Unexpected rectal cancer after TEM: outcome of completion surgery compared with primary TME

Excision of malignant and pre-malignant rectal lesions by transanal endoscopic microsurgery in patients under 50 years of age

BACKGROUND

The most common technique for treating benign and early malignant rectal lesions is transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Local excision is an acceptable technique for high-risk and elderly patients, but there are hardly any data regarding young patients.

AIM

To describe TEM outcomes in patients under 50 years of age.

METHODS

We collected demographic, clinical, and pathological data from all patients under the age of 50 years who underwent the TEM procedure at Hasharon Rabin Medical Center from January 2005 to December 2018.

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 26 patients under the age of 50 years underwent TEM procedures. Their mean age was 43.3 years. Eleven (42.0%) were male. The mean operative time was 67 min, and the mean tumor size was 2.39 cm, with a mean anal verge distance of 8.50 cm. No major intraoperative or postoperative complications were recorded. The median length of stay was 2 d. Seven (26.9%) lesions were adenomas with low-grade dysplasia, four (15.4%) were high-grade dysplasia adenomas, two were T1 carcinomas (7.8%), and three were T2 carcinomas (11.5%). No residual disease was found following endoscopic polypectomy in two patients (7.8%), but four (15.4%) had other pathologies. Surgical margins were negative in all cases. Local recurrence was detected in one patient 33 mo following surgery.

CONCLUSION

Among young adult patients, TEM for benign rectal lesions has excellent outcomes. It may also offer a balance between the efficacy of complete oncologic resection and postoperative quality of life in the treatment of rectal cancer. In some cases, it may be considered an alternative to radical surgery.

Completion Total Mesorectal Excision: A Case-Matched Comparison With Primary Resection

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative and oncological results of completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) versus primary total mesorectal excision (pTME).

Background

Early-stage rectal cancer can be treated by local excision alone, which is associated with less surgical morbidity and improved functional outcomes compared with radical surgery. When high-risk histological features are present, cTME is indicated, with possible worse clinical and oncological outcomes compared to pTME.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included all patients that underwent TME surgery for rectal cancer performed in 11 centers in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2017. After case-matching, we compared cTME with pTME. The primary outcome was major postoperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes included the rate of restorative procedures and 3-year oncological outcomes.

Results

In total 1069 patients were included, of which 35 underwent cTME. After matching (1:2 ratio), 29 cTME and 58 pTME were analyzed. No differences were found for major morbidity (27.6% vs 19.0%; P = 0.28) and abdominoperineal excision rate (31.0% vs 32.8%; P = 0.85) between cTME and pTME, respectively. Local recurrence (3.4% vs 8.6%; P = 0.43), systemic recurrence (3.4% vs 12.1%; P = 0.25), overall survival (93.1% vs 94.8%; P = 0.71), and disease-free survival (89.7% vs 81.0%; P = 0.43) were comparable between cTME and pTME.

Conclusions

cTME is not associated with higher major morbidity, whereas the abdominoperineal excision rate and 3-year oncological outcomes are similar compared to pTME. Local excision as a diagnostic tool followed by completion surgery for early rectal cancer does not compromise outcomes and should still be considered as the treatment of early-stage rectal cancer.

Completion Total Mesorectal Excision After Transanal Local Excision of Early Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Completion total mesorectal excision is recommended when local excision of early rectal cancers demonstrates high-risk histopathological features. Concerns regarding the quality of completion resections and the impact on oncological safety remain unanswered.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to summarize and analyze the outcomes associated with completion surgery and undertake a comparative analysis with primary rectal resections.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included PubMed, Cochrane library, MEDLINE, and Embase databases up to April 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies reporting any outcome of completion surgery after transanal local excision of an early rectal cancer were selected. Case reports, studies of benign lesions, and studies using flexible endoscopic techniques were not included.

