Intracorporeal rectal stapling following laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: overcoming a challenge

Controversies in IPAA for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review of Different Anastomotic Techniques

BACKGROUND

Available techniques for IPAA in ulcerative colitis include handsewn, double-stapled, and single-stapled anastomoses. There are controversies, indications, and different outcomes regarding these techniques.

OBJECTIVE

To describe technical details, indications, and outcomes of 3 specific types of anastomoses in restorative proctocolectomy.

DATA SOURCE

Systematic literature review for articles in the PubMed database according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies describing outcomes of the 3 different types of anastomoses, during pouch surgery, in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis.

INTERVENTION

IPAA technique.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative outcomes (anastomotic leaks, overall complication rates, and pouch function).

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were initially included: 6 studies exclusively on single-stapled IPAA, 2 exclusively on double-stapled IPAA, 6 studies comparing single-stapled to double-stapled techniques, 6 comparing double-stapled to handsewn IPAA, and 1 comprising single-stapled to handsewn IPAA. Thirty-seven studies were added according to authors' discretion as complementary evidence. Between 1990 and 2015, most studies were related to double-stapled IPAA, either only analyzing the results of this technique or comparing it with the handsewn technique. Studies published after 2015 were mostly related to transanal approaches to proctectomy for IPAA, in which a single-stapled anastomosis was introduced instead of the double-stapled anastomosis, with some studies comparing both techniques.

LIMITATIONS

A low number of studies with handsewn IPAA technique and a large number of studies added at authors' discretion were the limitations of this strudy.

CONCLUSIONS

Handsewn IPAA should be considered if a mucosectomy is performed for dysplasia or cancer in the low rectum or, possibly, for re-do surgery. Double-stapled IPAA has been more widely adopted for its simplicity and for the advantage of preserving the anal transition zone, having lower complications, and having adequate pouch function. The single-stapled IPAA offers a more natural design, is feasible, and is associated with reasonable outcomes compared to double-stapled anastomosis. See video from symposium.

Transanal transection and single-stapling techniques are associated with shorter rectal cuff and lower urgency rate after pouch surgery compared with the double-stapled approach

BACKGROUND

Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is most commonly performed by double-stapling technique after rectal transection with a linear stapler. Double-stapling is increasingly criticized for the uneven longer cuffs and potential weak points. A transanal rectal transection and single-stapled anastomosis may potentially overcome the limitations of double-stapling. A single-stapled anastomosis may be accomplished through a transanal rectal transection followed by bottom-up dissection (transanal-ileal pouch-anal anastomosis) or through an abdominal, rectal dissection and subsequent transanal transection and single-stapled anastomosis. The purpose of this study is to compare short-term and functional outcomes of double-stapling versus single-stapled techniques for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

METHODS

This is a single-institution, ambidirectional study. Patients with ulcerative colitis undergoing ileal pouch-anal anastomosis between 2014 and 2021 were included in the study and allocated into 2 groups: group 1, including double stapled ileal pouch anal anastomosis, and group 2, including single-stapled-ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. The primary endpoint was the difference in functional parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 130 patients were included, 46 undergoing double-stapling-ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and 84 receiving single-stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Rectal-cuff length (defined as the distance between the dentate line and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis) was shorter after single-stapled compared with double-stapling ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (1.98 ± 0.21 vs 2.20 ± 0.53 cm, P = .01). Anastomotic leak rate was comparable between group 1 and group 2 (6% vs 5%, P = .69). Functional parameters were comparable except for urgency, which was lower for single-stapled compared with double-stapling ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (8%, vs 30%, P = .002).

CONCLUSION

Single-stapled ileal pouch-anal anastomosis was associated with a shorter rectal cuff and lower urgency than double-stapling ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. In our opinion, these results warrant a prospective multicentric trial to scrutinize and confirm these benefits on a larger scale.

Mesentery in Transanal TME

Oncological adequacy in rectal cancer surgery mandates not only a clear distal and circumferential resection margin but also resection of the entire ontogenetic mesorectal package. Incomplete removal of the mesentery is one of the commonest causes of local recurrences. The completeness of the resection is not only determined by tumor and patient related factors but also by the patient-tailored treatment selected by the multidisciplinary team. This is performed in the context of the technical ability and experience of the surgeon to ensure an optimal total mesorectal excision (TME). In TME, popularized by Professor Heald in the early 1980s as a sharp dissection through the avascular embryologic plane, the midline pedicle of tumor and mesorectum is separated from the surrounding, mostly paired structures of the retroperitoneum. Although TME significantly improved the oncological and functional results of rectal cancer surgery, the difficulty of the procedure is still mainly dependent on and determined by the dissection of the most distal part of the rectum and mesorectum. To overcome some of the limitations of working in the narrowest part of the pelvis, robotic and transanal surgery have been shown to improve the access and quality of resection in minimally invasive techniques. Whatever technique is chosen to perform a TME, embryologically derived planes and anatomical points of reference should be identified to guide the surgery. Standardization of the chosen technique, widespread education, and training of surgeons, as well as caseloads per surgeon, are important factors to optimize outcomes. In this article, we discuss the introduction of transanal TME, with emphasis on the mesentery, relevant anatomy, standard procedural steps, and importance of a training pathway.

The impact of robotic surgery on a tertiary care colorectal surgery program, an assessment of costs and short term outcomes: A Canadian perspective

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery for colorectal pathology has gained interest as it can overcome technical challenges and limitations of traditional laparoscopic surgery. A lack of training and costs have been cited as reasons for limiting its use in Canada. The objective of this paper was to assess the impact of robotic surgery on outcomes and costs in a Canadian setting.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing left sided colorectal surgery ("Pre-Robotic Phase" n = 145 vs. "Post Robotic Phase" n = 150) and a single tertiary care centre in Ontario, Canada. Utilization and success of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), length of stay, complications and hospital costs were compared. Univariate and Multivariate analysis was used for these comparisons.

