Outcome after the introduction of a multimodality treatment program for locally advanced rectal cancer

A review of functional and surgical outcomes of gynaecological reconstruction in the context of pelvic exenteration

BACKGROUND

Radical surgical excision may be the only curative option for patients with advanced pelvic malignancy, but concerns surrounding the functional outcomes and survivorship of patients undergoing exenterative surgery remain. This is especially important in the context of vulvovaginal resection, where patients are often younger and surgery can have a profoundly negative impact on quality of life, body image and overall wellbeing. Reconstructive procedures are an important means of mitigating these adverse effects but outcomes are poorly described.

AIM

To define the outcomes associated with gynaecological reconstructive procedures following pelvic exenterative surgery and to compare them with the outcomes of those patients who did not undergo reconstruction.

METHODS

An international, multicentre retrospective investigation comparing the outcomes of reconstruction with no reconstruction. The protocol was prospectively registered (NCT05074069).

RESULTS

334 patients were included. 77 patients had a neovagina reconstructed, 139 patients underwent flap reconstruction and 118 were not reconstructed. Patients who underwent reconstruction had a longer operative time and hospital stay with an increased risk of minor perineal complications. Reconstruction did not confer an increased risk of surgical reintervention, and overall complication rates were equivalent. Procedure-specific major morbidity was 5.2 % and 11.5 % for neovaginal and flap reconstruction, respectively. 66 % of patients undergoing neovaginal reconstruction experienced no long term morbidity. 7 % developed neovaginal stenosis and 12 % suffered disease recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Neovaginal reconstruction is safe in carefully selected patients and offers specific advantages over alternative techniques, with few patients requiring reoperation. Primary closure does not increase perineal morbidity.

Consistency between POLARS and LARS scores regarding the incidence of low anterior resection syndrome in a Chilean population undergoing rectal surgery secondary to cancer in a high-volume hospital

AIM

The aim of this work was to evaluate the concordance between the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) and preoperative LARS (POLARS) scores regarding the incidence of LARS in a Chilean population undergoing rectal surgery for cancer in a high-volume hospital.

METHOD

The LARS score questionnaire, following telephone requests, was used to determine the presence and severity of LARS. The POLARS score was calculated based on variables described previously. Correlations and qualitative and quantitative concordance were evaluated using Spearman's correlation coefficient, the kappa coefficient and the Bland-Altman plot with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients met the inclusion criteria: 37.5% underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy, 61% underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) and 51.6% underwent ostomy. A total of 49% of patients did not present with LARS, whereas 28% had major LARS. The correlation between scales was poor, with a fair qualitative concordance to determine the presence/absence of LARS and a slight qualitative concordance to determine the degree of the intensity. The quantitative concordance was poor.

CONCLUSION

In the Chilean population, concordance between the LARS and POLARS scores was qualitatively fair to determine the presence/absence of the disease and qualitatively slight to determine the degree of intensity. We do not suggest using the POLARS score in the perioperative period in the Chilean population deliberately, as the score may help to determine the presence/absence of LARS but cannot determine its degree of intensity. Additional evaluations are required to determine the factors contributing to the degree of agreement between the scales.

Risk factors and clinical characteristics of rectal cancer recurrence after radical surgical treatment

<b><br>Introduction:</b> Recurrence of rectal cancer affects from 4% to even 50% of patients after surgical treatment. The incidence may be influenced by numerous factors depending on the patient, the characteristics of the tumor and the type and quality of the surgical technique used.</br> <b><br>Aim:</b> The aim of this study was to assess the clinical characteristics of rectal cancer recurrence, identify potential risk factors and role of patient surveillance after primary resection of rectal cancer.</br> <b><br>Materials and methods:</b> The study comprised patients operated on due to recurrence of rectal cancer at the Department of General and Colorectal Surgery of Medical University of Lodz between 2014 and 2020, who were in the follow-up program at the hospital's outpatient clinic after the primary surgery. Risk factors for disease recurrence were sought by analyzing the characteristics of the primary tumor, treatment history and postoperative care.</br> <b><br>Results:</b> Twenty-nine patients were included in the study, the majority (51.7%) of the patients were men. The largest group was represented by patients with stage II and III disease. The most frequently performed primary surgery was low anterior resection (LAR) (62.8%). 35% of patients received neoadjuvant treatment prior to primary surgery. We demonstrated that the lack of neoadjuvant treatment before primary surgery increases the risk of cancer recurrence nine times. Higher stage of disease at the point of primary surgery is associated with nearly seven times the risk of recurrence compared to stage I disease.</br> <b><br>Conclusions:</b> Optimal preoperative staging, reasonable neoadjuvant treatment, proper surgical technique and precise follow-up regimen are essential for further improvement of rectal cancer outcomes.</br>.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome and Quality of Life After Sphincter-Sparing Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Long-term Longitudinal Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Despite low anterior resection syndrome being a well-known consequence of sphincter-preserving rectal cancer surgery, the long-term effect on bowel function and quality of life is not fully understood.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to elucidate whether symptoms of low anterior resection syndrome change over time and if the correlation to quality of life is equivalent when measured at 2 time points.