INTERVENTION

The intervention was completion total mesorectal excision after transanal local excision of early rectal cancers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measures included histopathological and long-term oncological outcomes of completion total mesorectal excision. Secondary outcome measures included short-term perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies including 646 patients met the eligibility criteria, and 8 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Patients undergoing completion surgery have longer operative times (standardized mean difference, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.23-0.75; p = 0.0002) and higher intraoperative blood loss (standardized mean difference, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.01-0.5; p = 0.04) compared with primary resections, but perioperative morbidity is comparable (risk ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98-1.62; p = 0.08). Completion surgery is associated with higher rates of incomplete mesorectal specimens (risk ratio, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.41-6.62; p = 0.005) and lower lymph node yields (standardized mean difference, -0.26; 95% CI, -0.47 to 0.06; p = 0.01). Comparative analysis on long-term outcomes is limited, but no evidence of inferior recurrence or survival rates is found.

LIMITATIONS

Only small retrospective cohort and case-control studies are published on this topic, with considerable heterogeneity limiting the effectiveness of meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides the strongest evidence to date that completion surgery is associated with an inferior histopathological grade of the mesorectum and finds insufficient long-term results to satisfy concerns regarding oncological safety. International collaborative research is required to demonstrate noninferiority.

REGISTRATION NO

CRD42021245101.

Early salvage total mesorectal excision (sTME) after organ preservation failure in rectal cancer does not worsen postoperative outcomes compared to primary TME: systematic review and meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

While oncological outcomes of early salvage total mesorectal excision (sTME) after local excision (LE) have been well studied, the impact of LE before TME on postoperative outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to compare early sTME with a primary TME for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines with the random-effects model were adopted using Review Manager Version 5.3 for pooled estimates.

RESULTS

We retrieved eleven relevant articles including 1728 patients (350 patients in the sTME group and 1438 patients in the TME group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of mortality (OR = 0.90, 95%CI [0.21 to 3.77], p = 0.88), morbidity (OR = 1.19, 95%CI [0.59 to 2.38], p = 0.63), conversion to open surgery (OR = 1.34, 95%CI [0.61 to 2.94], p = 0.47), anastomotic leak (OR = 1.38, 95%CI [0.50 to 3.83], p = 0.53), hospital stay (MD = 0.23 day, 95%CI [- 1.63 to 2.10], p < 0.81), diverting stoma rate (OR = 0.69, 95%CI [0.44 to 1.09], p = 0.11), abdominoperineal resection rate (OR = 1.47, 95%CI [0.91 to 2.37], p = 0.11), local recurrence (OR = 0.94, 95%CI [0.44 to 2.04], p = 0.88), and distant recurrence (OR = 0.88, 95%CI [0.52 to 1.48], p = 0.62). sTME was associated with significantly longer operative time (MD = 25.62 min, 95%CI[11.92 to 39.32], p < 0.001) lower number of harvested lymph nodes (MD =  - 2.25 lymph node, 95%CI [- 3.86 to - 0.65], p = 0.006), and higher proportion of incomplete TME (OR = 0.25, 95%CI [0.11 to 0.61], p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

sTME is not associated with increased postoperative morbidity, mortality, or local recurrence. However, the operative times are longer and yield a poor specimen quality.