RESULTS

Characteristics, diagnosis and type of resection were similar between groups. Robotic Implementation resulted in higher rates of successful MIS (i.e. attempt at MIS without conversion) (85% vs. 47%, P < 0.001), shorter mean length of stay (4.7 days vs. 8.4 days, P < 0.001), and similar mean operative times (3.9 h vs. 3.9 h, P = 0.93). Emergency Department visits were fewer in the Robotic Phase (24% vs. 34%, P = 0.04), with no difference in readmission, anastomotic leak or unplanned reoperation. After robotic implementation, the mean total hospital costs decreased, but this was not statistically significant (-$1453, 95% CI -$3974 to +$1068, P = 0.25). Regression analysis, adjusting for age, gender, obesity, ASA and procedure showed similar findings (Robotic Phase -$657, 95% CI -$3038 to +$1724, vs Pre Robotic Phase [Reference], P = 0.59).

INTERPRETATION

Implementation of a robotic colorectal surgery program in a Canadian tertiary care centre showed improved clinical outcomes, without a significant increase in the cost of care. Although this study is from a single institution, we have demonstrated that robotic colorectal surgery is feasible and can be cost effective in the right setting.

Current and future role of three-dimensional modelling technology in rectal cancer surgery: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional (3D) modelling technology translates the patient-specific anatomical information derived from two-dimensional radiological images into virtual or physical 3D models, which more closely resemble the complex environment encountered during surgery. It has been successfully applied to surgical planning and navigation, as well as surgical training and patient education in several surgical specialties, but its uptake lags behind in colorectal surgery. Rectal cancer surgery poses specific challenges due to the complex anatomy of the pelvis, which is difficult to comprehend and visualise.

AIM

To review the current and emerging applications of the 3D models, both virtual and physical, in rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases were searched using the keywords “rectal surgery”, “colorectal surgery”, “three-dimensional”, “3D”, “modelling”, “3D printing”, “surgical planning”, “surgical navigation”, “surgical education”, “patient education” to identify the eligible full-text studies published in English between 2001 and 2020. Reference list from each article was manually reviewed to identify additional relevant papers. The conference abstracts, animal and cadaveric studies and studies describing 3D pelvimetry or radiotherapy planning were excluded. Data were extracted from the retrieved manuscripts and summarised in a descriptive way. The manuscript was prepared and revised in accordance with PRISMA 2009 checklist.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies, including 9 feasibility studies, were included in the systematic review. The studies were classified into four categories: feasibility of the use of 3D modelling technology in rectal cancer surgery, preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation, surgical education and surgical device design. Thirteen studies used virtual models, one 3D printed model and 2 both types of models. The construction of virtual and physical models depicting the normal pelvic anatomy and rectal cancer, was shown to be feasible. Within the clinical context, 3D models were used to identify vascular anomalies, for surgical planning and navigation in lateral pelvic wall lymph node dissection and in management of recurrent rectal cancer. Both physical and virtual 3D models were found to be valuable in surgical education, with a preference for 3D printed models. The main limitations of the current technology identified in the studies were related to the restrictions of the segmentation process and the lack of 3D printing materials that could mimic the soft and deformable tissues.

CONCLUSION

3D modelling technology has potential to be utilised in multiple aspects of rectal cancer surgery, however, it is still at the experimental stage of application in this setting.

Options for Low Rectal Cancer: Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision

Low rectal cancers (LRCs) may offer a difficult technical challenge even to experienced colorectal surgeons. Although laparoscopic surgery offers a superior exposure of the pelvis when compared with open approach, its role in rectal cancer surgery has been controversial. Robotic platforms are well suited for difficult pelvic surgery due to its three-dimensional visualization, degree of articulation of instruments, precise movements, and better ergonomics. The robot may be suitable especially in the anatomically narrow pelvis such as in male and obese patients. Meticulous dissection in critical steps, such as splenic flexure takedown, nerve-sparing mesorectal excision, and distal margin clearance, are potential technical advantages. In addition, robotic rectal resections are associated with lower conversion rates to open surgery, less blood loss, and shorter learning curve with similar short-term quality of life outcomes, similar rates of postoperative complications, and equivalent short-term surrogate outcomes compared with conventional laparoscopy. Robotic surgery approach, if used correctly, can enhance the skills and the capabilities of the well-trained surgeon during minimally invasive procedures for LRC.

Transanterior obturator nerve gateway: a novel approach to achieving intracorporeal distal rectal transection for ultralow rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Intracorporeal rectal transection at the anorectal junction for ultralow rectal cancer is technically difficult due to pelvic width and limited roticulation, which might require a transanal transection or an oblique transection with multiple firings. These procedures were reported to be associated with the increased risk of morbidity. To address these problems, we presented a novel technique Transanterior Obturator Nerve Gateway (TANG) to transect rectum for ultralow rectal cancer and evaluated its safety and feasibility in this study.

METHODS

A total of 210 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic coloanal anastomosis with or without partial intersphincteric resection (CAA/pISR) for rectal cancers between January 2017 and January 2020 were included. Eighty of these patients were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM). The perioperative characteristics, TANG-related variables, and genitourinary and anal function outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among these enrolled patients, 170 patients underwent traditional transection, and 40 underwent TANG transection; the patients were matched to include 40 patients in each group by PSM. After PSM, there were no significant differences in the operating time (p = 0.351) or bleeding volume (p = 0.474) between the two groups. However, the TANG group had fewer cases of conversion to transanal transection (0 vs. 13, p < 0.001). Moreover, the patients in TANG group had a more desirable transection with longer distal resection margin (1.7 vs. 1.1 cm, p < 0.001), shorter stapling line (6.6 vs. 10.3 cm, p < 0.001) and fewer stapler firings (p < 0.001). The overall postoperative complication rates and genitourinary and anal function outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The TANG approach appears to be a safe, feasible and effective approach for intracorporeal ultralow rectal transection with more distal resection, more vertical transection and fewer stapler firings.

