Trans-perineal minimally invasive surgery during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:437-447. [PMID: 29987569 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6316-8]

Transperineal minimally invasive surgery during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer could improve short-term outcomes: A single-institution retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Transperineal minimally invasive surgery (TpMIS) during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) is an emerging approach that allows for the precise treatment of lower rectal cancer. However, evidence regarding the efficacy of TpMIS is insufficient. This study evaluated the efficacy of TpMIS during laparoscopic APR for patients with lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic APR with TpMIS (TpMIS group; n = 12) and those who underwent conventional laparoscopic APR for low rectal cancer (conventional group; n = 13) were enrolled consecutively in this retrospective study. Standardized TpMIS was performed at our institution. Patient and tumor characteristics and intraoperative, postoperative, and pathological outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcome was postoperative perineal wound infection.

RESULTS

No patients in the TpMIS group experienced postoperative perineal wound infection; however, five (38.5%) patients in the conventional group experienced postoperative perineal wound infection (significant difference; p = 0.016). The estimated blood loss (median, 81 mL vs. 463 mL) and incidence of postoperative urinary dysfunction (8.3% vs. 46.1%) were significantly lower in the TpMIS group than in the conventional group. The postoperative hospital stay (median, 13 vs. 20 days) of the TpMIS group was significantly shorter than that of the conventional group. Pathological outcomes did not differ between groups. The positive circumferential resection margin rates of the TpMIS and conventional groups were 8.3% and 15.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

TpMIS during laparoscopic APR was associated with significant improvements in the postoperative outcomes of patients with low rectal cancer.

Efficacy of transperineal minimally invasive surgery with laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision for lower rectal cancer

PURPOSE

In abdominoperineal excision (APE), the advantages of the "down-to-up" approach are expected to be more obvious when performed as a two-team approach, including transperineal minimally invasive surgery (TpMIS). We investigated the efficacy of TpMIS with laparoscopic APE for lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic APE with (n = 20) or without (n = 30) TpMIS between December 2013 and April 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient and tumor characteristics, intraoperative outcome, short-term outcome, and pathological findings were compared. Additional subgroup analyses were performed in technically challenging cases, including male patients, obese patients, and patients with tumors located at the anterior wall.

RESULTS

There was no marked difference in the patient or tumor characteristics or short-term outcomes, including morbidity and mortality between the two groups. Pathological results were comparable, and the circumferential resection margin (CRM) positive rate was 10% in both groups. TpMIS achieved a significant reduction in operative time (p = 0.02). In a subgroup analysis, the amount of blood loss was also smaller in males (p = 0.02) and patients with a high BMI (> 25) (p = 0.005) than in others.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneously performing TpMIS and laparoscopic APE is feasible owing to the favorable complication and CRM-positive rates. In terms of operative time and blood loss, TpMIS is expected to be advantageous in both easy and challenging cases.

Transperineal abdominoperineal resection in the prone jackknife position in male patients with low rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

In male patients with low rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR), successful dissection of the anterior anorectum is key to reducing the risk of circumferential resection margin involvement, intraoperative bowel perforation, and local recurrence, but it is challenging. To overcome difficulties dissecting the anterior anorectum, we present a safe and feasible procedure using a transperineal endoscopic approach during APR (TpAPR).

MATERIALS AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

The male patient is placed in the prone jackknife position. TpAPR precedes the procedure from an abdominal approach. We use some pelvic tissues as clear anatomical landmarks to dissect the anterior anorectum. The key steps of this procedure are shown in the video.

DISCUSSION

The identification of a clear anatomical dissection plane of the anterior anorectum is difficult because of the complex surgical anatomy of the region. Clear anatomical landmarks for dissection of the anterior anorectum are necessary for safe implementation of this procedure. Therefore, TpAPR in the prone jackknife position can be performed to obtain better visualization of each anatomical landmark at a glance.

Transperineal minimally invasive abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: standardized technique and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing utilization of transanal total mesorectal excision as a promising approach for low rectal cancer, the feasibility and safety of transperineal minimally invasive abdominoperineal resection (tp-APR) remain unclear.

METHODS

In total, 25 patients who underwent tp-APR between April 2017 and May 2020 (tp-APR group) and 27 patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic APR between May 2009 and September 2016 (lap-APR group) for low rectal cancer were enrolled in this retrospective study. Clinical outcomes were compared between the groups before and after propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the incidence of the overall postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo grade II or above. Standardized technique of tp-APR was also demonstrated.

