High sacrectomy for locally recurrent rectal cancer: Can long-term survival be achieved?

Total pelvic exenteration extended to pelvic bones with subsequent VRAM flap reconstruction in patient with recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma following chemoradiotherapy

Anal squamous cell carcinoma, typically associated with human papillomavirus infection, remains a rare malignancy. This article outlines a case of local recurrence in a male patient with a history of HIV and hepatitis C virus infection, previously treated with chemoradiotherapy. Extensive tumour involvement called for total pelvic exenteration extended to anterior osteomuscular compartment and genitalia. The surgical approach involved multidisciplinary collaboration and detailed preoperative planning using three-dimensional reconstruction. Key surgical considerations comprised the following: achieving tumour-free margins (R0 resection), extensive osteotomies and intricate pelvic floor reconstruction with prosthetic mesh and flap reconstruction. The procedure successfully yielded an R0 resection, maintaining adequate lower limb functionality. Our case report underscores the benefits of pelvic exenteration in locally advanced or recurrent pelvic tumours, invariably following careful patient selection and exhaustive preoperative studies.

Contemporary results from the PelvEx collaborative: improvements in surgical outcomes for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

The PelvEx Collaborative collates global data on outcomes following exenterative surgery for locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LARC and LRRC, respectively). The aim of this study is to report contemporary data from within the collaborative and benchmark it against previous PelvEx publications.

METHOD

Anonymized data from 45 units that performed pelvic exenteration for LARC or LRRC between 2017 and 2021 were reviewed. The primary endpoints were surgical outcomes, including resection margin status, radicality of surgery, rates of reconstruction and associated morbidity and/or mortality.

RESULTS

Of 2186 patients who underwent an exenteration for either LARC or LRRC, 1386 (63.4%) had LARC and 800 (36.6%) had LRRC. The proportion of males to females was 1232:954. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range 52-71 years) compared with a median age of 63 in both historical LARC and LRRC cohorts. Compared with the original reported PelvEx data (2004-2014), there has been an increase in negative margin (R0) rates from 79.8% to 84.8% and from 55.4% to 71.7% in the LARC and LRRC cohorts, respectively. Bone resection and flap reconstruction rates have increased accordingly in both cohorts (8.2%-19.6% and 22.6%-32% for LARC and 20.3%-41.9% and 17.4%-32.1% in LRRC, respectively). Despite this, major morbidity has not increased.

CONCLUSION

In the modern era, patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for advanced rectal cancer are undergoing more radical surgery and are more likely to achieve a negative resection margin (R0) with no increase in major morbidity.

Novel and Innovative Surgical Strategies for Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Uncommon Resections, Local Interventions for Pelvic Reoccurrence, and Intraoperative Radiation Therapy

The frequency of recurrent rectal cancer has dropped significantly with improved surgical approaches and adjunctive therapies. These recurrences have proven challenging to obtain R0 resection with salvage operations. Meticulous planning, clear understanding of anatomy with imaging, and multispecialty support have become essential in local control and long-term survival with pelvic recurrence of rectal cancer. Technical considerations and prognosis indicators along with role of intraoperative radiation or boost radiation are discussed within.

Improving Surgical Outcomes in Pelvic Exenteration Surgery: Comparison of Prone Sacrectomy With Anterior Cortical Sacrectomy Techniques

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of changing our sacrectomy approach from prone to anterior on surgical and oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND

In patients with advanced pelvic malignancy involving the sacrum, pelvic exenteration (PE) with en-bloc sacrectomy is the only potential curative option but morbidity is high. Over time sacrectomy techniques have evolved from prone sacrectomy (PS) to abdominolithotomy sacrectomy (ALS, ≤S3) and high anterior cortical sacrectomy (HACS, >S3) to optimize surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective, single institution analysis of prospectively collected data for patients undergoing PE with en-bloc sacrectomy between 1994 and 2021 was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 363 patients were identified and divided into PS (n=77, 21.2%), ALS (n=247, 68.0%), and HACS (n=39, 10.7%). Indications were: locally advanced (n=92) or recurrent (n=177) rectal cancer, primary other (n=31), recurrent other (n=60), and benign disease (n=3). PS resulted in longer operating time ( P <0.01) and more blood loss ( P <0.01). Patients with HACS had more major nerve (87.2%) and vascular (25.6%) resections ( P <0.01). Vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap repair was less common following HACS (7.7%) than ALS (25.5%) and PS (27.3%) ( P =0.040). R0 rate was 80.8%, 65.8%, and 76.9% following ALS, PS, and HACS, respectively ( P =0.024). Wound-related complications and re-operations were significantly reduced following ALS and HACS compared with PS.

CONCLUSIONS

Changing our practice from PS to an anterior approach with ALS or HAS has been safe and improved overall surgical and perioperative outcomes, while maintaining good oncological outcomes. Given the improved perioperative and surgical outcomes, it would be important for surgeons to learn and adopt the anterior sacrectomy approaches.

Development and validation of a patient reported outcome measure for health-related quality of life for locally recurrent rectal cancer: a multicentre, three-phase, mixed-methods, cohort study

Background

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) occurs in 5-10% of patients following previous treatment of rectal cancer. It has a significant impact on patients' overall health-related quality of life (HrQoL). Major advances in surgical treatments have led to improved survival outcomes. However, due to the lack of disease-specific, validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), HrQoL, is variably assessed. The aim of this study is to develop a disease-specific, psychometrically robust, and validated PROM for use in LRRC.

Methods

A multicentre, three phase, mixed-methods, observational study was performed across five centres in the UK and Australia. Adult patients (>18 years old) with an existing or previously treated LRRC within the last 2 years were eligible to participate. Patients completed the proposed LRRC-QoL, EORTC QLQ-CR29, and FACT-C questionnaires. Scale structure was analysed using multi-trait scaling analysis and exploratory factor analysis, reliability was assessed using Cronbach's and the intra-class coefficient, convergent validity was assessed using Pearson's correlation, and known-groups comparison was assessed using the student t-test or ANOVA.