Association of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision With Local Recurrence of Rectal Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Proponents of novel transanal total mesorectal excision (TME) suggest the procedure overcomes the technical and oncologic challenges of conventional approaches for treating rectal cancer. Recently, however, there has been controversy regarding the oncologic safety of the procedure.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of transanal TME with the incidence of local recurrence (LR) of cancer and the probability of remaining free of LR during follow-up.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter cohort study used data from 8 high-volume rectal cancer academic institutions from across Canada on all consecutive patients with primary rectal cancer treated by transanal TME at the participating centers. The study was conducted between January 2014 and December 2018, and data were analyzed from April 1, 2020, to September 15, 2020.

EXPOSURE

Transanal TME.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The incidence of LR was reported as a direct measure of quality of resection. The cumulative probability of LR- and systemic recurrence (SR)-free survival at 36 months was estimated. Local recurrence and SR were defined as radiologic or endoscopic evidence of 1 or more new lesions in or outside the pelvis, respectively, documented during surveillance after the removal of the primary tumor.

RESULTS

Of 608 total patients included in the analysis, 423 (69.6%) were male; the median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-70 years). Local recurrence was identified in 22 patients (3.6%) after a median follow-up of 27 months (IQR, 18-38 months). The median time to LR was 13 months (IQR, 9-19 months). Sixteen of the 22 patients with LR (72.7%) were male, 14 (63.6%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation, and 12 (54.5%) had American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III disease. Of those with LR, 16 (72.7%) had a negative circumferential radial margin and 20 (90.9%) had a negative distal resection margin, 2 (9.1%) experienced conversion to open surgery, and 15 (68.2%) also developed SR. The probability of LR-free survival at 36 months was 96% (95% CI, 94%-98%). According to the Cox proportional hazards regression model, the hazard ratio of LR was estimated to be 4.2 (95% CI, 2.9-6.2) times higher among patients with a positive circumferential radial margin than among those with a negative circumferential radial margin.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, transanal TME performed by experienced surgeons was associated with an incidence of LR and SR that is in line with the published literature on open and laparoscopic TME, suggesting that transanal TME may be an acceptable approach for management of rectal cancer.

Total Mesorectal Excision Technique-Past, Present, and Future

While the treatment of rectal cancer is multimodal, above all, a proper oncological resection is critical. The surgical management of rectal cancer has substantially evolved over the past 100 years, and continues to progress as we seek the best treatment. Rectal cancer was historically an unsurvivable disease, with poor understanding of the embryological planes, lymphatic drainage, and lack of standardized technique. Major improvements in recurrence, survival, and quality of life have resulted from advances in preoperative staging, pathologic assessment, the development and timing of multimodal therapies, and surgical technique. The most significant contribution in advancing rectal cancer care may be the standardization and widespread implementation of total mesorectal excision (TME). The TME, popularized by Professor Heald in the early 1980s as a sharp, meticulous dissection of the tumor and mesorectum with all associated lymph nodes through the avascular embryologic plane, has shown universal reproducible reductions in local recurrence and improvement in disease-free and overall survival. Widespread education and training of surgeons worldwide in the TME have significantly impact outcomes for rectal cancer surgery, and the procedure has become the gold standard for curative resection of rectal cancer. In this article, we discuss the evolution of the standard abdominal approach to the TME, with emphasis on the history, relevant anatomy, standard procedure steps, oncologic outcomes, and technical evolution.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME): single-centre early experience in a selected population

Total mesorectal excision (TME) represents the key principle in the surgical treatment of rectal cancer. Transanal mesorectal excision was introduced as a complement to conventional surgery to overcome its technical difficulties. The aim of this study was to evaluate the early surgical results following the introduction of this novel technique at our Unit. Between January and May 2016, 12 patients diagnosed with mid-low rectal adenocarcinoma were enrolled into this study and evaluated with regards demography, histopathology, peri-operative data and postoperative complications. The tumor was located in the middle rectum in 6 patients (50%), in the lower rectum in 6 patients (50%). Mean operative time was 356.5 ± 76.2 min (range 240-494). Eleven out 12 patients (91.6%) had less than 200 mL of intraoperative blood loss. Mean hospital stay was 10.9 ± 4.6 days (range 5-19). No mortality was recorded. Intraoperative complications were recorded in 1, while early post-operative complications (< 30 days) were observed in 5 patients (41.6%). Histopathology showed in all cases an intact mesorectum. Mean number of lymphnodes harvested was 13.6 ± 6.6 (range 4-29). Distal and circumferential margin was, respectively, of 20.8 ± 14.2 mm (range 2-45 mm) and 16.1 ± 7.6 mm (range 3-30 mm). The comparative analysis showed significant differences concerning mean operative time (p = 0.0473) and estimated blood loss (p = 0.0367). This study confirms this technique is safe and feasible, but more evidence to support its use over conventional laparoscopic surgery is needed.

[Transanal mesorectumectomy for rectal cancer - is it optimal surgery for 'difficult' patients?]