The impact of transanal local excision of early rectal cancer on completion rectal resection without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The impact of transanal local excision (TAE) of early rectal cancer (ERC) on subsequent completion rectal resection (CRR) for unfavorable histology or margin involvement is unclear. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the impact of TAE on CRR in patients without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature up to March 2020. Medline and Cochrane libraries were searched for studies reporting outcomes of CRR after TAE for ERC. We excluded patients who had neoadjuvant CRT and endoscopic local excision. Surgical, functional, pathological and oncological outcomes were assessed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 353 patients were included. Pathology following TAE was as follows T0 = 2 (0.5%); T1 = 154 (44.7%); T2 = 142 (41.2%); T3 = 43 (12.5%); Tx = 3 (0.8%); T not reported = 9. Fifty-three percent were > T1. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) was performed in 80 (23.2%) patients. Postoperative major morbidity and mortality occurred in 22 (11.4%) and 3 (1.1%), patients, respectively. An incomplete mesorectal fascia resulting in defects of the mesorectum was reported in 30 (24.6%) cases. Thirteen (12%) patients developed recurrence: 8 (3.1%) local, 19 (7.3%) distant, 4 (1.5%) local and distant. The 5-year cancer-specific survival was 92%. Only 1 study assessed anal function reporting no continence disorders in 11 patients. In the meta-analysis, CRR after TAE showed an increased APR rate (OR 5.25; 95% CI 1.27-21.8; p 0.020) and incomplete mesorectum rate (OR 3.48; 95% CI 1.32-9.19; p 0.010) compared to primary total mesorectal excision (TME). Two case matched studies reported no difference in recurrence rate and disease free survival respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The data are incomplete and of low quality. There was a tendency towards an increased risk of APR and poor specimen quality. It is necessary to improve the accuracy of preoperative staging of malignant rectal tumors in patients scheduled for TAE.

New treatment strategies for non-metastatic rectal cancer

The most widely practiced (standard) treatment of non-metastatic rectal cancer is based on proctectomy with mesorectal excision (partial or total according to the location of the tumor and commonly called TME). Surgery is preceded by CAP50-type chemoradiotherapy (capecitabineand 50 Grays radiation) and performed 6-8 weeks after the end of chemoradiotherapy. The development of new endoscopic, surgical, radiation-based and chemotherapeutic modalities leads surgeons to envisage customized treatment to find the best compromise between functional and oncologic results according to the locoregional extension of the tumor. Superficial lesions are amenable to transanal excision. T2-3 tumors<4cm are amenable to rectal preservation when neoadjuvant treatment obtains a complete response, allowing local excision or close surveillance. Intensification endocavitary radiotherapy and induction and consolidation chemotherapy regimens to avoid recourse to salvage abdomino-perineal resection (APR) are under investigation. For locally advanced rectal cancers (T3-4 and all N+ irrespective of T), the following scenarios can be envisaged: for initially resectable tumors (T3N0, T1-T3N+, circumferential resection margin>2mm), neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone aims to minimize the risk of local recurrence while avoiding the sequelae of radiotherapy. In case of initially non-resectable tumors (T4, circumferential resection margin<1mm), induction chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy and consolidation chemotherapy after short course radiotherapy provide better results than standard treatment in terms of complete response and recurrence-free survival, and should be routinely proposed in this indication.

Completion Surgery in Unfavorable Rectal Cancer after Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery: Does It Achieve Satisfactory Sphincter Preservation, Quality of Total Mesorectal Excision Specimen, and Long-term Oncological Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Unfavorable adenocarcinoma after transanal endoscopic microsurgery requires "completion surgery" with total mesorectal excision. The literature on this procedure is very limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the percentage of transanal endoscopic microsurgery that will require completion surgery.

DESIGN

This is an observational study with prospective data collection and retrospective analysis from patients who were operated on consecutively.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single academic institution.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery from June 2004 to December 2018 who later required total mesorectal excision were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All the patients followed the same protocol: preoperative study, indication of transanal endoscopic microsurgery with curative intent, performance of transanal endoscopic microsurgery, and completion surgery indication 3 to 4 weeks after transanal endoscopic microsurgery.

RESULTS

Seven hundred seventy-four patients underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery, 622 with curative intent (group I: adenoma, 517; group II: adenocarcinoma, 105). Completion surgery was indicated in 64 of 622 (10.3%) patients: group I, 40 of 517 (7.7%) and group II, 24 of 105 (22.9%). After applying exclusion criteria, completion surgery was performed in 55 patients (8.8%). Abdominoperineal resection was performed in 23 (45.1%); the initial lesion was within 6 cm of the anal verge in 19 of these 23 (82.6%). The clinical morbidity rate (Clavien Dindo> II) was 3 of 51 (5.9%). Total mesorectal excision was graded as complete in 42 of 49 (85.7%). The circumferential resection margin was tumor-free in 47 of 50 (94%). Median follow-up was 58 months. Local recurrence was recorded in 2 of 51 (3.9%) and systemic recurrence was recorded in 7 of 51 (13.7%); 5-year disease-free survival was 86%.

