Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Proctectomy for Rectal Adenocarcinoma

Identification of mRNA Signature for Predicting Prognosis Risk of Rectal Adenocarcinoma

Background: The immune system plays a crucial role in rectal adenocarcinoma (READ). Immune-related genes may help predict READ prognoses. Methods: The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset and GSE56699 were used as the training and validation datasets, respectively, and differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified. The optimal DEG combination was determined, and the prognostic risk model was constructed. The correlation between optimal DEGs and immune infiltrating cells was evaluated. Results: Nine DEGs were selected for analysis. Moreover, ADAMDEC1 showed a positive correlation with six immune infiltrates, most notably with B cells and dendritic cells. F13A1 was also positively correlated with six immune infiltrates, particularly macrophage and dendritic cells, whereas LGALS9C was negatively correlated with all immune infiltrates except B cells. Additionally, the prognostic risk model was strongly correlated with the actual situation. We retained only three prognosis risk factors: age, pathologic stage, and prognostic risk model. The stratified analysis revealed that lower ages and pathologic stages have a better prognosis with READ. Age and mRNA prognostic factors were the most important factors in determining the possibility of 3- and 5-year survival. Conclusion: In summary, we identified a nine-gene prognosis risk model that is applicable to the treatment of READ. Altogether, characteristics such as the gene signature and age have a strong predictive value for prognosis risk.

National disparities in use of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is safe and improves outcomes in older persons with rectal cancer but may be underutilized. As older persons are the largest surgical population, investigation of the current use and factors impacting MIS use is warranted. Our goal is to investigate the trends and disparities that affect utilization of MIS in older persons with rectal cancer.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was reviewed for persons 65 years and older who underwent curative resection for rectal adenocarcinoma from 2010 to 2017. Cases were stratified by surgical approach (open or MIS [laparoscopic or robotic]). Univariate analysis compared patient and provider demographics across approaches. Multivariate analysis investigated variables associated with MIS use. Main outcome measures were trends and factors associated with MIS use in older persons.

RESULTS

Of 31,910 patients analyzed, 51.9% (n = 16,555) were open and 48.1% (n = 15,355) MIS. The MIS cohort was 66.7% (n = 10,236) laparoscopic and 33.3% (n = 5119) robotic. MIS increased from 29% in 2010 (n = 1197; 25% laparoscopic, 4% robotic) to 65% in 2017 (n = 2382; 35% laparoscopic, 30% robotic), likely from annual increases in robotics (OR 1.24/year, p < 0.0001). In the unadjusted analysis, there were significant differences in MIS use by age, race, comorbidity, socioeconomic status, and facility type. In multivariate analysis, patients with advancing age (OR 0.93, p < 0.001), major comorbidity (OR 0.75, p < 0.001), total proctectomy (OR0.78, p < 0.001), and advanced pathologic stage (OR 0.51, p < 0.001) were less likely to undergo MIS.

CONCLUSION

Nationwide, less than half of rectal cancer cases in older persons were performed with MIS, despite steady robotic growth. Patient and facility factors impacted MIS use. Further work on regionalizing rectal cancer care and ensuring equitable MIS access and training could improve utilization.

Posterior-First Two-Stage Approach to En Bloc Resection of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer Involving the Pelvic Sidewall

INTRODUCTION

Using standard anterior-only or anterior then posterior approaches can make an R0 resection difficult to achieve in patients with pelvic sidewall recurrences because of confined working spaces and poor visibility.

TECHNIQUE

Given the limitations of standard approaches, we have used a novel posterior-first then anterior 2-stage approach allowing us to widely expose and secure deep margins and control vessels under direct visualization.

RESULTS

We present a technical note describing this approach in patients with recurrent rectal cancer involving the pelvic sidewall with extrapelvic extension.

CONCLUSION

The posterior-first approach may assist in achieving a higher number of R0 resections in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer involving the pelvic sidewall.

