The Importance of the Pathologist's Role in Assessment of the Quality of the Mesorectum

Total mesorectal excision quality in rectal cancer surgery affects local recurrence rate but not distant recurrence and survival: population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

The quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen in rectal cancer surgery is assessed with a three-tier grade (mesorectal, intramesorectal and muscularis propria). This study aimed to analyse the prognostic impact of the total mesorectal excision grade on survival, and to identify risk factors for intramesorectal and muscularis propria resection in a population-based setting.

METHODS

All patients in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry with rectal cancer stage I-III ≤ 10 cm from the anal verge, diagnosed 2015-2019, undergoing total mesorectal excision were analysed. Clinical, surgical and pathological data were retrieved and analysed for the following primary outcomes: local and distant recurrence and overall and relative survival; secondary outcomes were risk factors for total mesorectal excision grading (intramesorectal or muscularis propria resection). Of note, postoperative death < 30 days or recurrence within 90 days were exclusion criteria for survival and recurrence analysis. Recurrence-free patients with less than 3 years follow-up, and patients lacking data regarding recurrence, were also excluded from recurrence analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, of 7979 patients treated during the study interval, 1499 patients were eligible for recurrence, 2441 patients for survival and 2476 patients for risk-factor analyses, of which 75% were graded mesorectal, 17% intramesorectal and 8% muscularis propria. Median follow-up for survival was 42 (1-77) months. The worst total mesorectal excision grading (muscularis propria resection) was an independent risk factor for local recurrence in multivariable analysis (HR 2.73, 95% c.i. 1.07 to 7.0, P = 0.036). Total mesorectal excision grade had no impact on distant recurrence or survival. Female sex, tumour level <5 cm, abdominoperineal resection, minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic and robotic), high blood loss, long duration of surgery and intraoperative perforation were independent risk factors for worse total mesorectal excision grading (intramesorectal and/or muscularis propria resection) in multivariable analyses.

CONCLUSION

Muscularis propria resection increases the risk of local recurrence but does not seem to affect distant recurrence or survival.

Using CT-Based Pelvimetry and Visceral Obesity Measurements to Predict Total Mesorectal Excision Quality for Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

A complete total mesorectal excision is the criterion standard in curative rectal cancer surgery. Ensuring quality is challenging in a narrow pelvis, and obesity amplifies technical difficulties. Pelvimetry is the measurement of pelvic dimensions, but its role in gauging preoperatively the difficulty of proctectomy is largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

To determine pelvic structural factors associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision after curative proctectomy and build a predictive model for total mesorectal excision quality.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A quaternary referral center database of patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma (2009-2017).

PATIENTS

Curative-intent proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma.

INTERVENTIONS

All radiological measurements were obtained from preoperative CT images using validated imaging processing software tools. Completeness of total mesorectal excision was obtained from histology reports.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Ability of radiological pelvimetry and obesity measurements to predict total mesorectal excision quality.

RESULTS

Of the 410 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 362 underwent a complete total mesorectal excision (88%). Multivariable regression identified a deeper sacral curve (per 100 mm 2 [OR: 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23; p < 0.001]) and a greater transverse distance of the pelvic outlet (per 10 mm [OR:1.41, 95% CI, 1.08-1.84; p = 0.012]) to be independently associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision. An increased area of the pelvic inlet (per 10 cm 2 [OR: 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97; p = 0.02) was associated with a higher rate of complete mesorectal excision. No difference in visceral obesity ratio and visceral obesity (ratio >0.4 vs <0.4) between BMI (<30 vs ≥30) and sex was identified. A model was built to predict mesorectal quality using the following variables: depth of sacral curve, area of pelvic inlet, and transverse distance of the pelvic outlet.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective analysis is not controlled for the choice of surgical approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvimetry predicts total mesorectal excision quality in rectal cancer surgery and can alert surgeons preoperatively to cases of unusual difficulty. This predictive model may contribute to treatment strategy and aid in the comparison of outcomes between traditional and novel techniques of total mesorectal excision. See Video Abstract .

USO DE MEDICIONES DE PELVIMETRA Y OBESIDAD VISCERAL BASADAS EN TC PARA PREDECIR LA CALIDAD DE TME EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGA DE CNCER DE RECTO

ANTECEDENTES:Una escisión mesorrectal total y completa es el estándar de oro en la cirugía curativa del cáncer de recto. Garantizar la calidad es un desafío en una pelvis estrecha y la obesidad amplifica las dificultades técnicas. La pelvimetría es la medición de las dimensiones pélvicas, pero su papel para medir la dificultad preoperatoria de la proctectomía está en gran medida inexplorado.OBJETIVO:Determinar los factores estructurales pélvicos asociados con la escisión mesorrectal total incompleta después de una proctectomía curativa y construir un modelo predictivo para la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ÁMBITO:Base de datos de un centro de referencia cuaternario de pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de recto (2009-2017).PACIENTES:Proctectomía con intención curativa para adenocarcinoma de recto.INTERVENCIONES:Todas las mediciones radiológicas se obtuvieron a partir de imágenes de TC preoperatorias utilizando herramientas de software de procesamiento de imágenes validadas. La integridad de la escisión mesorrectal total se obtuvo a partir de informes histológicos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Capacidad de la pelvimetría radiológica y las mediciones de obesidad para predecir la calidad total de la escisión mesorrectal.RESULTADOS:De los 410 casos que cumplieron los criterios de inclusión, 362 tuvieron una escisión mesorrectal total completa (88%). Una regresión multivariable identificó una curva sacra más profunda (por 100 mm2); OR:1,14,[IC95%:1,06-1,23,p<0,001], y mayor distancia transversal de salida pélvica (por 10mm); OR:1,41, [IC 95%:1,08-1,84,p=0,012] como asociación independiente con escisión mesorrectal total incompleta. Un área aumentada de entrada pélvica (por 10 cm2); OR:0,85, [IC95%:0,75-0,97,p=0,02] se asoció con una mayor tasa de escisión mesorrectal completa. No se identificaron diferencias en la proporción de obesidad visceral y la obesidad visceral (proporción>0,4 vs.<0,4) entre el índice de masa corporal (<30 vs.>=30) o el sexo. Se construyó un modelo para predecir la calidad mesorrectal utilizando variables: profundidad de la curva sacra, área de la entrada pélvica y distancia transversal de la salida pélvica.LIMITACIONES:Análisis retrospectivo no controlado por la elección del abordaje quirúrgico.CONCLUSIONES:La pelvimetría predice la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total en la cirugía del cáncer de recto y puede alertar a los cirujanos preoperatoriamente sobre casos de dificultad inusual. Este modelo predictivo puede contribuir a la estrategia de tratamiento y ayudar en la comparación de resultados entre técnicas tradicionales y novedosas de escisión mesorrectal total. (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo).

Partial mesorectal excision can be a primary option for middle rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

Although partial mesorectal excision (PME) and total mesorectal excision (TME) is primarily indicated for the upper and lower rectal cancer, respectively, few studies have evaluated whether PME or TME is more optimal for middle rectal cancer.

METHODS

This study included 671 patients with middle and upper rectal cancer who underwent robot-assisted PME or TME. The 2 groups were optimized by propensity score matching of sex, age, clinical stage, tumor location, and neoadjuvant treatment.

RESULTS

Complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 617 of 671 patients (92.0%), without showing a difference between the PME and TME groups. Local recurrence rate (5.3% vs. 4.3%, P>0.999) and systemic recurrence rate (8.5% vs. 16.0%, P=0.181) also did not differ between the 2 groups, in patients with middle and upper rectal cancer. The 5-year disease-free survival (81.4% vs. 74.0%, P=0.537) and overall survival (88.0% vs. 81.1%, P=0.847) also did not differ between the PME and TME groups, confined to middle rectal cancer. Moreover, 5-year recurrence and survival rates were not affected by distal resection margins of 2 cm (P=0.112) to 4 cm (P>0.999), regardless of pathological stages. Postoperative complication rate was higher in the TME than in the PME group (21.4% vs. 14.5%, P=0.027). Incontinence was independently associated with TME (odds ratio [OR], 2.009; 95% confidence interval, 1.015-3.975; P=0.045), along with older age (OR, 4.366, P<0.001) and prolonged operation time (OR, 2.196; P=0.500).

CONCLUSION

PME can be primarily recommended for patients with middle rectal cancer with lower margin of >5 cm from the anal verge.

Comparison of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging with postoperative pathology results in rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced rectal cancer often requires neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) before surgical intervention. This study aimed to assess the concordance between preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and postoperative pathology results after NAT in rectal cancer patients.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of 52 patients who underwent NAT and subsequent surgery at Ankara Bilkent City Hospital between May 2019 and May 2023 was conducted. Demographics, preoperative MRIs, time intervals between NAT, MRI, and surgery, and postoperative pathology were assessed.