AIM

To compare short-term outcomes after transanal total mesorectumectomy (Ta-TME) and laparoscopic (Lap-TME) procedure in 'difficult' patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective nonrandomized trial included patients with confirmed middle-/low rectum adenocarcinoma T1-4aN0-2M0 for the period November 2013 - September 2016. We identified 20 out of 55 in TA-TME and 14 out of 54 patients in Lap-TME group as those of 'difficult' subgroup: male, BMI ≥25 кг/м², previous chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

RESULTS

Time of surgery, blood loss, conversions rate, postoperative morbidity and length of hospital-stay were similar in both groups. Hardware anastomoses were more frequent in TA-TME compared with LAP-TME group (78.9% vs. 50%, p=0.086). Specimen quality was more favorable in TA-TME group: Grade I 10% in Ta-TME group vs. 28.6% in Lap-TME group; 'positive' CRM 5% vs. 14.3%, р=0.365. Within-group analysis did not reveal any differences between 'difficult' and 'typical' patients by surgical and pathomorphological characteristics in TA-TME group in contrast to Lap-TME group. Median of follow-up was 24.6 (IR 10.6-40.2) and 23.8 (IR 12.1-39.9) months for TA-TME and Lap-TME groups, respectively. Local recurrence occurred in 1 (1.8%) 'difficult' patient after Ta-TME. Distant metastases were observed in 1 (1.8%) patient of Ta-TME and 2 (3.7%) patients of Lap-TME group. Actuarial 3-years reccurence-free survival was 95.7% for Ta-TME and 93.9% for Lap-TME group, respectively (p=0.923).

CONCLUSION

TA-TME is advisable for 'difficult' patients. Further multicenter randomized trials are necessary to specify the effectiveness of TA-TME in these patients.

Transanal Versus Transabdominal Minimally Invasive (Completion) Proctectomy With Ileal Pouch-anal Anastomosis in Ulcerative Colitis: A Comparative Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare surgical outcome of transanal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (ta-IPAA) with transabdominal minimal invasive approach in ulcerative colitis (UC), using the comprehensive complication index (CCI).

BACKGROUND

Recent evolutions in rectal cancer surgery led to transanal dissection of the rectum resulting in a better exposure of the distal rectum and presumed better outcome. The same approach was introduced for patients with UC, resulting in decreased invasiveness.

METHODS

All patients, undergoing minimally invasive restorative proctocolectomy in 1, 2, or 3 stages between January 2011 and September 2016 in 3 referral centers were included. Only patients who underwent either multiport, single port, single port with 1 additional port, hand-assisted, or robotic (R) laparoscopy were included in the analysis. CCI, registered during 90 days after pouch construction, was compared between the transanal and the transabdominal approach.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients (male: 52%) with ta-IPAA were compared to 119 (male: 53%) with transabdominal IPAA. Ninety-nine (46%) patients had a defunctioning ileostomy at time of pouch construction. A 2-step model showed that the odds for postoperative morbidity were 0.52 times lower in the ta-IPAA group (95% confidence interval [0.29; 0.92] P = 0.026). In patients with morbidity, mean CCI of the transanal approach was 2.23 points lower than the transabdominal approach (95% confidence interval: [-6.64-3.36] P = 0.13), which was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Ta-IPAA for UC is a safe procedure, resulting in fewer patients with morbidity, but comparable CCI when morbidity is present. Overall, ta-IPAA led to lower CCI scores.

The novel appearance of low rectal anastomosis on contrast enema following laparoscopic anterior resection: discriminating anastomotic leaks from "dog-ears" on water-soluble contrast enema and flexible sigmoidoscopy

PURPOSE

Interpretation of water-soluble contrast enema following laparoscopic low anterior resection can be very challenging for both radiologists and colorectal surgeons. Discriminating the radiological appearances secondary to anastomotic configuration from those caused by actual anastomotic dehiscence is a common problem and may be made worse with the advent of laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study is to identify potential novel appearances of the water-soluble contrast enema (WSCE) images of rectal anastomosis following laparoscopic low anterior resection to radiologists and surgeons.

METHODS

We enrolled 45 patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection with proximal de-functioning loop ileostomy within a specialized colorectal unit. The water-soluble contrast enema reports were reviewed. Two blinded colorectal radiologists independently reviewed the images of patients suspected of anastomotic leak. All of these patients also underwent a flexible sigmoidoscopy to confirm or exclude anastomotic leak before reversal of loop ileostomy. Inter-observer concordance was calculated.

RESULTS

Seven out of eighteen patients (38.9%) were found to have true anastomotic leaks on flexible sigmoidoscopy (15% overall leak rate). In the remaining eleven patients the image appearances were attributed to the appearance of the anastomotic 'dog-ear effect', created by the anastomotic configuration due to multiple firing of the intra-corporeal laparoscopic stapling device. Radiologist inter-observer concordance was 83%. Sensitivity was 100%, specificity 71%, positive-predictive value (38.9%) and negative-predictive value (100%).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel appearances of laparoscopic-stapled rectal anastomoses in WSCE can be mistaken for anastomotic leak. To avoid delay in reversal of ileostomy, a flexible sigmoidoscopy can be used to confirm or exclude a leak.

Recent surgical advances in colorectal cancer excision: toward optimal outcomes

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer affecting both males and females in the western world. Despite all the developments in the current treatment of colorectal cancer, it is still continuing to be an important factor of patient morbidity and mortality worldwide. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for colorectal cancer. Over the last decade, there have been major changes and developments in the surgical treatment. Understanding the importance of the anatomy, technological advances in minimally invasive surgery and effects of chemoradiotherapy have changed the approaches to colorectal cancer treatment. Today, novel treatment strategies must be targeted not only minimally invasive approaches, but also aiming to increase patients’ quality of life without compromising the oncological principles.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the journey towards a new technique and its current status

INTRODUCTION

The surgical approach to total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer has undergone a substantial evolution with the adoption of more minimally invasive procedures. Transanal TME (taTME) is the latest advanced technique pioneered to tackle difficult pelvic dissections. Areas covered: The evolution of TME surgery from open to laparoscopic, robotic and transanal techniques was explored in this review. The outcomes to date on the latest approach, taTME, are reviewed and the future direction of rectal cancer surgery proposed. A literature search was performed using Embase, Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane databases for articles published between January 2005 to May 2016 using the keywords 'transanal', 'TME', 'laparoscopy', 'robotics', 'minimally invasive', 'outcomes' and 'training'. Expert commentary: Surgical experience in taTME is growing and randomised controlled trials have been planned and initiated worldwide. However, the learning curve for this procedure remains to be established and a structured training programme is necessary to ensure safe introduction and dissemination of the technique in the clinical setting. Further innovation including stereotactic navigation and more specialised transanal equipment are currently being explored and are likely to enhance the technique further.

