRP, mg/L) (0-500, higher score is worse)

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  8. Haemoglobin

    Haemoglobin (Hb, g/dL) (1-12, lower score is worse)

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  9. Laboratory values

    Hematocrit (H, %) (0-100, the normal hematocrit for men is 40 to 54%; for women it is 36 to 48%)

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  10. Leukocytes

    Leukocytes (× 10\^9/L), the normal range is 4.5 to 11.0 × 109/L

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  11. Prothrombin time

    Prothrombin time (PTT, seconds), normal range is 11 to 13.5 seconds

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  12. Sodium

    Sodium (mEq/L), normal range 135 to 145 milliequivalents per liter (mEq/L)

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  13. Potassium

    Potassium (mmol/L), normal range 3.6 to 5.2 millimoles per liter

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  14. Glomerular filtration rate

    Glomerular filtration rate (GFR, mL/min/1.73 m2), normal value \>90

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  15. Albumin

    Albumin (g/dL), normal range 3.5 to 5.5 grams per deciliter

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  16. Bilirubin

    Bilirubin (µmol/L), normal value less than 5.1 µmol/L

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  17. ASAT

    Alanine- Amino-Transferase (ASAT, U/L), normal range 8 to 33 U/L

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  18. ALAT

    Aspartate-Amino -transferase (ALAT, U/L), normal range 4 to 36 U/L

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  19. LDH

    Lactic acid dehydrogenase (LDH,U/L), normal range 140 to 280 U/L

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  20. ALP

    Alkaline phosphatase (ALP, IU/L), normal range 44 to 147

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  21. Gamma-GT

    Gamma-GT (U/L), normal range 0 to 30 IU/L

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  22. Creatinkinase

    Creatinkinase (U/L), norman range 22 to 198

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  23. Phosphate

    Phosphate (mg/dL), normal range 2.5 to 4.5

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

  24. Lactate

    Lactate (mg/dL), normal value \<1.0

    Time frame: During hospital stay (up to 1 week postoperative)