LIMITATIONS

The limitations are defined by the study's observational design and the retrospective analysis.

CONCLUSION

The indication of completion surgery after transanal endoscopic microsurgery is low, but is higher in the indication of adenocarcinoma. Compared with initial total mesorectal excision, completion surgery requires a higher rate of abdominoperineal resection, but has similar postoperative morbidity, total mesorectal excision quality, and oncological results. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B423.

CIRUGA COMPLEMENTARIA EN CNCER DE RECTO DESFAVORABLE DESPUS DE UNA TEM SE OBTIENE SATISFACTORIAMENTE PRESERVACIN DEL ESFNTER, CALIDAD DE MUESTRA DE ETM Y RESULTADOS ONCOLGICOS A LARGO PLAZO

ANTECEDENTES:El adenocarcinoma con evolución desfavorable luego de una de microcirugía endoscópica transanal (TEM) requiere "cirugía de finalización" con la excisión total del mesorecto. La literatura sobre este procedimiento es muy limitada.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el porcentaje de microcirugía endoscópica transanal que requerió cirugía completa.DISEÑO:Estudio observacional con recolección prospectiva de datos y análisis retrospectivo de pacientes operados consecutivamente.AJUSTES:El estudio se realizó en una sola institución académica.PACIENTES:Aquellos pacientes sometidos a microcirugía endoscópica transanal desde junio de 2004 hasta diciembre de 2018 que luego requirieron excisón toztal del mesorecto.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Todos los pacientes siguieron el mismo protocolo: estudio preoperatorio, indicación de microcirugía endoscópica transanal con intención curativa, realización de microcirugía endoscópica transanal e indicación de cirugía complementaria 3-4 semanas después de la microcirugía endoscópica transanal.RESULTADOS:Setecientos setenta y cuatro pacientes fueron sometidos a microcirugía endoscópica transanal, 622 con intención curativa (grupo I, adenoma: 517, grupo II, adenocarcinoma: 105). la cirugía complementaria fué indicada en 64/622 (10.3%), grupo I: 40/517 (7.7%) y grupo II 24/105 (22.9%). Después de aplicar los criterios de exclusión, la cirugía complementaria se realizó en 55 pacientes (8,8%). La resección abdominoperineal fué realizada en 23 (45,1%); en 19 de estos casos 23 (82,6%) la lesión inicial se encontraba dentro los 6 cm del margen anal. La tasa de morbilidad clínica (Clavien-Dindo > II) fue de 3/51 (5,9%). La excisión total del mesorecto se calificó como completa en 42/49 (85,7%). El margen de resección circunferencial se encontraba libre de tumor en 47/50 (94%). La mediana de seguimiento fue de 58 meses. La recurrencia local se registró en 2/51 (3.9%) y la recurrencia sistémica en 7/51 (13.7%); La supervivencia libre de enfermedad a 5 años fue del 86%.LIMITACIONES:Todas definidas por el diseño observacional y el análisis retrospectivo del mismo.CONCLUSIÓN:La indicación de completar la cirugía después de una TEM es baja, pero es más alta cuando la indicación es por adenocarcinoma. En comparación con la excisión total del mesorecto inicial, la cirugía complementaria requiere una tasa más alta de resección abdominoperineal, pero tiene una morbilidad postoperatoria, una calidad de excisión total del mesorecto y resultados oncológicos similares. ConsulteVideo Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B423. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

The utility of preoperative radiological evaluation of early rectal neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The diagnostic role for preoperative imaging of clinically benign rectal adenomas is unclear. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative imaging in distinguishing benign adenomas from rectal cancer.