RESULTS

The median age of the cohort was 59 years, with a male predominance (76.9%). Tumour T stage (κ = 0.157), lymph node stage (κ = 0.138), and circumferential resection margin (κ = 0.138) concordance showed poor agreement between post-neoadjuvant treatment (PNT) MRI and pathology. PNT MRI demonstrated a limited correlation with postoperative pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

While preoperative MRI is commonly used for restaging after NAT in rectal cancer, our study highlights its limited concordance with postoperative pathology. The sensitivity and specificity metrics, although reported in the literature, should be interpreted alongside concordance assessments for a comprehensive evaluation.

Surgical Outcomes in Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer Versus Standard Long-course Chemoradiation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the impact of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) for rectal cancers on surgical complications and surgical pathology when compared with standard long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT).

BACKGROUND

The oncological benefits of TNT are well published in previous meta-analyses, but there is little synthesized information on how it affects surgical outcomes. A recent study has suggested an increase in local recurrence and higher rates of breached total mesorectal excision (TME) plane in TNT patients.

METHODS

This study conformed to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A search was performed in Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane databases, EMBASE and CINAHL to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes between TNT and LCRT. Meta-analyses of pooled proportions between TNT and LCRT were performed, comparing primary outcomes of surgical mortality, morbidity and all reported complications; surgical-pathology differences, namely mesorectal quality, R0 resection rates, circumferential resection margin positive rates, and sphincter preservation rates. Death and progression of disease during neoadjuvant treatment period was also compared. Risk of bias of RCTs was performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool by 2 independent reviewers.

RESULTS

A total of 3185 patients with rectal cancer from 11 RCTs were included in the analysis: 1607 received TNT and 1578 received LCRT, of which 1422 (TNT arm) and 1391 (LCRT arm) underwent surgical resection with curative intent. There was no significant difference in mortality [risk ratio (RR)=0.86, 95% CI: 0.13-5.52, P =0.88, I2 =52%] or major complications (RR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.86-1.26, P =0.70, I2 =0%) between TNT and LCRT. There was a significantly higher risk of breached TME in TNT group on pooled analysis (RR=1.49, 95% CI: 1.03-12.16, P =0.03, I2 =0%), and on subgroup analysis there is higher risk of breached TME in those receiving extended duration of neoadjuvant treatment (>17 weeks from start of treatment to surgery) when compared with LCRT (RR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.06-2.44, P =0.03). No difference in R0 resection rates (RR=0.85, 95% CI: 0.66-1.10, P =0.21, I2 =15%), circumferential resection margin positive rates (RR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.65-1.16, P =0.35, I2 =10%) or sphincter preservation rates (RR=1.02, 95% CI: 0.83-1.25, P =0.88, I2 =57%) were observed. There was a significantly lower risk of progression of disease to an unresectable stage during the neoadjuvant treatment period in TNT patients (RR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.39-0.92, P =0.03, I2 =18%). On subgroup analysis, it appears to favor those receiving extended duration of neoadjuvant treatment (RR=0.44, 95% CI: 0.26-0.80, P =0.002), and those receiving induction-type chemotherapy in TNT (RR=0.25, 95% CI: 0.07-0.88, P =0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

TNT increases rates of breached TME which can contribute to higher local recurrence rates. TNT, however, improves systemic control by reducing early progression of disease during neoadjuvant treatment period. Further research is warranted to identify patients that will benefit from this strategy.

Does Completeness of the Mesorectal Excision Still Correlate With Local Recurrence?

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the standard surgical procedure for rectal cancer treatment. Several studies have shown a close correlation between the prognosis of patients with rectal cancer and the completeness of the mesorectal specimen.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the correlation between macroscopic assessment of mesorectal excision and long-term oncological outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of an Institutional Review Board-approved database.

SETTINGS

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients with rectal cancer who were operated on between March 2016 and October 2019 were classified into 3 groups based on the mesorectal specimen quality: complete, near complete, and incomplete. Only patients with a follow-up of ≥2 years and without signs of preoperative distant disease were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Relationship between total mesorectal excision and local and distant recurrence rates in patients with rectal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients (35.5% females) were included in the analysis, with a mean age of 58.1 (SD 12) years and a mean BMI of 26.4 (SD 4.59) kg/m². Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was administered to 71% of patients, whereas 13.7% received total neoadjuvant therapy. Restorative procedures were performed in 107 patients (86.3%), whereas 17 patients (13.7%) underwent abdominoperineal resection. The majority of mesorectal excision specimens (87.09%) were complete or near complete. Local recurrence rates were 6.3% (1/16) in the incomplete and 7.4% (8/108) in the complete/near complete group ( p = 0.86). Metachronous distant metastases occurred in 6 patients (37.5%) in the incomplete group and in 24 patients (22.2%) in the complete/near complete group (p = 0.18). Thus, specimen quality did not appear to impact disease-free survival.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, single-center study with relatively short follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of a multidisciplinary approach and extensive use of neoadjuvant therapy, macroscopic completeness of total mesorectal excision may not be as valuable a prognosticator as in the past. Larger studies with longer follow-ups are needed to clarify these preliminary findings. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C129.

LA INTEGRIDAD DE LA ESCISIN MESORRECTAL TODAVA SE CORRELACIONA CON LA RECURRENCIA LOCAL

ANTECEDENTES:La escisión total desl mesorrecto es el estándar de oro para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto. Varios estudios han demostrado una estrecha correlación entre el pronóstico de los pacientes con cáncer de recto y la integridad espécimen mesorrectal.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la correlación entre la evaluación macroscópica de la escisión mesorrectal y los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer de recto.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos aprobada por el IRB.ENTORNO CLINICO:El estudio se realizó en un centro de referencia terciario de una sola institución.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes con cáncer de recto operados entre 3/2016-10/2019. Los pacientes se clasificaron en 3 grupos, según la calidad del espécimen mesorrectal: completo, casi completo e incompleto. Solo se incluyeron pacientes con seguimiento >2 años y sin signos de enfermedad a distancia preoperatoria.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Identificar la relación entre la escisión mesorrectal total y las tasas de recurrencia local y a distancia en pacientes con cáncer de recto.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron 124 pacientes (35,5% mujeres) con una edad media de 58,1 años (DE 12) y un índice de masa corporal medio de 26,4 (DE 4,59). Se administró quimiorradiación neoadyuvante al 71% de los pacientes, mientras que el 13,7% recibió terapia neoadyuvante total. Se realizaron procedimientos de restauración en 107 pacientes (86,3%), mientras que 17 pacientes (13,7%) se sometieron a resección abdominoperineal. La mayoría (87,09%) de los especímenes de escisión mesorrectal fueron completas o casi completas. Las tasas de recurrencia local fueron 1/16 (6,3%) en el grupo incompleto y 8/108 (7,4%) en el grupo completo/casi completo ( p = 0,86). Se produjeron metástasis a distancia metacrónicas en 6 pacientes (37,5%) en el grupo incompleto y 24 (22,2%) en el grupo completo/casi completo ( p = 0,18). Por lo tanto, la calidad del espécimen no pareció afectar la supervivencia libre de enfermedad.LIMITACIONES:Estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro con pequeño número de casos y seguimiento relativamente corto.CONCLUSIÓN:En la era de un enfoque multidisciplinario y el uso extensivo de la terapia neoadyuvante, la integridad macroscópica de la escisión total del mesorrecto, puede no ser un pronóstico tan valioso como en el pasado. Se necesitan estudios más amplios con períodos de seguimiento más prolongados para aclarar estos hallazgos preliminares. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C129 . (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Do differences in surgical quality account for the higher rate of R1 margins to lymph node metastases in right- versus left-sided Stage III colon cancer: A retrospective cohort study

AIM

Microscopically positive (R1) margins to lymph node metastases (R1LNM) are associated with poorer oncological outcomes in patients with Stage III colon cancer. R1LNM margins are more common in right-sided cancer, although the cause of this phenomenon is unknown. We sought to investigate whether differences in surgical quality account for the higher rate of R1LNM in right-sided cancers.

METHOD

Patients treated for Stage III colon cancer from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2018 were identified using the Danish national cancer registry. Indicators of surgical quality (mesocolic resection grade, median lymph node yield, and length to the distal colonic margin) were compared according to tumour site and margin status.

RESULTS

In all, 1765 patients were included, 981 (55.6%) with right-sided cancers. R1LNM margins were more common in right-sided cancers (14.4% vs. 6.1%, P < 0.001). All three surgical quality indicators were higher in patients with right-sided cancers (mesocolic resection planes 81.7% vs. 69.5%, P < 0.001; median lymph node yield 28 vs. 25, P < 0.001; ≥5 cm to the distal colon margin 81.2% vs. 53.6%, P < 0.001). When stratified according to margin status, no differences in mesocolic resection planes or resectate length were noted, whilst median lymph node yield was higher in patients with R1LNM margins (29 vs. 27, P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Surgical quality does not appear to be poorer in patients undergoing surgery for right-sided versus left-sided colon cancers in Denmark. Suboptimal surgery does not appear to be responsible for R1LNM margins, implying that these margins may be a surrogate for more aggressive biology.