Transanal completion proctectomy after total colectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: a modified single stapled technique

AIM

Minimally invasive surgery has proved its efficacy for the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). The recent evolution in single port (SP) surgery together with transanal rectal surgery could further facilitate minimally invasive surgery in UC patients. This technical note describes a technical modification for single stapled anastomoses in patients undergoing transanal completion proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (ta-IPAA) for UC.

METHODS

A step-by-step approach of the ta-IPAA in UC is described, including pictures and a video illustration.

RESULTS

We describe a ta-IPAA with SP laparoscopy at the ileostomy site. All patients underwent a total colectomy with end-ileostomy for therapy refractory UC in a first step. Colectomy was done by multiport laparoscopy in six patients, while the ileostomy site was used as single port access in five patients. In all 11 patients the stoma site was used for SP mobilization of the mesenteric root and fashioning of the J-pouch. Completion proctectomy was done using a transanal approach. A single stapled anastomosis was performed in all patients. An 18 French catheter was used to approximate the pouch to the rectal cuff.

CONCLUSION

A technical modification of the single stapled anastomosis facilitates the formation of the ta-IPAA, further reducing invasiveness in UC patients.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: Towards standardization of technique

AIM: To describe the role of Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) in minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery, to examine the differences in patient selection and in reported surgical techniques and their impacts on postoperative outcomes and to discuss the future of TaTME.

METHODS: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched through the 1^st of March 2015 using a predefined search strategy.

RESULTS: A total of 20 studies with 323 patients were included. Most studies were single-arm prospective studies with fewer than 100 patients. Multiple transanal access platforms were used, and the laparoscopic approach was either multi- or single port. The procedure was initiated transanally or transabdominally. If a simultaneous approach with 2 operating surgeons was chosen, the operative time was significantly reduced.

CONCLUSION: TaTME was also associated with better TME specimens and a longer distal resection margin. TaTME is thus feasible in expert hands, but the learning curve and safety profile are not well defined. Long-term follow-up regarding anal function and oncological outcomes should be performed in the future.

CT/MRI pelvimetry as a useful tool when selecting patients with rectal cancer for transanal total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

The quality of a total mesorectal excision (TME) is one of the most important prognostic factors for local recurrence of rectal carcinoma. The aim of this study was to clarify the manner in which lesser pelvis dimensions affect the quality of TME via the transabdominal approach, while simultaneously defining the criteria for selecting patients most likely to have Grade 3 TME outcomes for a transanal approach using the TaTME technique.

METHODS

An analysis from the registry was conducted using 93 of total 198 patients with rectal cancer of the mid- and lower third of the rectum who underwent: (1) a low anterior resection, (2) an ultra-low resection with coloanal anastomosis, or (3) an intersphincteric rectal resection, all with total mesorectal excision. The procedures were carried out at the Department of Surgery at the University Hospital Hradec Králové between 2011 and 2014. Rectal specimens were histopathologically examined according to a standardized protocol. Pelvimetry data were obtained using anteroposterior, transverse, and sagittal CT or MRI scans.

RESULTS

A correlation was found between the quality of the TME and pelvimetry parameter A5, i.e., the angle between the longitudinal axis of the symphysis, and the lines between the symphysis and the promontory (R(2) = -0.327, p < 0.001). The ordinal regression method was used to identify parameters of the model describing levels of probability for TME quality. These relationships were described by equations that provide probability of the achievement of each grade of TME.

CONCLUSION

The correlation described by obtained equations between pelvimetry parameters and the quality of TME represents a new tool for use in preoperative decision-making with regard to resection via the transanal approach (TaTME).

The new approach to the rectal cancer: 'down-to-up' double endolaparoscopic pelvic access. Preliminary evaluation of outcomes

Laparoscopic access in low anterior rectal resection is widely adopted, performing an 'up-to-down' dissection. The aim of this study is to present and analyze the outcomes of a novel surgical 'down-to-up' total mesorectal excision technique that could obviate to the well-known issues of the standard treatment. 18 suitable patients underwent double endolaparoscopic pelvic access (DEPA) 'down-to-up' technique. DEPA TME was completed in all patients, with intact mesorectum. Mean operative time was 365 min (range 280-510 min). The morbidity rate was 22%, including three radiologically detected leakage (grade A) and one pelvic abscess, requiring only a conservative management. Mortality rate at 30 and 90 days was 0%. Resection margins were negative in all patients. A median of 11 nodes (range 5-19) was retrieved per specimen. Mean length of hospital stay was 9 days (range 7-19 days). Patients were followed for an average of 14 months (range 0-42 months), with no recurrence. Despite exiguous patient's sample in this pilot study, transanal endoscopic TME with laparoscopic assistance seems to be feasible and safe, and is a promising alternative to open and laparoscopic TME. However, a conspicuous functional and oncologic long-term evaluation is required, before the widespread adoption could be recommended.

