A Comparative Study of Obstructed Colon Tumor Resection with and Without Prophylactic Diversion
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54361/LJMR.20.1.31Keywords:
Cancer Colon, Stages, Obstructed, MortalityAbstract
Background: Cancer is a severe non-infectious disease that significantly affects quality of life. Technological advancements and daily exposure to toxins contribute to its rise by disrupting cellular mechanisms and causing genetic damage.
Aim: To compare a one-stage operation versus a two-stage operation in the therapy of blocked non-perforated colon cancer conducted on 24 patients divided equally into one-stage and two-stage groups. Methods: This prospective randomized research has been performed at Tobruk Medical Center over the past four years, including 24 patients diagnosed with obstructed nonperforated colon cancer. Participants were randomly separated into two groups: 12 cases underwent a one-stage procedure, while the remaining 12 underwent a two-stage approach. Results: A statistically insignificant variance has been observed among the studied groups in terms of duration of obstruction, previous abdominal surgeries, weight loss, preoperative blood transfusion, surgeon experience, liver condition, locally advanced disease, blood loss, operative time, intraoperative blood transfusion, mass size, anastomotic configuration, anastomotic technique, postoperative pathology, intraoperative complications, lymph vascular (LV) invasion, free safety margin, white blood cells (WBCs), Ryle amount per day, postoperative ileus, wound infection, fever, leakage, electrolyte imbalance, and mortality) P > 0.05). However, significant differences were observed in Ryle removal time, oral intake initiation, hospital stay, and stoma complications. (P < 0.05) Conclusion: This study found no significant differences in postoperative complications, except for higher stoma complications in one group, possibly due to surgical technique.
Downloads
References
1. Esmeeta A, Adhikary S, Dharshnaa V, Swarnamughi P, Ummul Maqsummiya Z, Banerjee A, Pathak S, Duttaroy AK. Plant-derived bioactive compounds in colon cancer treatment: An updated review. Biomed Pharmacother. 2022 Sep; 153:113384. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2022.113384. Epub 2022 Jul 9. PMID: 35820317.
2. Bhat SA, Hassan T, Majid S. Heavy metal toxicity and their harmful effects on living organisms–a review. International Journal of Medical Science and Diagnosis Research. 2019 Jan;3(1):106-22.
3. Lewandowska A, Rudzki G, Lewandowski T, Stryjkowska-Góra A, Rudzki S. Risk Factors for the Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer. Cancer Control. 2022 Jan-Dec; 29:10732748211056692. doi: 10.1177/10732748211056692. PMID: 35000418; PMCID: PMC8753079.
4. Gandomani HS, Aghajani M, Mohammadian-Hafshejani A, Tarazoj AA, Pouyesh V, Salehiniya H. Colorectal cancer in the world: incidence, mortality and risk factors. Biomedical Research and Therapy. 2017 Oct 14;4(10):1656-75.
5. Shinji S, Yamada T, Matsuda A, Sonoda H, Ohta R, Iwai T, Takeda K, Yonaga K, Masuda Y, Yoshida H. Recent Advances in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: A Review. J Nippon Med Sch. 2022 Jun 28;89(3):246-254. doi: 10.1272/jnms.JNMS.2022_89-310. Epub 2022 Jan 25. PMID: 35082204.
6. Shinji S, Yamada T, Matsuda A, Sonoda H, Ohta R, Iwai T, Takeda K, Yonaga K, Masuda Y, Yoshida H. Recent Advances in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: A Review. J Nippon Med Sch. 2022 Jun 28;89(3):246-254. doi: 10.1272/jnms.JNMS.2022_89-310. Epub 2022 Jan 25. PMID: 35082204.
7. Crosby D, Bhatia S, Brindle KM, Coussens LM, Dive C, Emberton M, Esener S, Fitzgerald RC, Gambhir SS, Kuhn P, Rebbeck TR, Balasubramanian S. Early detection of cancer. Science. 2022 Mar 18;375(6586): eaay9040. doi: 10.1126/science. aay9040. Epub 2022 Mar 18. PMID: 35298272.
8. Inoue H, Arita T, Kuriu Y, Shimizu H, Kiuchi J, Yamamoto Y, Konishi H, Morimura R, Shiozaki A, Ikoma H, Kubota T, Fujiwara H, Okamoto K, Otsuji E. Emergency Management of Obstructive Colorectal Cancer - A Retrospective Study of Efficacy and Safety in Self-expanding Metallic Stents and Trans-Anal Tubes. In Vivo. 2021 Jul-Aug;35(4):2289-2296. doi: 10.21873/invivo.12502. PMID: 34182508; PMCID: PMC8286508.
9. Langell JT, Mulvihill SJ. Gastrointestinal perforation and the acute abdomen. Med Clin North Am. 2008 May;92(3):599-625, viii-ix. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2007.12.004. PMID: 18387378.
10. Basheer M, NeamatAllah M, Abbas A, Shetiwy M. One Stage Procedure versus Two Stages Procedure in Management of Obstructed Non-Perforated Cancer Colon. Mansoura Medical Journal. 2023;52(2):1.
11. Ahn HM, Lee TG, Shin HR, Lee J, Yang IJ, Suh JW, Oh HK, Kim DW, Kang SB. Oncologic impact of technical difficulties during the early experience with laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: long-term follow-up results of a prospective cohort study. Curr Probl Surg. 2025 Feb; 63:101694. doi: 10.1016/j.cpsurg.2024.101694. Epub 2024 Dec 10. PMID: 39922625.
12. Hafez ME, Al-Ramah AF, Brham MM. One Stage Versus Two Stages Surgery in The Management of Left Colorectal Emergencies. International Journal of Medical Arts. 2022 Sep 1;4(9):2676-82.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mohamed fathalla eljali, Yamen Mohamed Bobaker (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access Policy
Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR).is an open journal, therefore there are no fees required for downloading any publication from the journal website by authors, readers, and institution.
The journal applies the license of CC BY (a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license). This license allows authors to keep ownership f the copyright of their papers. But this license permits any user to download , print out, extract, reuse, archive, and distribute the article, so long as appropriate credit is given to the authors and the source of the work.
The license ensures that the article will be available as widely as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific archive.
Editorial Policy
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR). It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editorial, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
Any manuscript or substantial parts of it, submitted to the journal must not be under consideration by any other journal. In general, the manuscript should not have already been published in any journal or other citable form, although it may have been deposited on a preprint server. Authors are required to ensure that no material submitted as part of a manuscript infringes existing copyrights, or the rights of a third party.
Authorship Policy
The manuscript authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution and intellectual input to the research submitted to the journal, including design, performance, interpretation of the reported study, and writing the manuscript. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the manuscript but without intellectual input should only be recognized in the acknowledgements section of the manuscript. Also, one of the authors should be selected as the corresponding author to communicate with the journal and approve the final version of the manuscript for publication in the LJMR.
Peer-review Policy
- All the manuscripts submitted to LJMR will be subjected to the double-blinded peer-review process;
- The manuscript will be reviewed by two suitable experts in the respective subject area.
- Reports of all the reviewers will be considered while deciding on acceptance/revision or rejection of a manuscript.
- Editor-In-Chief will make the final decision, based on the reviewer’s comments.
- Editor-In-Chief can ask one or more advisory board members for their suggestions upon a manuscript, before making the final decision.
- Associate editor and review editors provide administrative support to maintain the integrity of the peer-review process.
- In case, authors challenge the editor’s negative decision with suitable arguments, the manuscript can be sent to one more reviewer and the final decision will be made based upon his recommendations.
https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN/2413-6069