Transanal versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision in Male Patients with Low Tumor Location after Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

Background. Since Sylla and Lacy successfully reported the transanal total mesorectal excision in 2010, taTME was considered to have the potential to overcome some problematic laparoscopic cases in male, low advanced rectal cancer. However, the evidence is still lacking. This study compared the short and long outcomes of taTME with laTME in these “challenging” patients to explore the advantages of taTME among the patients. Method. After propensity score matching analysis, 106 patients were included in each group from 325 patients who met the including standard. Statistical analysis was used to compare the differences of perioperative outcomes, histopathological results, and survival results between taTME and laTME groups. Results. The mean time of pelvic operation in the taTME group was significantly shorter than in the laTME group ( $62.2\pm 14.2$ mins vs $81.1\pm 18.9$ mins, $P=0.003$ ). The complication incidence rate and the rate of protective loop ileostomy in the taTME group were significantly lower than those in the laTME group (19.8% vs 38.7%, $P=0.003$ and 70.8% vs 92.5%, $P<0.001$ ). In long-term result, there was no significant difference between the two groups for 3-year OS (87.3% vs 85.4%, $P=0.86$ ) or 3-year DFS (74.9% vs 70.1%, $P=0.92$ ). The 2-year cumulative local recurrence rate was similar between the two groups (1.1% vs 5.8%, $P=0.22$ ). Conclusion. This study demonstrated that taTME might reduce the incidence of postoperative complications, especially of anastomotic leakage in these “challenging” patients. taTME may be considered to have clear advantages for “challenging” patients.

Sphincter-Saving Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision Provides Better Mesorectal Specimen and Good Oncological Local Control Compared with Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision in Male Patients with Mid-Low Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic rectal resection with total mesorectal excision is a technically challenging procedure, and there are limitations in conventional laparoscopy. A surgical robotic system may help to overcome some of the limitations. The aim of our study was to compare long-term oncological outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted as a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. One-hundred-three robotic and 84 laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excisions were performed by a single surgeon between January 2011 and January 2020. Patient characteristics, perioperative recovery, postoperative complications, pathology results, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The patients' characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Median operating time was longer in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (180 minutes versus 140 minutes, p=0.033). Macroscopic grading of the specimen in the robotic group was complete in 96 (93.20%), near complete in four (3.88%) and incomplete in three (2.91%) patients. In the laparoscopic group, grading was complete in 37 (44.04%), near complete in 40 (47.61%) and incomplete in seven (8.33%) patients (p=0.03). The median length of follow up was 48 (9-102) months in the robotic, and 75.6 (11-113) months in the laparoscopic group. Overall, five-year survival was 87% in the robotic and 85.3% in the laparoscopic groups. Local recurrence rates were 3.8% and 7.14%, respectively, in the robotic and laparoscopic groups (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Sphincter-saving robotic total mesorectal excision is a safe and feasible tool, which provides good mesorectal integrity and better local control in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer.

Transanal total mesorectal excision outcomes for advanced rectal cancer in a complex surgical population

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard for oncologic resection in low and mid rectal cancers. However, abdominal approaches to TME can be hampered by poor visibility, inadequate retraction, and distal margin delineation. Transanal TME (taTME) is a promising hybrid technique that was developed to mitigate the difficulties of operating in the low pelvis and to optimize the circumferential resection and distal margins.

METHODS

The objective of this study was to characterize our experience implementing taTME at our institution in a technically challenging patient population. We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent taTMEs between November 2013 and May 2019 for rectal cancer at a tertiary community cancer center. Outcome measures included pathologic grading of TME specimen, post-operative complications, and oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients with mid and low rectal cancer underwent low anterior resection via taTME. The most common staging modality was rectal MRI which demonstrated T3 or T4 tumors in 89% of our patients prior to neoadjuvant. Eighty-six percent of patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The initial cases were performed sequentially as a single team, but we later transitioned to a synchronous, two-team approach. Ninety-one percent of TME grades were complete or near complete. Only one patient (2.3%) had a positive circumferential margin. Six patients developed anastomotic leaks with an overall anastomotic complication rate of 18.2%. Two patients (4.5%) with primary rectal cancer developed local recurrence, one of which developed multifocal local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the taTME approach on selected locally advanced low rectal cancers, especially in technically complex irradiated and obese male patients, has yielded comparably safe and effective outcomes to laparoscopic proctectomy.

Re-evaluation of possible vulnerable sites in the lateral pelvic cavity to local recurrence during robot-assisted total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

Despite mechanical and technical improvements in laparoscopic and robot-assisted (LAR) rectal cancer procedures, the absence of prognostic disparities among various approaches cannot improve the quality of TME. The present study re-evaluated robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (TME) procedures to determine whether these procedures may reveal technical faults that may increase the rate of local recurrence (LR).

METHODS

This study enrolled 886 consecutive patients with rectal cancer, who underwent curative robot-assisted LAR at Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea) between July 2010 and August 2017 (the first vs second period; n = 399 vs 487). The quality of TME and lateral pelvic mesorectal excision (LPME) were analyzed, as were LR rates and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Complete TME and LPME were achieved in 89.2% and 80.1% of these patients, respectively, with ≤ 1% having incomplete TME excluding intramesorectal excision. LR rates were 13.5 and 14.5 times higher in patients with incomplete TME and LPME, respectively, than in patients with complete TME and LPME (14.8% vs 1.1% and 8.7% vs 0.6%; p < 0.001 each by univariate analyses). Multivariate analyses showed that defective LPME was independently associated with incomplete TME and vice versa (p < 0.001). Cox regression analysis showed that defective LPME was independently correlated with reduced 5-year disease-free survival rate (hazard ratio, 1.563; 95% confidence interval, 1.052-2.323; p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

LR in rectal cancer patients was largely due to incomplete LPME, which was significantly associated with incomplete TME. Complete LPME may enhance the likelihood of complete TME, reducing LR rates.

The multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer

Rectal cancer treatment has evolved during the past 40 years with the use of a standardized surgical technique for tumour resection: total mesorectal excision. A dramatic reduction in local recurrence rates and improved survival outcomes have been achieved as consequences of a better understanding of the surgical oncology of rectal cancer, and the advent of adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments to compliment surgery have paved the way for a multidisciplinary approach to disease management. Further improvements in imaging techniques and the ability to identify prognostic factors such as tumour regression, extramural venous invasion and threatened margins have introduced the concept of decision-making based on preoperative staging information. Modern treatment strategies are underpinned by accurate high-resolution imaging guiding both neoadjuvant therapy and precision surgery, followed by meticulous pathological scrutiny identifying the important prognostic factors for adjuvant chemotherapy. Included in these strategies are organ-sparing approaches and watch-and-wait strategies in selected patients. These pathways rely on the close working of interlinked disciplines within a multidisciplinary team. Such multidisciplinary forums are becoming standard in the treatment of rectal cancer across the UK, Europe and, more recently, the USA. This Review examines the essential components of modern-day management of rectal cancer through a multidisciplinary team approach, providing information that is essential for any practising colorectal surgeon to guide the best patient care.

Synoptic Operative Reporting: Documentation of Quality of Care Data for Rectal Cancer Surgery

Operative reports can be used to evaluate quality of care indicators in surgical patients. This study evaluated documentation of preoperative and intraoperative quality of care indicators for rectal cancer surgery in synoptic reports and traditional dictated reports. Two surgeons independently reviewed 40 prospectively collected synoptic operative reports from rectal cancer cases and a case-matched historical cohort of 40 dictated reports. Rectal cancer–specific quality measures were scored in both report groups using two separate, previously validated checklists. Synoptic reports had significantly higher overall scores on both checklists 1 (mean adjusted score ± SD 76 ± 4 vs 41 ± 19, P < 0.01) and 2 (54 ± 3 vs 24 ± 11, P < 0.01; maximum score of 100 for both checklists). Synoptic reports scored significantly higher in reporting preoperative and intraoperative care indicators. Data were extracted quickly from synoptic reports (mean 3:46 vs 6:21, minutes:seconds to complete checklists, P < 0.05). Synoptic reports are associated with accurate documentation of quality of care data for rectal cancer surgery. Refining the synoptic templates used will further enhance the collection of quality indicators and reporting in complex oncologic procedures.

Trans-perineal minimally invasive approach during extralevator abdominoperineal excision for advanced low rectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study is to evaluate trans-perineal minimally invasive approach for extralevator abdominoperineal excision (TP-ELAPE) in a synchronous lithotomy position for locally advanced low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between May 2013 and February 2016, 14 patients with locally advanced low rectal cancer underwent TP-ELAPE for the perineal phase of extralevator abdominoperineal excision, and 18 patients underwent conventional ELAPE.