Transanal endoscopic total mesorectal excision: technical aspects of approaching the mesorectal plane from below--a preliminary report

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for low rectal cancer can be technically challenging. This report describes our initial experience with a hybrid laparoscopic and transanal endoscopic technique for TME in low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between December 2012 and October 2013, we identified patients with rectal cancer < 5 cm from the anorectal junction (ARJ) who underwent laparoscopic-assisted TME with a transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) technique. A standardized stepwise approach was used in all patients. Resection specimens were examined for completeness and measurement of margins. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics and short-term postoperative outcomes were examined. All values are mean ± standard deviation.

RESULTS

Ten patients (8 males; median age: 60.5 (range 36-70) years) were included. On initial MRI, all tumors were T2 or T3, mean tumor height from the ARJ was 28.9 ± 12.2 mm, mean circumferential resection margin was 5.3 ± 3.1 mm , and the mean angle between the anal canal and the levator ani was 83.9° ± 9.7°. All patients had had preoperative chemoradiotherapy, TME via TAMIS, and distal anastomosis. There were no intraoperative complications, anastomotic leaks, or 30-day mortality. The pathologic quality of all mesorectal specimens was excellent. The distal resection margin was 19.4 ± 10.4 mm, the mean circumferential resection margin was 13.8 ± 5.1 mm, and the median lymph node harvest was 10.5 (range 5-15) nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

A combined laparoscopic and transanal approach can achieve a safe and oncologically complete TME dissection for low rectal tumors. This approach may improve clinical outcomes in these technically difficult cases, but larger prospective studies are needed.

Predicting the pathological features of the mesorectum before the laparoscopic approach to rectal cancer

Pelvic anatomy and tumour features play a role in the difficulty of the laparoscopic approach to total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer. The aim of the study was to analyse whether these characteristics also influence the quality of the surgical specimen. We performed a prospective study in consecutive patients with rectal cancer located less than 12 cm from the anal verge who underwent laparoscopic surgery between January 2010 and July 2013. Exclusion criteria were T1 and T4 tumours, abdominoperineal resections, obstructive and perforated tumours, or any major contraindication for laparoscopic surgery. Dependent variables were the circumferential resection margin (CMR) and the quality of the mesorectum. Sixty-four patients underwent laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision. Resection was complete in 79.1% of specimens and CMR was positive in 9.7%. Univariate analysis showed tumour depth (T status) (P = 0.04) and promontorium-subsacrum angle (P = 0.02) independently predicted CRM (circumferential resection margin) positivity. Tumour depth (P < 0.05) and promontorium-subsacrum axis (P < 0.05) independently predicted mesorectum quality. Multivariate analysis identified the promontorium-subsacrum angle (P = 0.012) as the only independent predictor of CRM. Bony pelvis dimensions influenced the quality of the specimen obtained by laparoscopy. These measurements may be useful to predict which patients will benefit most from laparoscopic surgery and also to select patients in accordance with the learning curve of trainee surgeons.

Short-term follow-up after laparoscopic versus conventional total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer in a large teaching hospital

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancer remains controversial, and large randomized studies on oncologic outcome are lacking. The objective of this study was to analyze the short-term results of laparoscopic resection versus conventional total mesorectal excision (TME) for low rectal cancer (≤10 cm from the anal verge).

METHODS

The institutional colorectal surgery database was reviewed, and 166 consecutive patients operated for low rectal cancer between 2006 and 2011 were included in this analysis which focuses on the first 18 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Eighty patients underwent conventional TME, whereas 86 patients underwent laparoscopic TME. Patient characteristics were comparable between groups. Conversion rate was 17 %. Laparoscopic rectal resection resulted in significantly less blood loss (200 versus 475 ml, p = <0.001) and a 3-day shorter hospital stay (median, 7 versus 10 days; p = 0.06). Oncologic results from resected specimens were comparable, although significantly more lymph nodes were harvested in laparoscopic resections (median, 13 versus 11; p = 0.005). Disease-free survival after curative resection was better in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.04), but this was no longer significant after correction for potential confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of short-term results of laparoscopic versus conventional TME for low rectal cancer demonstrates that laparoscopic surgery is feasible and safe, resulting in similar oncologic outcomes with less blood loss, a trend towards less postoperative complications and shorter duration of hospital stay. Further randomized studies are needed to attribute to the body of evidence of equivalence or even superiority of laparoscopic resections compared to conventional resections for distal rectal cancer.

Transanal minimally invasive surgery for total mesorectal excision

Transanal TME is a new and important application for TAMIS. It allows for resection and mobilization of the rectum while preserving the quality of the mesorectal envelop. This new approach has gained considerable interest not only because of its minimally invasive nature, but because TAMIS-TME offers a solution to one of the most difficult problems in rectal cancer surgery: Specifically, access to the distal rectum in obese male patients with a narrow pelvis. Recently, transanal TME has become one of the most rapidly expanding areas in rectal cancer surgery. Interestingly, the origin and inception of this approach began decades ago. The evolution of transanal TME with a historical perspective is described.

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer

Laparoscopic surgery for colonic cancer is a safe and established alternative to traditional open colectomy. The potential advantages of shorter length of stay, faster recovery and fewer operative complications are well documented. The last 5 years has seen an increase in the number of laparoscopic colorectal operations as more surgeons learn this technique. Short and medium term results have been encouraging with respect to oncological outcomes. However, laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remains a contentious issue. The increased complexity of operating within the confines of the pelvis and the greater risk of oncological compromise, have led to some surgeons urging caution. We present the challenges associated with laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery and explain that appropriate patient selection, surgical planning and laparoscopic experience are the key to successful outcomes.

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal rectal cancer surgery: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach is increasingly applied in colorectal surgery. Although laparoscopic surgery in colon cancer has been proved to be safe and feasible with equivalent long-term oncological outcome compared to open surgery, safety and long-term oncological outcome of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remain controversial. Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery might be efficacious, but indications and limitations are not clearly defined. Therefore, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) has developed this clinical practice guideline.