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Boeding JRE, Cuperus IE, Rijken AM, Crolla RMPH, Verhoef C, Gobardhan PD, Schreinemakers JMJ. Postponing surgery to optimise patients with acute right-sided obstructing colon cancer - A pilot study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2023 Sep;49(9):106906. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.04.005. Epub 2023 Apr 9. PubMed 37061403 ↗
  • Barberan-Garcia A, Ubre M, Roca J, Lacy AM, Burgos F, Risco R, Momblan D, Balust J, Blanco I, Martinez-Palli G. Personalised Prehabilitation in High-risk Patients Undergoing Elective Major Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized Blinded Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2018 Jan;267(1):50-56. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002293. PubMed 28489682 ↗
  • van Rooijen SJ, Molenaar CJL, Schep G, van Lieshout RHMA, Beijer S, Dubbers R, Rademakers N, Papen-Botterhuis NE, van Kempen S, Carli F, Roumen RMH, Slooter GD. Making Patients Fit for Surgery: Introducing a Four Pillar Multimodal Prehabilitation Program in Colorectal Cancer. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2019 Oct;98(10):888-896. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000001221. PubMed 31090551 ↗
  • Li C, Carli F, Lee L, Charlebois P, Stein B, Liberman AS, Kaneva P, Augustin B, Wongyingsinn M, Gamsa A, Kim DJ, Vassiliou MC, Feldman LS. Impact of a trimodal prehabilitation program on functional recovery after colorectal cancer surgery: a pilot study. Surg Endosc. 2013 Apr;27(4):1072-82. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2560-5. Epub 2012 Oct 9. PubMed 23052535 ↗
  • Nishiyama VKG, Albertini SM, Moraes CMZG, Godoy MF, Netinho JG. MALNUTRITION AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES IN SURGICAL PATIENTS WITH COLORECTAL DISEASE. Arq Gastroenterol. 2018 Oct-Dec;55(4):397-402. doi: 10.1590/S0004-2803.201800000-85. PubMed 30785525 ↗
  • Barao K, Abe Vicente Cavagnari M, Silva Fucuta P, Manoukian Forones N. Association Between Nutrition Status and Survival in Elderly Patients With Colorectal Cancer. Nutr Clin Pract. 2017 Oct;32(5):658-663. doi: 10.1177/0884533617706894. Epub 2017 May 23. PubMed 28535359 ↗
  • Schwegler I, von Holzen A, Gutzwiller JP, Schlumpf R, Muhlebach S, Stanga Z. Nutritional risk is a clinical predictor of postoperative mortality and morbidity in surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2010 Jan;97(1):92-7. doi: 10.1002/bjs.6805. PubMed 20013933 ↗
  • Li CY, Guo SB, Wang NF. Decompression of acute left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: comparing transanal drainage tube with metallic stent. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2014 May-Jun;48(5):e37-42. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31829f30ca. PubMed 24162168 ↗
  • Shigeta K, Baba H, Yamafuji K, Kaneda H, Katsura H, Kubochi K. Outcomes for patients with obstructing colorectal cancers treated with one-stage surgery using transanal drainage tubes. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014 Aug;18(8):1507-13. doi: 10.1007/s11605-014-2541-1. Epub 2014 May 29. PubMed 24871080 ↗
  • Amelung FJ, Borstlap WAA, Consten ECJ, Veld JV, van Halsema EE, Bemelman WA, Siersema PD, Ter Borg F, van Hooft JE, Tanis PJ; Dutch Snapshot Research Group. Propensity score-matched analysis of oncological outcome between stent as bridge to surgery and emergency resection in patients with malignant left-sided colonic obstruction. Br J Surg. 2019 Jul;106(8):1075-1086. doi: 10.1002/bjs.11172. Epub 2019 May 10. PubMed 31074507 ↗
  • van den Berg MW, Sloothaak DA, Dijkgraaf MG, van der Zaag ES, Bemelman WA, Tanis PJ, Bosker RJ, Fockens P, ter Borg F, van Hooft JE. Bridge-to-surgery stent placement versus emergency surgery for acute malignant colonic obstruction. Br J Surg. 2014 Jun;101(7):867-73. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9521. Epub 2014 Apr 16. PubMed 24740753 ↗
  • Tan CJ, Dasari BV, Gardiner K. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of self-expanding metallic stents as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction. Br J Surg. 2012 Apr;99(4):469-76. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8689. Epub 2012 Jan 19. PubMed 22261931 ↗
  • Zhang Y, Shi J, Shi B, Song CY, Xie WF, Chen YX. Self-expanding metallic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2012 Jan;26(1):110-9. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-1835-6. Epub 2011 Jul 26. PubMed 21789642 ↗