RESULTS

There was no positive circumferential resection margin in both groups. Patients who received TP-ELAPE had similar bowel perforation rate (7.1% vs. 5.6%, p = 1.000), longer transperineal operative time (100 vs. 40 min, p < 0.001) and higher surgical difficulty visual analog scale (VAS) scores (6 vs. 2, p < 0.001), while had shorter total procedure time (215 vs. 260 min, p = 0.015), lower VAS pain scores on day 1 postoperatively (5 vs. 6.5, p = 0.049), shorter postoperative anus exhausting time (22 h vs 28 h, p = 0.006), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (11.5 d vs 13.5d, p = 0.028) compared with patients who received conventional ELAPE. There was no local recurrence with median follow-up time of 53 months in the TP-ELAPE group and 51 months in the conventional ELAPE group. There were no differences for disease-free survival (p = 0.835) and overall survival (p = 0.829) between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TP-ELAPE approach in the synchronous lithotomy position might be a feasible approach for low rectal cancer, while ensuring a radical and safe surgical procedure.

Uptake of Total Mesorectal Excision and Total Mesorectal Excision Grading for Rectal Cancer: A Statewide Study

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is associated with decreased local recurrence and improved disease-free survival following rectal cancer resection. The extent to which total mesorectal excision has been adopted in the United States is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess trends in total mesorectal excision performance and grading in Michigan hospitals.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Trends in total mesorectal excision performance and grade assignment were analyzed by using χ tests and linear regression.

SETTINGS

Participating hospitals (initially 14 hospitals, now 38) abstracted medical records data for rectal cancer cases from 2007 to 2016.

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent rectal cancer resection were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The main outcome measures were surgeon-documented total mesorectal excision performance and pathologist-reported total mesorectal excision grade.

RESULTS

Of 510 rectal cancer cases, 367 (72.0%) had surgeon-reported total mesorectal excision performance and 78 (15.3%) had pathologist-reported total mesorectal excision grade. Between-hospital variability in total mesorectal excision performance ranged from 0% to 97% and total mesorectal excision grading ranged from 0% to 90%. Total mesorectal excision grading was associated with a higher likelihood of also having adequate lymph node assessment (88.5% versus 71.9%, p = 0.002). There has been a statistically significant trend toward an increase in total mesorectal excision grading in the original 14 hospitals (p = 0.001), but not in the complete cohort of all hospitals (p = 0.057).

LIMITATIONS

This is a retrospective cohort design with sampled rectal cancer cases. In addition, there is insufficient granularity to capture all factors associated with total mesorectal excision performance or grade assignment.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of total mesorectal excision performance and grade assignment are widely variable throughout the state of Michigan. Overall, grade assignment remains very low. This suggests an opportunity for quality improvement projects to increase total mesorectal excision performance and grading, involving both the surgeons and pathologists for effective implementation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B53. IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL Y LA CLASIFICACIÓN POR ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL PARA EL CÁNCER RECTAL: UN ESTUDIO A NIVEL ESTATAL.: La escisión mesorrectal total se asocia con una menor recurrencia local y una mejor supervivencia libre de enfermedad después de la resección del cáncer rectal. Se desconoce hasta que punto se ha adoptado la escisión mesorrectal total en los Estados Unidos.Se intento evaluar las tendencias en el rendimiento y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total en los hospitales de Michigan.Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo de la "Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative". Las tendencias en el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total y la asignación de grado se analizaron mediante pruebas de chi-cuadrada y regresión lineal.Los hospitales participantes (inicialmente 14 hospitales, ahora 38) extrajeron datos de registros médicos de los casos de cáncer rectal desde 2007 hasta 2016.Pacientes que se sometieron a resección de cáncer rectal.Las principales medidas de resultado fueron el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total documentado por el cirujano y el grado de escisión mesorrectal total informada por el patólogo.De 510 casos de cáncer rectal, 367 (72.0%) tenían un rendimiento de escisión mesorrectal total reportado por el cirujano y 78 (15.3%) tenían un grado de escisión mesorrectal total reportado por el patólogo. La variabilidad entre hospitales en el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total varió del 0 al 97% y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total varió del 0 al 90%. La clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total se asoció con una mayor probabilidad de tener también una evaluación adecuada de los ganglios linfáticos (88.5% versus 71.9%, p = 0.002). Ha habido una tendencia estadísticamente significativa hacia un aumento en la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total en los 14 hospitales originales (p = 0.001), pero no en la cohorte completa de todos los hospitales (p = 0.057).Diseño de cohorte retrospectivo con casos de cáncer rectal muestreados. Además, no hay suficiente granularidad para capturar todos los factores asociados con el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total o la asignación de grados.Las tasas de rendimiento de escisión mesorrectal total y asignación de grado son muy variables en todo el estado de Michigan. En general, la asignación de calificaciones sigue siendo muy baja. Esto sugiere una oportunidad para que los proyectos de mejora de la calidad aumenten el rendimiento y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total, involucrando tanto a los cirujanos como a los patólogos para una implementación efectiva. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B53.

Impact of a multidisciplinary training programme on outcome of upper rectal cancer by critical appraisal of the extent of mesorectal excision with postoperative MRI

BACKGROUND

Optimal management of patients with upper rectal cancer remains unclear. Partial mesorectal excision (PME) without neoadjuvant therapy is currently advocated for the majority of patients. Recent studies, however, reported a high risk of local recurrence and suboptimal surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a quality assurance initiative with postoperative MRI to improve outcomes in these patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent mesorectal excision with curative intent for rectal cancer in 2007-2013 were included. Postoperative MRI of the pelvis was performed 1 year after surgery. In 2011, a multidisciplinary workshop with focus on extent and completeness of surgery was held for training surgeons, pathologists and radiologists involved in treatment planning. Images of residual mesorectum and histopathological reports were reviewed with regard to the distal resection margin. Local recurrence after a minimum of 3 years' follow-up was compared between two cohorts from 2007-2010 and 2011-2013.

RESULTS

A total of 627 patients were included; postoperative MRI of the pelvis was done in 381 patients. The 3-year actuarial local recurrence rate in patients with upper rectal cancer improved from 12·9 to 5·0 per cent (P = 0·012). After the workshop, fewer patients with cancer of the upper rectum were selected to have PME (90·8 per cent in 2007-2010 versus 80·2 per cent in 2011-2013; P = 0·023), and fewer patients who underwent PME had an insufficient distal resection margin (61·7 versus 31 per cent respectively; P < 0·001).

CONCLUSION

Quality assessment of surgical practice may have a major impact on oncological outcome after surgery for upper rectal cancer.

Systematic review of educational interventions to improve contouring in radiotherapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Contouring is a critical step in the radiotherapy process, but there is limited research on how to teach it and no consensus about the best method. We summarize the current evidence regarding improvement of contouring skills.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Comprehensive literature search of the Pubmed-MEDLINE database, EMBASE database and Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies (independently examined by two investigators) that included baseline contouring followed by a re-contouring assessment after an educational intervention.

RESULTS

598 papers were identified. 16 studies met the inclusion criteria representing 370 participants (average number of participants per study of 23; range (4-141). Regarding the teaching methodology, 5/16 used onsite courses, 8/16 online courses, and 2/16 used blended learning. Study quality was heterogenous. There were only 3 randomized studies and only 3 analyzed the dosimetric impact of improving contouring homogeneity. Dice similarity coefficient was the most common evaluation metric (7/16), and in all these studies at least some contours improved significantly post-intervention. The time frame for evaluating the learning effect of the teaching intervention was almost exclusively short-time, with only one study evaluating the long-term utility of the educational program beyond 6 months.

CONCLUSION

The literature on educational interventions designed to improve contouring performance is limited and heterogenous. Onsite, online and blended learning courses have all been shown to be helpful, however, sample sizes are small and impact assessment is almost exclusively short-term and typically does not take into account the effect on treatment planning. The most effective teaching methodology/format is unknown and impact on daily clinical practice is uncertain.

Transanal total mesorectal excision combined with laparoscopic dissection: perioperative results and assessment of the mesorectal quality

OBJECTIVE

to assess the perioperative and postoperative results of transanal total mesorectal excision, as well as the quality of the specimens obtained by this technique.

METHODS

we conducted a prospective, descriptive study in consecutive patients with rectal adenocarcinoma located up to 10cm from the anal verge, without distant metastasis, subjected or not to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. We evaluated the presence of technical difficulties, conversion to open abdominal route, surgical time and intra and postoperative complications. Through histopathological analysis, we assessed the quality of the mesorectum, involvement of the proximal and distal margins and positivity of the circumferential, classifying quality of the mesorectum as complete, partially complete or incomplete resection.

RESULTS

between December 2016 and May 2019, 41 patients underwent transanal total mesorectal excision, of which 75% were classified as clinical stage III, 13% clinical stage II and 12% clinical stage I. The average distance between the anal verge and the lower border of the tumor was 6.2cm. Forty percent of the tumors were in the anterior rectal wall and 17% were circumferential. The average operative time was 189 minutes. The average hospital stay was 4.6 days. There were no in-hospital deaths. Eighty-two percent of the specimens were classified as complete resection.

CONCLUSION

transanal total mesorectal excision demonstrates adequate specimen quality and surgical margins, being associated with lower rates of perioperative complications, acceptable surgical time and short hospitalization.

