Management after local excision of small rectal cancers. Indications for completion total mesorectal excision and possible alternatives

The treatment of superficial rectal cancers (local excision, or proctectomy with total mesorectal excision (TME) remains controversial. Endoscopy and endorectal ultrasonography are essential for the precise initial definition of these small cancers. During endoscopy, the depth of the lesion can be estimated using virtual chromoendoscopy with magnification, thereby aiding the assessment of the possibilities of local excision. Current international recommendations indicate completion proctectomy after wide local excision for cases where the pathologic examination reveals poorly-differentiated lesions, lymphovascular invasion, grade 2 or 3 tumor budding, and incomplete resection. But debate persists regarding whether the depth of submucosal invasion can accurately predict the risk of lymph node spread. Recent data from the literature suggest that the depth of submucosal invasion should no longer, by itself, be an indication for additional oncological surgery. Adjuvant radio-chemotherapy could be an alternative to completion proctectomy in patients with pT1 rectal cancer and unfavorable histopathological criteria. A Dutch randomized controlled trial is underway to validate this strategy.

Long-term restoration of bowel continuity after rectal cancer resection and the influence of surgical technique: A nationwide cross-sectional study

AIM

Literature on nationwide long-term permanent stoma rates after rectal cancer resection in the minimally invasive era is scarce. The aim of this population-based study was to provide more insight into the permanent stoma rate with interhospital variability (IHV) depending on surgical technique, with pelvic sepsis, unplanned reinterventions and readmissions as secondary outcomes.

METHOD

Patients who underwent open or minimally invasive resection of rectal cancer (lower border below the sigmoid take-off) in 67 Dutch centres in 2016 were included in this cross-sectional cohort study.

RESULTS

Among 2530 patients, 1470 underwent a restorative resection (58%), 356 a Hartmann's procedure (14%, IHV 0%-42%) and 704 an abdominoperineal resection (28%, IHV 3%-60%). Median follow-up was 51 months. The overall permanent stoma rate at last follow-up was 50% (IHV 13%-79%) and the unintentional permanent stoma rate, permanent stoma after a restorative procedure or an unplanned Hartmann's procedure, was 11% (IHV 0%-29%). A total of 2165 patients (86%) underwent a minimally invasive resection: 1760 conventional (81%), 170 transanal (8%) and 235 robot-assisted (11%). An anastomosis was created in 59%, 80% and 66%, with corresponding unintentional permanent stoma rates of 12%, 24% and 14% (p = 0.001), respectively. When corrected for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, cTNM, distance to the anorectal junction and neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, the minimally invasive technique was not associated with an unintended permanent stoma (p = 0.071) after a restorative procedure.

CONCLUSION

A remarkable IHV in the permanent stoma rate after rectal cancer resection was found. No beneficial influence of transanal or robot-assisted laparoscopy on the unintentional permanent stoma rate was found, although this might be caused by the surgical learning curve. A reduction in IHV and improving preoperative counselling for decision-making for restorative procedures are required.

Current treatment of pT1 rectal cancers in Denmark: A retrospective national cohort study

AIM

Organ preservation strategies for patients with rectal cancer are increasingly common. In appropriately selected patients, local excision (LE) of pT1 cancers can reduce morbidity without compromising cancer-related outcomes. However, determining the need for completion surgery after LE can be challenging, and it is unknown if prior LE compromises subsequent total mesorectal excision (TME). The aim of this study is to describe the current management of patients with pT1 rectal cancers.

METHOD

This is a retrospective national cohort study of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database, including patients with newly diagnosed pT1 cancers between 2016 and 2020. Patients were stratified according to treatment into LE alone, completion TME after LE or upfront TME. The treatment and outcomes of these groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 1056 patients were included. Initial LE was performed in 715 patients (67.7%), of whom 194 underwent completion TME (27.1%). The remaining 341 patients underwent upfront TME (32.3%). Patients undergoing LE alone were more likely to be male with low rectal cancers and greater comorbidity. No differences in specimen quality or perioperative outcomes were noted between patients undergoing completion or upfront TME. Eighty-five patients (15.9%) had lymph node metastases (LNM). Pathological risk factors poorly discriminated between patients with and without LNM, with similar rates seen in patients with zero (14.1%), one (12.0%) or two (14.4%) risk factors.