DESIGN

This prospective cohort study included measurements at 2 time points (5 years between; range, 7.1-16.1 years from surgery to second follow-up).

SETTINGS

This multicenter study included patients from Sweden and Denmark.

PATIENTS

Patients were included if they were ≥18 years of age and underwent curative rectal cancer surgery with either total or partial mesorectal excision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes were measured with the low anterior resection syndrome questionnaire including a question assessing the impact of bowel function on quality of life and with the validated quality-of-life questionnaire EORTC QLQ-C30.

RESULTS

In total, 282 patients were included and there were no statistically significant differences in the distribution among the 3 groups (no, minor, and major low anterior resection syndrome) when comparing time points follow-up 1 with follow-up 2 (p = 0.455). At follow-up 2, 138 patients (49%) still experienced major impairment. No both statistically and clinically significant differences were seen in the mean score of EORTC QLQ-C30 when comparing the same low anterior resection syndrome group at follow-up 1 and follow-up 2, and the impact on quality of life was comparable. Global health status/quality of life was impaired in the major low anterior resection syndrome group at both follow-up 1 (p < 0.001) and follow-up 2 (p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The study design prevents an evaluation of causality.

CONCLUSIONS

Difficulties with low anterior resection syndrome and the impact on patients' quality of life persist over time. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A762.

Imaging Advances in Colorectal Cancer

The optimal management of rectal cancer is achieved through a shared multidisciplinary decision making process with accurate staging by imaging being critical for treatment planning. Good quality, high-resolution MRI has become the imaging gold standard as it allows consistent staging and stratification of patients into distinct prognostic groups according to MR-findings. Imaging features other than T and N have been proven to influence patient outcomes, and increasingly these features are taken into consideration when determining treatment options: distance of tumour to the potential circumferential margin (CRM), presence of tumour within the extramural rectal vessels (EMVI), discontinuous tumour deposits (N1c), relationship to the intersphincteric plane in low rectal tumours and to pelvic compartments in advanced disease. The presence or absence of proven adverse MR features should be included in the MRI report and shared with the patient when treatment choices are offered. MRI enables the identification of high risk tumours where the use of neoadjuvant therapy is justified and is a robust method of identifying patients with a strong likelihood of complete response after preoperative treatment.

Remaining cancer cells within the fibrosis after neo-adjuvant treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer

AIM

To analyse the incidence and distribution of remaining cancer cells within the fibrosis induced by preoperative chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

The histopathological specimens from 46 patients operated on with extensive surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer after CRT were examined. The extension of fibrosis in relation to the mesorectal fascia (MRF) and the distribution of cancer cells within the fibrosis was examined using routine haematoxylin-eosin staining. In addition, immunohistochemical staining with CK20 was done to examine if cancer cells were missed by routine pathological work up.

RESULTS

All specimens showed CRT induced fibrosis. Two specimens showed complete response without viable cancer cells (ypT0). The fibrosis was limited inside the MRF in three cases, adherent to or involved the MRF in ten cases and in 33 cases the fibrosis was obvious outside as well as inside the fascia. Twenty-one cases showed fibrosis on the surgical resection margin, and in 9 of these cancer cells were found on the surgical margin (R1, R2-resection). 37 patients had R0 resections and among those 24 showed fibrosis beyond the MFR and 13 had scattered cancer cells in the fibrosis along or outside the MRF.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of remaining cancer cells within the fibrosis was high in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with CRT. Frequently cancer cells were detected near the border of the fibrosis. A complete resection of the fibrosis is therefore recommended to achieve an R0 resection after neo-adjuvant treatment.