Standardized Pathology Report for Colorectal Cancer, 2nd Edition

The first edition of the 'Standardized Pathology Report for Colorectal Cancer,' which was developed by the Gastrointestinal Pathology Study Group (GIP) of the Korean Society of Pathologists, was published 13 years ago. Meanwhile, there have been many changes in the pathologic diagnosis of colorectal cancer (CRC), pathologic findings included in the pathology report, and immunohistochemical and molecular pathology required for the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer. In order to reflect these changes, we (GIP) decided to make the second edition of the report. The purpose of this standardized pathology report is to provide a practical protocol for Korean pathologists, which could help diagnose and treat CRC patients. This report consists of "standard data elements" and "conditional data elements." Basic pathologic findings and parts necessary for prognostication of CRC patients are classified as "standard data elements," while other prognostic factors and factors related to adjuvant therapy are classified as "conditional data elements" so that each institution could select the contents according to the characteristics of the institution. The Korean version is also provided separately so that Korean pathologists can easily understand and use this report. We hope that this report will be helpful in the daily practice of CRC diagnosis.

The Time Between Chemoradiation and Surgery for Rectal Carcinoma Negatively Influences Mesorectal Excision Quality

Total mesorectal excision quality (TMEq) is a prognostic factor associated with local recurrence in rectal adenocarcinoma. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) reduces the risk of tumor recurrence, but may compromise TMEq. The time between NCRT and surgery (TTS) and how it influences TMEq and tumor control were evaluated. In prospective registry, 236 patients after NCRT and TME were analyzed. NCRT involved radiotherapy with 45 Gy to the pelvis, plus tumor boost dose 5.4 Gy with concurrent 5-fluorouracil infusion. NCRT was followed by TME after 9 weeks on average (median 9.4 ± SD 2.5). TMEq was parametrically analyzed by standard three-grade system. With median follow-up of 47.5 months, 3-year overall survival (OS) was 83.8%, disease-free survival (DFS) was 77.7%, and 6.4% was the rate of local recurrence (LR). TTS was not associated with OS, DFS, or LR. TMEq was found to be associated with LR in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate, where pathological tumor stage and resection margins remained dominant predictors. TMEq was negatively influenced by inferior location of the tumor, longer TTS, higher tumor and nodal stage, presence of tumor perforation, perineural invasion, and close/positive resection margins. Nonetheless, TTS remained a strong predictor of TMEq in multivariate analyses. TTS was proven to be an independent predictor of TMEq. With longer TTS, fewer complete TME with intact mesorectal plane were observed. However, TTS was not associated with survival deterioration or tumor recurrence. These were negatively influenced by other factors interfering with TMEq, especially by pathological tumor stage and resection margins.

Hospital and surgeon variation in positive circumferential resection margin among rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate variation in positive CRM at the surgeon and hospital levels and assess impact on disease-specific survival.

METHODS

Patients with stage I-III rectal cancer were identified in New York State. Bayesian hierarchical regressions estimated observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios for each surgeon/hospital. Competing-risks analyses estimated disease-specific survival among patients who were treated by surgeons/hospitals with O/E > 1 compared to those with O/E ratio ≤ 1.

RESULTS

Among 1,251 patients, 208 (17%) had a positive CRM. Of the 345 surgeons and 118 hospitals in the study, 99 (29%) and 48 (40%) treated a higher number of patients with CRM than expected, respectively. Patients treated by surgeons with O/E > 1 (HR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.16, 1.67) and those treated at hospitals with O/E > 1 (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.11, 1.85) had worse disease-specific survival.

DISCUSSION

Surgeon and hospital performance in positive CRM is associated with worse prognosis suggesting opportunities to enhance referral patterns and standardize care.

The Estimate of the Impact of Coccyx Resection in Surgical Field Exposure During Abdominal Perineal Resection Using Preoperative High-Resolution Magnetic Resonance

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the improvement in surgical exposure by removal of the coccyx, during abdomino-perineal resection (APR), in rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 29 consecutive patients with rectal cancer was carried out. Using MR T2 sagittal series, the solid angle was estimated using the angle determined by the anterior resection margin and the tip of coccyx (no coccyx resection) or the tip of last sacral vertebra (coccyx resection). The solid angle provides an estimate of the tridimensional surface area provided by an original angle resulting in the best estimate of the surgeon's view/exposure to the critical dissecting point of choice (anterior rectal wall). The difference ("Gain") in surgical field exposure by removal of the coccyx was compared by the solid angle variation between the two estimates (with and without the coccyx).

RESULTS

Routine removal of the coccyx determines an average 42% (95% CI 27-57%) gain in surgical field exposure area facing the anterior rectal wall at the level of the prostate/vagina by the surgeon. Fifteen (51%) patients had ≥30% (median) estimated gain in surgical field exposure by coccygectomy. There was no association between BMI, age or gender and estimated gain in surgical field exposure area.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine removal of the coccyx during APR may result in an average increase in 42% in surgical field exposure during APR's perineal dissection. Precise estimation of surgical field exposure gain by removal of the coccyx may be predicted by MR sagittal series for each individual patient.

Histopathological Analysis of 173 Consecutive Patients with Colorectal Carcinoma: A Pathologist's View

Background

Worldwide, colorectal carcinomas are the third most common carcinomas in men and the second most common carcinomas in women. Pathological examination of rectum specimens requires special attention for correctly evaluating many prognostically important factors. In this study, we present pathological results of 173 lower anterior resection (LAR) and abdominoperineal resection (APR) specimens retrospectively evaluated.

Material/Methods

We included 173 LAR and APR specimens in this study. Patients were evaluated in the Istanbul Ekin Private Pathology Laboratory and underwent surgery at Çanakkale State Hospital, General Surgery Clinic.

Results

Of the 173 specimens, 15 (8.7%) were APR and 158 (91.3%) were LAR specimens. Ninety-four patients (54.3%) were males and 79 patients (45.7%) were females. The mean age of the patients was 63.5 years (range 26–90 years). In the histopathological examination, malignant neoplasm was detected in 172 of the cases (99.4%) and benign endometriosis was detected in 1 of the cases (0.6%). There were 151 (87.2%), 8 (4.6%), 5 (2.9%), 1 (0.6%), 1 (0.6%), 1 (0.6%), 1 (0.6%), 1 (0.6%), and 4 (2.3%) patients with adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, intramucosal adenocarcinoma in the setting of a high-grade tubulovillous adenoma, synchronous colon/prostate adenocarcinoma, malignant melanoma, signet ring cell carcinoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, endometriosis, and adenocarcinoma diagnosed by the examination of colonoscopic biopsy specimens that showed complete regression with neoadjuvant therapy, respectively.

Conclusions

When evaluating specimens from patients with colorectal carcinoma, pathological evaluation, which is one of the most fundamental pillars in managing patients with cancer, must be performed carefully and meticulously. Each pathological parameter should be evaluated carefully and clinicians and pathologists should evaluate these cases together.

Association of Plane of Total Mesorectal Excision With Prognosis of Rectal Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Previous retrospective studies have shown that surgical quality affects local control in rectal cancer..

Objective

In this secondary end point analysis, we evaluated the prognostic effect of the total mesorectal excision (TME) plane in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase 3 randomized clinical trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The CAO/ARO/AIO-04 trial enrolled 1236 patients with cT3-4 and/or node-positive rectal adenocarcinoma from 88 centers in Germany between July 25, 2006, and February 26, 2010.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to receive treatment with standard fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) alone (control arm) or oxaliplatin (experimental arm) followed by TME and adjuvant chemotherapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The TME quality (mesorectal, intramesorectal, and muscularis propria plane) was prospectively assessed in 1152 operation specimens. An assessment was performed independently by pathologists and surgeons. The results were correlated with clinicopathologic data and the clinical outcome was tested, including multivariable analysis with the Cox regression model.

Results

Of 1152 German Caucasian participants, 332 (28.8) were women and the mean age was 63 years. The plane of TME was mesorectal in 930 patients (80.7%), intramesorectal in 169 (14.7%), and muscularis propria in 53 (4.6%). In a univariable analysis, the TME plane was significantly associated with 3-year disease-free survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 73.1-78.8 vs 61.6-76.0 vs 55.6-81.3, respectively; P = .01), cumulative incidence of local and distant recurrences (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 2.0-4.5 vs 1.2-8.1 vs 2.5-20.5, respectively; P < .001; and mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 17.0-22.4 vs 18.3-32.0 vs 14.2-39.0, respectively; P = .03, respectively), and overall survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 88.3-92.3 vs 79.7-91.0 vs 81.6-98.7, respectively; P = .02). In contrast to the pathologist-based evaluation, the assessment of TME plane by the operating surgeon failed to demonstrate prognostic significance for any of these clinical end points. In a multivariable analysis, the plane of surgery (mesorectal vs muscularis propria TME) constituted an independent factor for local recurrence (P = .002).

Conclusions and Relevance

This phase 3 randomized clinical trial confirms the long-term clinical effect of TME plane quality on local recurrence, as initially reported in the MRC CR07 study. The data highlight the key role of pathologists and surgeons in the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00349076.

Transanal transabdominal TME: how far can we push it?