CONCLUSION

LE is a key component of the treatment of pT1 rectal cancer and does not appear to affect the outcomes of completion TME. Patient selection for completion TME remains a major challenge, with current stratification methods appearing to be inadequate.

LASSO-based nomogram predicts the risk factors of low anterior resection syndrome for middle and low rectal cancer underwent robotic surgery

BACKGROUND

This study aims to analyze the influencing factors of postoperative Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) in patients with middle and low rectal cancer who underwent robotic surgery. It also seeks to predict the probability of LARS through a visual, quantitative, and graphical nomogram. This approach is expected to lower the risk of postoperative LARS in these patients and improve their quality of life through effective prevention and early intervention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This research involved patients with middle and low rectal cancer who underwent robotic surgery in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from January 2015 to October 2022. A series of intestinal dysfunction symptoms arising from postoperative rectal cancer were diagnosed and graded using LARS scoring criteria. After the initial screening of all variables related to LARS with Lasso regression, they were included in logistic regression for further univariate and multivariate analysis to identify independent risk factors for LARS. A prediction model was then constructed.

RESULTS

The study included 358 patients. The parameters identified by Lasso regression included obstruction, BMI, tumor localization, maximum tumor diameter, AJCC stage, stoma, neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), and postoperative adjuvant therapy (AT). Univariate and multivariate analyses indicated that a higher BMI, lower tumor localization, higher AJCC stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and postoperative adjuvant therapy were independent risk factors for total LARS. The AUC of the prediction nomogram was 0.834, with a sensitivity of 0.825 and specificity of 0.741. The calibration curve demonstrated excellent concordance with the nomogram, indicating the prediction curve fit the diagonal well.

CONCLUSION

Higher BMI, lower tumor localization, higher AJCC stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and adjuvant therapy were identified as independent risk factors for total LARS. A new predictive nomogram for postoperative LARS in patients with middle and low rectal cancer undergoing robotic surgery was developed, proving to be stable and reliable. This tool will assist clinicians in managing the postoperative treatment of these patients, facilitating better clinical decision-making and maximizing patient benefits.

Outcomes Post Beyond Total Mesorectal Excision Plane Resections Following Setting up Complex Colorectal Cancer Service in a District General Hospital

Background: This study aims to validate the feasibility of a hub-and-spoke model for pelvic exenteration (PE) surgery while upholding favorable patient outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing PE at our trust October 2017 and December 2023 was conducted. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were employed. Results: Sixty-seven patients underwent PE during the study period, mainly for locally advanced colorectal cancer (n=61, 91.04%). Minimally invasive surgery was performed in 16 cases (Robotic 3, 4.47% / Laparoscopic 13, 19.40) while the rest of patients 51 had open surgery (75.11%). Median hospital stay was 12 days (range:8-20). While 24 patients (35.82%) developed major complications (CD III-IV) post-surgery, there were no mortalities associated with pelvic exenteration in this study. Of the 67 patients undergoing surgery with curative intent, negative margins (R0 resection) were achieved in 57 patients (85.12%). This is comparable to outcomes reported by the PelvEx collaborative (85.07% versus 79.8%). At a median follow-up of 22 months, 15 patient (22.38%) recurred with 10.44% local recurrence rate. The 2 years overall and disease-free survival were 85.31% and 77.0.36%, respectively. Conclusion: Our study suggests that a nascent PE service, supported by specialist expertise and resources, can achieve good surgical outcomes within a district general hospital.

Robotic beyond total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancers: Perioperative and oncological outcomes from a multicentre case series

BACKGROUND

Around 20% of rectal tumors are locally advanced with invasion into adjacent structures at presentation. These may require surgical resections beyond boundaries of total mesorectal excision (bTME) for radicality. Robotic bTME is under investigation. This study reports perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic bTME for locally advanced rectal cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicentre, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected robotic bTME resections (July 2015-November 2020). Demographics, clinicopathological features, short-term outcomes, recurrences, and survival were investigated.