Pattern of rectal cancer recurrence after curative surgery

PURPOSE

After curative rectal cancer surgery, local recurrences manifest in 2.4-10% and distant metastases in 20-50% of patients. The effectiveness of different surveillance regimens is not well established. We evaluated the pattern of recurrence and the utility of different surveillance instruments. Risk factors for recurrence were also recorded.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprises 580 consecutive rectal cancer patients operated on at Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland, during 2005-2011. Data were collected from patient records. After exclusions, 481 patients treated with curative intent remained. Patients were followed up according to an intensive surveillance program.

RESULTS

Rectal cancer recurrence was observed in 124 patients (25.8%). Local recurrence manifested in 40 patients (8.3%) and distant metastases in 112 patients (23.3%). Recurrences were observed a median of 1.3 years after surgery. Twelve patients had to be followed up to find one local recurrence and four patients to find one distant metastasis. Recurrences detected during regular follow-up visits were discovered on average earlier than those detected in additional visits arranged because of patient symptoms (p = 0.023 for local recurrence, p = 0.001 for distant metastases). All surveillance instruments were similarly useful in finding recurrence. Curative treatment was possible in 51 (41.1%) of 124 patients with disease recurrence. Follow-up led to a 10.0% chance of detecting recurrence that could be treated with curative intent.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal cancer recurrences are detected earlier within a surveillance program than by symptoms alone. The most intensive follow-up should be focused on patients with known risk factors for recurrence.

Health-related quality of life after surgery for advanced and recurrent rectal cancer: a nationwide prospective study

AIM

Advances in the treatment of rectal cancer have made it possible to perform complex rectal cancer surgery (COMP-RCS) in patients with primary advanced rectal cancer penetrating beyond the total mesorectal excision planes and in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to examine health-related quality of life (HRQoL) before and during the first 2 years after COMP-RCS.

METHOD

Between 2001 and 2008, 180 patients were treated with COMP-RCS at Aarhus University Hospital. HRQoL was assessed preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after surgery using three questionnaires. The results were compared with those for patients treated with standard rectal cancer surgery (STAN-RCS) and with data from the general Danish population (NORM-data).

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-two (68%) patients responded to the questionnaires. Of these 80 (66%) with disease-free survival for 2 years after surgery were included in the main analysis. The lowest level of functioning and the highest degree of symptoms were reported preoperatively. The majority of the HRQoL scales improved or remained stable during the first postoperative year; a decrease was observed for body image only. One year after surgery, HRQoL in patients treated with COMP-RSC was comparable to that for patients treated with STAN-RCS. Lower levels were found for physical and emotional role functioning, compared with NORM-data.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with COMP-RCS experienced improvement in HRQoL in the first year after surgery. One year after surgery, HRQoL was similar to that of patients treated with STAN-RCS. Compared with NORM-data, lower levels were found for physical and emotional role functioning.

A 10-year experience of total pelvic exenteration for primary advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer based on a prospective database

AIM

The study was conducted in a dedicated centre treating the majority of Danish patients with intended curative total pelvic exenteration for primary advanced (PARC) or locally recurrent (LRRC) rectal cancer. We compared PARC and LRRC and analysed postoperative morbidity and mortality, and long-term outcome.

METHOD

There were 90 consecutive patients (PARC/LRRC 50/40) treated between January 2001 and October 2010, recorded on a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

The median age was 63 (32-75) years with a gender ratio of 7 women to 83 men. All patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists level I or II. Sacral resection was performed in five patients with PARC and 15 with LRRC (P=0.002). R0 resection was achieved in 33 (66%) patients with PARC and in 15 (38%) with LRRC, R1 resection in 17 (34%) with PARC and 20 (50%) with LRRC and R2 resection in five (13%) with LRRC. R0 resection was more frequent in PARC (P=0.007). Forty-four (49%) patients had no postoperative complications. Fifty-five major complications were registered. Two (2.2%) patients died within 30 days, and the total in-hospital mortality was 5.6%. The median follow-up was 12 (0.4-91) months. The 5-year survival was 46% for PARC and 17% for LRRC (P=0.16).

CONCLUSION

Pelvic exenteration is associated with considerable morbidity but low mortality in an experienced centre. Pelvic exenteration can improve long-term survival, especially for patients with PARC. However, pelvic exenteration is also justified for patients with LRRC.