METHOD

A systematic search was performed for all studies published that correlated staging of clinically benign rectal adenomas with endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) or MRI and histology. Imaging was compared with postoperative histology and data on the numbers of true positives, false positives, true negatives and false negatives were extracted. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% CIs were calculated using a bivariate random effects model. The QUADAS2 tool was used to determine the methodological quality of included studies.

RESULTS

Eleven studies describing 1511 patients were retrieved. A total of 1134 patients underwent local excision and 377 had a formal proctectomy. A benign rectal adenoma was diagnosed in 840 and 214 had a T1 rectal cancer. For confirming benign adenomas, the pooled sensitivity of ERUS was 0.81 (95% CI 0.69-0.89) and specificity was 0.85 (95% CI 0.68-0.93). For detecting occult T1 tumours, the pooled sensitivity of ERUS was 0.50 (95% CI 0.33-0.66) and specificity was 0.89 (95% CI 0.82-0.94). Quantitative analysis of MRI could not be performed due to insufficient studies.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the limited accuracy of preoperative ERUS in distinguishing benign adenomas from T1 rectal cancer. Preoperative imaging must be interpreted with caution to prevent over-staging and unnecessary proctectomy. We propose that clinically benign lesions may undergo local excision, with subsequent management based on final histology.

Outcomes of completion total mesorectal excision are not compromised by prior transanal minimally invasive surgery

AIM

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is used increasingly often as an organ-preserving treatment for early rectal cancer. If final pathology reveals unfavourable histological prognostic features, completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is recommended. This study is the first to investigate the results of cTME after TAMIS.

METHOD

Data were retrieved from the prospective database of the Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital. Completion TME patients were case matched with a control group of patients undergoing primary TME (pTME). Primary and secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes and oncological outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

From 2011 to 2017, 20 patients underwent cTME and were compared with 40 patients undergoing pTME. There were no significant differences in operating time (238 min vs 226 min, P = 0.53), blood loss (137 ml vs. 158 ml, P = 0.88) or complications (45% vs 55%, P = 0.07) between both groups. There was no 90-day mortality in the cTME group. The mesorectal fascia was incomplete in three patients (15%) in the cTME group compared with no breaches in the pTME group (P = 0.083). There were no local recurrences in either group. In three patients (15%), distant metastases were detected after cTME compared with one patient (2.5%) in the pTME group (P = 0.069). After cTME patients had a 1- and 5-year disease-free survival of 85% compared with 97.5% for the pTME group (P = 0.062).

CONCLUSION

Completion TME surgery after TAMIS is not associated with increased peri- or postoperative morbidity or mortality compared with pTME surgery. After cTME surgery patients have a similar disease-free and overall survival when compared with patients undergoing pTME.

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in T2-T3 rectal cancer: current status and critical appraisal

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer is an organ-preserving procedure which aims at reducing morbidity and functional disorders associated with total mesorectal excision (TME) in selected patients. Although TME after chemoradiotherapy remains the gold standard for locally advanced mid and low rectal cancer, in the last years multicenter research trials have offered encouraging oncologic results which have allowed to preserve the rectum in patients with a pathologic complete response after chemoradiotherapy. A review of the available literature on this topic was conducted to define the state of the art of this conservative approach and to focus on the most controversial aspects concerning local excision performed after chemoradiotherapy, in particular tumor scatter and lymph node status, completion and salvage surgery, morbidity and quality of life. The analysis of these topics should be considered, in trial setting or in current practice, for their clinical implications. Oncologic outcomes of recent trials are encouraging for part of the patients presenting T2 rectal cancer; however, TME still remains the standard treatment in clinical practice. In such cases, local excision should include a surgical safety margin of at least 1 cm from the resection margin to achieve a true negative margin from residual tumor cells. The selection of the patients should be carefully performed and their consensus extremely detailed because TME is necessary in about 30% of cases. Failing that, morbidity and quality of life are negatively affected. However, about half of these patients refuse radical surgery (45%), thus undergoing only palliative care.

