Palliative Surgery Versus Conservative Management for Patients With Bowel Obstruction and Unresectable Peritoneal...

BackgroundBowel obstruction in the setting of peritoneal metastases is a complex clinical situation. Evidence for operative intervention in this setting remains unclear. This study aimed to compare outcomes between patients with bowel obstruction and peritoneal metastases who underwent operative intervention vs those who underwent conservative management.MethodsThis was a retrospective single center study of all patients that were consulted on by the Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery in the 6-year period between January 1st 2019 and December 31st 2024 for the management of bowel obstruction in the setting of peritoneal metastases. The study compared patients who underwent operative intervention vs those who underwent conservative management. The primary outcome measures were ability to tolerate solid food at discharge, median obstruction free survival, and median overall survival.ResultsA total of 100 patients were diagnosed with bowel obstruction in the setting of peritoneal carcinomatosis. 47 patients underwent operative intervention and 53 underwent non-operative management. Those who underwent operative intervention were more likely to tolerate solid food at discharge (78.72% vs 47.17%, P < 0.01) and had a longer median obstruction free survival (593 days vs 147 days, P = 0.01). No difference was identified in overall survival (133 days vs 99 days, P = 0.49).ConclusionsBowel obstruction in the setting of peritoneal metastases is a complex situation that requires a personalized and pragmatic approach for each patient. Selecting those who may benefit from operative intervention can be challenging, however, there are subsets of patients for whom surgical management may be offered with acceptable outcomes.