Over many decades, advances in surgical technology, such as the use of the electrocautery Bovie, development of minimally invasive and advanced endoscopic platforms and the ability to create and maintain pneumorectum have propelled surgical techniques forward to today, with development of the transanal total mesorectal excision TME (taTME) for en bloc resection of rectal cancers. The transanal platform offers, for now, a viable alternative to perform safe and oncologically sound TME, especially favorable in cases of low rectal lesions in a narrow pelvis post neoadjuvant treatment. The aspiration of the colorectal community remains to continue to push the operative boundaries whilst maintaining safe oncological principals with the best possible functional outcomes for patients. In this article we review this evolving technique and focus on future directions.

Variability of clinical target volume delineation for rectal cancer patients planned for neoadjuvant radiotherapy with the aid of the platform Anatom-e

Objective

Delineation of treatment volumes is a major source of uncertainties in radiotherapy (RT). This is also true for rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant RT, with a potential impact on treatment quality. We investigated the role of the digital platform Anatom-e (Anatom-e Information Sytems Ltd., Houston, Texas) in increasing the compliance to follow a specific treatment protocol in a multicentric setting.

Materials and methods

Two clinical cases of locally advanced rectal cancer were chosen. Participants were instructed to follow the 2009 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group consensus atlas and asked to manually segment clinical target volumes (CTVs), for both patient 1 and 2, on day 1 with and without the use of Anatom-e. After one week (day 2), the same radiation oncologist contoured again, with and without Anatom-e, the same CT series. Intraobserver (Intra-OV) and interobserver (Inter-OV) variability were evaluated with the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), the Hausdorff distance (HD) and mean distance to agreement (MDA).

Results

For clinical case 1, no significant difference was found for Intra-OV and Inter-OV. For clinical case 2, no significant difference was found for Intra-OV but a statistically significant difference was found for Inter-OV in DSC when using or not the platform. Mean DCS was 0.65 (SD: ±0.64; range: 0.58-0.79) for day 1 vs reference volume without Anatom-e and 0.72 (SD: ±0.39; range: 0.67-0.77) (p = 0.03) with it. Mean MDA was lower with Anatom-e (3.61; SD: ±1.33; range: 2.85-4.78) than without (4.14; SD: ±2.97; range: 2.18-5.21), with no statistical significance (p = 0.21) The use of Anatom-e decreased the SD from 2.97 to 1.33. Mean HD was lower with Anatom-e (26.06; SD: ±2.05; range: 24.08-32.62), with no statistical significance (p = 0.14) compared to that without (31.39; SD: ±1.31; range: 26.14-48.72).

Conclusions

The use of Anatom-e decreased the Inter-OV in the CTV delineation process for locally advanced rectal cancer with complex disease presentation planned for neoadjuvant RT. This system may be potentially helpful in increasing the compliance to follow shared guidelines and protocols.

Rectal cancer and the pathologist

Examination of the rectum by pathologists is instrumental in the management of patients affected by rectal carcinoma. That role includes evaluation of multiple gross and microscopic features that convey prognostic implications. The analysis is based on the authors' experience handling rectal specimens along with review of the pertinent literature in these areas: margins of excision, quality of the mesorectum, diligence and techniques to sample lymph nodes, tumor budding, grading of residual amount of carcinoma after preoperative therapy, vascular/perineural invasion, and staging the tumor. Pathologists must communicate the findings in a clear manner. Evaluation of margins and completeness of mesorectum are markers of the quality of surgical excision. The number of lymph nodes obtained and examined is dependent in great part on the diligence of the pathologist finding them in the mesenteric adipose tissue. There are grades for budding and response to prior chemoradiation therapy. The location of vascular invasion (extramural vs. intramural) may predict aggressive behavior. Pathologists proactively are to choose sections of tumor for molecular testing. Meticulous macro- and microscopic evaluation of specimens for rectal carcinoma by pathologist is needed to determine an accurate assessment of staging and other prognostic factors. The modern pathologists play a pivotal part in the care and management of patients suffering from rectal adenocarcinoma. That role goes from the initial histological diagnosis to the gross and microscopic examination of the excised specimens. Based on that examination pathologists issue statements that not only evaluate the quality of the surgical procedure, but also through the application of molecular tests they give light on prognostic factors and information for therapeutic purposes.

The quality of total mesorectal excision specimen: A review of its macroscopic assessment and prognostic significance

As a surgical procedure which could significantly lower the recurrence rate of cancers, total mesorectal excision (TME) has been the gold standard for middle and lower rectal cancer treatment. However, previous studies have shown that the procedure did not achieve the ideal theoretical local recurrence rates of rectal cancers. Some researchers pointed out it was very likely that not all so-called TME treatments completely removed the mesorectum, implying that some of these TME surgical treatments failed to meet oncological quality standards. Therefore, a suitable assessment tool for the surgical quality of TME is necessary. The notion of “macroscopic assessment of mesorectal excision (MAME)” was put forward by some researchers as a better assessment tool for the surgical quality of TME and has been confirmed by a series of studies. Besides providing rapid and accurate surgical quality feedbacks for surgeons, MAME also effectively assesses the prognosis of patients with rectal cancer. However, as a new assessment tool used for TME surgical quality, MAME has an only limited influence on the current guidelines and is yet to be widely applied in most countries. The aims of this review are to provide a detailed introduction to MAME for clinical practice and to summarize the current prognostic significance of MAME.

Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer

AIM

To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery at our department from January 2009 to December 2013 were enrolled in this retrospective study. The primary end points were 3-year local recurrence and overall and disease-free survival (DFS) rates. Secondary end points were intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic group had longer operative time (165.0 versus 140.0, P < .001), less blood loss (20.0 versus 40.0, P < .001), shorter length of incision (5.0 versus 18.0, P < .001), and more lymph node harvested (11.0 versus 9.0, P = .002). However, time to first flatus (P = .941), postoperative hospital stay (P = .095), postoperative complications (P = .155), and 30-day mortality (P = .683) was similar between two groups. With the median follow-up period of 65 months, the 3-year local recurrence rate was 4.3% in laparoscopic group and 7.5% in open group (P = .077); the 3-year overall and DFS rates were similar in two groups (85.9% versus 88.8%, P = .229 and 76.9% versus 79.2%, P = .448, respectively); and the overall and DFS curves were comparable between two groups (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.858, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.709-1.037, P = .112 and HR = 1.076, 95% CI 0.834-1.389, P = .275, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is safe and has equivalent long-term oncologic outcomes for low rectal cancer when compared to open surgery. Furthermore, large-scale, prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm the present findings.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Pneumodissection of Retroperitoneal Structures Eases Laparoscopic Rectal Resection

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision is effective and safe but often technically challenging because of inadequate exposure. Transanal total mesorectal excision was introduced to mitigate this limitation and improve the quality of mesorectal dissection in even the most challenging cases. Currently, the technique for transanal total mesorectal excision dissection is not standardized.

TECHNIQUE

The sequential approach to transanal total mesorectal excision mirrors the principles of the transanal abdominal transanal procedure. It begins with the transanal step, followed by the laparoscopic step, and then the transanal total mesorectal excision. The perirectal space is entered via a full-thickness dissection of the anterior rectal wall. Carbon dioxide is left flowing, widening the embryonic planes between the mesorectal and pelvic fascias, then moving upward through the retroperitoneal space. The surgeon switches to the abdominal field and begins laparoscopic dissection, consisting of inferior mesenteric artery dissection and division, inferior mesenteric vein dissection and division, and possible splenic flexure dissection. Pneumodissection facilitates this procedure by distancing the inferior mesenteric artery from the hypogastric nerves and opening the embryonic fusion plane between the Toldt and Gerota fascias to allow faster division of the left colon lateral attachments. The operation continues with a switch to the perineal field and mesorectal excision.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients underwent transanal total mesorectal excision as described. Mean operative time was 185.0 + 87.5 minutes (range, 60-480 min), and there was no conversion to open surgery. Postoperative morbidity was 33.3%. Mortality rate at 30 days was 1.96% (2 cases). Quality of mesorectal excision according to Quirke was assessed in all of the specimens and found to be complete in 99 cases (97.1%) and nearly complete in 2.9% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal total mesorectal excision may benefit from pneumodissection, expedites the laparoscopic step, and the sequential approach facilitates the visualization of the correct dissection planes. The safety and cost-effectiveness of the procedure still warrant consideration. See Video at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A418.

Significant Individual Variation Between Pathologists in the Evaluation of Colon Cancer Specimens After Complete Mesocolic Excision

BACKGROUND

After the introduction of complete mesocolic excision, a new pathological evaluation of the resected colon cancer specimen was introduced. This concept has quickly gained acceptance and is often used to compare surgical quality. The grading of colon cancer specimens is likely to depend on both surgical quality and the training of the pathologist.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to validate the principles of the pathological evaluation of colon cancer specimens.

DESIGN

This was an exploratory study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in Aarhus, Denmark, and Leeds, United Kingdom.