Findings

Between 01/03/2015 and 31/12/2019, 117 patients with a diagnosis of LRRC were recruited. The final scale structure of the LRRC-QoL consisted of nine multi-item scales (healthcare services, psychological impact, pain, urostomy-related symptoms, lower limb symptoms, stoma, sexual function, sexual interest, and urinary symptoms) and three single items. Cronbach's Alpha and Intraclass correlation values of >0.7 across the majority of scales supported overall reliability. Convergent validity was demonstrated between LRRC-QoL Pain Scale and FACT-C Physical Well Being scale (r = 0.528, p < 0.001), LRRC-QoL Psychological Impact scale with EORTC QLQ CR29 Body Image (r = 0.680, p < 0.001) and the FACT-C Emotional Well Being scale (r = 0.326, p < 0.001), and LRRC-QoL Urinary Symptoms scale with EORTC QLQ-CR29 Urinary Frequency scale (r = 0.310, p < 0.001). Known-groups validity was demonstrated for gender, disease location, treatment intent, and re-recurrent disease.

Interpretation

The LRRC-QoL has demonstrated robust psychometric properties and can be used in clinical and academic practice.

Funding

None.

Short-term outcomes of health-related quality of life in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer: multicentre, international, cross-sectional cohort study

BACKGROUND

Overall survival rates for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) continue to improve but the evidence concerning health-related quality of life (HrQoL) remains limited. The aim of this study was to describe the short-term HrQoL differences between patients undergoing surgical and palliative treatments for LRRC.

METHODS

An international, cross-sectional, observational study was undertaken at five centres across the UK and Australia. HrQoL in LRRC patients was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-CR29 and functional assessment of cancer therapy - colorectal (FACT-C) questionnaires and subgroups (curative versus palliative) were compared. Secondary analyses included the comparison of HrQoL according to the margin status, location of disease and type of treatment. Scores were interpreted using minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and Cohen effect size (ES).

RESULTS

Out of 350 eligible patients, a total of 95 patients participated, 74.0 (78.0 per cent) treated with curative intent and 21.0 (22.0 per cent) with palliative intent. Median time between LRRC diagnosis and HrQoL assessments was 4 months. Higher overall FACT-C scores denoting better HrQoL were observed in patients undergoing curative treatment, demonstrating a MCID with a mean difference of 18.5 (P < 0.001) and an ES of 0.6. Patients undergoing surgery had higher scores denoting a higher burden of symptoms for the EORTC CR29 domains of urinary frequency (P < 0.001, ES 0.3) and frequency of defaecation (P < 0.001, ES 0.4). Higher overall FACT-C scores were observed in patients who underwent an R0 resection versus an R1 resection (P = 0.051, ES 0.6). EORTC CR29 scores identified worse body image in patients with posterior/central disease (P = 0.021). Patients undergoing palliative chemoradiation reported worse HrQoL scores with a higher symptom burden on the frequency of defaecation scale compared with palliative chemotherapy (P = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

Several differences in short-term HrQoL outcomes between patients undergoing curative and palliative treatment for LRRC were documented. Patients undergoing curative surgery reported better overall HrQoL and a higher burden of pelvic symptoms.

The impact of multidisciplinary team decision-making in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Appropriate patient selection within the context of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) is key to good clinical outcomes. The current evidence base for factors that guide the decision-making process in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is limited to anatomical factors.

METHODS

A registry-based, prospective cohort study was undertaken of patients referred to our specialist MDT between 2015 and 2019. Data were collected on patients and disease characteristics including performance status, Charlson Comorbidity Index, the English Index of Multiple Deprivation quintiles and MDT treatment decision. Curative treatment was defined as neoadjuvant treatment and surgical resection that would achieve a R0 resection, and/or complete treatment of distant metastatic disease. Palliative treatment was defined as non-surgical treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 325 patients were identified; 72.7% of patients with LARC and 63.6% of patients with LRRC were offered treatment with curative intent (p = 0.08). Patients with poor performance status (PS > 2; p < 0.001), severe comorbidity (p < 0.001), socio-economic deprivation (p = 0.004), a positive predictive circumferential resection margin (p = 0.005) and metastatic disease (p < 0.001) were associated with palliative treatment. Overall survival in the curative cohort was 49 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 32.4-65.5) compared with 12 months (95% CI 9.1-14.9) in the palliative cohort (p < 0.001). The presence of metastatic disease was identified as a prognostic factor for patients undergoing curative treatment (p = 0.05). The only prognostic factor identified in patients treated palliatively was performance status (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identifies a number of preoperative, prognostic factors that affect MDT decision-making and overall survival.

Re-resection of Microscopically Positive Margins Found on Intraoperative Frozen Section Analysis Does Not Result in a Survival Benefit in Patients Undergoing Surgery and Intraoperative Radiation Therapy for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative frozen-section analysis provides real-time margin resection status that can guide intraoperative decisions made by the surgeon and radiation oncologist. For patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing surgery and intraoperative radiation therapy, intraoperative re-resection of positive margins to achieve negative margins is common practice.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess whether re-resection of positive margins found on intraoperative frozen-section analysis improves oncologic outcomes.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was an analysis of a prospectively maintained multicenter database.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent surgical resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer with intraoperative radiation therapy between 2000 and 2015 were included and followed for 5 years. Three groups were compared: initial R0 resection, initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, and initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection. Grossly positive margin resections (R2) were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measures were 5-year overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and local re-recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 267 patients were analyzed (initial R0 resection, n = 94; initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, n = 95; initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection, n = 78). Overall survival was 4.4 years for initial R0 resection, 2.7 years for initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, and 2.9 years for initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection ( p = 0.01). Recurrence-free survival was 3.0 years for initial R0 resection and 1.8 years for both initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection and initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection ( p ≤ 0.01). Overall survival did not differ for patients with R1 and re-resection R1 or R0 ( p = 0.62). Recurrence-free survival and freedom from local re-recurrence did not differ between groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the heterogeneous patient population restricted to those receiving intraoperative radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Re-resection of microscopically positive margins to obtain R0 status does not appear to provide a significant survival advantage or prevent local re-recurrence in patients undergoing surgery and intraoperative radiation therapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B886 .