Local excision followed by early radical surgery in rectal cancer: long-term outcome

Background

In rectal cancers, radical surgery should follow local excisions, in cases of unexpected, unfavorable tumor characteristics. The oncological results of this completion surgery are inconsistent.

This retrospective cohort study assessed the clinical and long-term oncological outcomes of patients that underwent completion surgery to clarify whether a local excision compromised the results of radical surgery.

Methods

Forty-six patients were included, and the reasons for completion surgery, intraoperative complications, residual tumors, local recurrences (LRs), distant metastases, and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were assessed. The results were compared to 583 patients that underwent primary surgery without adjuvant therapy, treated with a curative intention during the same time period.

Results

The median follow-up was 14.6 years. The reasons for undergoing completion surgery were positive resection margins (24%), high-risk cancer (30%), or both (46%). Intraoperative perforations occurred in 10/46 (22%) cases. Residual tumor in the rectal wall or lymph node involvement occurred in 12/46 (26%) cases. The risk of intraoperative perforation and residual tumor increased with the pT category. Intraoperative perforations did not increase postoperative complications, but they increased the risk of LRs in cases of intramural residual tumors (p = 0.003). LRs occurred in 2.6% of pT1/2 and 29% of pT3 tumors. Both the 5- and 10-year CSS rates were 88.8% (95% CI 80.0–98.6). Moreover, the LRs of patients with pT1/2 cancers were lower in patients with completion surgery than in patients with primary surgery.

Conclusions

Rectal wall perforations at the local excision site and residual cancer were the main risks for poor oncological outcomes associated with completion surgery. Local excisions followed by early radical surgery did not appear to compromise outcomes compared to patients with primary surgery for pT1/2 rectal cancer. Improvements in clinical staging should allow more appropriate selection of patients that are eligible for a local excision of rectal cancer.

Short-term outcomes of transanal completion total mesorectal excision (cTaTME) for rectal cancer: a case-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Local excision of early rectal tumors as a rectal preserving treatment is gaining popularity, especially since bowel cancer screening programs result in a shift towards the diagnosis of early stage rectal cancers. However, unfavorable histological features predicting high risk for recurrence within the "big biopsy" may mandate completion total mesorectal excision (cTME). Completion surgery is associated with higher morbidity, poorer specimen quality, and less favorable oncological outcomes compared to primary TME. Transanal approach potentially improves outcome of completion surgery for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare radical completion surgery after local excision for rectal cancer by the transanal approach (cTaTME) with conventional abdominal approach (cTME).

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent cTaTME for rectal cancer between 2012 and 2017 were case-matched with cTME patients, according to gender, tumor height, preoperative radiotherapy, and tumor stage. Surgical, pathological, and short-term postoperative outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 25 patients underwent completion TaTME and were matched with 25 patients after cTME. Median time from local excision to completion surgery was 9 weeks in both groups. In the cTaTME and cTME groups, perforation of the rectum occurred in 4 and 28% of patients, respectively (p = 0.049), leading to poor specimen quality in these patients. Number of harvested lymph nodes was higher after cTaTME (median 15; range 7-47) than after cTME (median 10; range 0-17). No significant difference was found in end colostomy rate between the two groups. Major 30-day morbidity (Clavien-Dindo≥ III) was 20 and 32%, respectively (p = 0.321). Hospital stay was significantly longer after cTME.

CONCLUSION

TaTME after full-thickness excision is a promising technique with a significantly lower risk of perforation of the rectum and better specimen quality compared to conventional completion TME.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery with or without Completion Total Mesorectal Excision for T2 and T3 Rectal Carcinoma

AIM

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is used for the resection of large rectal adenomas and well or moderately differentiated T1 carcinomas. Due to difficulty in preoperative staging, final pathology may reveal a carcinoma not suitable for TEM. Although completion total mesorectal excision is considered standard of care in T2 or more invasive carcinomas, this completion surgery is not always performed. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the outcome of patients after TEM-only, when completion surgery would be indicated.