PATIENTS

Colon cancers specimens were used.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The agreement of gradings between participants was of interest. Four specialist GI pathologists and 2 abdominal surgeons evaluated 2 rounds of colon cancer specimens, each at 2 separate time points. Each round contained 50 specimens. After the first round, a protocol of detailed principles for the grading procedure was agreed on. Results from an experienced pathologist were considered as the reference results.

RESULTS

In the first round, the distribution of gradings between participants showed substantial variation. In the second round, the variation was reduced. Intraobserver agreement was mostly fair to good, whereas interobserver agreement was frequently poor. This did not significantly change from round 1 to round 2.

LIMITATIONS

The small sample size of 100 specimens provided a very small number of specimens resected in the muscularis propria plane, which renders the evaluation of this group potentially unreliable. The evaluations were made on photos and not on fresh specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates significant variation in the pathological evaluation of colon cancer specimens. It demonstrates that it cannot be used in clinical studies, and care should be taken when comparing results between different hospitals.

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between transanal and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for the treatment of mid and low rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

AIM

The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and short-term clinical outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) comparing with laparoscopy total mesorectal excision (LapTME) for mid and low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Relevant studies were searched from the databases of Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The qualities of all of the included studies were evaluated using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The synthesized outcomes were pooled using fixed-effects models or random-effects models, which weighted the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). A funnel plot was used to evaluate the publication bias.

RESULTS

Seven original studies including 209 TaTME patients and 257 LapTME patients with rectal cancer met the inclusion criteria in this meta-analysis. Compared with LapTME, TaTME showed a longer CRM, lower rate of positive CRM, complete TME rate, and less operative time. There were no significant differences in the outcomes of the harvested lymph nodes, distal margin distance, hospital stay, intraoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, postoperative complications, reoperation, readmission, or conversion between the TaTME group and the LapTME group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with LapTME, TaTME is a feasible and safe approach for patients with mid and low rectal cancer. In addition, TaTME showed a better short-term clinical outcomes, such as a longer CRM, lower risk of positive CRM, higher complete quality of TME rate, and shorter operative duration. Further prospective studies with long-term follow-up are required.

Review of the quality of total mesorectal excision does not improve the prediction of outcome

AIM

A fair to moderate concordance in grading of the total mesorectal excision (TME) surgical specimen by local pathologists and a central review panel has been observed in the PROCARE (Project on Cancer of the Rectum) project. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the difference, if any, in the accuracy of predicting the oncological outcome through TME grading by local pathologists or by the review panel.

METHOD

The quality of the TME specimen was reviewed for 482 surgical specimens registered on a prospective database between 2006 and 2011. Patients with a Stage IV tumour, with unknown incidence date or without follow-up information were excluded, resulting in a study population of 383 patients. Quality assessment of the specimen was based on three grades including mesorectal resection (MRR), intramesorectal resection (IMR) and muscularis propria resection (MPR). Using univariable Cox regression models, local and review panel histopathological gradings of the quality of TME were assessed as predictors of local recurrence, distant metastasis and disease-free and overall survival. Differences in the predictions between local and review grading were determined.

RESULTS

Resection planes were concordant in 215 (56.1%) specimens. Downgrading from MRR to MPR was noted in 23 (6.0%). There were no significant differences in the prediction error between the two models; local and central review TME grading predicted the outcome equally well.

CONCLUSION

Any difference in grading of the TME specimen between local histopathologists and the review panel had no significant impact on the prediction of oncological outcome for this patient cohort. Grading of the quality of TME as reported by local histopathologists can therefore be used for outcome analysis. Quality control of TME grading is not warranted provided the histopathologist is adequately trained.

Technologies, technical steps, and early postoperative results of transanal TME

INTRODUCTION

First described in 1982, TME overcomes most of the concerns regarding adequate local control after anterior rectal resection. TME requires close sharp dissection along the so-called Heald's plane down to the levators, with distal dissection often cumbersome. In recent years, Transanal TME was introduced with the aim to improve distal rectal dissection and quality of mesorectal excision.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective, non-randomized study, started in 2013, is currently ongoing in two Italian Centers. Study objectives were assessing the safety of TaTME and TME quality. TaTME technique and technologies as performed in these centers and cumulative results at ≤30 postoperative days of the first 102 patients are reported.

RESULTS

Early postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were 33.3% (34 pts, 16 Clavien-Dindo I + II and 18 Clavien-Dindo III + IV + V), and 1.96% (two deaths), respectively. The quality of mesorectal excision according to Quirke was: complete in 97.1% and nearly complete in 2.9% of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm the effectiveness of TaTME, especially regarding the quality of the mesorectal dissection. Open questions regarding standardization, anatomical landmarks, indications, morbidity (with special regard to local infection and sepsis), learning curve and oncological outcomes require further answers from larger studies and RCTs before definitive validation of this procedure.  .

The circumferential resection margins status: A comparison of robotic, laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer (RC) is now widely performed via the laparoscopic approach, but robotic-assisted surgery may overcome some limitations of laparoscopy in RC treatment. We compared the rate of positive circumferential margins between robotic, laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision (TME) for RC in our institution.

METHODS

Mid and low rectal adenocarcinoma patients consecutively submitted to robotic surgery were compared to laparoscopic and open approach. From our prospective database, 59 patients underwent robotic-assisted rectal surgery from 2012 to 2015 (RTME group) were compared to our historical control group comprising 200 open TME (OTME group) and 41 laparoscopic TME (LTME group) approaches from July 2008 to February 2012. Primary endpoint was to compare the rate of involved circumferential resection margins (CRM) and the mean CRM between the three groups. Secondary endpoint was to compare the mean number of resected lymph nodes between the three groups.

RESULTS

CRM involvement was demonstrated in 20 patients (15.5%) in OTME, 4 (16%) in LTME and 9 (16.4%) in the RTME (p = 0.988). The mean CRM in OTME, LTME and RTME were respectively 0.6 cm (0-2.7), 0.7 cm (0-2.0) and 0.6 cm (0-2.0) (p = 0.960). Overall mean LN harvest was 14 (0-56); 16 (0-52) in OTME, 13 (1-56) in LTME and 10 (0-45) in RTME (p = 0.156).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that robotic TME has the same oncological short-term results when compared to the open and laparoscopic technique, and it could be safely offered for the treatment of mid and low rectal cancer.

Predictors of circumferential resection margin involvement in surgically resected rectal cancer: A retrospective review of 23,464 patients in the US National Cancer Database

INTRODUCTION

The circumferential resection margin (CRM) is a key prognostic factor after rectal cancer resection. We sought to identify factors associated with CRM involvement (CRM+).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of the National Cancer Database, 2004-2011. Patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical resection and had a recorded CRM were included. Multivariable analysis of the association between clinicopathologic characteristics and CRM was performed. Tumor <1 mm from the cut margin defined CRM+.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Of 23,464 eligible patients, 13.3% were CRM+. Factors associated with CRM+ were diagnosis later in the study period, lack of insurance, advanced stage, higher grade, undergoing APR, and receiving radiation. Nearly half of CRM+ patients did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. CRM+ patients who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy were more likely to be female, older, with more comorbidities, smaller tumors, earlier clinical stage, advanced pathologic stage, and CEA-negative disease compared to those who received it.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors associated with CRM+ include features of advanced disease, undergoing APR, and lack of health insurance. Half of CRM+ patients did not receive neoadjuvant treatment. These represent cases where CRM status may be modifiable with appropriate pre-operative selection and multidisciplinary management.

Is transanal total mesorectal excision a reproducible and oncologically adequate technique? A pilot study in a single center

PURPOSE

An oncologically effective total mesorectal excision (TME) still represents a technical challenge, especially in the presence of a low rectal cancer and anatomical restraints such as obesity or narrow pelvis. Recently, few reports have shown that transanal TME was feasible and associated with good outcomes. Nevertheless, a widespread employment of the technique has yet to happen due to the doubts about the reproducibility of the results outside a tertiary specialized center.

METHODS

Between February 2014 and June 2015, patients with low rectal cancer underwent a transanal TME with laparoscopic assistance. The end points included the oncologic adequacy of the mesorectal excision and the perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Eleven patients (9 male, median age 70.5 years) with proven low rectal cancer were enrolled in the study. The median distance of the tumor from the anal verge was 5 cm (2-7). Four patients (36.4 %) received preoperative chemoradiation. The median operative time was 360 min (275-445). Postoperative morbidity (36.4 %) included one (9.1 %) anastomotic leak requiring a reoperation. The median length of hospital stay was 8 days (3-28). The median distance from the circumferential and distal resection margins were, respectively, 5 (1-20) and 10 (5-20) mm, and the mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 21.7 (11-50). All cases had a complete or nearly complete mesorectal plane of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Although technically challenging, the initial results suggest that transanal TME could be a feasible, oncologically safe, and reproducible operation. However, more robust studies are required to assess the short- and long-term outcomes.

Mesorectal pathologic assessment in two grades predicts accurately recurrence, positive circumferential margin, and correlates with survival

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the prognostic value of the mesorectum quality assessed in a two-grade system compared with a classic system.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer were included (n = 103). Mesorectum was assessed into three grades (classic system: complete, nearly complete, incomplete) and compared with a two-grade system (adequate, inadequate).