Health-related quality of life after surgery for primary advanced rectal cancer and recurrent rectal cancer: a review

AIM

Health-related quality of life is an important outcome measure in treatment of cancer. A review of the literature was undertaken to provide an overview of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after surgery for primary advanced or recurrent rectal cancer and to outline proposals for future HRQoL studies in this area.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was undertaken. Only studies concerning surgery for primary advanced or recurrent rectal cancer and describing methods used for measuring HRQoL were considered.

RESULTS

Seven studies were identified, including two prospective longitudinal studies, three cross-sectional studies and two based on qualitative data. Global quality of life, and physical, social, role and sexual function seemed to be impaired for a varying time after surgery. All the studies had methodical problems due to small sample size (12-44 patients) and different points of time for the assessment of HRQoL (12.3-47 months), which made it difficult to determine the period of time of impaired HRQoL and also if this is different after surgery for locally advanced or recurrent disease compared with after total mesorectal excision used for earlier tumours.

CONCLUSION

Several aspects of HRQoL are impaired for a variable time after treatment for locally advanced or recurrence of rectal cancer. Larger prospective longitudinal studies are needed to provide further information regarding the effects of this extensive surgery on quality of life.

Management of locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer

Treatment for patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer differs significantly from patients with rectal cancer restricted to the mesorectum. Adequate preoperative imaging of the pelvis is therefore important to identify those patients who are candidates for multimodality treatment, including preoperative chemoradiation protocols, intraoperative radiotherapy, and extended surgical resections. Much effort should be made to select patients with these advanced tumors for treatment in specialized referral centers. This has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality and improve long-term survival rates. In this article, we review the best treatment options for patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. We also emphasize the necessity of a multidisciplinary team, including a radiologist, radiation oncologist, urologist, surgical oncologist, plastic surgeon, and gynecologist in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with these pelvic tumors.

Prognostic factors after preoperative irradiation and surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer

AIMS

The experience of preoperative irradiation in clinically locally advanced rectal cancer for the period 1991-2003 is reported. Prognostic factors for survival and recurrence, and parameters for obtaining a free circumferential margin were evaluated.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of 204 M0 patients given >45 Gy preoperatively (median age 66 years; 29% women; tumour level <16 cm from the anal verge).

RESULTS

Multivisceral and/or pelvic wall resections were performed in 61% of the patients. R0, R1 and R2 resections were achieved in 74%, 21% and 5%. Five-year survival was 52% for all patients, 60% for R0 resections, 31% for R1 and 0% for R2. The calculated 5-year recurrence rates were 13% for R0 resections and 24% for R1 resections (p<0.035). R-stage, N-stage, age, type of rectal resection and pelvic wall resection remained significant in Cox multivariate analysis for survival. Regarding local recurrence, the following parameters were independent: N-stage, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) response and pelvic wall resection. Medium high tumour level and reduced histopathological differentiation are important individual factors that seem to predict increased risk for not obtaining a R0 resection.

CONCLUSIONS

After preoperative irradiation and surgery, about 50% of the patients with locally advanced rectal cancer without overt metastases (M0) can be cured.

Value of intraoperative radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

PURPOSE

This study was designed to analyze the results of a multimodality treatment using preoperative radiotherapy, followed by surgery and intraoperative radiotherapy in patients with primary locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between 1987 and 2002, 123 patients with initial unresectable and locally advanced rectal cancer were identified in our prospective database, containing patient characteristics, radiotherapy plans, operation notes, histopathologic reports, and follow-up details. An evaluation of prognostic factors for local recurrence, distant metastases, and overall survival was performed.

RESULTS

All patients were treated preoperatively with a median dose of 50 Gy radiotherapy. Surgery was performed six to ten weeks after radiotherapy. Twenty-seven patients were treated with intraoperative radiotherapy because margins were incomplete or </=2 mm. Postoperative mortality was 2 percent. The median follow-up of all patients was 25.1 months. The overall five-year local control was 65 percent and the overall five-year survival was 50 percent. Positive lymph nodes and incomplete resections negatively influenced local control and overall survival. Intraoperative radiotherapy improved five-year local control (58 vs. 0 percent, P = 0.016) and overall survival (38 vs. 0 percent, P = 0.026) for patients with R1/2 resections.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented multimodality treatment is feasible with an acceptable mortality and a five-year overall survival of 50 percent. Addition of intraoperative radiotherapy for patients with a narrow or microscopic incomplete resection seems to overrule the unfavorable prognostic histologic finding.