RESULTS

On comparison, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and overall postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo grade II or above were significantly less in the tp-APR group both before and after propensity score matching. The rates of urinary disturbance and perineal wound infection were significantly less in the tp-APR group after matching. Further, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the tp-APR group both before and after matching. However, pathological outcomes did not differ between the groups before and after matching. There has been no local recurrence in the tp-APR group with a median follow-up period of 18 months.

CONCLUSION

Standardized tp-APR for low rectal cancer is feasible and seems superior to conventional laparoscopic APR in terms of short-term outcomes. Further larger-scale studies with a longer follow-up period are required to evaluate oncological outcomes.

Transperineal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer on the residual rectum after multiple abdominal surgeries in a patient with Crohn's disease: a case report

BACKGROUND

The improved prognosis of Crohn's disease may increase the opportunities of surgical treatment for patients with Crohn's disease and the risk of development of colorectal cancer. We herein describe a patient with Crohn's disease and a history of multiple surgeries who developed rectal stump carcinoma that was treated laparoscopically and transperineally.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 51-year-old man had been diagnosed with Crohn's disease 35 years earlier and had undergone several operations for treatment of Crohn's colitis. Colonoscopic examination was performed and revealed rectal cancer at the residual rectum. The patient was then referred to our department. The tumor was diagnosed as clinical T2N0M0, Stage I. We treated the tumor by combination of laparoscopic surgery and concomitant transperineal resection of the rectum. While the intra-abdominal adhesion was dissected laparoscopically, rectal dissection in the correct plane progressed by the transperineal approach. The rectal cancer was resected without involvement of the resection margin. The duration of the operation was 3 h 48 min, the blood loss volume was 50 mL, and no intraoperative complications occurred. The pathological diagnosis of the tumor was type 5 well- and moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma, pT2N0, Stage I. No recurrence was evident 3 months after the operation, and no adjuvant chemotherapy was performed.

CONCLUSION

The transperineal approach might be useful in patients with Crohn's disease who develop rectal cancer after multiple abdominal surgeries.

Feasibility of laparoscopic-assisted transanal pelvic exenteration in locally advanced rectal cancer with anterior invasion

BACKGROUND

Transanal (Ta) pelvic exenteration is a promising, minimally invasive method for treating locally advanced colorectal cancer. However, since it is technically difficult to perform, Ta pelvic exenteration is rarely reported in locally advanced T4 rectal cancer cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of transabdominal laparoscopy-assisted Ta pelvic exenteration.

METHODS

Six patients (4 males and 2 females) had laparoscopy-assisted Ta total or posterior pelvic exenteration for locally advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer cases at the Nagasaki University Hospital between September 2018 and August 2019. Clinical and pathological outcomes were measured and analyzed.

RESULTS

The median operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 481 (range 456-709) minutes and 352.5 (range 257-1660) ml, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in all cases, and no patient required open surgery. Two patients had grade 3 complications (Clavien-Dindo) or higher. There was no mortality, and no reoperation was required.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that laparoscopic-assisted Ta pelvic exenteration is an acceptable procedure, may help overcome the current technical difficulties, and may improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Transperineal minimally invasive APE: preliminary outcomes in a multicenter cohort

Background

Abdominoperineal excision (APE) for rectal cancer is associated with a relatively high risk of positive margins and postoperative morbidity, particularly related to perineal wound healing problems. It is unknown whether the use of a minimally invasive approach for the perineal part of these procedures can improve postoperative outcomes without oncological compromise. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of minimally invasive transperineal abdominoperineal excision (TpAPE)

Methods

This multicenter retrospective cohort study included all patients having TpAPE for primary low rectal cancer. The primary endpoint was the intraoperative complication rate. Secondary endpoints included major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3), histopathology results, and perineal wound healing.

Results

A total of 32 TpAPE procedures were performed in five centers. A bilateral extralevator APE (ELAPE) was performed in 17 patients (53%), a unilateral ELAPE in 7 (22%), and an APE in 8 (25%). Intraoperative complications occurred in five cases (16%) and severe postoperative morbidity in three cases (9%). There were no perioperative deaths. A positive margin (R1) was observed in four patients (13%) and specimen perforation occurred in two (6%). The unilateral extralevator TpAPE group had worse specimen quality and a higher proportion of R1 resections than the bilateral ELAPE or standard APE groups. The rate of uncomplicated perineal wound healing was 53% (n = 17) and three patients (9%) required surgical reintervention.