METHODS

In this retrospective multicenter, observational cohort study, outcome after TEM-only (n = 41) and completion surgery (n = 40) following TEM for a pT2-3 rectal adenocarcinoma was compared.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 29 months for the TEM-only group and 31 months for the completion surgery group. Local recurrence rate was 35 and 11% for the TEM-only and completion surgery groups respectively. Distant metastasis occurred in 16% of the patients in both groups. The 3-year overall survival was 63% in the TEM-only group and 91% in the completion surgery group respectively. Three-year disease-specific survival was 91 versus 93% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local recurrence after TEM-only for pT2-3 rectal cancer is worse compared to the recurrence that occurs after completion surgery, disease-specific survival is comparable between both groups. The lower unadjusted overall survival in the TEM-only group indicates that TEM-only may be a valid alternative in older and frail patients, especially when high morbidity of completion surgery is taken into consideration. Nevertheless, completion surgery should always be advised when curation is intended.

Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision Following Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients' selection for transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) depends on diagnostic modalities; however, there are still some limitations in the preoperative diagnosis of rectal lesions, and in some reports, up to third of the adenomas resected by TEM were found to be adenocarcinoma; therefore, salvage radical resection (RR) remains necessary for achieving oncological resection. Salvage RR may encounter some technical problems as the violation of the mesorectum and the scar formation. In this study, we aimed to report the outcome in patients undergoing salvage RR in terms of morbidity and oncological results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Demographic and clinical data pertaining to patients undergoing RR following TEM between 2004 and 2014 were retrospectively collected.

RESULTS

One hundred forty one TEM were performed in the study period, 53 (38%) for malignant rectal lesions. Indication for TEM: 15 (28%) benign adenoma, 25 (47%) early rectal cancer, and 13 (25%) had clinical complete response after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. Ten (19%) patients had no residual tumor in TEM specimen, 15 (28%) had T1, and 2 of them underwent salvage low anterior resection (LAR). Ten (19%) had T2, 4 had LAR, and 1 had abdominoperineal resection (APR). Five (9%) had a T3, 3 underwent LAR, and 2 had APR. Among the 13 (25%) after chemo-radiotherapy (CRT), 4 had salvage AR. The time from TEM to RR was 47 days (range32-70). Of 16 salvage surgeries, 8 (50%) were laparoscopic. The median operative time was 210 minutes (range165-360). Five patients had protective ileostomy. Rectal perforation occurred in 2 (12%) patients; both had a posterior location, one after CRT. Two (12%) postoperative small-bowl obstruction and three wound infections occurred. There was no perioperative mortality in any of the patients who underwent RR. The final pathology was no residual disease in 9, T3N1 in 1, T3N0 in 3, T2N1 in 1, and T2N0 in 2 patients. Eight (50%) had adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision following TEM seems to be safe, and with no negative impact of the completeness of the resection. The concern of intraoperative specimen perforation is real, and should be dealt with meticulous technique and careful dissection, particularly after CRT.

Organ preservation in rectal cancer: a synopsis of current guidelines

BACKGROUND

The high morbidity associated with radical resection for rectal cancer is an incentive for surgeons to adopt strategies aimed at organ preservation, particularly for early disease. There are a number of different approaches to achieve this. In this study we have collated current national and international guidelines to produce a synopsis to support this changing practice.

METHODS

The databases PubMed, Embase, Trip database, national guideline clearinghouse, BMJ Best practice were interrogated. Guidelines published before 2010 were excluded. The AGREE-II tool was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

24 guidelines were drawn from 2278 potential publications. A consensus exists for local excision for "low risk" T1 rectal cancer but there is no agreement how to stratify the risk of treatment failure. There is a low level of agreement for rectal preservation for more advanced disease but when mentioned is recommended for unfit patients or in th context of a clinical trial. Guidelines are inconsistent with respect to surveillance in node negative disease and after, complete response to chemoradiotherapy CONCLUSION: According to current guidelines and consensus statements organ preservation for rectal cancer beyond low risk T1, is still considered experimental and only indicated in patients unsuitable for radical surgery.. Follow up strategies and cN0 staging deserve attention and highlight the need for high quality clinical trials. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Outcomes following completion and salvage surgery for early rectal cancer: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To establish outcomes after completion and salvage surgery following local excision in literature published since 2005, to inform decision-making when offering local excision.