  • Alcantara M, Serra-Aracil X, Falco J, Mora L, Bombardo J, Navarro S. Prospective, controlled, randomized study of intraoperative colonic lavage versus stent placement in obstructive left-sided colonic cancer. World J Surg. 2011 Aug;35(8):1904-10. doi: 10.1007/s00268-011-1139-y. PubMed 21559998 ↗
  • van Hooft JE, Fockens P, Marinelli AW, Bossuyt PM, Bemelman WA; Dutch Stent-In study group. Premature closure of the Dutch Stent-in I study. Lancet. 2006 Nov 4;368(9547):1573-4. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69660-8. No abstract available. PubMed 17084754 ↗
  • Sloothaak DA, van den Berg MW, Dijkgraaf MG, Fockens P, Tanis PJ, van Hooft JE, Bemelman WA; collaborative Dutch Stent-In study group. Oncological outcome of malignant colonic obstruction in the Dutch Stent-In 2 trial. Br J Surg. 2014 Dec;101(13):1751-7. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9645. Epub 2014 Oct 9. PubMed 25298250 ↗
  • van Hooft JE, Bemelman WA, Oldenburg B, Marinelli AW, Lutke Holzik MF, Grubben MJ, Sprangers MA, Dijkgraaf MG, Fockens P; collaborative Dutch Stent-In study group. Colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011 Apr;12(4):344-52. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70035-3. Erratum In: Lancet Oncol. 2011 May;12(5):418. PubMed 21398178 ↗
  • Pirlet IA, Slim K, Kwiatkowski F, Michot F, Millat BL. Emergency preoperative stenting versus surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2011 Jun;25(6):1814-21. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1471-6. Epub 2010 Dec 18. PubMed 21170659 ↗
  • Frago R, Biondo S, Millan M, Kreisler E, Golda T, Fraccalvieri D, Miguel B, Jaurrieta E. Differences between proximal and distal obstructing colonic cancer after curative surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2011 Jun;13(6):e116-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02549.x. PubMed 21564463 ↗
  • Kube R, Mroczkowski P, Granowski D, Benedix F, Sahm M, Schmidt U, Gastinger I, Lippert H; Study group Qualitatssicherung Kolon/Rektum-Karzinome (Primartumor) (Quality assurance in primary colorectal carcinoma). Anastomotic leakage after colon cancer surgery: a predictor of significant morbidity and hospital mortality, and diminished tumour-free survival. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010 Feb;36(2):120-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2009.08.011. Epub 2009 Sep 22. PubMed 19775850 ↗
  • Gessler B, Eriksson O, Angenete E. Diagnosis, treatment, and consequences of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017 Apr;32(4):549-556. doi: 10.1007/s00384-016-2744-x. Epub 2017 Jan 9. PubMed 28070659 ↗
  • Ramphal W, Boeding JRE, Gobardhan PD, Rutten HJT, de Winter LJMB, Crolla RMPH, Schreinemakers JMJ. Oncologic outcome and recurrence rate following anastomotic leakage after curative resection for colorectal cancer. Surg Oncol. 2018 Dec;27(4):730-736. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2018.10.003. Epub 2018 Oct 10. PubMed 30449500 ↗
  • van de Wall BJ, Draaisma WA, Schouten ES, Broeders IA, Consten EC. Conventional and laparoscopic reversal of the Hartmann procedure: a review of literature. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010 Apr;14(4):743-52. doi: 10.1007/s11605-009-1084-3. PubMed 19936852 ↗
  • Pisano M, Zorcolo L, Merli C, Cimbanassi S, Poiasina E, Ceresoli M, Agresta F, Allievi N, Bellanova G, Coccolini F, Coy C, Fugazzola P, Martinez CA, Montori G, Paolillo C, Penachim TJ, Pereira B, Reis T, Restivo A, Rezende-Neto J, Sartelli M, Valentino M, Abu-Zidan FM, Ashkenazi I, Bala M, Chiara O, De' Angelis N, Deidda S, De Simone B, Di Saverio S, Finotti E, Kenji I, Moore E, Wexner S, Biffl W, Coimbra R, Guttadauro A, Leppaniemi A, Maier R, Magnone S, Mefire AC, Peitzmann A, Sakakushev B, Sugrue M, Viale P, Weber D, Kashuk J, Fraga GP, Kluger I, Catena F, Ansaloni L. 2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation. World J Emerg Surg. 2018 Aug 13;13:36. doi: 10.1186/s13017-018-0192-3. eCollection 2018. PubMed 30123315 ↗
  • Amelung FJ, Consten ECJ, Siersema PD, Tanis PJ. A Population-Based Analysis of Three Treatment Modalities for Malignant Obstruction of the Proximal Colon: Acute Resection Versus Stent or Stoma as a Bridge to Surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Oct;23(11):3660-3668. doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5247-7. Epub 2016 May 24. PubMed 27221360 ↗
