Long-term outcomes following salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer: A 15-year follow-up study

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus radical resection for early-stage rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta- analysis

PURPOSE

In the treatment of early-stage rectal cancer, a growing number of studies have shown that transanal endoscopic microsurgery is one of the alternatives to radical surgery adhering to total mesorectal excision that can reduce the incidence of adverse events without compromising treatment outcomes. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the safety and treatment effect of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery adhering to total mesorectal excision to provide a basis for clinical treatment selections.

METHOD

We searched the literatures of four major databases, PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane Library, without limitation of time. The literatures included randomized controlled studies and cohort studies comparing two surgical procedures of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery adhering to total mesorectal excision. Treatment effectiveness and safety results of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery were extracted from the included literatures and statistically analyzed using RevMan5.4 and stata17.

RESULT

Ultimately, 13 papers were included in the study including 5 randomized controlled studies and 8 cohort studies. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the treatment effect and safety of both transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery in distant metastasis (RR, 0.59 (0.34, 1.02), P > 0.05), overall recurrence (RR, 1.49 (0.96, 2.31), P > 0.05), disease-specific-survival (RR, 0.74 (0.09, 1.57), P > 0.05), dehiscence of the sutureline or anastomosis leakage (RR, 0.57 (0.30, 1.06), P > 0.05), postoperative bleeding (RR, 0.47 (0.22, 0.99), P > 0.05), and pneumonia (RR, 0.37, (0.10, 1.40), P > 0.05) were not significantly different. However, they differ significantly in perioperative mortality (RR, 0.26 (0.07, 0.93, P < 0.05)), local recurrence (RR, 2.51 (1.53, 4.21), P < 0.05),_overall survival_ (RR, 0.88 (0.74, 1.00), P < 0.05), disease-free-survival (RR, 1.08 (0.97, 1.19), P < 0.05), temporary stoma (RR, 0.05 (0.01, 0.20), P < 0.05), permanent stoma (RR, 0.16 (0.08, 0.33), P < 0.05), postoperative complications (RR, 0.35 (0.21, 0.59), P < 0.05), rectal pain (RR, 1.47 (1.11, 1.95), P < 0.05), operation time (RR, -97.14 (-115.81, -78.47), P < 0.05), blood loss (RR, -315.52 (-472.47, -158.57), P < 0.05), and time of hospitalization (RR, -8.82 (-10.38, -7.26), P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery seems to be one of the alternatives to radical surgery for early-stage rectal cancer, but more high-quality clinical studies are needed to provide a reliable basis.

Use of Image-Guided Surgical Navigation during Resection of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) presents several challenges, which is why the percentage of inadequate resections of these tumors is high. In this exploratory study, we evaluate the use of image-guided surgical navigation during resection of LRRC. Patients who were scheduled to undergo surgical resection of LRRC who were deemed by the multidisciplinary team to be at a high risk of inadequate tumor resection were selected to undergo surgical navigation. The risk of inadequate surgery was further determined by the proximity of the tumor to critical anatomical structures. Workflow characteristics of the surgical navigation procedure were evaluated, while the surgical outcome was determined by the status of the resection margin. In total, 20 patients were analyzed. For all procedures, surgical navigation was completed successfully and demonstrated to be accurate, while no complications related to the surgical navigation were discerned. Radical resection was achieved in 14 cases (70%). In five cases (25%), a tumor-positive resection margin (R1) was anticipated during surgery, as extensive radical resection was determined to be compromised. These patients all received intraoperative brachytherapy. In one case (5%), an unexpected R1 resection was performed. Surgical navigation during resection of LRRC is thus safe and feasible and enables accurate surgical guidance.

Surgical treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer: a narrative review

Objective

To summarize the recent literature on surgical treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

Background

LRRC is a heterogeneous disease that requires a multidisciplinary treatment approach. The treatment and prognosis depend on the site and type of recurrence. Radical resection remains the primary method for achieving long-term survival and improving symptom control. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy can reduce tumor volume and improve the R0 resection rate. Surgeons must clearly understand pelvic anatomy, develop a detailed preoperative plan, adopt a multidisciplinary approach for the surgical resection of the tumor as well as any invaded soft tissues, vessels, and bones, and ensure proper reconstruction. However, extended radical surgery often leads to a higher risk of postoperative complications and a low quality of life.

Methods

We searched English-language articles with keywords “locally recurrent rectal cancer”, “surgery” and “multidisciplinary team” in PubMed published between January 2000 to October 2020.

Conclusions

LRRC is a complex problem. Long-term survival is not impossible following multidisciplinary treatment in appropriately selected LRRC patients. The management of LRRC relies on a specialist team that determines the biological behavior of the tumor and evaluates treatment options through multidisciplinary discussions, thereby balancing the surgical costs and benefits, alleviating postoperative complications, and improving patients’ quality of life.