RESULTS

One-hundred-sixty-eight patients (eight centres) were included. Median age and BMI were 60.0 (50.0-68.7) years and 24.0 (24.4-27.7) kg/m2. Female sex was prevalent (n = 95, 56.8%). Fifty patients (29.6%) were ASA III-IV. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was given to 125 (74.4%) patients. Median operative time was 314.0 (260.0-450.0) minutes. Median estimated blood loss was 150.0 (27.5-500.0) ml. Conversion to laparotomy was seen in 4.8%. Postoperative complications occurred in 77 (45.8%) patients; 27.3% and 3.9% were Clavien-Dindo III and IV, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 1.2% (n = 2). R0 rate was 92.9%. Adjuvant chemotherapy was offered to 72 (42.9%) patients. Median follow-up was 34.0 (10.0-65.7) months. Distant and local recurrences were seen in 35 (20.8%) and 15 patients (8.9%), respectively. Overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 91.7, 82.1, and 76.8%. Disease-free survival (DFS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 84.0, 74.5, and 69.2%.

CONCLUSION

Robotic bTME is technically safe with relatively low conversion rate, good OS, and acceptable DFS in the hands of experienced surgeons in high volume centres. In selected cases robotic approach allows for high R0 rates during bTME.

Long-term Changes in Low Anterior Resection Syndrome in Survivors of Rectal Cancer: Longitudinal Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative bowel dysfunction, also known as low anterior resection syndrome, is common in rectal cancer survivors and significantly impacts quality of life. Although long-term longitudinal follow-up is lacking, improvement of the syndrome is commonly believed to happen only within the first 2 years.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to depict the longitudinal evolvement of low anterior resection syndrome beyond 3 years and explore factors associated with changes.

DESIGN

Longitudinal long-term follow-ups were performed for the single center with the largest cohort within the multicenter FOWARC randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

A quaternary referral center.

PATIENTS

Individuals diagnosed with rectal cancer who received long-course neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, followed by sphincter-preserving radical proctectomy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Change of low anterior resection syndrome score and stoma status.

RESULTS

Of the 220 patients responding to the first follow-up at a median of 39 months, 178 (80.9%) responded to the second follow-up after a median of 83 months. During this interval, the mean low anterior resection syndrome score improved from 29.5 (95% CI, 28.3-30.7) to 18.6 (95% CI, 16.6-20.6). Fifty-six (31.5%) patients reported improvement from major to no/minor severity, and 6 (3.4%) patients had new stomas because of severe bowel dysfunction. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy ( p = 0.016) was independently and negatively associated with improvement of the score.

LIMITATIONS

Loss of follow-up during the long-term follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

Most rectal cancer survivors with low anterior resection syndrome continued to improve beyond 3 years after proctectomy. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was negatively associated with long-term improvement of low anterior resection syndrome. See Video Abstract .

CAMBIO A LARGO PLAZO DEL SNDROME DE RESECCIN ANTERIOR BAJA EN SUPERVIVIENTES DE CNCER DE RECTO SEGUIMIENTO LONGITUDINAL DE UN ENSAYO CONTROLADO ALEATORIO

ANTECEDENTES:La disfunción intestinal posoperatoria, también conocida como síndrome de resección anterior baja, es común en los sobrevivientes de cáncer de recto y afecta significativamente la calidad de vida. Aunque falta un seguimiento longitudinal a largo plazo, comúnmente se cree que la mejoría del síndrome ocurre sólo dentro de los primeros dos años.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo representar la evolución longitudinal del síndrome de resección anterior baja más allá de los 3 años y explora los factores asociados con el cambio.DISEÑO:Se realizaron seguimientos longitudinales a largo plazo para el único centro con la cohorte más grande dentro del ensayo controlado aleatorio multicéntrico FOWARC.AJUSTE:Un centro de referencia cuaternario.PACIENTES:Individuos diagnosticados con cáncer de recto que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante de larga duración o quimiorradioterapia, seguida de proctectomía radical con preservación del esfínter.PRINCIPALES MEDICIONES DE RESULTADO:Cambio en la puntuación del síndrome de resección anterior baja y el estado del estoma.RESULTADOS:De los 220 pacientes que respondieron al primer seguimiento con una mediana de 39 meses, 178 (80,9%) respondieron al segundo seguimiento después de una mediana de 83 meses. Durante el intervalo, la puntuación media del síndrome de resección anterior baja mejoró de 29,5 (intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%: 28,3-30,7) a 18,6 (IC del 95%: 16,6-20,6). 56 (31,5%) pacientes informaron una mejoría de mayor a ninguna gravedad, y 6 (3,4%) pacientes tuvieron un nuevo estoma debido a una disfunción intestinal grave. La radiación neoadyuvante (p = 0,016) se asoció de forma independiente y negativa con la mejora de la puntuación.LIMITACIONES:Pérdida de seguimiento durante los seguimientos a largo plazo.CONCLUSIÓN:La mayoría de los sobrevivientes de cáncer de recto con síndrome de resección anterior baja continuaron mejorando más allá de los 3 años después de la proctectomía. La radiación neoadyuvante se asoció negativamente con la mejora a largo plazo del síndrome de resección anterior baja. (Traducción-Dr Yolanda Colorado ).