METHODS

An international expert panel was invited to appraise the current literature and to develop evidence-based recommendations. The expert panel constituted for a consensus development conference in May 2010. Thereafter, the recommendations were presented at the annual congress of the EAES in Geneva in June 2010 in a plenary session. A second consensus process (Delphi process) of the recommendations with the explanatory text was necessary due to the changes after the consensus conference.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal (mid- and low-) rectal cancer is feasible and widely accepted. The laparoscopic approach must offer the same quality of surgical specimen as in open surgery. Short-term outcomes such as bowel function, surgical-site infections, pain and hospital stay are slightly improved with the laparoscopic approach. Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is not inferior to the open in terms of disease-free survival, overall survival or local recurrence. Laparoscopic pelvic dissection may impair genitourinary and sexual function after rectal resection, like in open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for mid- and low-rectal cancer can be recommended under optimal conditions. Still, most level 1 evidence is for colon cancer surgery rather than rectal cancer. Upcoming results from large randomised trials are awaited to strengthen the evidence for improved short-term results and equal long-term results in comparison with the open approach.

Minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: Are we there yet?

Laparoscopic colon surgery for select cancers is slowly evolving as the standard of care but minimally invasive approaches for rectal cancer have been viewed with significant skepticism. This procedure has been performed by select surgeons at specialized centers and concerns over local recurrence, sexual dysfunction and appropriate training measures have further hindered widespread acceptance. Data for laparoscopic rectal resection now supports its continued implementation and widespread usage by expeienced surgeons for select patients. The current controversies regarding technical approaches have created ambiguity amongst opinion leaders and are also addressed in this review.

Complications following restorative proctocolectomy in children

BACKGROUND

Adverse outcomes following restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) in adults have been attributed to steroid exposure and use of hand-sutured anastomoses. This study analyses complications in children undergoing RPC.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of all children undergoing RPC in an English regional center over a 10-year period. The main outcome measure was defined as a complication within 30 days of surgery. Logistic regression analysis was used with possible explanatory variables (eg, steroid use, indication for surgery, weight and height z scores, hematologic indices, degree of blood loss, and use of laparoscopic surgery).

RESULTS

Sixty (33 female) patients underwent RPC at a median age of 13.5 years. Of these, 16 had an operative complication and 17 had a late complication. Only severe acute colitis with inability to induce remission as an indication for surgery was significant in predicting operative complications (odds ratio, 6.8 [95% confidence interval, 1.2-37]; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe acute colitis resistant to medical therapy but not steroid use or hand-sutured anastomoses appears to be a risk factor for complication. This differs from the adult experience.

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: The state of the art

At present time, there is evidence from randomized controlled studies of the success of laparoscopic resection for the treatment of colon cancer with reported smaller incisions, lower morbidity rate and earlier recovery compared to open surgery. Technical limitations and a steep learning curve have limited the wide application of mini-invasive surgery for rectal cancer. The present article discusses the current status of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. A review of the more recent retrospective, prospective and randomized controlled trial (RCT) data on laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer including the role of trans-anal endoscopic microsurgery and robotics was performed. A particular emphasis was dedicated to mid and low rectal cancers. Few prospective and RCT trials specifically addressing laparoscopic rectal cancer resection are currently available in the literature. Improved short-term outcomes in term of lesser intraoperative blood loss, reduced analgesic requirements and a shorter hospital stay have been demonstrated. Concerns have recently been raised in the largest RCT trial of the oncological adequacy of laparoscopy in terms of increased rate of circumferential margin. This data however was not confirmed by other prospective comparative studies. Moreover, a similar local recurrence rate has been reported in RCT and comparative series. Similar findings of overall and disease free survival have been reported but the follow-up time period is too short in all these studies and the few RCT trials currently available do not draw any definitive conclusions. On the basis of available data in the literature, the mini-invasive approach to rectal cancer surgery has some short-term advantages and does not seem to confer any disadvantage in term of local recurrence. With respect to long-term survival, a definitive answer cannot be given at present time as the results of RCT trials focused on long-term survival currently ongoing are still to fully clarify this issue.

Laparoscopic approaches to rectal cancer

Laparoscopic colectomy has been proven oncologically equivalent to conventional surgery and is now generally agreed to offer patients a reduced length of stay, shorter recovery times, and improved cosmesis. In contrast, acceptance of laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer has been much delayed and the enthusiasm of early studies has met considerable skepticism. For rectal cancer, it has been demonstrated that there is considerable variation between surgeons in disease-free survival and local pelvic recurrence after open proctectomy for rectal cancer. These differences are likely to be magnified when the technical challenge of laparoscopy is added to proctectomy. Minimally invasive approaches to rectal cancer need to demonstrate equivalent oncologic outcomes and maintenance or improvement in quality of life. This review will outline the current evidence for laparoscopy as a treatment option for patients with rectal cancer, emphasize the need for standardized approaches among multidisciplinary teams, and highlight the technical details of different laparoscopic operations for rectal cancer.

Robotic pursestring technique in low anterior resection

PURPOSE

Rectal division and anastomosis are difficult steps in a laparoscopic low anterior resection. This difficulty is due to the limitations of laparoscopic instrumentation within the anatomical confines of the pelvis. Robotic technology overcomes most of these limitations to simplify the procedure. We describe our technique of controlled rectal transection and robotic purse-string placement by use of the da Vinci Robotic system.

METHODS

Three patients with rectal cancer who were scheduled to undergo a robot-assisted low anterior resection were selected to undergo this procedure. Safety, feasibility, and immediate postoperative outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

The procedure was successfully completed in all 3 patients with no intraoperative complications. One patient had a postoperative bilateral femoral neuropathy that resolved spontaneously. The mean operating time was 339.6 minutes, and all 3 patients were sent home by the fifth postoperative day.