Prognostic Factors Affecting Short- and Long-Term Recurrence-Free Survival of Patients with Rectal Cancer using Cure Models: A Cohort Study

Background:

Understanding the prognostic factors affecting the recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients with rectal cancer (RC) is the mainstay of care. The present study aimed to identify factors affecting both short- and long-term RFS of patients with RC using semiparametric mixture cure models.

Methods:

The data were obtained from the database of the Colorectal Research Center of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran, which was collected during 2007-2017. To determine the factors affecting recurrence, cure models were applied to short-term and long-term RFS of patients with RC separately. The cure rate was calculated using the smcure package in R 3.5.1 (2018-07-02) software. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

Out of the 376 eligible patients with RC, 75.8% of men and 74.5% of women were long-term survivors. The mean age of the patients was 57.0±13.8 years. Lymph node ratio (LNR)≤0.2 increased the probability of short-term RFS. The prominent factors affecting long-term RFS were body mass index (BMI)<25 kg/m² (OR=1.98, P=0.047), tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage (OR=6.48, P<0.001), abdominal pain (OR=2.15, P=0.007), and computed tomography (CT) scan detected pelvic lymph nodes (OR=3.40, P=0.01). Over a 9-year follow-up period, the empirical and estimated values of cure rates were 75.3% and 83.9%, respectively.

Conclusion:

The results showed that factors affecting short-term RFS might be different from long-term RFS. A lower BMI was related to a poorer prognosis in patients with RC. Early diagnosis leads to a lower TNM stage and could increase the probability of long-term RFS.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with superior survival, lymphadenectomy and surgical margins: propensity matched analysis of the National Cancer Database

Despite excellent short-term outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), there is minimal data on long-term outcomes compared to open esophagectomy. MIE's superior visualization may have improved lymphadenectomy and complete resection rate and therefore improved long-term outcomes. We hypothesized that MIE would have superior long-term survival. Patients undergoing an esophagectomy for cancer between 2010 and 2016 were identified in the National Cancer Database. MIE included laparoscopic/robotic approach, and conversions were categorized as open. A 1:1 propensity match was performed. Lymphadenectomy and margin status were compared between MIE and open using Stuart Maxwell marginal homogeneity and Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank test. Survival was compared using log-rank test. 13,083 patients were identified: 8,906 (68%) open and 4,177 (32%) MIE. Propensity matching identified 3,659 'pairs' of MIE and open esophagectomy patients. Among them, MIE was associated with higher number lymph nodes examined (16 vs. 14, P < 0.001) and similar number of positive lymph nodes (0 vs. 0, P = 0.33). MIE had higher rate of negative pathologic margin (95 vs. 93.5%, P < 0.001). MIE was also associated with shorter hospitalization (9 vs. 10 days, P < 0.001). Survival was improved among MIE patients (46.6 vs. 41.4 months for open, P = 0.003) and among pathologic node-negative patients (71.4 vs. 61.5 months, P = 0.005). These data suggest that MIE has improved short-term outcomes (improved lymphadenectomy, pathologic margins, and length of stay) and also associated improved overall survival. The etiology of superior overall survival is likely secondary to many factors related and unrelated to surgical approach.

Preoperative predictive risk to cancer quality in robotic rectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement is widely considered the strongest predictor of local recurrence after TME. This study aimed to determine preoperative factors associated with a higher risk of pathological CRM involvement in robotic rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive adult patients who underwent elective, curative robotic low anterior or abdominoperineal resection with curative intent for primary rectal adenocarcinoma in a tertiary referral cancer center from March 2012 to September 2019. Pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports were reviewed for all the patients. Risk factors for pathological CRM involvement were investigated using Firth's logistic regression and a predictive model based on preoperative radiological features was formulated.

RESULTS

A total of 305 patients were included, and 14 (4.6%) had CRM involvement. Multivariable logistic regression found both T3 >5 mm (OR 6.12, CI 1.35-36.44) and threatened or involved mesorectal fascia (OR 4.54, CI 1.33-17.55) on baseline MRI to be preoperative predictors of pathologic CRM positivity, while anterior location (OR 3.44, CI 0.72-33.13) was significant only on univariate analysis. The predictive model showed good discrimination (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve >0.80) and predicted a 32% risk of positive CRM if all risk factors were present.

CONCLUSION

Patients with pre-operatively assessed threatened radiological margin, T3 tumors with greater than 5 mm extension and anterior location are at risk for a positive CRM. The predictive model can preoperatively estimate the CRM positivity risk for each patient, allowing surgeons to tailor management to improve oncological outcomes.

Long-term Oncological Outcomes Following Anastomotic Leak in Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak remains a critical complication after restorative rectal cancer surgery and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates, whereas reported rates range from 4% to 29%. Whether the occurrence of leak may have an impact on long-term oncological outcomes is under debate.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe the oncological impact of anastomotic leak on patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a high-volume colorectal center.

PATIENTS

Data on patients who underwent restorative surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma from January 2000 until December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measured was the impact of anastomotic leak, defined according to the classification proposed by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer, on long-term overall survival, disease-free survival, disease-specific survival, and local recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 787 patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer met the inclusion criteria. Forty-two (5.3%) patients presented a symptomatic anastomotic leak. The median follow-up period was 64 months. Fifty-one (6.5%) patients experienced a cancer-related death, 2 of 42 in the anastomotic leak group. Five-year overall survival, disease-specific survival, and disease-free survival were 88%, 94.7%, and 85.3%. Local recurrence rate was 2%. There was no difference in long-term overall survival, disease-specific survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence rate between groups. On a multivariable analysis, anastomotic leak did not impact oncological outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by retrospective analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The occurrence of anastomotic leak after restorative resection for rectal cancer did not impact long-term oncological outcomes in our cohort of patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B187. RESULTADOS ONCOLÓGICOS A LARGO PLAZO DESPUÉS DE UNA FUGA ANASTOMÓTICA EN CIRUGÍA DE CÁNCER RECTAL: La fuga anastomótica sigue siendo una complicación crítica después de la cirugía restauradora del cáncer rectal y se asocia con tasas significativas de morbilidad y mortalidad, mientras que las tasas reportadas varían del 4% al 29%. Se está debatiendo si la aparición de fugas puede tener un impacto en los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo.Describir el impacto oncológico de la fuga anastomótica en pacientes sometidos a cirugía de preservación del esfínter para adenocarcinoma rectal.Revisión retrospectiva de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.El estudio se realizó en un centro colorrectal de alto volumen.Se analizaron retrospectivamente los datos de pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía reparadora por adenocarcinoma rectal desde Enero de 2000 hasta Diciembre de 2013.Impacto de la fuga anastomótica, definida de acuerdo con la clasificación propuesta por el Grupo de Estudio Internacional del Cáncer Rectal (International Study Group of Rectal Cancer), sobre la supervivencia general a largo plazo, la supervivencia libre de enfermedad, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad y la recurrencia local.Un total de 787 pacientes sometidos a cirugía para preservar el esfínter por cáncer rectal cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión. Cuarenta y dos (5.3%) pacientes presentaron una fuga anastomótica sintomática. El tiempo mediano del período de seguimiento fue de 64 meses. Cincuenta y un (6.5%) pacientes sufrieron muerte relacionada con el cáncer, 2 de 42 en el grupo de fuga anastomótica. La supervivencia global a cinco años, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad y la supervivencia libre de enfermedad fueron del 88%, 94.7% y 85.3%, respectivamente. La tasa de recurrencia local fue del 2%. No hubo diferencias en la supervivencia global a largo plazo, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad, la supervivencia libre de enfermedad y la tasa de recurrencia local entre los grupos. En un análisis multivariable, la fuga anastomótica no afectó los resultados oncológicos.Este estudio fue limitado por análisis retrospectivo.La aparición de fuga anastomótica después de la resección restauradora para el cáncer rectal no afectó los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo en nuestra cohorte de pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B187. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Kahlil).

Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer Provides Advantageous Outcomes Over Laparoscopic Approach: Results From a Large Retrospective Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To compare short term outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic rectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND

Significant benefits of robotic rectal cancer surgery over laparoscopy have yet to be demonstrated. Operative time and direct institutional cost seem in favor of the laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients operated on for rectal cancer with a mini-invasive approach at Mayo Clinic from 2005 to 2018. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the difference in postoperative morbidity between the laparoscopic and robotic approach. Multivariable models for odds to complications and prolonged (≥6 days) length of stay were built.

RESULTS

A total of 600 patients were included in the analysis. The number of patients undergoing robotic surgery was 317 (52.8%). The 2 groups were similar in respect to age, sex, and body mass index. Laparoscopic surgery was correlated to shorter operative time (214 vs 324 minutes; P < 0.001). Patients undergoing robotic surgery had a lower overall complications rate (37.2% vs 51.2%; P < 0.001). Robotic surgery was found to be the most protective factor [odds ratio (OR) 0.485; P = 0.006] for odds to complications. The event of a complication (OR 9.33; P < 0.001) and conversion to open surgery (OR 3.095; P = 0.002) were identified as risk factors for prolonged length of stay whereas robotic surgery (OR 0.62; P = 0.027) was the only independent protective factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic rectal cancer surgery is strongly associated with better short-term outcomes over laparoscopic surgery.

Risk factors for conversion in laparoscopic and robotic rectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to review risk factors for conversion in a cohort of patients with rectal cancer undergoing minimally invasive abdominal surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive patients operated on from February 2005 to April 2018. Adult patients undergoing low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection for primary rectal adenocarcinoma by a minimally invasive approach were included. Exclusion criteria were lack of research authorization, stage IV or recurrent rectal cancer, and emergency surgery. Risk factors for conversion were investigated using logistic regression. A subgroup analysis of obese patients (BMI 30 kg/m² or more) was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 600 patients were included in the analysis. The overall conversion rate was 9·2 per cent. Multivariable analysis showed a 72 per cent lower risk of conversion when patients had robotic surgery (odds ratio (OR) 0·28, 95 per cent c.i. 0·15 to 0·52). Obese patients experienced a threefold higher risk of conversion compared with non-obese patients (47 versus 24·4 per cent respectively; P < 0·001). Robotic surgery was associated with a reduced risk of conversion in obese patients (OR 0·22, 0·07 to 0·71).

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery was associated with a lower risk of conversion in patients undergoing minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery, in both obese and non-obese patients.

What are the results of laparoscopic re-operative rectal surgery?

INTRODUCTION

Reoperative rectal surgery is challenging, performed selectively by experienced colorectal surgeons. The minimally invasive approach has not been well defined. This study reviewed the results of laparoscopy in this challenging setting.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent trans-abdominal re-operative rectal surgery from 2010 to 2019 was performed.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients [35 females (45%); BMI 25kg/m2) were included. Reasons for reoperation were recurrent cancer in 18 (43%) patients and anastomotic failure in 57 (73%). Twenty-two (28%) had laparoscopic surgery and 4 had attempted laparoscopy converted to laparotomy. A higher success rate was noted for laparoscopy with prior laparoscopic surgery. Benefits of laparoscopy included significant reduction in length of stay (6.7 vs 9.7 days, p = 0.012) and abdominal superficial surgical site infection (0% vs 25%, p < 0.001) and higher rate of achieving bowel continuity compared to laparotomy (77% vs 50%, p = 0.021) CONCLUSIONS: Reoperative laparoscopic rectal surgery is safe and feasible in the context of a high-volume laparoscopic surgeon with substantial experience in redo proctectomies. It offers clear benefits including decreased surgical site infection rates and length of stay.

Creation of a rectal cancer registry in Italy by the Advanced International Mini-Invasive Surgery (AIMS) academy clinical research network

Background: The management of rectal cancer is multimodal and involves a multidisciplinary team of cancer specialists with expertise in medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology and radiology. It is crucial for highly specialized centers to collaborate via networks that aim to maintain uniformity in every aspect of treatment and rigorously gather patients’ data, from the first clinical evaluation to the last follow-up visit.

The Advanced International Mini-Invasive Surgery (AIMS) academy clinical research network aims to create a rectal cancer registry. This will prospectively collect the data of patients operated on for non-metastatic rectal cancer in high volume colorectal surgical units through a well design pre-fashioned database for non-metastatic rectal cancer, in order to take all multidisciplinary aspects into consideration.

Methods/Design: The protocol describes a multicenter prospective observational cohort study, investigating demographics, frailty, cancer-related features, surgical and radiological parameters, and oncological outcomes among patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer who are candidates for surgery with curative intent. Patients enrolled in the present registry will be followed up for 5 years after surgery.

Discussion: Standardization and centralization of data collection for neoplastic diseases is a virtuous process for patient care. The creation of a register will allow the control of the quality of treatments provided and permit prospective and retrospective studies to be carried out on complete and reliable high quality data. Establishing data collection in a prospective and systematic fashion is the only possibility to preserve the enormous resource that each patient represents.

Hybrid minimally invasive/open approach versus total minimally invasive approach for rectal cancer resection: short- and long-term results

OBJECTIVES

To reduce the technical challenges of a totally minimally invasive approach (TMA) and to decrease the morbidity associated with open surgery, a hybrid minimally invasive/open approach (HMOA) has been introduced as a surgical technique for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare postoperative results and long-term oncologic outcomes between hybrid minimally invasive/open approach and totally minimally invasive approach in patients who underwent rectal resection for cancer.

METHODS

All patients with rectal cancer undergoing a totally minimally invasive approach or hybrid minimally invasive/open approach proctectomy between 2012 and 2016 were analyzed. Preoperative and postoperative outcomes were collected from a prospectively maintained institutional database.

RESULTS

Among 283 patients, 138 (48.8%) underwent a hybrid minimally invasive/open approach and 145 (51.2%) a totally minimally invasive approach. Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups except for distance from the anal verge, which was lower in totally minimally invasive approach group (50.7% vs 29%; p = 0.0008). Length of stay (LOS) was significantly longer in the hybrid minimally invasive/open approach group (6.4 vs 4.3; p = < 0.0001). The median follow-up was 29.6 (14-40.6) months. Overall survival and disease-free survival were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with a hybrid minimally invasive/open approach, a totally minimally invasive approach has a shorter length of stay and may improve short-term outcomes in patients undergoing proctectomy for cancer.

Impact of enhanced recovery on oncological outcomes following minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncological outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer depend on the quality of surgical and oncological management. Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) have yet to be assessed for their oncological impact when used in combination with minimally invasive surgery. This study assessed outcomes with or without an ERP in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of all consecutive adult patients who underwent elective minimally invasive surgery for primary rectal adenocarcinoma with curative intent between February 2005 and April 2018. Both laparoscopic and robotic procedures were included. Short-term morbidity and overall survival were compared between patients treated according to the institutional ERP and those who received conventional care.

RESULTS

A total of 600 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery, of whom 320 (53·3 per cent) were treated according to the ERP and 280 (46·7 per cent) received conventional care. ERP was associated with less overall morbidity (34·7 versus 54·3 per cent; P < 0·001). Patients in the ERP group had improved overall survival on univariable (91·4 versus 81·7 per cent at 5 years; hazard ratio (HR) 0·53, 95 per cent c.i. 0·28 to 0·99) but not multivariable (HR 0·78, 0·41 to 1·50) analysis. Multivariable analysis revealed age (HR 1·46, 1·17 to 1·82), male sex (HR 1·98, 1·05 to 3·70) and complications (HR 2·23, 1·30 to 3·83) as independent risk factors for compromised overall survival. Disease-free survival was comparable for patients who had ERP or conventional treatment (80·5 versus 84·6 per cent at 5 years respectively; P = 0·272).

CONCLUSION

Treatment within an ERP was associated with a lower morbidity risk that may have had a subtle impact on overall but not disease-specific survival.