Postoperative morbidity following Hartmann's procedure in comparison to anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer-a population-based study

AIM

There is ongoing controversy regarding the extent to which Hartmann's procedure (HP) should be used in rectal cancer treatment. This study was designed to investigate 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality following HP, anterior resection (AR) and abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer using a national registry.

METHODS

All patients operated for rectal cancer, tumour height 5-15 cm, between the years 2010 and 2017, were identified through the Swedish colorectal cancer registry.

RESULTS

A total of 8476 patients were included: 1210 (14%) undergoing HP, 5406 (64%) AR and 1860 (22%) APR. HP was associated with an increased risk of intra-abdominal infection (OR 1.7, CI 1.26-2.28, P = 0.0004) compared to AR and APR, while APR was related to an increased risk of overall complications (OR 1.18, CI 1.01-1.40, P = 0.040). No significant difference was observed in the rate of reoperations and readmissions between HP, AR and APR, and type of surgical procedure was not a risk factor for 30-day mortality. Findings from a subgroup analysis of patients with a tumour 5-7 cm from the anal verge revealed that HP was not associated with increased risk for complications or 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients where AR is not appropriate HP is a valid alternative with a favourable outcome. APR was associated with the highest overall 30-day complication rate.

Short-term outcomes of robotic tumor-specific mesorectal resection of rectal cancer: surgical techniques in mesorectal division using rolling division of the mesorectum

BACKGROUND

This study aims to report our surgical techniques for robot-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection, specifically focusing on mesorectal division using rolling division of the mesorectum, and to elucidate short-term outcomes at a single institution. Tumor-specific mesorectal excision (TSME) is commonly performed for resection of a tumor located in the upper rectum. However, especially in a narrow pelvis, it is difficult to perform appropriate mesorectal division at an adequate distance from the tumor in robot-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection.

METHODS

Retrospective case series of patients with rectal cancer who underwent robot-assisted TSME using rolling division of mesorectum. Patient characteristics, perioperative clinical results, surgical and pathological details were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 198 patients underwent robot-assisted TSME for rectal cancer using rolling division of mesorectum between May 2019 and December 2023.The tumor was located in the upper rectum in 45 patients, middle rectum in 115 patients and lower rectum in 38 patients. The types of resections were 40 high anterior resection and 158 low anterior resections. The median operation time was 175 (range 109-310) min, and median mesorectal division time was 24 (range 15-45) min. Median blood loss was 3 (range 0-20) ml; no patients required blood transfusion. The overall complication rate of Clavien-Dindo classification grades I-IV was 7.1%. Anastomotic leakage was observed in two patients (1.0%) with grade III. There was no surgical mortality in this series.

CONCLUSION

This robotic technique for anterior resection is a feasible and reliable procedure for achieving sufficient and safe TSME in this cohort.

Short- and long-term morbidity after Taylor flap (oblique rectus abdominis flap) for perineal reconstruction after abdominoperineal resection: A single-center series of 140 patients

BACKGROUND

Abdominoperineal resection (APR) leads to a substantial loss of tissue and a high rate of complications. The Taylor flap is a musculocutaneous flap used in reconstruction after APR.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyze the short and long-term morbidity of reconstruction with a Taylor flap (oblique rectus abdominis flap) after APR and to identify the risk factors for postoperative complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively included all patients who had undergone APR with immediate reconstruction with a Taylor flap in our department between July 2000 and June 2018. Demographics, oncological data, treatment, and short- and long-term morbidity were reviewed.

RESULTS

Among the 140 patients included, we identified early minor complications in 42 patients (30%) and 14 early major complications (10%). Total necrosis of the flap requiring its removal occurred in four patients (2.8%). Eleven patients (7.9%) presented with a midline incision hernia, and seven (5%) presented with a subcostal incision hernia. No perineal hernia was found. No risk factors for the complications were identified.