CONCLUSIONS

The advanced surgical dexterity of the da Vinci Robot enables a controlled rectal transection and purse-string suture placement on the rectal stump. This achieves a right-angled rectal division and a secure, single-stapled anastomosis in a low anterior resection. The feasibility of this technique has been demonstrated in 3 patients, in whom this technique has been safely performed with acceptable results. A larger series of patients and a long-term follow-up is required to demonstrate an objective benefit.

Factors affecting the difficulty of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with double stapling technique anastomosis for low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Although the laparoscopic approach is accepted for the treatment of colon cancer, its value for low rectal cancer is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of patient and tumor factors, particularly pelvic dimensions, on the difficulties in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Seventy-nine consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic TME with intracorporeal rectal transection and double stapling technique (DST) anastomosis for low rectal cancer. Gender, body mass index (BMI), tumor diameter, tumor depth, tumor distance from the anal verge, preoperative chemoradiotherapy, and 5 pelvic dimensions (pelvic inlet, pelvic outlet, length of sacrum, interspinous distance, and intertuberous distance) were analyzed as variables affecting the difficulties of laparoscopic TME. The dependent variables were pelvic operative time, which was defined as the time required for dissection of the rectum from the pelvis, intracorporeal transaction, and anastomosis. Other dependent variables were intraoperative blood loss, overall postoperative morbidity, and anastomotic leakage. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the predictive significance of variables.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed that BMI (P < .0001), tumor distance from the anal verge (P = .0003), tumor depth (P = .0021), and pelvic outlet (P = .0362) were independently predictive of pelvic operative time. Pelvic operative time was related to intraoperative blood loss (P < .0001). The tumor distance from the anal verge (P = .0333, odds ratio [OR]: 1.06) was related to postoperative morbidity, and pelvic outlet was related to anastomotic leakage (P = .0305, OR: 1.13).

CONCLUSION

BMI, tumor distance from the anal verge, tumor depth, and pelvic outlet were independent predictors for operative time and morbidity. These factors should be taken into account when planning laparoscopic TME.

Laparoscopic low rectal anastomosis using a new stapling device: early experience with the Contour stapler

Rectal cancer was initially considered a contraindication for the laparoscopic approach to low rectal resection due to the greater difficulty of deep pelvic dissection, but several studies have demonstrated its potential clinical advantages. The currently accepted technique for this intervention includes total mesorectal excision, which entails complete dissection of the mesorectum followed by low transection of the rectum. The laparoscopic approach provides good visualization and magnification of the operative field, but transection of the rectum may be more difficult. This is illustrated by the conversion rate of around 15% in most series, mainly due to technical difficulties. Contour placement may overcome these difficulties. Two key points support the interest in the use of devices with the features of the Contour. First, the current feeling and evidence indicate that with presently available laparoscopic devices, the section of the low rectum in selected patients (males and mid-third rectal tumors) is often difficult. Secondly, although the Contour device was designed for open surgery, surgeons have the intuitive perception that it perfectly accomplishes the functions an ideal laparoscopic stapler should include. There is clearly a need for more appropriate laparoscopic instruments for low rectal transection. The Contour device could be considered a prototype because it meets the surgeon's requirements when operating on the low rectum, providing one shot, simultaneous sewing and cutting function and a symmetric rectum section. However, a number of technical modifications would enhance the utility of the instrument in this setting.

Can we predict immediate outcome after laparoscopic rectal surgery? Multivariate analysis of clinical, anatomic, and pathologic features after 3-dimensional reconstruction of the pelvic anatomy

OBJECTIVES

The laparoscopic approach for colon resection is widely accepted but its definitive role in rectal tumors is controversial due to the technical difficulties associated with this procedure. Tumor size and volume, and pelvic dimensions may influence intraoperative and/or immediate outcome. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of anatomic and pathologic features on immediate outcome after laparoscopic rectal resection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included a prospective series of 60 patients submitted to laparoscopic resection for rectal tumors. A preoperative computed tomography was performed in all patients. Three-dimension reconstruction of the pelvis, rectal tumor, and prostate was computed. Tumor and prostate volume and diameters were calculated, as were main pelvic diameters (subsacrum-retropubic, coccyx pubis, and promontorium coccyx), and lateral diameters, at the tumor level (3D Doctor Software package). Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), tumor height, previous radiotherapy treatment, and type of procedure (anterior resection, low anterior resection, and abdominoperineal resection) were recorded. Immediate outcome (morbidity, mortality, and stay) was also collected. Dependent variables were operative time, intraoperative difficulty, conversion, and postoperative morbidity. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed (SPSS package).

RESULTS

The series included 36 men and 24 women, with a mean age of 72 years (range, 38-87). Surgical procedures were 10 anterior resections, 31 low anterior resections, and 19 abdominoperineal resections. Conversion rate was 9 of 60 (15%), operative time: 172 minutes (range, 90-360), morbidity: 31% and stay: 9 days (range, 6-43). Multivariate analysis showed tumor craniocaudal length was an independent predictive factor for conversion (P < 0.04, odds ratio [OR]: 1.5, confidence interval [CI]95%: 1-2.2). Pubic coccyx axis (P < 0.005) and sex (P < 0.009) showed independent values for operative time, and BMI (P < 0.02, OR: 1.2, CI 95%:1-1.5) was related to postoperative morbidity. When a subanalysis was performed in relation to sex, independent factors differed between males and females, with a predominance of anatomic and tumor measures in men.

CONCLUSION

Local anatomy and pathologic features directly affect surgical outcome in the laparoscopic approach to the rectum. Sex, BMI, lower pelvis diameter, and tumor size are independent predictors for conversion, operative time, and morbidity. These data should be taken into account when planning this kind of procedure.