Long-term outcomes of resection for locoregional recurrence of colon cancer: A retrospective descriptive cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Resection for isolated distant recurrence of colon cancer is well accepted. Resection for locoregionally recurrent colon cancer (LRCC) is not well studied. We evaluated the long-term outcomes of curative-intent resection for LRCC.

METHODS

All patients undergoing curative-intent resection for LRCC at three specialized cancer centers affiliated with the University of Toronto were identified (1993-2017). Follow-up included serial clinical assessment, colonoscopy, CEA, and cross-sectional imaging. Overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and time to re-recurrence were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and cumulative incidence function. The association between resection margins and outcome was assessed with Cox models.

RESULTS

117 patients were included in the study cohort. Median follow-up was 53 months (IQR: 34-101). OS was 75% (95% CI: 68-84) at 5 years, and 69% (95% CI: 59-79) at 10 years. CSS was 78% (95% CI: 70-86) at 5 years and 72% (95% CI: 63-83) at 10 years. The rate of re-recurrence was 22% (95% CI: 14-31) at 5 years, and 27% (95% CI: 16-39) at 10 years. Negative resection margin (R0) was associated with improved OS (HR 3.33, 95% CI: 1.85-6.00, p < 0.01). There were no postoperative deaths; complications with Clavien-Dindo grade > II occurred in 12% of patients. Perioperative chemotherapy was used in 63% of patients and radiotherapy in 37%.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients with LRCC, excellent OS, CSS and low re-recurrence rates were observed, and R0 resection predicted better outcomes. These findings support consideration of resection for LRCC in fit patients after review at a multidisciplinary cancer conference.

Impact of a history of metastases or synchronous metastases on survival in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) frequently present with either synchronous metastases or a history of metastases. This study was conducted to evaluate whether LRRC patients without metastases have a different oncological outcome compared to patients with a history of metastases treated with curative intent or patients with potentially curable synchronous metastases.

METHOD

All consecutive LRRC patients who underwent intentionally curative surgery between 2005 and 2017 in a large tertiary hospital were retrospectively reviewed and categorized as having no metastases, a history of (curatively treated) metastases or synchronous metastases. Patients with unresectable distant metastases were excluded from the analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 349 patients who were analysed, 261 (75%) had no metastases, 42 (12%) had a history of metastases and 46 (13%) had synchronous metastases. The 3-year metastasis-free survival was 52%, 33% and 13% in patients without metastases, with a history of metastases, and with synchronous metastases, respectively (P < 0.001) A history of metastases did not influence overall survival (OS), but there was a trend towards a worse OS in patients with synchronous metastases compared with patients without synchronous metastases (hazard ratio 1.43; 95% CI 0.98-2.11).

CONCLUSION

LRRC patients with a history of curatively treated metastases have an OS comparable to that in patients without metastases and should therefore be treated with curative intent. However, LRRC patients with synchronous metastases have a poor metastasis-free survival and worse OS; in these patients, an individualized treatment approach to observe the behaviour of the disease is recommended.

Clinical selection strategy for and evaluation of intra-operative brachytherapy in patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A radical resection of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) or recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) can be challenging. In case of increased risk of an R1 resection, intra-operative brachytherapy (IOBT) can be applied. We evaluated the clinical selection strategy for IOBT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between February 2007 and May 2018, 132 LARC/RRC patients who were scheduled for surgery with IOBT standby, were evaluated. By intra-operative inspection of the resection margin and MR imaging, it was determined whether a resection was presumed to be radical. Frozen sections were taken on indication. In case of a suspected R1 resection, IOBT (1 × 10 Gy) was applied. Histopathologic evaluation, treatment and toxicity data were collected from medical records.

RESULTS

Tumour was resected in 122 patients. IOBT was given in 42 patients of whom 54.8% (n = 23) had a histopathologically proven R1 resection. Of the 76 IOBT-omitted R0 resected patients, 17.1% (n = 13) had a histopathologically proven R1 resection. In 4 IOBT-omitted patients, a clinical R1/2 resection was seen. In total, correct clinical judgement occurred in 72.6% (n = 88) of patients. In LARC, 58.3% (n = 14) of patients were overtreated (R0, with IOBT) and 10.9% (n = 5) were undertreated (R1, without IOBT). In RRC, 26.5% (n = 9) of patients were undertreated.

CONCLUSION

In total, correct clinical judgement occurred in 72.6% (n = 88). However, in 26.5% (n = 9) RRC patients, IOBT was unjustifiedly omitted. IOBT is accompanied by comparable and acceptable toxicity. Therefore, we recommend IOBT to all RRC patients at risk of an R1 resection as their salvage treatment.