BACKGROUND

Local excision of early rectal cancer aims to offer cure while maintaining quality of life through organ preservation. However, some patients will require radical surgery, prompted by unexpected poor pathology or local recurrence. Consistent definition and reporting of these scenarios is poor. We propose the term "salvage surgery" for recurrence after local excision and "completion surgery" for poor pathology.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched in February 2016. Studies since 2005 describing outcomes for radical surgery following local excision of rectal cancer were included. Pooled and average values were obtained.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies included 262 completion and 165 salvage operations. Most completion operations were done within 4 weeks; local recurrence rate was 5% and overall disease recurrence rate was 14%. The majority of salvage operations for local recurrence were within 15 months of local excision, often following adjuvant treatment. Re-do local excision was used in 15%; APR was the most common radical procedure. Further local recurrence was uncommon (3%) but overall disease recurrence rate was 13%. Estimated 5-year survival was in the order of 50%. Heterogeneity was high among the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing local excision must be informed of risks and expected outcomes, but better data on completion and salvage surgery are required to achieve this.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42014014758.

Hybrid transanal and total mesorectal excision after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for unfavourable early rectal cancer: a report of two cases

Completion total mesorectal excision (TME) is a rare but complex procedure after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer with unfavourable final histology. Two cases are reported when completion TME was performed after upfront transanal partial mesorectal dissection. Intact non-perforated TME specimens with negative and adequate distal and circumferential margins were created. The quality of both total mesorectal excisions was complete and distal margins were sufficient. We believe that our technique might be a way of approaching completion TME after TEM, especially in cases of low rectal cancer.

Transanal Approach to Rectal Polyps and Cancer

A transanal approach to rectal polyp and cancer excision is often an appropriate alternative to conventional rectal resection, and has a lower associated morbidity. There has been a steady evolution in the techniques of transanal surgery over the past 30 years. It started with traditional transanal excision and was revolutionized by introduction of transanal endoscopic microsurgery in early 1980s. Introduction of transanal minimally invasive surgery made it more accessible to surgeons around the world. Now robotic platforms are being tried in certain institutions. Concerns have been raised about recurrence rates of cancers with transanal approach and success of subsequent salvage operations.

Organ preservation in rectal cancer: current status and future perspectives

With the introduction of population screening initiatives, more patients may be amenable to local, transanal excision (LE) of early-stage rectal cancer. The most important drawback of LE is the risk of understaging node-positive disease. The most powerful predictors of node-positive disease are lymphatic invasion, submucosal invasion depth and width, tumor budding and poor differentiation. Therefore, LE should be reserved for low-risk T1 tumors in those reluctant or unable to undergo major surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by LE for T2 tumors allows adequate local control, and is currently being compared with anterior resection alone in randomized trials. A mere watchful waiting approach has been proposed in clinical complete responders to chemoradiation. However, given the very poor accuracy of current imaging modalities to predict a true pathological complete response, this strategy should not be offered outside of well-controlled trials.

Organ preservation in rectal cancer: have all questions been answered?

Improved treatment strategies have eliminated local control as the major problem in rectal cancer. With increasing awareness of long-term toxic effects in survivors of rectal cancer, organ-preservation strategies are becoming more popular. After chemoradiotherapy, both watchful waiting and local excision are used as possible alternatives for radical surgery. Although these seem attractive strategies, many issues about the safety of organ preservation remain. Additionally, radiotherapy strategies are mainly aimed at intermediate and high-risk rectal tumours, and adaptation of this standard practice for a completely new treatment indication has yet to start. This Review will discuss the options and problems of organ preservation, and address the research questions that need to be answered in the coming years, with a specific focus on radiotherapy.