CONCLUSION

The Taylor flap is a safe procedure with few complications and limited donor site morbidity. Moreover, it prevents perineal hernias. These results confirm that the Taylor flap is a well-suited procedure for reconstruction after APR.

Surgical Management of Primary Anorectal Melanoma: Is Less More?

PURPOSE

Ano-uro-genital (AUG) Mucosal Melanoma UK guidelines recommended a less radical surgical strategy for anorectal melanoma (ARM) where possible. We report our experience of ARM consistent with that approach including clinical presentation, intervention undertaken and prognosis.

METHODS

We present a retrospective study of 15 consecutive patients with ARM surgically treated between November 2014 and April 2023. Patients were divided into the two surgery types: wide local excision (WLE, n = 9) and abdominoperineal resection (APR, n = 6). Data on demographics, diagnosis, treatment and oncological outcomes were assessed between the groups.

RESULTS

The mean age was 65.3 ± 17.4 years and 6 (40.0%) were female patients. Nine patients (60.0%) were diagnosed with stage I and six patients (40.0%) with stage II disease. R0 margins were achieved in all cases. The overall mean length of stay was lower following WLE compared to APR (2.6 ± 2.4 days versus 14.0 ± 9.8 days, p = 0.032). Two complications were observed in the WLE group compared to four complications after APR (p = 0.605). Five patients (55.5%) developed local/distant recurrence in the WLE group compared to three patients (50.0%) in the APR group (p = 0.707), with a median overall survival of 38.5 (12-83) months versus 26.5 (14-48) months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving clear margins by the least radical fashion may have equivalent oncological outcomes to radical surgery, potentially reducing patient morbidity and preserving function. In our experience, the surgical management of ARM consistent with the 'less is more' approach adhering to AUG guidelines has acceptable outcomes.

SafeHeal Colovac Colorectal Anastomosis Protection Device evaluation (SAFE-2) pivotal study: an international randomized controlled study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Colovac Colorectal Anastomosis Protection Device

AIM

Although proximal faecal diversion is standard of care to protect patients with high-risk colorectal anastomoses against septic complications of anastomotic leakage, it is associated with significant morbidity. The Colovac device (CD) is an intraluminal bypass device intended to avoid stoma creation in patients undergoing low anterior resection. A preliminary study (SAFE-1) completed in three European centres demonstrated 100% protection of colorectal anastomoses in 15 patients, as evidenced by the absence of faeces below the CD. This phase III trial (SAFE-2) aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the CD in a larger cohort of patients undergoing curative rectal cancer resection.

METHODS

SAFE-2 is a pivotal, multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the CD arm or the diverting loop ileostomy arm, with a recruitment target of 342 patients. The co-primary endpoints are the occurrence of major postoperative complications within 12 months of index surgery and the effectiveness of the CD in reducing stoma creation rates. Data regarding quality of life and patient's acceptance and tolerance of the device will be collected.

DISCUSSION

SAFE-2 is a multicentre randomized, control trial assessing the efficacy and the safety of the CD in protecting low colorectal anastomoses created during oncological resection relative to standard diverting loop ileostomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05010850.

A novel perineal exposure method in laparoscopic abdominal perineal resection of rectal cancer: a case series study

BACKGROUND

Abdominal perineal resection (APR) of rectal cancer, also known as Mile's procedure, is a classic procedure for the treatment of rectal cancer. Through the improvement of surgical skills and neoadjuvant therapy, the sphincter-preserving rate in rectal cancer patients has improved, even in patients with ultralow rectal cancer who underwent APR in the past. However, APR cannot be completely replaced by low anterior resection (LAR) in reality. APR still has its indications, when the tumor affects the external sphincter, etc. Good perineal exposure in APR is difficult and can seriously affect surgical safety and the long-term prognosis.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of 16 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent APR at Anqing Municipal Hospital from January 2022 to April 2023, including 11 males and 5 females, with an average age of 64.8 ± 10.3 years. The perineal operation was completed with the Lone-Star® retractor-assisted (LSRA) exposure method. After incising the skin and subcutaneous tissue, a Lone-Star® retractor was placed, and the incision was retracted in surrounding directions with 8 small retractors, which facilitated the freeing of deep tissues. We dynamically adjusted the retractor according to the plane to fully expose the surgical field.

RESULTS

All 16 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted APR successfully. Thirteen procedures were performed independently by a single person, and the others were completed by two persons due to intraoperative arterial hemostasis. All specimens were free of perforation and had a negative circumferential resection margin (CRM). Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients, including urinary retention in 1 patient, pulmonary infection in 1 patient, intestinal adhesion in 1 patient and peristomal dermatitis in 1 patient, and were graded as ClavienDindo grade 3 or lower and cured. No distant metastasis or local recurrence was found for any of the patients in the postoperative follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of the LSRA exposure method might be helpful for perineal exposure during APR for rectal cancer, which could improve intraoperative safety and surgical efficiency, achieve one-person operation, and increase the comfort of operators.

Construction of a nomogram model to predict technical difficulty in performing laparoscopic sphincter-preserving radical resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal surgeons are well aware that performing surgery for rectal cancer becomes more challenging in obese patients with narrow and deep pelvic cavities. Therefore, it is essential for colorectal surgeons to have a comprehensive understanding of pelvic structure prior to surgery and anticipate potential surgical difficulties.

AIM

To evaluate predictive parameters for technical challenges encountered during laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively gathered data from 162 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Three-dimensional reconstruction of pelvic bone and soft tissue parameters was conducted using computed tomography (CT) scans. Operative difficulty was categorized as either high or low, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to identify predictors of operative difficulty, ultimately creating a nomogram.

RESULTS

Out of 162 patients, 21 (13.0%) were classified in the high surgical difficulty group, while 141 (87.0%) were in the low surgical difficulty group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the surgical approach using laparoscopic intersphincteric dissection, intraoperative preventive ostomy, and the sacrococcygeal distance were independent risk factors for highly difficult laparoscopic radical sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer (P < 0.05). Conversely, the anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic inlet/sacrococcygeal distance was identified as a protective factor (P < 0.05). A nomogram was subsequently constructed, demonstrating good predictive accuracy (C-index = 0.834).

CONCLUSION

The surgical approach, intraoperative preventive ostomy, the sacrococcygeal distance, and the anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic inlet/sacrococcygeal distance could help to predict the difficulty of laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery.

Robotic, transanal, and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for locally advanced mid/low rectal cancer: European multicentre, propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard surgery for low/mid locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare three minimally invasive surgical approaches for TME with primary anastomosis (laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, and transanal TME).

METHODS

Records of patients undergoing laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, or transanal TME between 2013 and 2022 according to standardized techniques in expert centres contributing to the European MRI and Rectal Cancer Surgery III (EuMaRCS-III) database were analysed. Propensity score matching was applied to compare the three groups with respect to the complication rate (primary outcome), conversion rate, postoperative recovery, and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 468 patients (mean(s.d.) age of 64.1(11) years) were included; 190 (40.6%) patients underwent laparoscopic TME, 141 (30.1%) patients underwent robotic TME, and 137 (29.3%) patients underwent transanal TME. Comparative analyses after propensity score matching demonstrated a higher rate of postoperative complications for laparoscopic TME compared with both robotic TME (OR 1.80, 95% c.i. 1.11-2.91) and transanal TME (OR 2.87, 95% c.i. 1.72-4.80). Robotic TME was associated with a lower rate of grade A anastomotic leakage (2%) compared with both laparoscopic TME (8.8%) and transanal TME (8.1%) (P = 0.031). Robotic TME (1.4%) and transanal TME (0.7%) were both associated with a lower conversion rate to open surgery compared with laparoscopic TME (8.8%) (P < 0.001). Time to flatus and duration of hospital stay were shorter for patients treated with transanal TME (P = 0.003 and 0.001 respectively). There were no differences in operating time, intraoperative complications, blood loss, mortality, readmission, R0 resection, or survival.

CONCLUSION

In this multicentre, retrospective, propensity score-matched, cohort study of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, newer minimally invasive approaches (robotic TME and transanal TME) demonstrated improved outcomes compared with laparoscopic TME.

Total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer: multicentre study comparing oncological outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision in high-volume centres

BACKGROUND

The routine use of MRI in rectal cancer treatment allows the use of a strict definition for low rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer in expert laparoscopic, transanal and robotic high-volume centres.

METHODS

All MRI-defined low rectal cancer operated on between 2015 and 2017 in 11 Dutch centres were included. Primary outcomes were: R1 rate, total mesorectal excision quality and 3-year local recurrence and survivals (overall and disease free). Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, complications and whether there was a perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan.

RESULTS

Of 1071 eligible rectal cancers, 633 patients with low rectal cancer were identified. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen (P = 0.337), R1 rate (P = 0.107), conversion (P = 0.344), anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.942), local recurrence (P = 0.809), overall survival (P = 0.436) and disease-free survival (P = 0.347) were comparable among the centres. The laparoscopic centre group had the highest rate of perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan (10.4%), compared with robotic expert centres (5.2%) and transanal centres (2.1%), P = 0.004. The main reason for this change was stapling difficulty (43%), followed by low tumour location (29%). Multivariable analysis showed that laparoscopic surgery was the only independent risk factor for a change in the preoperative planned procedure, P = 0.024.

CONCLUSION

Centres with expertise in all three minimally invasive total mesorectal excision techniques can achieve good oncological resection in the treatment of MRI-defined low rectal cancer. However, compared with robotic expert centres and transanal centres, patients treated in laparoscopic centres have an increased risk of a change in the preoperative intended procedure due to technical limitations.

Predictors for temporary stomas non-closure among non-metastatic rectal cancer patients undergoing curative resection: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

The primary treatment for non-metastatic rectal cancer is curative resection. However, sphincter-preserving surgery may lead to complications. This study aims to develop a predictive model for stoma non-closure in rectal cancer patients who underwent curative-intent low anterior resection.

METHODS

Consecutive patients diagnosed with non-metastatic rectal cancer between January 2005 and December 2017, who underwent low anterior resection, were retrospectively included in the Chang Gung Memorial Foundation Institutional Review Board. A comprehensive evaluation and analysis of potential risk factors linked to stoma non-closure were performed.

RESULTS

Out of 956 patients with temporary stomas, 10.3% (n = 103) experienced non-closure primarily due to cancer recurrence and anastomosis-related issues. Through multivariate analysis, several preoperative risk factors significantly associated with stoma non-closure were identified, including advanced age, anastomotic leakage, positive nodal status, high preoperative CEA levels, lower rectal cancer presence, margin involvement, and an eGFR below 30 mL/min/1.73m2. A risk assessment model achieved an AUC of 0.724, with a cutoff of 2.5, 84.5% sensitivity, and 51.4% specificity. Importantly, the non-closure rate could rise to 16.6% when more than two risk factors were present, starkly contrasting the 3.7% non-closure rate observed in cases with a risk score of 2 or below (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Prognostic risk factors associated with the non-closure of a temporary stoma include advanced age, symptomatic anastomotic leakage, nodal status, high CEA levels, margin involvement, and an eGFR below 30 mL/min/1.73m2. Hence, it is crucial for surgeons to evaluate these factors and provide patients with a comprehensive prognosis before undergoing surgical intervention.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological outcomes with transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer

AIM

Transanal total mesorectal (taTME) excision is a method used to assist in the radical removal of the rectum. By adopting the concept of natural orifice surgery, it offers potential benefits over conventional techniques. Early enthusiasm for this strategy led to its rapid and widespread adoption. The imposing of a local moratorium was precipitated by the discovery in Norway of an uncommon multifocal pattern of locoregional recurrence. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the incidence of local recurrence after taTME for rectal cancer.

METHOD

Conforming to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines checklist, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. This included case series and comparative studies between taTME and preferentially laparoscopic procedures published between 2010 and 2021.

RESULTS

There were a total of 1175 studies retrieved. After removal and screening for quality and relevance, the final analysis contained 40 studies. The local recurrence rate following taTME was 3.4% (95% CI 2.9%-3.9%, I2 = 0%) in 4987 patients with follow-up durations ranging from 0.7 to 5.5 years. Compared with laparoscopic TME, local recurrence was not statistically different for the taTME group (p = 0.076); however, it was less probable (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.24-1.09, I2 = 0%). Systemic recurrence and circumferential resection margin status were secondary outcomes; however, the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the local recurrence for regular laparoscopic and transanal TME surgeries may be comparable, suggesting that taTME can be performed without influencing locoregional oncological outcomes in patients treated at specialized institutions and who have been cautiously selected.