LA RERESECCIN DE LOS MRGENES MICROSCPICAMENTE POSITIVOS ENCONTRADOS DE MANERA INTRAOPERATORIA MEDIANTE LA TCNICA DE CRIOSECCIN, NO DA COMO RESULTADO UN BENEFICIO DE SUPERVIVENCIA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGA Y RADIOTERAPIA INTRAOPERATORIA PARA EL CNCER RECTAL LOCALMENTE RECIDIVANTE

ANTECEDENTES:El análisis de la ténica de criosección para los margenes positivos encontrados de manera intraoperatoria proporciona el estado de la resección del margen en tiempo real que puede guiar las decisiones intraoperatorias tomadas por el cirujano y el oncólogo radioterapeuta. Para los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente recurrente que se someten a cirugía y radioterapia intraoperatoria, la re-resección intraoperatoria de los márgenes positivos para lograr márgenes negativos es una práctica común.OBJETIVO:Evaluar si la re-resección de los márgenes positivos encontrados en el análisis de la ténica por criosecciónde manera intraoperatorios mejora los resultados oncológicos.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Análisis de una base de datos multicéntrica mantenida de forma prospectiva.POBLACIÓN:Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a resección quirúrgica de cáncer de recto localmente recurrente con radioterapia intraoperatoria entre 2000 y 2015 fueron incluidos y seguidos durante 5 años. Se compararon tres grupos: resección inicial R0, R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección y R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección. Se excluyeron las resecciones de márgenes macroscópicamente positivos (R2).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Supervivencia global a cinco años, supervivencia sin recidiva y recidiva local.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron un total de 267 pacientes (resección inicial R0 n = 94, R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección n = 95, R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección n = 78). La supervivencia global fue de 4,4 años para la resección inicial R0, 2,7 años para la R1 inicial convertida en R0 después de la re-resección y 2,9 años para la R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección ( p = 0,01). La supervivencia libre de recurrencia fue de 3,0 años para la resección inicial R0 y de 1,8 años para el R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección y el R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección ( p ≤ 0,01). La supervivencia global no difirió para los pacientes con R1 y re-resección R1 o R0 ( p = 0,62). La supervivencia libre de recurrencia y la ausencia de recurrencia local no difirieron entre los grupos.LIMITACIONES:Población de pacientes heterogénea, restringida a aquellos que reciben radioterapia intraoperatoria.CONCLUSIONES:La re-resección de los márgenes microscópicamente positivos para obtener el estado R0 no parece proporcionar una ventaja de supervivencia significativa o prevenir la recurrencia local en pacientes sometidos a cirugía y radioterapia intraoperatoria para el cáncer de recto localmente recurrente. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B886 . (Traducción-Dr. Daniel Guerra ).

Towards Standardisation of Technique for En Bloc Sacrectomy for Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Treatment strategies for advanced or recurrent rectal cancer have evolved such that the ultimate surgical goal to achieve a cure is complete pathological clearance. To achieve this where the sacrum is involved, en bloc sacrectomy is the current standard of care. Sacral resection is technically challenging and has been described; however, the technique has yet to be streamlined across units. This comprehensive review aims to outline the surgical approach to en bloc sacrectomy for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer, with standardisation of the operative steps of the procedure and to discuss options that enhance the technique.

Pelvic exenteration combined with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for advanced primary or recurrent colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases

AIM

The aim was to report early outcomes of six patients who underwent combined pelvic exenteration (PE), cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer with colorectal peritoneal metastases at a single centre. The literature contains limited data on the safety and oncological outcomes of patients who undergo this combined procedure.

METHODS

Six patients who underwent combined PE, CRS and HIPEC at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, between January 2017 and February 2020 were identified and included. Data were extracted from prospectively maintained databases.

RESULTS

Three patients underwent surgery for advanced primary rectal cancer, while two patients had recurrent sigmoid cancer and one had recurrent rectal cancer. All patients had synchronous peritoneal metastases. Two patients required total PE and two patients had a central (bladder-sparing) PE. The median peritoneal carcinomatosis index was 6 (range 3-12) and all patients underwent a complete cytoreduction. The median operating time was 702 min (range 485-900) and the median blood loss was 1650 ml (range 700-12,000). The median length of intensive care unit and hospital stay was 4.5 and 25 days, respectively. There was no inpatient, 30-day or 90-day mortality. Three patients (50%) experienced a major (Clavien-Dindo III/IV) complication. At a median follow-up of 11.5 months (range 2-18 months), two patients died with recurrent disease, one patient was alive with recurrence, while three patients remain alive and disease-free. Of the three patients who developed recurrent disease, one had isolated pelvic recurrence, one had pelvic and peritoneal recurrences and one had bone metastases.

CONCLUSION

Early results from this initial experience with simultaneous PE, CRS and HIPEC suggest that this combined procedure is safe and feasible; however, the long-term oncological and quality of life outcomes require further investigation.

Outcome of Sacropelvic Resection and Reconstruction Based on a Novel Classification System

BACKGROUND

Sacral tumor resections require a multidisciplinary approach to achieve a cure and a functional outcome. Currently, there is no accepted classification system that provides a means to communicate among the multidisciplinary teams in terms of approach, osseous resection, reconstruction, and acceptable functional outcome. The purpose of this study was to report the outcome of sacral tumor resection based on our classification system.

METHODS

In this study, 196 patients (71 female and 125 male) undergoing an oncologic en bloc sacrectomy were reviewed. The mean age (and standard deviation) was 49 ± 16 years, and the mean body mass index was 27.2 ± 6.4 kg/m. The resections included 130 sarcomas (66%). The mean follow-up was 7 ± 5 years.

RESULTS

Resections included total sacrectomy (Type 1A: 20 patients [10%]) requiring reconstruction, subtotal sacrectomy (Type 1B: 5 patients [3%]) requiring reconstruction, subtotal sacrectomy (Type 1C: 104 patients [53%]) not requiring reconstruction, hemisacrectomy (Type 2: 29 patients [15%]), external hemipelvectomy and hemisacrectomy (Type 3: 32 patients [16%]), total sacrectomy and external hemipelvectomy (Type 4: 5 patients [3%]), and hemicorporectomy (Type 5: 1 patient [1%]). The disease-specific survival was 66% at 5 years and 52% at 10 years. Based on the classification, the 5-year disease-specific survival was 34% for Type 1A, 100% for Type 1B, 71% for Type 1C, 65% for Type 2, 57% for Type 3, 100% for Type 4, and 100% for Type 5 (p < 0.001). Tumor recurrence occurred in 67 patients, including isolated local recurrence (14 patients), isolated metastatic disease (31 patients), and combined local and metastatic disease (22 patients). At 5 years, the local recurrence-free survival was 77% and the metastasis-free survival was 68%. Complications occurred in 153 patients (78%), most commonly wound complications (95 patients [48%]). Following the procedure, 154 patients (79%) were ambulatory, and the mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS93) score was 60% ± 23%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although resections of sacral malignancies are associated with complications, they can be curative in a majority of patients, with a majority of patients ambulatory with an acceptable functional outcome considering the extent of the resection. At our institution, this classification allows for communication between surgical teams and implies a surgical approach, staging, reconstruction, and potential functional outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer-how much more?

There have been significant advances in the surgical management of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer in recent decades. Patient with advanced pelvic tumours involving adjacent organs and neurovascular structures, beyond the traditional mesorectal planes, who would have traditionally been considered irresectable at many centres, now undergo surgery routinely at specialised units. While high rates of morbidity and mortality were reported by the pioneers of pelvic exenteration (PE) in early literature, this is now considered historical data. In 2019, patients who undergo PE for advanced or recurrent rectal cancer can expect reasonable rates of long-term survival (up to 60% at 5 years) and acceptable morbidity and quality of life. This article describes the surgical techniques that have been developed for radical multivisceral pelvic resections and reviews contemporary outcomes.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer: what the radiologist should know

Despite advances in surgical techniques and chemoradiation therapy, recurrent rectal cancer remains a cause of morbidity and mortality. After successful treatment of rectal cancer, patients are typically enrolled in a surveillance strategy that includes imaging as studies have shown improved prognosis when recurrent rectal cancer is detected during imaging surveillance versus based on development of symptoms. Additionally, patients who experience a complete clinical response with chemoradiation therapy may elect to enroll in a "watch-and-wait" strategy that includes imaging surveillance rather than surgical resection. Factors that increase the likelihood of recurrence, patterns of recurrence, and the imaging appearances of recurrent rectal cancer are reviewed with a focus on CT, PET CT, and MR imaging.

Influence of the level of sacrectomy on survival in patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Exenterative surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer may involve partial sacrectomy to achieve complete resection. High sacrectomy is technically challenging, and can be associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of the level of sacrectomy on the survival of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was an international multicentre retrospective analysis of patients undergoing exenterative abdominosacrectomy between July 2006 and June 2016. High sacrectomy was defined as resection at or above the junction of S2-S3; low sacrectomy was below the S2-S3 junction. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to assess overall survival and cancer-specific survival. Predictive factors were determined using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 345 patients were identified, of whom 91 underwent high sacrectomy and 254 low sacrectomy. There was no difference in 5-year overall survival (53 versus 44·1 per cent; P = 0·216) or cancer-specific survival (60 versus 56·1 per cent; P = 0·526) between high and low sacrectomy. Negative margin rates were similar for primary and recurrent disease: 65 of 90 (72 per cent) versus 97 of 153 (63·4 per cent) (P = 0·143). Level of sacrectomy was not a significant predictor of mortality (P = 0·053). Positive resection margin and advancing age were the only significant predictors for death, with hazard ratios of 2·78 (P < 0·001) and 1·02 (P = 0·020) respectively.

CONCLUSION

There was no survival difference between patients who underwent high or low sacrectomy. In appropriately selected patients, high sacrectomy is feasible and safe.

[Resection of recurrent rectal cancer]

A curative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) can only be achieved with a complete resection and microscopically tumor-free surgical margins (R0). Imaging techniques are the most important investigations for the preoperative staging of local and systemic diseases. Due to substantial improvements in surgical strategies and techniques, previously unresectable tumors can now be excised. Several publications have demonstrated the oncological benefits of high sacral resection for LRRC. High subcortical sacrectomy (HiSS), extended lateral resection and extended lateral pelvic sidewall excision (ELSiE) belong to the newer surgical options. Biological meshes, various myocutaneous flaps, titanium and bone allografts can be used for reconstruction. Specialized centers provide an efficient management of complications and postoperative treatment.

Factors affecting outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is associated with variable outcomes, with the majority of data from single-centre series. This study analysed data from an international collaboration to determine robust parameters that could inform clinical decision-making.

METHODS

Anonymized data on patients who had pelvic exenteration for LRRC between 2004 and 2014 were accrued from 27 specialist centres. The primary endpoint was survival. The impact of resection margin, bone resection, node status and use of neoadjuvant therapy (before exenteration) was assessed.

RESULTS

Of 1184 patients, 614 (51·9 per cent) had neoadjuvant therapy. A clear resection margin (R0 resection) was achieved in 55·4 per cent of operations. Twenty-one patients (1·8 per cent) died within 30 days and 380 (32·1 per cent) experienced a major complication. Median overall survival was 36 months following R0 resection, 27 months after R1 resection and 16 months following R2 resection (P < 0·001). Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy had more postoperative complications (unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·53), readmissions (unadjusted OR 2·33) and radiological reinterventions (unadjusted OR 2·12). Three-year survival rates were 48·1 per cent, 33·9 per cent and 15 per cent respectively. Bone resection (when required) was associated with a longer median survival (36 versus 29 months; P < 0·001). Node-positive patients had a shorter median overall survival than those with node-negative disease (22 versus 29 months respectively). Multivariable analysis identified margin status and bone resection as significant determinants of long-term survival.

CONCLUSION

Negative margins and bone resection (where needed) were identified as the most important factors influencing overall survival. Neoadjuvant therapy before pelvic exenteration did not affect survival, but was associated with higher rates of readmission, complications and radiological reintervention.

Advances in surgical management for locally recurrent rectal cancer: How far have we come?

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is a complex disease with far-reaching implications for the patient. Until recently, research was limited regarding surgical techniques that can increase the ability to perform an en bloc resection with negative margins. This has changed in recent years and therefore outcomes for these patients have improved. Novel radical techniques and adjuncts allow for more radical resections thereby improving the chance of negative resection margins and outcomes. In the past contraindications to surgery included anterior involvement of the pubic bone, sacral invasions above the level of S2/S3 and lateral pelvic wall involvement. However, current data suggests that previously unresectable cases may now be feasible with novel techniques, surgical approaches and reconstructive surgery. The publications to date have only reported small patient pools with the research conducted by highly specialised units. Moreover, the short and long-term oncological outcomes are currently under review. Therefore although surgical options for LRRC have expanded significantly, one should balance the treatment choices available against the morbidity associated with the procedure and select the right patient for it.

[The possibilities of treatment of recurrent colorectal cancer with sacral invasion]

AIM

To describe current methods of surgical treatment of rare form of recurrent rectal cancer with sacral invasion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article presents the methodology for the treatment of patients with recurrent colorectal cancer and sacral invasion using preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by high-tech surgery of recurrent tumor removal with sacral resection at various levels (including high intersection at S1 level).

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that chemoradiotherapy is indicated in patients with recurrent colorectal cancer if it was not made at the first stage of treatment. Additional radiotherapy up to optimum overall focal dose prior to surgery is advisable in those patients who previously underwent radiotherapy with partial dose. This type of operations has high risk of complications and requires a personalized approach to the selection of patients. However, R0-resection is associated with favorable long-term prognosis, significantly increased survival and overall quality of life. Combined surgery for recurrent tumors with sacral invasion should be performed by multidisciplinary surgical team in specialized centers using current possibilities of anesthesiology and intensive care.

Systematic Review of Pelvic Exenteration With En Bloc Sacrectomy for Recurrent Rectal Adenocarcinoma: R0 Resection Predicts Disease-free Survival

BACKGROUND

The management of recurrent rectal cancer is challenging. At the present time, pelvic exenteration with en bloc sacrectomy offers the only hope of a lasting cure.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome measures and complication rates following sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer.

DATA SOURCES

A search was conducted on Pub Med for English language articles relevant to sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer with no time limitations.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reported sacrectomy with survival data for recurrent rectal adenocarcinoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Disease-free survival following sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer was the main outcome measured.

RESULTS

A total of 220 patients with recurrent rectal cancer were included from 7 studies, of which 160 were men and 60 were women. Overall median operative time was 717 (570-992) minutes and blood loss was 3.7 (1.7-6.2) L. An R0 (>1-mm resection margin) resection was achieved in 78% of patients. Disease-free survival associated with R0 resection was 55% at a median follow-up period of 33 (17-60) months; however, none of the patients with R1 (<1-mm resection margin) survived this period. Postoperative complication rates and median length of stay were found to decrease with more distal sacral transection levels. In contrast, R1 resection rates increased with more distal transection.

LIMITATION

The studies assessed by this review were retrospective case series and thus are subject to significant bias.

CONCLUSION

Sacrectomy performed for patients with recurrent rectal cancer is associated with significant postoperative morbidity. Morbidity and postoperative length of stay increase with the level of sacral transection. Nevertheless, approximately half of patients eligible for rectal excision with en bloc sacrectomy may benefit from disease-free survival for up to 33 months, with R0 resection predicting disease-free survival in the medium term.

Abdominosacral resection for locally recurring rectal cancer

AIM

To investigate feasibility and outcome of abdominal-sacral resection for treatment of locally recurrent rectal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A population of patients who underwent an abdominal-sacral resection for posterior recurrent adenocarcinoma of the rectum at the National Cancer Institute of Milano, between 2005 and 2013, is considered. Retrospectively collected data includes patient characteristics, treatment and pathology details regarding the primary and the recurrent rectal tumor surgical resection. A clinical and instrumental follow-up was performed. Surgical and oncological outcome were investigated. Furthermore an analytical review of literature was conducted in order to compare our case series with other reported experiences.

RESULTS

At the time of abdomino-sacral resection, the mean age of patients was 55 (range, 38-64). The median operating time was 380 min (range, 270-480). Sacral resection was performed at S2/S3 level in 3 patients, S3/S4 in 3 patients and S4/S5 in 4 patients. The median operating time was 380 ± 58 min. Mean intraoperative blood loss was 1750 mL (range, 200-680). The median hospital stay was 22 d. Overall morbidity was 80%, mainly type II complication according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Microscopically negative margins (R0) is obtained in all patients. Overall 5-year survival after first surgical procedure is 60%, with a median survival from the first surgery of 88 ± 56 mo. The most common site of re-recurrence was intrapelvic.

CONCLUSION

Sacral resection represents a feasible approach to posterior rectal cancer recurrence without evidence of distant spreading. An accurate staging is essential for planning the best therapy.

Locally advanced rectal cancer: management challenges

Between 5% and 10% of patients with rectal cancer present with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), and 10% of rectal cancers recur after surgery, of which half are limited to locoregional disease only (locally recurrent rectal cancer). Exenterative surgery offers the best long-term outcomes for patients with LARC and locally recurrent rectal cancer so long as a complete (R0) resection is achieved. Accurate preoperative multimodal staging is crucial in assessing the potential operability of advanced rectal tumors, and resectability may be enhanced with neoadjuvant therapies. Unfortunately, surgical options are limited when the tumor involves the lateral pelvic sidewall or high sacrum due to the technical challenges of achieving histological clearance, and must be balanced against the high morbidity associated with resection of the bony pelvis and significant lymphovascular structures. This group of patients is usually treated palliatively and subsequently survival is poor, which has led surgeons to seek innovative new solutions, as well as revisit previously discarded radical approaches. A small number of centers are pioneering new techniques for resection of beyond-total mesorectal excision tumors, including en bloc resections of the sciatic notch and composite resections of the first two sacral vertebrae. Despite limited experience, these new techniques offer the potential for radical treatment of previously inoperable tumors. This narrative review sets out the challenges facing the management of LARCs and discusses evolving management options.

Surgery for Locally Advanced T4 Rectal Cancer: Strategies and Techniques

Locally advanced T4 rectal cancer represents a complex clinical condition that requires a well thought-out treatment plan and expertise from multiple specialists. Paramount in the management of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer are accurate preoperative staging, appropriate application of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments, and, above all, the provision of high-quality, complete surgical resection in potentially curable cases. Despite the advanced nature of this disease, extended and multivisceral resections with clear margins have been shown to result in good oncological outcomes and offer patients a real chance of cure. In this article, we describe the assessment, classification, and multimodality treatment of primary locally advanced T4 rectal cancer, with a focus on surgical planning, approaches, and outcomes.

Soft-tissue reconstruction after total en bloc sacrectomy

OBJECT

Total en bloc sacrectomy is a dramatic procedure that results in extensive sacral defects. The authors present a series of patients who underwent flap reconstruction after total sacrectomy, report clinical outcomes, and provide a treatment algorithm to guide surgical care of this unique patient population.

METHODS

After institutional review board approval, data were collected for all patients who underwent total sacrectomy between 2002 and 2012 at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. Variables included demographic data, medical history, tumor characteristics, surgical details, postoperative complications, and clinical outcomes. All subtotal sacrectomies were excluded.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2012, 9 patients underwent total sacrectomy with flap reconstruction. Diagnoses included chordoma (n = 5), osteoblastoma (n = 1), sarcoma (n = 2), and metastatic colon cancer (n = 1). Six patients received gluteus maximus (GM) flaps with a prosthetic rectal sling following a single-stage, posterior sacrectomy. Four required additional paraspinous muscle (PSM) or pedicled latissimus dorsi (LD) fasciocutaneous flaps. Three patients underwent multistage sacrectomy with an anterior-posterior approach, 2 of whom received pedicled vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous (VRAM) flaps, and 1 of whom received local GM, LD, and PSM flaps. Flap complications included dehiscence (n = 4) and infection (n = 1). During the 1st year of follow-up, 2 of 9 patients (22%) were able to ambulate with an assistive device by the 1st postoperative month, and 6 of 9 (67%) were ambulatory with a walker by the 3rd postoperative month. By postoperative Month 12, 5 of 9 patients (56%)—or 5 of 5 patients not lost to follow-up (100%)—were able to able to ambulate independently.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' experience suggests that the GM and pedicled VRAM flaps are reliable options for softtissue reconstruction of total sacrectomy defects. For posterior-only operations, GM flaps with or without a prosthetic rectal sling are generally used. For multistage operations including a laparotomy, the authors consider the pedicled VRAM flap to be the gold standard for simultaneous reconstruction of the pelvic diaphragm and obliteration of dead space.

Adenovirally delivered enzyme prodrug therapy with herpes simplex virus-thymidine kinase in composite tissue free flaps shows therapeutic efficacy in rat models of glioma

INTRODUCTION

Free flap gene therapy exploits a novel therapeutic window when viral vectors can be delivered into a flap ex vivo. The authors investigated the therapeutic potential of an adenovirally-delivered thymidine kinase/ganciclovir prodrug system expressed following vector delivery into a free flap.

METHODS

The authors demonstrated direct in vitro cytotoxicity by treating a panel of malignant cell lines with the thymidine kinase/ganciclovir system and demonstrated significant cell kill proportional to the multiplicity of infection of adenoviral vector expressing thymidine kinase. Bystander cytotoxicity was demonstrated using conditioned media from producer cells (expressing adenovirally-delivered thymidine kinase and treated with ganciclovir) to demonstrate cytotoxicity in naive tumor cells. The authors investigated the effect of adenoviral vector expressing thymidine kinase/ganciclovir therapy in vivo, using models of microscopic and macroscopic residual disease in a rodent superficial inferior epigastric artery flap model.

RESULTS

The authors observed retardation of tumor volume growth in both microscopic (p = 0.0004) and macroscopic (p = 0.0005) residual disease models and prolongation of animal survival. Gene expression studies demonstrated that viral genomic material was found predominantly in flap tissues but declined over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors describe the utility of virally delivered enzyme/prodrug therapy, using a free flap as a vehicle for delivery. They discuss the merits and limitations of this approach and the unique role of therapeutic free flaps among reconstructive techniques available to the plastic surgeon.

Systematic review of health-related quality of life issues in locally recurrent rectal cancer

The standardization of surgical techniques supplemented with appropriate neoadjuvant chemoradiation has led to the decline in local recurrence rates of rectal cancer (LRRC) from 25-50% to 5-10%. The outcomes reported for surgical intervention in LRRC is encouraging, however, a number of controversies exist especially in the ultra-advanced and palliative setting. Incorporating health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in this field could supplement traditional clinical endpoints in assessing the effectiveness of surgical intervention in this cohort. This review aimed to identify the HRQOL themes that might be relevant to patients with LRRC. A systematic review was undertaken to identify all studies reporting HRQoL in LRRC. Each study was evaluated with regards to its design and statistical methodology. A meta-synthesis of qualitative and quantitative studies was undertaken to identify relevant HRQoL themes. A total of 14 studies were identified, with 501 patients, with 80% of patients undergoing surgery. HRQoL was the primary endpoint in eight studies. Eight themes were identified: physical, psychological and social impact, symptoms, financial and occupational impact, relationships with others, communication with healthcare professionals and sexual function. The impact on HRQoL is multifactorial and wide ranging, with a number of issues identified that are not included in current measures. These issues must be incorporated into the assessment of HRQoL in LRRC through the development of a validated, disease-specific tool.

Aggressive surgical treatment with bony pelvic resection for locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

In the current era of total mesorectal excision, local relapse remains a main cause of recurrence. Although standard treatment for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) has not been established, R0 resection represents the only potentially curative treatment. However, extended surgery accompanying bony pelvic resection is technically demanding and is still challenging.

METHODS

Studied were 35 patients with LRRC who underwent combined resection of bony pelvis between August 2006 and October 2013. Safety and prognostic factors for survival were analyzed. Median follow-up was 33 months.

RESULTS

Sacrectomy was performed in 32 patients and 3 patients underwent combined resection of the pubis and ischium. The dominant operative procedure was total pelvic exenteration in 30 (86%) patients. R0 resection was achieved in 27 (77%) patients. No patients died. Pelvic sepsis was the most frequent complication (40%). Recurrence developed in 20 (57%), with the lung the most frequent site (10 patients). Three-year local relapse-free survival (LRFS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 72.1% and 32.7%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, R1 resection was the only independent risk factor for local recurrence (p = 0.010), and concomitant liver metastasis and initial non sphincter-preserving surgery were independent predictors of worse DFS (p = 0.008 and p = 0.042, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Aggressive surgical treatment combined with bony resection for carefully selected patients with LRRC was safe with a high rate of R0 resection and favorable LRFS. However, DFS was not satisfactory even after R0 resection and the main cause was lung metastasis. Preventing distant recurrence might be a key to improve survival.

Extended lateral pelvic sidewall excision (ELSiE): an approach to optimize complete resection rates in locally advanced or recurrent anorectal cancer involving the pelvic sidewall

BACKGROUND

Complete pathological resection of locally advanced or recurrent rectal and anal cancer is regarded as one of the most important determinants of oncological outcome. Disease in the lateral pelvic sidewall has been considered a contraindication for pelvic exenteration surgery owing to the significant likelihood of incomplete resection.

METHODS

We describe a novel technique (ELSiE) to resect disease involving the lateral pelvic sidewall. Patient demographics, post-operative histology, length of hospital stay and complications were collected from prospectively maintained electronic patient database.

RESULTS

During 2011-2013, six patients underwent pelvic exenteration surgery with the ELSiE approach. All patients had R0 resection. Three patients required sciatic nerve excision. Four patients developed post-operative complications although no major complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with locally advanced and recurrent cancer involving the lateral pelvic sidewall may be rendered suitable for potentially curative radical resection with a modification in the approach to the lateral pelvic sidewall. Our pilot series seems to indicate that our novel technique (ELSiE) is feasible, safe and yields high rates of complete pathological resection.

Total sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer - A case report featuring technical details and potential pitfalls

INTRODUCTION

Total sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer is controversial. However, recent publications suggest encouraging outcomes with high sacral resections. We present the first case report describing technical aspects, potential pitfalls and treatment of complications associated with total sacrectomy performed as a treatment of recurrent rectal cancer.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A fifty-three year old man was previously treated at another institution with a low anterior resection (LAR) followed by chemo-radiation and left liver tri-segmentectomy for metastatic rectal cancer. Three years following the LAR, the patient developed a recurrence at the site of colorectal anastomosis, manifesting clinically as a contained perforation, forming a recto-cutaneous fistula through the sacrum. Abdomino-perineal resection (APR) and complete sacrectomy were performed using an anterior–posterior approach with posterior spinal instrumented fusion and pelvic fixation using iliac crest bone graft. Left sided vertical rectus abdominis muscle flap and right sided gracilis muscle flap were used for hardware coverage and to fill the pelvic defect. One year after the resection, the patient remains disease free and has regained the ability to move his lower limbs against gravity.

DISCUSSION

The case described in this report features some formidable challenges due to the previous surgeries for metastatic disease, and the presence of a recto-sacral cutaneous fistula. An approach with careful surgical planning including considerationof peri-operative embolization is vital for a successful outcome of the operation. A high degree of suspicion for pseudo-aneurysms formation due infection or dislodgement of metallic coils is necessary in the postoperative phase.

CONCLUSION

Total sacrectomy for the treatment of recurrent rectal cancer with acceptable short-term outcomes is possible.A detailed explanation to the patient of the possible complications and expectations including the concept of a very high chancefor recurrence is paramount prior to proceeding with such a surgery.

Prognostic factors associated with locally recurrent rectal cancer following primary surgery (Review)

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is defined as an intrapelvic recurrence following a primary rectal cancer resection, with or without distal metastasis. The treatment of LRRC remains a clinical challenge. LRRC has been regarded as an incurable disease state leading to a poor quality of life and a limited survival time. However, curative reoperations have proved beneficial for treating LRRC. A complete resection of recurrent tumors (R0 resection) allows the treatment to be curative rather than palliative, which is a milestone in medicine. In LRRC cases, the difficulty of achieving an R0 resection is associated with the post-operative prognosis and is affected by several clinical factors, including the staging of the local recurrence (LR), accompanying symptoms, patterns of tumors and combined therapy. The risk factors following primary surgery that lead to an increased rate of LR are summarized in this study, including the surgical, pathological and therapeutic factors.

Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes

BACKGROUND

The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority.

METHODS

Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus.

RESULTS

The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management.

CONCLUSION

The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.

Partial anterior sacrectomy with nerve preservation to treat locally advanced rectal cancer

AIM

Most studies that have reported outcomes after composite abdomino-sacral resection for locally advanced/recurrent rectal cancer have involved resections below the S2/3 disc space. Involvement of the sacrum above this level is uncommon and, until recently, was considered a contraindication to resection.

METHOD

We report here a surgical technique to deal with high sacral involvement with an anterior approach and maintenance of sacropelvic stability.

RESULTS

The operative findings confirmed a locally perforated rectal cancer with an associated abscess cavity and direct invasion into S2. Given the likelihood that a complete dislocation of the sacrum would cause significant neurological damage and pelvic instability without oncological benefit, we opted for a partial high anterior sacrectomy with nerve preservation. The patient made an uncomplicated recovery without neurological deficit and was able to walk with the aid of crutches from postoperative day 3.

CONCLUSION

While a high sacral transection is appropriate for some patients with locally advanced/recurrent rectal cancer, operative decisions and options should be tailored to each individual.

Surgery for recurrent rectal cancer: higher and wider?

AIM

There has been a steady increase in the number of centres that carry out resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). The aim of this review was to highlight the present management and suggest technical strategies that may improve survival and quality of life.

METHOD

The review identified relevant studies from an electronic search of MEDLINE and PubMed databases between 1980 and 2011. References in published articles were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Surgical intervention offers the best hope to control LRRC but the proportion of patients offered this remains small. Certain contraindications previously considered to be absolute should now be thought of as relative.

CONCLUSION

Awareness of the surgical options and a willingness to consider more aggressive options may result in more patients being considered for potentially curative resection.

Comparison of long-term survival outcome of operative vs nonoperative management of recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

Complete surgical resection is considered the best treatment for recurrent rectal cancer (RRC). The aim of the study was to compare survival outcomes from operative and nonoperative patients presenting with RRC.

METHOD

Patients with RRC whose management was discussed by a tertiary referral specialist multidisciplinary team between January 2007 and August 2011 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. The primary end-point was 3-year overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 127 patients with RRC, it was isolated to the pelvis in 105 and associated with distant disease at presentation in 22. From the time of primary surgery to first recurrence, 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year local recurrence rates were 22%, 72%, 85% and 96%, respectively. The number of operated patients available at 1, 2 and 3 years' follow-up was 53, 34 and 23, respectively. Of 70 patients who underwent pelvic resection for recurrence, 64% received R0, 20% received R1 and 16% received R2 resections. Corresponding 3-year overall survival rates were 69%, 56% and 20% (P=0.011). There was no significant difference in survival between R2 resection and those managed nonoperatively (hazard ratio=1.258; P=0.579). Those undergoing surgery for pelvic recurrence affecting one or more compartments had a worse prognosis than those with single-compartment involvement (hazard ratio=2.640; P=0.027). Three-year local recurrence-free survival was 80% with R0 resection vs 60% with R1 resection.

CONCLUSION

Most recurrences occur within 5 years of primary surgery, although some occur up to 10 years later. R0 resection is the treatment of choice. There was no survival benefit of R2 resection over nonresected recurrences.

Elevated circulating CD19+ lymphocytes predict survival advantage in patients with gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Circulating lymphocyte subsets reflect the immunological status and might therefore be a prognostic indicator in cancer patients. Our aim was to evaluate the clinical significance of circulating lymphocyte subset in gastric cancer (GC) cases.

METHODS

A retrospective study on a prevalent cohort of 846 GC patients hospitalized at Hospital from Aug 2006 to Jul 2010 was conducted. We calculated the patient's disease free survival (DFS) after first hospital admission, and hazard ratios (HR) from the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Our findings indicated a significantly decreased percentage of CD3+, and CD8+ cells, a significantly increased proportion of CD4+, CD19+, CD44+, CD25+, NK cells, and an increased CD4+/CD8+ ratio in GC patients as compared with healthy controls (all P<0.05). Alteration of lymphocyte subsets was positively correlated with sex, age, smoking, tumor stage and distant metastasis of GC patients (all P<0.05). Follow-up analysis indicated significantly higher DFS for patients with high circulating CD19+ lymphocytes compared to those with low CD19+ lymphocytes (P=0.037), with CD19+ showing an important cutoff of 7.91± 2.98%.

CONCLUSION

Circulating lymphocyte subsets in GC patients are significantly changed, and elevated CD19+ cells may predict a favorable survival.

Pelvic exenteration: surgical approaches

Although the incidence of local recurrence after curative resection of rectal cancer has decreased due to the understanding of the anatomy of pelvic structures and the adoption of total mesorectal excision, local recurrence in the pelvis still remains a significant and troublesome complication. While surgery for recurrent rectal cancer may offer a chance for a cure, conservative management, including radiation and chemotherapy, remain widely accepted courses of treatment. Recent improvement in imaging modalities, perioperative care, and surgical techniques, including bone resection and wound coverage, have allowed for reductions in operative mortality, though postoperative morbidity still remains high. In this review, the techniques, including surgical approaches, employed for management of locally recurrent rectal cancer are highlighted.

Meta-analysis of survival based on resection margin status following surgery for recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

To determine the presence and duration of survival advantages was investigated for resection margin status (R0, R1 or R2) following surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature was performed for studies comparing resection margin status for LRRC. Weighted mean differences and meta-analysis of hazard ratios were used as a measure of median and overall cumulative survival.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included, providing outcome for 1460 patients undergoing surgery for LRRC. 57% underwent an R0 resection, 25% an R1 resection and 11% an R2 resection. The most commonly performed operations were abdominoperineal excision (35%), exenteration (23%) and anterior resection (21%). The range of median survival per resection margin was R0 28-92 months, R1 12-50 months, R2 6-17 months. Patients undergoing an R0 resection survived on average for 37.6 (95% confidence interval: 23.5-51.7) months longer than those undergoing R1 resection and 53.0 (31.2-74.8) months longer than those undergoing R2 resection. This correlated to a hazard ratio of 2.03 (1.73-2.38) for R0 vs R1 and 3.41 (2.21-5.25) for R0 vs R2. Patients undergoing R1 resection survived on average 13.3 (7.23-19.4) months longer than those undergoing R2 resection [hazard ratio of 1.68 (1.33-2.12)].

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing R0 resection have the greatest survival advantage following surgery for recurrent rectal cancer. There is a survival advantage for R1 over R2 resection, but there may be no benefit of R2 resection over palliative treatment.

Retrorectal tumours: optimization of surgical approach and outcome

AIM

The aim was to identify the radiological features of retrorectal tumours that influence management and to highlight technical points that facilitate safe surgical excision.

METHOD

A consecutive series of patients was identified from a prospective database. All cases were discussed within a multidisciplinary team. Medical records, radiology and pathology reports were also checked retrospectively.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients [37 women; median age 51 (20-88) years] underwent excision of retrorectal tumours between 2002 and 2010 under the care of one surgeon. Seventeen (37.5%) had a malignant tumour. The commonest symptom was pain or discomfort. Features identified after MRI that suggested malignancy included heterogenous signal intensity (15/17 malignant lesions vs 5/39 benign lesions), an irregular infiltrative margin (14/17 malignant lesions vs 4/39 benign lesions) and enhancement (14/17 malignant lesions vs 2/39 benign lesions) (all P < 0.05). An abdominal approach was used in 27 (48%) patients, a perineal/trans-sacral approach in 20 (36%) and a composite abdomino-sacral approach in nine (16%). The perineal approach was used if the tumours were below the middle of S3 without sacral, pelvic side-wall or visceral involvement. The three most common types of tumour were schwannoma (n = 11), tail gut cyst (n = 13) and chordoma (n = 9). Over a median follow-up period of 46 (6-90) months there were two local recurrences among the malignant tumours (both resected) and two deaths (both sarcomas).

CONCLUSION

MR imaging, avoidance of routine preoperative biopsy and careful clinical evaluation result in a good outcome after surgical excision of retrorectal tumours.

Outcome of abdominosacral resection for locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer

Background

The aim was to assess the indications for and outcomes of abdominosacral resection for patients with locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing abdominosacral resection between January 2006 and December 2011 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. The main endpoints were 3-year local recurrence-free (LRFS) and disease-free (DFS) survival.

Results

Thirty patients underwent abdominosacral resection, 22 for recurrent rectal cancer and eight for locally advanced primary cancer. Sacrectomy was performed at S1/2 in five, S3 in 11 and S4/5 in 14 patients. R0 resection was achieved in 23 patients; all seven positive margins (R1) were in patients with recurrent disease. There were no deaths in hospital or within 30 days. S1/2 sacrectomy was associated with the highest rate of major complications (60 per cent versus 27 and 29 per cent for S3 and S4/5 respectively) and long-term complications (60, 36 and 14 per cent). Overall 3-year LRFS was 66 per cent and 3-year DFS was 55 per cent. Both were significantly better in patients with negative compared with positive margins (LRFS: 87 versus 0 per cent, P &lt; 0·001; DFS: 71 versus 0 per cent, P = 0·033).

Conclusion

Abdominosacral resection was associated with long-term survival in carefully selected patients with advanced rectal cancer. Postoperative complications were common and often multiple. Sacrectomy for locally advanced primary rectal cancer was associated with a low margin-positive rate and should be considered as an acceptable treatment. Margin-positive resection was associated with poor survival outcomes and should be avoided.