RESULTS

Mesorectum was complete in 62 (60.25%) patients, nearly complete in 21, and incomplete in 20. Reassessment showed adequate mesorectum in 83 (80.5%) patients and inadequate in 20. A R0 resection was achieved in 90.4% of adequate mesorectum and in 65% of inadequate mesorectum (P = 0.006). Recurrence was present in 18% of adequate mesorectum patients as compared with 50% of inadequate mesorectum (P = 0.003). The classic system failed to accurately predict the 5-year survival rate between complete (78.9%) and nearly complete (86.2%) categories (P = 0.235); whereas a two grading system showed a 5-year survival rate of 80.8% for adequate versus 39.3% for inadequate (P = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

High recurrence occurred in inadecuate mesorectum patients and was correlated with R1/R2 resections, positive margins, and decreased survival. We propose a simplified classification of mesorectum that correlates with survival and overall recurrence.

Current concepts of colorectal cancer resection pathology

The discussion of pathology results is one of the important items in the multidisciplinary meeting. These results describe not only the adequacy of earlier treatments (neoadjuvant therapy, surgery), but guide subsequent treatment decisions by providing staging information and additional prognostic and predictive factors. In the era of next-generation sequencing, every so often the emphasis is put on the molecular background of tumours, but the information that can be retrieved from the resection specimen remains essential for optimal patient care. In the current review the different surgical approaches will be described, together with the relevant macroscopic evaluations. Microscopic features will be addressed, giving an overview that is aimed at optimal information exchange in the multidisciplinary meeting. Finally, special requirements for reporting local excisions and specimen after neoadjuvant therapy will be discussed.

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.

Scoring the quality of total mesorectal excision for the prediction of cancer-specific outcome

AIM

A three-grade system for macroscopic evaluation of the resection plane is used to describe the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME). In several studies, two of the three grades have been combined when analysing the outcome. The aim of our study was to compare the predictive value of the three-graded with that of a two-graded TME score.

METHOD

The quality of TME in 1382 patients who underwent elective resection for mid or low rectal adenocarcinoma was registered by 65 hospitals in PROCARE, a Belgian multidisciplinary improvement project. Prediction of outcome based on the classic three-grade score was compared with a two-grade scoring system in which intramesorectal resection (IMR) was combined with mesorectal (MRR) or with muscularis propria resection (MPR). End-points included the local recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate (DMR), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among the 1382 resections, 63% were MRR, 27% IMR and 9% MPR. No significant differences were found in local recurrence between the different grades of TME. A two-grade score distinguishing MRR from the others was found to predict DMR, DFS and OS as well as the three-grade score.

CONCLUSION

The discriminatory and predictive value of a two-grade score, differentiating MRR from the combined IMR and MPR, was as good as the classic three-grade score.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal carcinoma: short-term outcomes and experience after 80 cases

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection for distal and mid-rectal cancer is associated with high positive resection margins. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a new treatment in which the rectum is dissected transanally according to TME principles. The short-term results and oncological follow-up of the first 80 patients were described.

METHODS

Between June 2012 and September 2014, all patients in the Gelderse Vallei Hospital and the VU University Medical Center with histologically proven distal or mid-rectal carcinomas without evidence of distant metastases underwent TaTME. Patients with T4 tumors were excluded. Transanal mobilization was performed with the aid of a single port and endoscopic instruments according to TME criteria.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were operated in a period of 2 years. Laparotomy was recommended and performed in four patients. Postoperative morbidity was 39%. Ten (12%) complications were graded as severe (Clavien-Dindo grade 3, 4 and 5) and needed re-intervention. Median operative time was 204 min (range 91-447). Median hospital stay was 8 days (range 3-41). Specimens were graded as complete in 88% of the patients, nearly complete in 9% and incomplete in 3%. A positive circumferential resection margin (<2 mm) was observed in two patients. During the two and half years study period, a local recurrence was observed in two patients.

CONCLUSION

TaTME is a safe alternative to standard laparoscopic TME in selected low-risk patients with rectal carcinoma when treated by an experienced colorectal team. In the future, randomized trials are necessary to prove its oncological safety.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: Outcomes after 140 Patients

BACKGROUND

The anatomic difficulties that we have to deal with in open surgery for rectal cancer have not been overcome with the laparoscopic approach. In the search for a solution, a change of concept arose: approaching the rectum from below. The main objectives of this study were to show the potential advantages of the hybrid transabdominal-transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME). This approach may improve quality of the mesorectal specimens. Second, proctectomy can be technically easier and more safely performed "down to up," which would result in shorter surgical times, lower conversion rates, and less morbidity.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective series of hybrid taTME was conducted from October 2011 to November 2014.

RESULTS

During the study period, 140 procedures were performed. Mean operative time was 166 minutes. There were no conversions or intraoperative complications. Macroscopic quality assessment of the resected specimen was complete in 97.1% and nearly complete in 2.1%. Thirty-day morbidity was minor (Clavien-Dindo I + II) in 24.2% and major (Clavien-Dindo III + IV) in 10 %. No patient died within the first 30 days postsurgery (Clavien-Dindo V). The mean follow-up was 15 months, with a 2.3% local recurrence rate and a 7.6% rate of systemic recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathologic analysis showed a very good macroscopic quality of TME specimens, which is the most important prognostic factor in rectal cancer. Intraoperative outcomes regarding conversion, surgical times, and intraoperative complications are very satisfactory. Short-term morbidity and oncologic outcomes are as good as in other laparoscopic TME series.

Pathologic processing of the total mesorectal excision

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the current optimal surgical treatment for patients with rectal carcinoma. A complete TME is related to lower local recurrence rates and increased patient survival. Many confounding factors in the patient's anatomy and prior therapy can make it difficult to obtain a perfect plane, and thus a complete TME. The resection specimen can be thoroughly evaluated, grossly and microscopically, to identify substandard surgical outcomes and increased risk of local recurrence. Complete and accurate data reporting is critical for patient care and helps surgeons improve their technique.

Higher risk of incomplete mesorectal excision and positive circumferential margin in low rectal cancer regardless of surgical technique

INTRODUCTION

Currently, the predominant question is whether a laparoscopic approach is comparatively radical in comparison with an open access approach, especially in the circumferential resection margin and quality of the completeness of total mesorectal excision. These factors are important in determining the quality of surgical care as well as long-term results of the treatment.

AIM

This article focuses on the evaluation of circumferential resection margins and on the quality of mesorectal excision of middle and lower rectum tumors. In addition, laparoscopic and open techniques are compared.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data were collected prospectively and stored in a rectal cancer registry over a 3-year period. The parameters studied were age, sex, body mass index, localization and topography of the tumor, clinical stage, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and its response, the type of surgery, character of the circumferential and distal margins, quality of the mesorectal excision, pT and pN.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-five patients were chosen for our study. Laparoscopy was performed in 53 operations and a conventional approach was performed in 72 operations. Complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 54.7% of laparoscopic operations versus 44.4% in the conventional technique; partially complete excision was performed in 20.8 and 12.5%, respectively. Incomplete excisions were described in 24.5 and 43.1% (p = 0.085). Positive circumferential margin occurred during laparoscopic surgery in 11 (20.8%) patients, and in the case of conventional resection in 27 (37.5%) patients (p = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed comparable results between laparoscopic and open access procedures during rectal resection. The results achieved, in particular in the quality of the mesorectal excision and negative circumferential resection margin, show that the laparoscopic approach is comparable to conventional surgical techniques, with an adequate surgical outcome, in the treatment of rectal cancer.

Improved quality of care for patients undergoing an abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

New diagnostics, the emergence of total mesorectal excision and neoadjuvant treatments have improved outcome for patients with rectal cancer. Patients with distal rectal cancer undergoing an abdominoperineal excision seem to do worse compared to those treated with sphinctersparing techniques. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of care for patients undergoing an abdominoperineal excision for distal rectal cancer during the last 15 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with rectal cancer, who underwent an abdominoperineal excision between December 1996 and December 2010 in 5 Dutch hospitals were analysed. Patients were divided into three cohorts; 1996-2001, 2001-2005 and 2006-2010. All data was extracted from medical records.

RESULTS

477 patients were identified. There was no significant difference in sex, age, BMI, prior pelvic surgery and ASA stages between the cohorts. MRI became a standard tool in the work-up, the use increased from 4.5% in the first, to 95.1% in the last cohort (p < 0.0001). Neoadjuvant treatment shifted from predominantly none (64.9% in cohort 1) to short course radiotherapy (66.7% in cohort 2) and chemoradiation therapy (55.7% in cohort 3). There was a trend towards a decreased circumferential resection margin involvement in the cohorts (18.8%, 16.7% and 11.4%; p = 0.142). Accidental bowel perforations have significantly decreased from 28.6%, and 21.7% to 9.2% in cohort 3 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Significant improvements in work-up, neoadjuvant and surgical treatment have been made for patients with low rectal cancer, undergoing an abdominoperineal excision. These improvements result in improved short term outcome.