  • Tan KK, Sim R. Surgery for obstructed colorectal malignancy in an Asian population: predictors of morbidity and comparison between left- and right-sided cancers. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010 Feb;14(2):295-302. doi: 10.1007/s11605-009-1074-5. Epub 2009 Nov 6. PubMed 19894082 ↗
  • Kolfschoten NE, Wouters MW, Gooiker GA, Eddes EH, Kievit J, Tollenaar RA, Marang-van de Mheen PJ; Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit group. Nonelective colon cancer resections in elderly patients: results from the dutch surgical colorectal audit. Dig Surg. 2012;29(5):412-9. doi: 10.1159/000345614. Epub 2012 Dec 13. PubMed 23235489 ↗
  • Tanis PJ, Paulino Pereira NR, van Hooft JE, Consten EC, Bemelman WA; Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Resection of Obstructive Left-Sided Colon Cancer at a National Level: A Prospective Analysis of Short-Term Outcomes in 1,816 Patients. Dig Surg. 2015;32(5):317-24. doi: 10.1159/000433561. Epub 2015 Jul 4. Erratum In: Dig Surg. 2015;32(5):324. PubMed 26159388 ↗
  • Aslar AK, Ozdemir S, Mahmoudi H, Kuzu MA. Analysis of 230 cases of emergent surgery for obstructing colon cancer--lessons learned. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Jan;15(1):110-9. doi: 10.1007/s11605-010-1360-2. Epub 2010 Oct 26. PubMed 20976568 ↗
  • Ho KS, Quah HM, Lim JF, Tang CL, Eu KW. Endoscopic stenting and elective surgery versus emergency surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a prospective randomized trial. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012 Mar;27(3):355-62. doi: 10.1007/s00384-011-1331-4. Epub 2011 Oct 28. PubMed 22033810 ↗
  • Panis Y, Maggiori L, Caranhac G, Bretagnol F, Vicaut E. Mortality after colorectal cancer surgery: a French survey of more than 84,000 patients. Ann Surg. 2011 Nov;254(5):738-43; discussion 743-4. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31823604ac. PubMed 21997816 ↗
  • Bakker IS, Snijders HS, Grossmann I, Karsten TM, Havenga K, Wiggers T. High mortality rates after nonelective colon cancer resection: results of a national audit. Colorectal Dis. 2016 Jun;18(6):612-21. doi: 10.1111/codi.13262. PubMed 26749028 ↗
  • Boeding JRE, Ramphal W, Crolla RMPH, Boonman-de Winter LJM, Gobardhan PD, Schreinemakers JMJ. Ileus caused by obstructing colorectal cancer-impact on long-term survival. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018 Oct;33(10):1393-1400. doi: 10.1007/s00384-018-3132-5. Epub 2018 Jul 25. PubMed 30046958 ↗
  • Jullumstro E, Wibe A, Lydersen S, Edna TH. Colon cancer incidence, presentation, treatment and outcomes over 25 years. Colorectal Dis. 2011 May;13(5):512-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02191.x. PubMed 20128833 ↗
  • Van Leersum NJ, Snijders HS, Henneman D, Kolfschoten NE, Gooiker GA, ten Berge MG, Eddes EH, Wouters MW, Tollenaar RA; Dutch Surgical Colorectal Cancer Audit Group; Bemelman WA, van Dam RM, Elferink MA, Karsten TM, van Krieken JH, Lemmens VE, Rutten HJ, Manusama ER, van de Velde CJ, Meijerink WJ, Wiggers T, van der Harst E, Dekker JW, Boerma D. The Dutch surgical colorectal audit. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Oct;39(10):1063-70. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.05.008. Epub 2013 Jul 18. PubMed 23871573 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Jan 2024 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Jan 2025, 12 months after the start.

Of 186 non-industry observational studies under Colonic Neoplasms, half reached primary completion within 54 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 24 and three quarters within 116. This study's planned 12 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 224 studies reached it within 50 months; a quarter within 24 and three quarters within 116.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Mar 7, 2024
First posted
Mar 29, 2024
StartActual
Jan 1, 2024
Primary completionEst.
Jan 2025
CompletionEst.
Jan 2028
Last update
Mar 29, 2024
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 29, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06338332
Lead sponsor
Amphia Hospital
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 29, 2024
Start date
Jan 1, 2024
Primary completion
Jan 2025 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 29, 2024

Study contacts

Elze Lockhorst, Drs.
Contact
elockhorst@amphia.nl
+31613723827
Jennifer Schreinemakers, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Amphia Hospital Breda, The Netherlands

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion