Surgeon influenced variables in resectional rectal cancer surgery

Shared Decision-Making, Sphincter Preservation, and Rectal Cancer Treatment: Identifying and Executing What Matters Most to Patients

Rectal cancer treatment often encompasses multiple steps and options, with benefits and risks that vary based on the individual. Additionally, patients facing rectal cancer often have preferences regarding overall quality of life, which includes bowel function, sphincter preservation, and ostomies. This article reviews these data in the context of shared decision-making approaches in an effort to better inform patients deliberating treatment options for rectal cancer.

Post-Chemoradiation Metastatic, Persistent and Resistant Nodes in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Metrics and Their Impact on Long-Term Outcome

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term oncological progression pattern of locally advanced rectal cancer patients with post-neoadjuvant nodal metastatic disease (ypN+) and correlate potential prognostic features associated with proven radiochemoresistant nodal biology.

METHODS

Individual patient data (100 variables) from a 20-year consecutive single-institution multidisciplinary experience (1995-2015), delivering multimodal therapy to rectal cancer patient candidates for radical treatment, including a neoadjuvant component and surgical resection with or without intraoperative radiotherapy followed by optional adjuvant chemotherapy. The ypN+ disease data was registered in the context of initial staging categories post-neoadjuvant T status (ypT).

RESULTS

Data on 487 patients showed histologically confirmed diagnoses of metastatic nodal disease in 108 specimens (ypN+, 22.1). There was a significant age difference (p = 0.009) between the ypN groups: age ≥ 65 was 57.6% in pN0 and 43.5% in ypN+ and patients aged < 65 constituted 42.4% of pN0 and 56.5% of ypN+. According to the clinical stage there were statistically significant differences (p = 0.001) in the categories' distribution: ypN+ patients 10.8% were stage II and 89.2% were stage III. Univariant analysis on outcome variables showed statistically significant differences in overall survival at 7 years (63.8% vs. 55.7%, p = 0.016) disease-free survival (DFS) (78% vs. 53.8%, p = 0.000) and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (93.6% vs. 84%, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of nodal metastases (ypN+) after neoadjuvant therapy containing long-course pelvic irradiation severely impacts the long-term outcome for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and correlates with multiple clinical and therapeutic variable metrics. Implementation of local and systemic therapies should be adapted and intensified in relation to the finding of ypN+ category in surgical specimens.

Report from the 24th Annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference on Colorectal Cancer, Richmond, British Columbia, 28-29, October 2022

The 24th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference (WCGCCC) was held in Richmond, British Columbia, on 28-29 October 2022. The WCGCCC is an interactive multidisciplinary conference attended by healthcare professionals from across Western Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) who are involved in the care of patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists; pathologists; radiologists; and allied health care professionals such as dieticians, nurses and a genetic counsellor participated in presentation and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management of colorectal cancer.

Learning Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision

A dynamic evolution is occurring in transanal surgery. Transanal techniques began with intraluminal surgical removal of rectal masses and have progressed to transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer. TaTME was first performed in 2009 by Sylla, Rattner, Delgado, and Lacy. This article documents the training pathway followed by pioneers in the taTME technique as well as consensus reports outlining the process of learning the taTME technique. A literature search was performed for taTME training, learning, and technique. Key elements in learning the taTME technique include appropriate indications, cadaver training, and outcomes reporting such as participating in a taTME registry. Consensus reports also agree on the following facets associated with improved outcomes: (1) appropriate case selection of mid and low rectal cancers, (2) prerequisite completion of an accredited training program in laparoscopic colorectal surgery and prior experience in transanal endoscopic surgery, (3) a two-team taTME approach from above and below is ideal, and (4) higher rectal cancer volume surgical practice. The unifying international recommendation for surgeons interested in learning the taTME technique conveys the following message: taTME is an advanced and complex technique that requires dedicated training and experience in TME surgery.

Impact of Preoperative Care for Rectal Adenocarcinoma on Pathologic Specimen Quality and Postoperative Morbidity: A NSQIP Analysis

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive and multidisciplinary care are critical in rectal cancer treatment. We sought to determine if completeness of preoperative care was associated with pathologic specimen quality and postoperative morbidity.

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma patients who underwent elective low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection were identified from the 2016-2017 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) database. The 3 preoperative NSQIP variables (colonoscopy, stoma marking, and neoadjuvant chemoradiation) were used to divide patients into 2 cohorts: complete vs incomplete preoperative care. The primary outcome was a composite higher pathologic specimen quality score (>12 lymph nodes, negative circumferential, and negative distal margins). The secondary outcome was 30-day morbidity. Preoperative characteristics were compared with ANOVAs and chi-square tests. Outcomes measures were evaluated with logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 1,125 patients: 591 (52.5%) complete and 534 (47.5%) incomplete. The complete group was younger, had more women, lower-third rectal tumors, clinical stage III disease, and neoadjuvant treatment. The complete group had higher odds of better pathologic specimen quality after adjusting for age, sex, tumor location, stage, and neoadjuvant therapy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.75, p = 0.001). The complete group had decreased rates of transfusions (odds ratio [OR] 0.47, p < 0.001), postoperative ileus (OR 0.67, p = 0.01), sepsis (OR 0.32, p = 0.01), and readmissions (OR 0.60, p = 0.003). Other complications did not statistically differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Complete preoperative care in rectal adenocarcinoma is associated with higher pathologic specimen quality and reduced postoperative morbidity. This highlights the importance of adherence to guideline-directed care.

Prognostic factors and patterns of failure after surgery for T4 rectal cancer in the beyond total mesorectal excision era

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in the rates of total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer surgery, decreased local recurrence rates and increased 5-year survival, there still exists large variation in the quality of treatment received. Up to 30 per cent of rectal cancers are locally advanced at presentation and approximately 5-10 per cent still breach the mesorectal plane and invade adjacent structures despite neoadjuvant therapy. With the evolution of extended resections for rectal cancers beyond the TME plane, proponents advocate that these resections should be performed only in specialist centres. The aim was to assess the prognostic factors and patterns of failure after beyond TME surgery for T4 rectal cancers.

METHODS

Data were collected from prospective databases at three high-volume institutions specializing in beyond TME surgery for T4 rectal cancers between 1990 and 2013. The primary outcome measures were overall survival, local recurrence and patterns of first failure.

RESULTS

Three hundred and sixty patients were identified. The negative resection margin (R0) rate was 82·8 per cent (298 patients) and the local recurrence rate was 12·5 per cent (45 patients). The type of surgical procedure (Hartmann's: hazard ratio (HR) 4·49, 95 per cent c.i. 1·99 to 10·14; P = 0·002) and lymphovascular invasion (HR 2·02, 1·08 to 3·77; P = 0·032) were independent predictors of local recurrence. The 5-year overall survival rate for all patients was 61 (95 per cent c.i. 55 to 67) per cent. The 5-year cumulative incidence of first failure was 8 per cent for local recurrence, 6 per cent for local and distant disease, and 18 per cent for distant disease.

CONCLUSION

This study has demonstrated that a coordinated approach in specialist centres for beyond TME surgery can offer good oncological and long-term survival in patients with T4 rectal cancers.

Benchmarking rectal cancer care: institutional compliance with a longitudinal checklist

BACKGROUND

In 2012, the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons published the Rectal Cancer Surgery Checklist, a consensus document listing 25 essential elements of care for all patients undergoing radical surgery for rectal cancer. The authors herein examine checklist adherence in a mature, multisurgeon specialty academic practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective medical record review of patients undergoing elective radical resection for rectal adenocarcinoma over a 23-mo period was conducted. Checklists were completed post hoc for each patient, and these results were tabulated to determine levels of compliance. Subgroup analyses by compliance and experience levels of the treating surgeon were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients underwent resection, demonstrating a median completion rate of 84% per patient. Poor compliance was noted consistently in documenting baseline sexual function (0%), multidisciplinary discussion of treatment plans (16.8%), pelvic nerve identification (8.7%) and leak testing (52.9%), and radial margin status reporting (57.5%). Junior surgeons achieved higher rates of compliance and were more likely to restage after neoadjuvant therapy (67.9% versus 29.4%, P < 0.001), discuss patients at tumor board (31.3% versus 13.2%, P = 0.014), and document leak testing (86.7% versus 47.2%, P = 0.005) compared with senior surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Checklist compliance within a high-volume, specialty academic practice remains varied. Only surgeon experience level was significantly associated with high checklist compliance. Junior surgeons achieved greater compliance with certain items, particularly those that reinforce decision-making. Further efforts to standardize rectal cancer care should focus on checklist implementation, targeted surgeon outreach, and assessment of checklist compliance correlation to clinical outcomes.

High Rate of Positive Circumferential Resection Margins Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Call to Action

OBJECTIVES

To identify predictors of positive circumferential resection margin following rectal cancer resection in the United States.

BACKGROUND

Positive circumferential resection margin is associated with a high rate of local recurrence and poor morbidity and mortality for rectal cancer patients. Prior study has shown poor compliance with national rectal cancer guidelines, but whether this finding is reflected in patient outcomes has yet to be shown.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for stage I-III rectal cancer were identified from the 2010-2011 National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was a positive circumferential resection margin. The relationship between patient, hospital, tumor, and treatment-related characteristics was analyzed using bivariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A positive circumferential resection margin was noted in 2859 (17.2%) of the 16,619 patients included. Facility location, clinical T and N stage, histologic type, tumor size, tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, type of operation, and operative approach were significant predictors of positive circumferential resection margin on multivariable analysis. Total proctectomy had nearly a 30% increased risk of positive margin compared with partial proctectomy (OR 1.293, 95%CI 1.185-1.411) and a laparoscopic approach had nearly 22% less risk of a positive circumferential resection margin compared with an open approach (OR 0.882, 95%CI 0.790-0.985).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite advances in surgical technique and multimodality therapy, rates of positive circumferential resection margin remain high in the United States. Several tumor and treatment characteristics were identified as independent risk factors, and advances in rectal cancer care are necessary to approach the outcomes seen in other countries.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a training pathway

BACKGROUND

With increasing interest in natural orifice surgery, there has been a dramatic evolution of transanal and endoluminal surgical techniques. These techniques began with transanal endoluminal surgical removal of rectal masses and have progressed to transanal radical proctectomy for rectal cancer. The first transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) was performed in 2009 by Sylla, Rattner, Delgado, and Lacy. The improved visibility and working space associated with the taTME technique is intriguing. This video manuscript outlines the training pathway followed by pioneers in the taTME technique, the process of implementation into clinical practice, and initial case report.

METHODS

A double board-certified colorectal surgeon with expertise in rectal cancer, minimally invasive total mesorectal excision, transanal endoscopic surgery (TES), and intersphincteric dissection, underwent taTME training in male cadaver models. Institutional review board (IRB) approval for a phase I clinical trial was achieved. The entire operative team including surgeons, nurses, and operative staff underwent taTME cadaver training the day prior to the first clinical case. The case was proctored by an expert in taTME.

RESULTS

A 66-year-old male with uT3N1M0 rectal cancer located in the posterior distal rectum, underwent taTME with laparoscopic abdominal assistance, hand sewn coloanal anastomosis, and diverting loop ileostomy. The majority of the TME was performed transanally with laparoscopic assistance for exposure, splenic flexure mobilization, and high ligation of the vascular pedicles. Operative time was 359 min. There were no intraoperative complications. Pathology revealed a ypT2N1 moderately differentiated invasive adenocarcinoma, grade I TME, 1 cm circumferential radial margin, and 2/13 positive lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of taTME into practice can be achieved by surgeons with expertise in minimally invasive TME, TES, pre-clinical taTME training in cadavers, case observation, proctoring, and ongoing mentorship. IRB peer review process and participation in a clinical registry are additional measures that should be employed.

Utilizing the multidisciplinary team for planning and monitoring care and quality improvement

Multidisciplinary team management of patients with rectal cancer requires a dedicated group of surgeons, medical and radiation oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, and mid-level providers who meet to discuss every patient with rectal cancer. The data from that meeting is collected prospectively, recommendations made for case, follow-up obtained, and quality issues monitored. Improved case is the result.

Multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer: the OSTRICH

BACKGROUND

Disparity exists in outcomes for rectal cancer patients in the US. Similar problems in several European countries have been addressed by the creation of national networks of rectal cancer centers of excellence (CoEs) that follow evidence-based care pathways and specified protocols of care and process and are certified by regular external validation.

AIM

This paper reviews the current status of rectal cancer care in the U.S. and examines the evidence for multidisciplinary rectal cancer management. A U.S. rectal cancer CoE system based on the existing U.K. model is proposed.

METHODS

A literature search was performed for publications related to US rectal cancer outcomes, multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer, and European rectal cancer programs.

RESULTS

U.S. rectal cancer outcomes are highly variable. The majority of US rectal cancer patients are treated by generalists in low-volume hospitals. Current evidence supports five main principles of rectal cancer care that have been incorporated into European rectal cancer CoE programs. These programs have dramatically improved rectal cancer outcomes in Scandanavian countries and the U.K.

CONCLUSIONS

A similar CoE program should be established in the U.S. to improve the outcomes of rectal cancer patients.

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS): cause and effect and reconstructive considerations

Between 25 and 80% of patients undergoing a low or very low anterior resection will suffer postoperatively, from a constellation of symptoms including fecal urgency, frequent bowel movements, bowel fragmentation and incontinence, collectively referred to as the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). The etiology of LARS is multifactorial with the potential of sphincter injury during anastomosis construction, alterations in anorectal physiology, the development of a pudendal neuropathy, and a lumbar plexopathy with exacerbation of symptoms if there is associated anastomotic sepsis or the use of adjuvant and neoadjuavnt therapies. The symptoms of LARS may be obviated in part by the construction of a neorectal reservoir which may take the form of a colonic J-pouch, a transverse coloplasty, or a side-to-end anastomosis. This review outlines the factors contributing to LARS symptomatology along with the short- and medium-term functional results of comparative trials with the different types of neorectal reconstructions.

Functional outcome following restorative rectal cancer surgery

The trend towards preoperative adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in selected patients with rectal cancer has led to increases in sphincter preservation with a limited understanding of the factors governing unsatisfactory functional outcomes. Data would suggest the need for a more selective use of standard radiotherapeutic fields in low- to intermediate-risk cases where there appears to be limited survival or locoregional recurrence benefit and where there is under-reported toxicity. This article discusses the complex factors which impact on functional outcome following open rectal cancer surgery particularly when it is accompanied by adjuvant therapy.

Long-term results of transanal excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for T2 and T3 adenocarcinomas of the rectum

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, selected early distal rectal cancers have been considered for treatment by transanal excision (TAE) with acceptable oncologic results. With the frequent use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCR) for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer, there is growing interest in the application of TAE for such lesions. We report our experience of TAE for T2 and T3 rectal cancers following NCR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between July 1994 and August 2006, 44 patients were identified as having undergone full-thickness TAE of pretreatment ultrasound-staged T2 and T3 rectal cancers that were treated with NCR. Fifteen patients were deemed medically unfit for radical resection, and 29 would have required abdominoperineal resection but were opposed to colostomy.

RESULTS

Our patient population consisted of 26 men and 18 women, with a median age of 69 (range, 43-89) and a median follow up of 64 months (6-153). Thirty-one patients had a clinical complete response (cCR) to NCR of which 19 (61%) had a pathologic CR (pCR). Seven (16%) of 44 patients sustained disease recurrence of which two were local only, two local and systemic, and three systemic only. Only four (9%) patients had died of disease at current follow up. Overall 5-year survival rates for T2/T3N0 and T2/T3N1 patients were 84% and 81%, respectively. Five patients underwent radical resection immediately following TAE for either positive margins or residual cancer. There was minimal morbidity with no perioperative mortality associated with TAE.

CONCLUSIONS

TAE of T2 and T3 rectal cancers following NCR is a safe alternative to radical resection in a highly select group of patients for which recurrence and survival rates comparable to radical resection can be achieved. This study supports ongoing efforts to assess this approach in prospective, multi-center trials.

The diagnosis and management of rectal cancer: expert discussion and recommendations derived from the 9th World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2007

Knowledge of the biology and management of rectal cancer continues to improve. A multidisciplinary approach to a patient with rectal cancer by an experienced expert team is mandatory, to assure optimal diagnosis and staging, surgery, selection of the appropriate neo-adjuvant and adjuvant strategy and chemotherapeutic management. Moreover, optimal symptom management also requires a dedicated team of health care professionals. The introduction of total mesorectal excision has been associated with a decrease in the rate of local failure after surgery. High quality surgery and the achievement of pathological measures of quality are a prerequisite to adequate locoregional control. There are now randomized data in favour of chemoradiotherapy or short course radiotherapy in the preoperative setting. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is more beneficial and has less toxicity for patients with resectable rectal cancer than postoperative chemoradiotherapy. Furthermore chemoradiotherapy leads also to downsizing of locally advanced rectal cancer. New strategies that decrease the likelihood of distant metastases after initial treatment need be developed with high priority. Those involved in the care for patients with rectal cancer should be encouraged to participate in well-designed clinical trials, to increase the evidence-based knowledge and to make further progress. Health care workers involved in the care of rectal cancer patients should be encouraged to adopt quality control processes leading to increased expertise.

Multidisciplinary management of patients with advanced rectal cancer

The chance of lymph node involvement in T(3) and T(4) rectal cancers is 20% to 60%, a risk sufficiently high that most clinicians favor mesorectal excision rather than less aggressive approaches. Patients who have a complete clinical response of the primary lesions to neoadjuvant therapy may represent a special case. Total mesorectal excision can be accomplished without sacrifice of the anal sphincters, and continence can be preserved. Evolving understanding of patterns of tumor spread and mechanisms of anal continence have resulted in increased use of continence-preserving procedures. Removal of the anal sphincters seems to be advantageous only if the sphincters are directly involved. A few small series suggest that a segmental sphincter resection could result in good local control and continence preservation, even if the sphincters are involved. Areas of controversy currently include the role of neoadjuvant therapy for high rectal lesions, the role of lateral lymph node dissection, and methods of improving anal continence after rectal resection.

Safe introduction of new procedures and emerging technologies in surgery: education, credentialing, and privileging

Ongoing horizon scanning is needed to identify new procedures and emerging technologies that should be evaluated for introduction into surgical practice. Following evidence-based evaluation, if a new modality is found ready for adoption in practice, surgeons need education in the safe and effective use of the new modality. The educational experience should include structured teaching and learning, verification of new knowledge and skills, preceptoring or proctoring, and monitoring of outcomes. Credentialing and privileging to perform a new procedure or use an emerging technology should be based on evaluation of knowledge and skills and outcomes of surgical care, and not merely on the numbers of procedures performed. Education of the surgical team is also essential. The entire process involving education, verification of knowledge and skills, credentialing, and privileging must be transparent. Patients need to play a central role in making informed decisions regarding their care that involves use of a new procedure or an emerging technology, and they should participate actively in their perioperative care.

Understanding variation in the management of rectal cancer: the potential of a surgeon-initiated database

BACKGROUND

Administrative databases oversimplify the relationship of factors such as volume or training on surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A prospective statewide surgeon-initiated database was queried to obtain incident cases of rectal cancer in Vermont from April 1999 to June 2001. Demographics, procedure performed, method of detection, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, blood transfusions, length of stay, complications, stage, and use of adjuvant therapy were recorded by the operating surgeon. A post hoc analysis was performed on patients operated on for rectal cancer to define the specific impact of specialty training on care patterns.

RESULTS

There was a marked difference in the distribution of surgical procedures, with colorectal surgeons using local excision and coloanal anastomosis in addition to anterior and abdominoperineal resection. Although the overall use of adjuvant therapy was similar, patients in the colorectal group were more likely to receive preoperative then postoperative radiation therapy (91% vs 17%, P <.0001) and more likely to receive radiation therapy when stage appropriate (98% vs 67%, P <.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal specialty training in this population was a surrogate for a wider array of surgical options and preoperative radiation. Failure to use radiation when stage-appropriate was related to patient comorbidities and/or refusal and not related to failure of the surgeon to offer adjuvant therapy. Prospective, surgeon-initiated databases provide an excellent opportunity to identify and understand practice variability.

Laparoscopic anterior resection and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective nonrandomized study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to present our experience of laparoscopic total mesorectal resection, including ultralow resection and coloanal anastomosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 1993 and 2005, patients fit for general anesthesia, with resectable cancers, and with lower edge of tumor beyond 5 cm of the anal verge were subjected to laparoscopic anterior resection with sphincter preservation. Double stapling technique is used to establish bowel continuity.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients, 88 males and 82 females, were subjected to successful laparoscopic anterior resection, which included high anterior resection (n=90), low anterior resection (n=52), ultralow anterior resection (n=20), and coloanal anastomosis (n=8). The average age of patients was 58.4 years (12-90 years). Mean operating time was 130 min and mean hospital stay was 7 days. The morbidity was 13.5% with nil mortality. With an average follow-up of 49 months (range 9 years to 3 months), 9 patients developed local recurrence and 45 patients developed distant metastasis.

CONCLUSION

In selected cases, laparoscopic anterior resection is possible for all levels of rectal tumors, allowing sphincter preservation and maintaining oncological safety.

Factors influencing change of preoperative treatment intent in a gastrointestinal cancer practice

BACKGROUND

Postoperative assessment of indications for cancer directed surgical procedures frequently differs from preoperative plans.

METHODS

Specifically defined preoperative indications and postoperative results were followed prospectively over 48 months in a single surgeon academic practice, and relationships to postoperative outcomes evaluated.

RESULTS

Operations were performed on 406 patients with a median age of 61 (range: 18-90). Major operations (n = 303, 75%) involved 270 abdominal resections including pancreatectomies (37%), liver resections (23%), gastrectomies (19%), and others (21%). Preoperative curative (70%), diagnostic (38%), palliative (12%), access (9%), and non-cancer related therapy (21%) goals were in part combined in 176 patients (43%). Postoperative assessment differed from preoperative goals in 118 patients (29%). Predominant reasons were proof of benign disease (n = 35), incomplete resection (R1 or R2, n = 23), unresectability by laparoscopy (n = 21) or laparotomy (n = 21), or others (n = 18). Potential preoperative cure or palliation goals were not achieved in 37% or 15% of cases, respectively. Circumstances of changed treatment intent were specific for disease site.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative therapeutic intent frequently differs from postoperative assessments in gastrointestinal cancer, based on shortcomings in diagnosis or therapy. Formulations of precise operative indications are recommended to optimize individual outcomes and avoid unnecessary or ineffective procedures.

Clinicopathologic and prognostic significance of matrix metalloproteinases in rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic role of matrix metalloproteinases in rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue sections of 94 rectal carcinomas were used for the immunohistochemical analysis of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP)-2, MMP-7, MT1-MMP, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases (TIMP)-2. Inclusion criteria were sporadic rectal adenocarcinoma resected curatively (including total mesorectal excision), adjuvant radiochemotherapy in UICC stages II and III, and complete intra-institutional follow-up. Results of immunohistochemistry were correlated with clinical and histopathologic data from the prospective rectal cancer registry and prognosis. End points of the prognostic analysis were tumor progression caused by local and/or distant recurrence and 5-year survival (disease-free and overall). To assess prognostic significance, statistics included univariate and multivariate analysis (p<0.05 statistically significant).

RESULTS

Of the 94 rectal carcinomas, 35% (33/94) showed an epithelial MMP-2 expression, 77% (72/94) were MMP-2 positive in the stroma. Fifty-four percent (51/94) were MMP-7 positive, and 47% (46/94) were positive for both MT1-MMP and TIMP-2. The stromal MMP-2 staining pattern was correlated with the depth of invasion (pT status, p=0.006) with MMP-7 (p=0.016) and TIMP-2 expression (p=0.036). Positive expression of MMP-2 in tumor epithelium was correlated with MMP-7 (p=0.027), MT1-MMP (p=0.036), and TIMP-2 expression (p<0.0001). A positive staining pattern of MMP-7 was significantly correlated with depth of invasion and TIMP-2 (p<0.01). The positive staining pattern of MT1-MMP was correlated with epithelial MMP-2 (p=0.036), MMP-7 (p=0.004), and TIMP-2 expression (p=0.002). TIMP-2 immunoreactivity correlated with depth of invasion (p=0.013), epithelial MMP-2 (p<0.001), stromal MMP-2 (p=0.036), MMP-7 (p<0.001), and MT1-MMP (p=0.002). Neither pattern correlated with age, gender, tumor stage (UICC), grading, preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, or nodal status (p>0.05). Within a mean follow-up of 46 months, tumor progression, caused by either local recurrence or distant metastasis, occurred in 14 patients (15.4%). There was no significant association between the MMP expression and the incidence of local and/or distant recurrence. In terms of survival, preoperative CEA level (disease-free 5-year survival 46% with increased CEA vs 70% with normal CEA, p=0.01; overall 5-year survival 43 vs 74%, p<0.01) and UICC stage were the only factors to be significantly related to 5-year survival by univariate analysis, whereas the metalloproteinases failed to show a significant association. In multivariate analysis, CEA and UICC stage were not identified as independent factors predictive of survival.

CONCLUSION

MMP-2, MMP-7, MT1-MMP, and TIMP-2 do not appear to be significant predictors of prognosis in a homogenous collective of curatively resected rectal adenocarcinomas.

Safe Introduction of New Procedures and Emerging Technologies in Surgery: Education, Credentialing, and Privileging

Ongoing horizon scanning is needed to identify new procedures and emerging technologies that should be evaluated for introduction into surgical practice. Following evidence-based evaluation, if a new modality is found ready for adoption in practice, surgeons need education in the safe and effective use of the new modality. The educational experience should include structured teaching and learning, verification of new knowledge and skills, preceptoring or proctoring, and monitoring of outcomes. Credentialing and privileging to perform a new procedure or use an emerging technology should be based on evaluation of knowledge and skills and outcomes of surgical care, and not merely on the numbers of procedures performed. Education of the entire surgical team is also essential. The entire process involving education, verification of knowledge and skills, credentialing, and privileging must be transparent. Patients need to play a central role in making informed decisions regarding their care that involves use of a new procedure or an emerging technology, and they should participate actively in their perioperative care.

Rectal cancer: from outcomes of care to process of care

This paper represents a current opinion on the impact surgeons may have on the variability of the quality of care of rectal cancer surgery. No systematic review of the evidence available in the literature is provided. The objective is to present a concise insight on selected outcomes of care studies, to review the limitations of such studies and to discuss the value of process of care studies. Outcomes of care studies measure what happens to patients, and process of care studies measure what is done to patients. Three variables are reviewed: training, volume and individual skill. It is concluded that the quality of the selected outcomes of care studies is not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions on whether surgeons are a variable. Further efforts should prompt process of care studies on rectal cancer surgery. This implies that outcomes should be measured, processes of care modified and outcomes measured again. This cycle should be continuously repeated in order to achieve the best quality of care.

Surgeon and hospital volume and the management of colorectal cancer patients in Australia

BACKGROUND

The evidence for a relationship between patient outcomes and clinician and hospital volume is increasing. The National Colorectal Cancer Care Survey was undertaken to determine the management patterns in Australia for individuals newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer in a 3 month period in the year 2000.

METHODS

All new cases of colorectal cancer registered at each Australian State Cancer Registry were entered into the survey. This generated a questionnaire that was sent to the treating surgeon. Chi-squared tests and logistic regression analyses were used to determine levels of statistical significance.

RESULTS

Of 2,383 surgical questionnaires generated, 2,015 (85%) were completed. The majority (58%) of surgeons treated one or two patients with colorectal cancer over the 3 months of the survey. There was variation across surgeon cohorts for preoperative measures including the use of deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis. Patients seen by low volume surgeons were most likely to be given a permanent stoma (P < 0.0001). Patients with rectal cancer who were operated on by high volume surgeons were significantly more likely to receive a colonic pouch (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This nationwide population-based survey of the treatment of colorectal cancer patients suggests that the delivery of care by surgeons (the majority) who treat patients with rectal cancer infrequently should be evaluated.

Influence of hospital volume on local recurrence and survival in a population sample of rectal cancer patients

AIMS

To investigate the role of hospital volume and individual hospitals on long term outcomes (local recurrence and survival) of rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

One thousand thirty-eight patients with rectal cancer were diagnosed between 1996 and 1998. From these, we analysed 884 patients with a resected invasive primary rectal cancer. Median follow-up was 5.7 years. The impact of hospital volume (<10, 10-30 and >30 rectal cancer patients annually) on local recurrence and survival was examined in a Cox model. Differences between the four largest clinics in the high volume group were also investigated.

RESULTS

In the multivariate model predicting survival the following variables were significant: UICC stage, grade, age, local recurrence, and (neo-) adjuvant therapy treatment. In the multivariate model predicting local recurrence UICC stage, tumour localisation, and neoadjuvant therapy treatment were significant variables. Hospital volume was not a significant factor for survival or local recurrence. Within the high volume category one hospital showed significantly worse local recurrence rates than all other hospitals, but no survival difference could be seen between the four largest hospitals of the high volume group.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of a rectal cancer population found that hospital volume did not determine survival or local recurrence. Detailed clinical data with long term follow-up from cancer registries are vital to demonstrate the quality of routine care.

Is local excision of T2/T3 rectal cancers adequate?

In selected patients, local excision of rectal cancer may be an alternative to radical surgery such as abdominoperineal excision of the rectum or anterior resection. Local excision carries lower mortality and morbidity, without the functional disturbance or alteration in body image that can be associated with radical surgery. There are several techniques of local therapy for rectal cancer, with most experience being available in transanal excision. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery is also used but experience with this newer technique is limited. Patient selection is the most important factor in successful local excision; however, specific criteria for selecting patients have not been universally accepted. Review of the published literature is difficult because of the variation in adjuvant therapy regimes and follow-up strategies, as well as results reported in terms of local recurrence and survival rates. There is increasing evidence to suggest that local excision should be restricted to patients with T1-stage rectal cancer without high-risk factors. The place for local excision in patients with T2 or high-risk T1 tumours requires prospective, randomised multicentre trials comparing radical surgery with local excision, with or without adjuvant therapy. Local excision for T3 tumours should be restricted to the palliative setting or patients unfit for radical surgery.

Quality of treatment in routine care in a population sample of rectal cancer patients

Variations in compliance with rectal cancer treatment guidelines and the effect of quality indicators on long-term outcomes were investigated with data from the Munich Cancer Registry. Patients diagnosed between 1996 and 1998 with an invasive primary rectal tumor which was resected were included in these analyses (n=884). Median follow up was 5.7 years. Relative and overall survival was examined. Adjusted survival was predicted by UICC stage, grade, age, local recurrence, and residual tumor status. UICC III patients receiving the recommended adjuvant therapy had a significant survival advantage in the multivariate model; UICC II patients did not. Even if there were no significant survival differences there were significant treatment and outcome (regarding local recurrence) variations between hospitals. The variations between hospitals refer to different quality indicators in the individual hospitals. The outcome (regarding survival) appears good in Munich and is comparable with other population studies. Fewer local recurrences, better reporting of the TME technique, greater use of combined therapy and fewer stomas, however, may improve the quality of care in Munich. Variations in care between hospitals should therefore be monitored and controlled. Detailed and frequent feedback to the clinicians is vital to improve quality of care and is possible with cancer registries.

[Surgical therapy of rectal carcinoma]

Total mesorectal excision (TME) has gained a revolutionary impact on the surgical therapy of rectal cancer within the last 2 decades, providing superior local tumor control in comparison to conventional resection. Consequently, 85% of rectal carcinomas can be resected by sphincter-preserving surgery without compromising either oncologic radicality or continence. With the introduction of TME, local recurrence rates have been reliably decreased below 10% after curative resection. Surgical dissection along the connective tissue space between rectal and parietal pelvic fascia with complete mesorectal excision results in reliable excision of all relevant lymphatic pathways with preservation of continence and sexual function. Complete removal of a TME specimen is mandatory in carcinomas of the middle and lower third of the rectum. Both removal of the complete TME specimen and careful pathologic examination of the circumferential resection margin have decisive significance. An additional pelvic lymphadenectomy with the potential risk of increased morbidity does not improve prognosis. As a spread of tumor distally along the bowel wall rarely exceeds a few centimeters, a distal resection margin of 1-2 cm is oncologically sufficient in sphincter-saving procedures without compromising prognosis. Taken together, the convincing results of TME provide a rationale for using TME as the dissection policy of choice to resect rectal cancers in the distal two-thirds of the rectum, despite the absence of direct evidence from prospective randomized trials. The question whether laparoscopic curative resection for rectal cancer is oncologically adequate cannot be definitely answered to date, as results of randomized studies are currently missing. However, the preliminary results of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer provided by centers are promising.

Rectal cancer. Is the surgeon the variable in the outcome?

Four factors influence the outcome of rectal surgery: tumour biology, stage of lesion, type of surgery performed and the performing surgeon himself. Tumour biology and tumour stage depend on each other and are not influenced on by the surgeon, while he seems to have a great influence on the latter two factors. This influence mainly consists of the following: training, volume, individual skill and experience.

Impact of Hospital Procedure Volume on Surgical Operation and Long-Term Outcomes in High-Risk Curatively Resected Rectal Cancer: Findings From the Intergroup 0114 Study

Purpose

Prior studies have demonstrated superior outcomes after a curative surgical resection of rectal cancer at hospitals where the volume of such surgeries is high. However, because these studies often lack detailed information on tumor and treatment characteristics as well as cancer recurrence, the true nature of this relation remains uncertain.

Patients and Methods

We studied a nested cohort of 1,330 patients with stage II and stage III rectal cancer participating in a multicenter, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy trial. We analyzed differences in rates of sphincter-preserving operations, overall survival, and cancer recurrence by hospital surgical volume.

Results

We observed a significant difference in the rates of abdominoperineal resections across tertiles of hospital procedure volume (46.3% for patients resected at low-volume, 41.3% at medium-volume, and 31.8% at high-volume hospitals; P < .0001), even after adjustment for tumor distance from the anal verge. However, this higher rate of sphincter-sparing operations at high-volume centers was not accompanied by any increase in recurrence rates. Hospital surgical volume did not predict overall, disease-free, recurrence-free, or local recurrence-free survival. However, among patients who did not complete the planned adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (270 patients), those who underwent surgery at low-volume hospitals had a significant increase in cancer recurrence (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.01 to 3.72; P = .04 for the trend) and a nonsignificant trend toward increased overall mortality (P = .08) and local recurrence (P = .10). In contrast, no significant volume-outcome relation was noted among patients who did complete postoperative therapy.

Conclusion

Using prospectively recorded data, we found that hospital surgical volume had no significant effect on rectal cancer recurrence or survival when patients completed standard adjuvant therapy. Sphincter-preserving surgery was more commonly performed at high-volume centers.

Comparative evaluation of immune response after laparoscopical and open total mesorectal excisions with anal sphincter preservation in patients with rectal cancer

AIM: The study of immune response of open versus laparoscopical total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation in patients with rectal cancer has not been reported yet. The dissected retroperitoneal area that contacts directly with carbon dioxide is extensive in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation surgery. It is important to clarify whether the immune response of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation (LTME with ASP) in patients with rectal cancer is suppressed more severely than that of open surgery (OTME with ASP). This study was designed to compare the immune functions after laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation for rectal cancer.

METHODS: This study involved 45 patients undergoing laparoscopic (n = 20) and open (n = 25) total mesorectal excisions with anal sphincter preservation for rectal cancer. Serum interleukin-2 (IL-2), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor α (TNF_α) were assayed preoperatively and on days 1 and 5 postoperatively. CD3⁺ and CD56⁺ T lymphocyte count, CD3^- and CD56⁺ natural killer cell (NK) count and immunoglobulin (IgG/IgM/IgA) were assayed preoperatively and on day 5 postoperatively. The numbers of CD3⁺ and CD56⁺ T lymphocytes and CD3^- and CD56⁺ NK cells were counted using flow cytometry. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used for IL-2, IL-6 and TNF_α determination. And IgG, IgM, and IgA were assayed using immunonephelometry.

RESULTS: The demographic data of the two groups had no difference. The preoperative levels of CD3⁺ and CD56⁺ T lymphocyte count, CD3^- and CD56⁺ NK count, serum IgG, IgM, IgA, IL-2, IL-6 and TNF_α also had no significant difference in the two groups (P > 0.05). The CD3⁺ and CD56⁺ T lymphocyte counts had no obvious changes after surgery in laparoscopic (d = -0.79% ± 3.83%) and open (d = 0.42% ± 2.09%) groups. The CD3^- and CD56⁺ NK counts were decreased postoperatively in both laparoscopic (d = -7.23% ± 11.33%) and open (d = -9.21% ± 13.93%) groups. The differences of the determined values of serum IgG, IgM and IgA on the fifth day after operation subtracted those before operation were -2.56 ± 2.14 g/L, -252.35 ± 392.94 mg/L, -506.15 ± 912.24 mg/L in laparoscopic group, and -1.81 ± 2.10 g/L, -282.72 ± 356.75 mg/L, -252.20 ± 396.28 mg/L in open group, respectively. The levels of IL-2 were decreased after operation in both groups. However, the levels of IL-6 were decreased after laparoscopic surgery (d₁ = -23.14 ± 263.97 ng/L and d₅ = -40.08 ± 272.03 ng/L), and increased after open surgery (d₁ = 27.38 ± 129.14 ng/L and d₅ = 21.67 ± 234.31 ng/L). The TNF_α levels were not elevated after surgery in both groups. There were no significant differences in the numbers of CD3⁺ and CD56⁺ T lymphocytes and CD3^- and CD56⁺ NK cells, the levels of IgG, IgM, IgA, IL-2, IL-6 and TNF_α between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION: There are no differences in immune responses between the patients having laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation and those undergone open surgery for rectal cancer.

N/A

N/A

What Predicts Serious Complications in Colorectal Cancer Resection?

Virtually all volume-outcome studies use mortality as their outcome measure, yet most general surgical procedures have low in-patient death rates. We examined whether hospital surgical volume impacts other colorectal cancer resection outcomes and complications. Colorectal cancer (CRC) resections from 1996 to 2000 were identified using the California hospital discharge database. Comorbidity was graded using a modified Charlson index. Hospital CRC resection volume was calculated. Serious medical complications were defined as life-threatening cardiac or respiratory events, renal failure, or shock. Serious surgical complications were defined as vascular events, need for reoperation, or bleeding. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the impact of predictors on complications. We identified 56,621 resections. Median age was 70 to 74 years. Eighty-one per cent of patients were white. Most had localized (57%) versus distant (22%) disease. Serious medical (17.5%) and surgical (9.8%) complications were not infrequent. In multivariate analyses, greater annual CRC surgical volume predicted lower odds of serious complication, but patient characteristics (age, comorbidity, and acuity of surgery) were more important. Although patients receiving CRC resection at lower-volume hospitals have greater odds of complication than patients treated at higher-volume institutions, patient factors remain the most important determinants of complication.

Long-term results of the Lyons R90-01 randomized trial of preoperative radiotherapy with delayed surgery and its effect on sphincter-saving surgery in rectal cancer

Delayed surgery does not reduce local recurrance or improve survival

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer with preservation of anal sphincter: A report of 82 cases

AIM: To assess the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) of low rectal cancer with preservation of anal sphincter.

METHODS: From June 2001 to June 2003, 82 patients with low rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with preservation of anal sphincter. The lowest edge of tumors was below peritoneal reflection and 1.5-7 cm from the dentate line (1.5-5 cm in 48 cases, 5-7 cm in 34 cases).

RESULTS: LTME with anal sphincter preservation was performed on 82 randomized patients with low rectal cancer, and 100% sphincter preservation rate was achieved. There were 30 patients with laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) at the level of the anastomosis below peritoneal reflection and 2 cm above from the dentate line; 27 patients with laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection (LULAR) at the level of anastomoses 2 cm below from the dentate line; and 25 patients with laparoscopic coloanal anastomoses (LCAA) at the level of the anastomoses at or below the dentate line. No defunctioning ileostomy was created in any case. The mean operating time was 120 min (ranged from 110-220 min), and the mean operative blood loss was 20 mL (ranged from 5-120 mL). Bowel function was restored and diet was resumed on day 1 or 2 after operation. The mean hospital stay was 8 d (ranged from 5-14). Postoperative analgesics were used in 45 patients. After surgery, 2 patients had urinary retention, one had anastomotic leakage, and another 2 patients had local recurrence one year later. No interoperative complication was observed.

CONCLUSION: LTME with preservation of anal sphincter is a feasible, safe and minimally invasive technique with less postoperative pain and rapid recovery, and importantly, it has preserved the function of the sphincter.

Local excision carcinoma in early stage

AIM

To assess the validity of local excision for the early stage low rectal cancer as an effective treatment alternative to radical resection.

METHODS

A retrospective medical chart review was done in 47 patients with early stage low rectal carcinoma who underwent local excision from November 1980 through November 1999 at Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS). The patients were treated by either transanal (40 cases), trans-sacral (5 cases), or trans-vaginal (2 cases) excision of tumors and no death was related to surgery. Sixteen patients received postoperative radiotherapy.

RESULTS

T1 and T2 lesion was found in 36 (76.6 %) and 11 patients (23.4 %) respectively. The overall local tumor recurrence rate was 14.9 % (7/47), with an average recurrence time of 21 months. Among these 7 recurrent patients, there were 4 T1 and 3 T2 lesions. Microscopically, the surgical incisal margin was negative in 45 (95.7 %) and positive in 2 patients (4.3 %); Both of the later had developed local recurrence. The overall 5-year survival rate was 91.7 %, in which there were 94.4 % for T1 and 83.3 % for T2 tumors. T stage, intravessel tumor thrombosis, lymphocytic infiltration and histological grade were not found to be significant by related to the local recurrence and survival (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Local tumor excision was a safe procedure for the treatment of early stage low rectal carcinoma with minimal morbidity and mortality, which might serves as one of the primary surgical treatment methods for the disease of this kind.

Pathologic prognostic factors in the recurrence of rectal cancer

For rectal cancer, local recurrence following surgical treatment is a grave complication that occurs in as many as 25% of cases. Pathological examination of the surgical resection specimen plays a primary role in assessing both the surgery- and tumor-related factors that contribute to the risk of recurrence. Among the tumor-related factors, stage has long been considered the single most accurate indicator of survival. However, recent evidence strongly suggests that the most powerful predictor of both local recurrence and overall outcome in the absence of distant metastatic disease is the macroscopic quality of the mesorectum in the resection specimen and the proximity of the tumor to the circumferential (radial) resection margin. Additional pathologic features have been shown to have stage-independent prognostic significance in colorectal cancer and may help to further define risk of adverse outcome. Such features include: tumor grade; histologic type; extent of extramural penetration by tumor; neural, venous, and/or lymphatic invasion; tumor border configuration; tumor budding; and host lymphoid response. The predictive value of tumor-specific molecular features is currently under investigation and may help to further improve prognostication and refine individual patient management in rectal cancer.

Experience of surgery for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision in a general surgical practice

BACKGROUND

Results from specialist centres have shown that total mesorectal excision (TME) produces excellent control of local disease in patients with carcinoma of the rectum.

METHODS

The results of TME were reviewed in a surgical practice in which patients with rectal cancer comprised 1 per cent of the total caseload and mean case numbers were less than 15 each year.

RESULTS

Eighty-two consecutive patients underwent rectal excision with TME over a 72-month period (68 anterior resection, eight abdominoperineal excision and six Hartmann's procedure). Sixty-nine operations were deemed 'curative' at the time of surgery. Anastomotic leak occurred in two (3 per cent) of 68 patients, both of whom recovered without additional surgery. There were two local recurrences (3 per cent) among 69 patients who underwent 'curative' surgery. At a median follow-up of 190 weeks, the survival rate for Dukes' stage A, B, C and 'D' was 100, 83, 68 and 18 per cent respectively.

CONCLUSION

Outcome as measured by perioperative morbidity and local disease control achieved in a surgical practice with a broad case mix and relatively low annual case volume was comparable to that from larger centres. Appropriate surgical training and attention to technical detail may be as important as case volume in determining outcome after surgery for rectal cancer.