Conclusions

TpAPE seems to be feasible with acceptable perioperative morbidity and a relatively low rate of perineal wound dehiscence, while histopathological outcomes remain suboptimal. Additional evaluation of the viability of this technique is needed in the form of a prospective trial with standardization of the procedure, indication, audit of outcomes and performed by surgeons with vast experience in transanal total mesorectal excision.

Intersphincteric Resection Versus Abdominoperineal Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) has been the standard surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer for a century. In recent years, intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been increasingly used to avoid the permanent colostomy. Up to now, there is no relevant meta-analysis comparing the clinical efficacy of ISR and APR. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of these 2 procedures. Methods. A comprehensive search of online databases was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to obtain comparative studies of ISR and APR. Then the data from studies that met the inclusion criteria were extracted and analyzed. Results. A total of 12 studies covering 2438 patients were included. No significant differences were found between ISR and APR in gender, body mass index, distance from tumor to anal edge, operative time, and blood loss. In addition, hospital stay (weighted mean differences = -2.98 days; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -3.54 to -2.43; P < .00001) and postoperative morbidity (odds ratio [OR] = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.99; P = .04) were significantly lower in ISR group compared with APR group. However, patients who underwent ISR showed lower pathological T-stage (T3T4%, OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.28 to 0.86; P = .01) and lymph node metastasis rate (OR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.59 to 1.01; P = .06) compared with those who underwent APR. Moreover, oncological outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusion. ISR may provide a safe alternative to APR, with shorter hospital stays, lower postoperative morbidity, and similar oncological outcomes. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm and update the findings of this analysis.

Comprehensive and innovative techniques for laparoscopic choledocholithotomy: A surgical guide to successfully accomplish this advanced manipulation

Surgeries for benign diseases of the extrahepatic bile duct (EHBD) are classified as lithotomy (i.e., choledocholithotomy) or diversion (i.e., choledochojejunostomy). Because of technical challenges, laparoscopic approaches for these surgeries have not gained worldwide popularity. The right upper quadrant of the abdomen is advantageous for laparoscopic procedures, and laparoscopic choledochojejunostomy is safe and feasible. Herein, we summarize tips and pitfalls in the actual procedures of choledocholithotomy. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy with primary closure of the transductal incision and transcystic C-tube drainage has excellent clinical outcomes; however, emergent biliary drainage without endoscopic sphincterotomy and preoperative removal of anesthetic risk factors are required. Elastic suture should never be ligated directly on the cystic duct. Interrupted suture placement is the first choice for hemostasis near the EHBD. To prevent progressive laceration of the EHBD, full-layer interrupted sutures are placed at the upper and lower edges of the transductal incision. Cholangioscopy has only two-way operation; using dedicated forceps to atraumatically grasp the cholangioscope is important for smart maneuvering. The duration of intraoperative stone clearance accounts for most of the operative time. Moreover, dedicated forceps are an important instrument for atraumatic grasping of the cholangioscope. Damage to the cholangioscope requires expensive repair. Laparoscopic approach for choledocholithotomy involves technical difficulties. I hope this document with the visual explanation and literature review will be informative for skillful surgeons.

Transanal TME: new standard or fad?

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has been developed to overcome the difficulty of laparoscopic dissection and transection in the deep pelvis. TaTME has several clinical benefits over laparoscopic surgery, such as better exposure of the distal rectum and direct determination of distal resection margin. Although evidence demonstrating the true benefits of taTME over laparoscopic TME (LapTME) is still insufficient, accumulating data have revealed that, as compared with LapTME, taTME is associated with shorter operative time and a lower conversion rate without jeopardizing other short-term outcomes. However, taTME is a technically demanding procedure with specific complications such as urethral injury, and so sufficient experience of LapTME and step-by-step acquisition of the skills needed for this procedure are requisite. The role of transanal endoscopic surgery is expected to change, along with the recent progress in the treatment of rectal cancer, such as robotic surgery and the watch-and-wait strategy. Optimization of treatment will be needed in the future in terms not only of oncological but also of functional outcomes.