Local therapy for rectal cancer

Comparison of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery and Total Mesorectal Excision in the Treatment of T1 Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for the treatment of early-stage rectal cancer has attracted attention due to its advantages of reduced surgical trauma, fewer complications, low operative mortality, rapid postoperative recovery and short hospital stay. However, there are still significant controversies regarding TEM for the treatment of rectal cancer, mainly related to the prognosis associated with this method.

Objective

This study sought to compare the efficacy of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and total mesorectal excision (TME) for the treatment of T1 rectal cancer.

Methods

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase and CNKI databases. Based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews, we screened the trials, evaluated the quality and extracted the data.

Results

One randomized controlled trial (RCT) and six non-randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were included in the meta-analysis (a total of 860 rectal cancer patients were included; 303 patients were treated with TEM, and 557 patients were treated with TME). Analysis revealed that all seven studies reported local recurrence rates, and there was a significant difference between the TEM and TME groups [odds ratio (OR) = 4.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) (2.03, 10.53), P = 0.0003]. A total of five studies reported distant metastasis rates, and there was no significant difference between the TEM and TME groups [OR = 0.74, 95%CI (0.32, 1.72), P = 0.49]. A total of six studies reported postoperative overall survival of the patients, and there was no significant difference between the TEM and TME groups [OR = 0.87, 95%CI(0.55, 1.38), P = 0.55]. In addition, two studies reported the postoperative disease-free survival rates of patients, and there was no significant difference between the TEM and TME groups [OR = 1.12, 95%CI (0.31, 4.12), P = 0.86].

Conclusions

For patients with T1 rectal cancer, the distant metastasis, overall survival and disease-free survival rates did not differ between the TEM and TME groups, although the local recurrence rate after TEM was higher than that after TME.

Rectal cancer

Surgery is the cornerstone of rectal cancer treatment. Oncological cure and overall survival continue to be the main goals, but sparing of the anal sphincter mechanism and functional results are also important. The modern management of rectal cancer is a multidisciplinary approach, and pre-operative staging is of crucial importance when planning treatment in these patients. Pre-operative staging is used to determine the indication for neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgical resection or to determine whether local excision is an option in carefully selected patients with early rectal cancer. Surgery in the form of total mesorectal excision (TME) has become the standard of care for mid and distal rectal cancers. Early rectal cancers do not require neoadjuvant therapy. For locally advanced cancers of the lower two-thirds of the rectum, the combination of surgical resection with chemoradiotherapy decreases local recurrence rates and probably improves overall survival. Whereas in the past local excision was only contemplated in patients who were unfit for radical surgery or for local palliation in cases of metastatic disease, over the last number of years there has been increasing interest in local treatment with curative intent in early rectal cancer.

Modern management of rectal cancer: A 2006 update

The goal of this review is to outline some of the important surgical issues surrounding the management of patients with early (T1/T2 and N0), as well as locally advanced (T3/T4 and/or N1) rectal cancer. Surgery for rectal cancer continues to develop towards the ultimate goals of improved local control and overall survival, maintaining quality of life, and preserving sphincter, genitourinary, and sexual function. Information concerning the depth of tumor penetration through the rectal wall, lymph node involvement, and presence of distant metastatic disease is of crucial importance when planning a curative rectal cancer resection. Preoperative staging is used to determine the indication for neoadjuvant therapy as well as the indication for local excision versus radical cancer resection. Local excision is likely to be curative in most patients with a primary tumor which is limited to the submucosa (T1N0M0), without high-risk features and in the absence of metastatic disease. In appropriate patients, minimally invasive procedures, such as local excision, TEM, and laparoscopic resection allow for improved patient comfort, shorter hospital stays, and earlier return to preoperative activity level. Once the tumor invades the muscularis propria (T2), radical rectal resection in acceptable operative candidates is recommended. In patients with transmural and/or node positive disease (T3/T4 and/or N1) with no distant metastases, preoperative chemoradiation followed by radical resection according to the principles of TME has become widely accepted. During the planning and conduct of a radical operation for a locally advanced rectal cancer, a number of surgical management issues are considered, including: (1) total mesorectal excision (TME); (2) autonomic nerve preservation (ANP); (3) circumferential resection margin (CRM); (4) distal resection margin; (5) sphincter preservation and options for restoration of bowel continuity; (6) laparoscopic approaches; and (7) postoperative quality of life.

© 2006 The WJG Press. All rights reserved.

Dorsal transsacrococcygeal rectal approach

A modification of the dorsal rectal approach is described as an alternative to consider in selected low and middle rectal lesions unsuitable for the transanal approach. The dorsal rectal approach is performed through the sacrococcygeal joint and below the gluteus maximus muscle resulting in an easier, safe, and well-tolerated procedure.

Systematic approach to the analysis of cross-sectional imaging for surveillance of recurrent colorectal cancer

Recurrent disease in colorectal cancer occurs in approximately 50% of patients who undergo a "curative" operation. Tumor recurrence may occur locally (at the anastomotic site), in the mesentery or mesocolon adjacent to the post-operative site, in the nodal echelon downstream to the post-operative site, and as distant metastases to the peritoneal cavity, liver or lung. Local recurrence at the anastomosis is frequently diagnosed at follow-up endoscopic examinations as part of screening for metachronous lesions. Other types of recurrences require imaging studies, most frequently CT or MR imaging to diagnose. We developed an approach to analyze imaging obtained after curative resection of colorectal cancer. Our approach is based on the knowledge of patterns of disease spread, of types of surgical procedures and of pathologic staging. Using this approach has the potential to detect recurrent disease at an early stage because the locoregional and nodal spread of this disease is predictable. Early diagnosis of recurrent disease, even in asymptomatic cases, allows for more effective treatment that can improve the long-term survival of these patients.

The management of rectal cancer in the elderly

INTRODUCTION

The majority of patients with rectal cancer are elderly. Due to the increasingly aging population the number of people with colorectal cancer is increasing. As medical advances in the areas of local therapy, radiation therapy, and surgical technique, such as, laparoscopy are made more elderly patients are offered various types of treatment for rectal cancer. As the number of treatment options increase, the debate on how to treat elderly patients' with rectal cancer intensifies.

METHODS

A Medline search using "rectal cancer," "elderly," "local therapy," "radical surgery," and "radiation therapy" as key words was performed for English-language articles. Further references were obtained through cross-referencing the bibliography cited in each work.

DISCUSSION

Numerous treatment options exists for elderly patients with rectal cancer. These range from transanal local excision to radical surgery. The best treatment option for a certain elderly patient is multifactorial and includes tumor stage, operative curability, preoperative functioning of the patient, patient comorbidities, quality of life goals, and patient preference.

CONCLUSION

Age, taken as an independent variable, is not a contraindication to any specific type of therapy, including radical surgery with primary anastomsis. Patients' who meet the criteria for local resection should undergo this procedure. However, for tumors which are not amenable to local resection, these patients should be considered for radical surgery if this provides the best chance for cure. Elderly patients who can tolerate a major operation, and have good preoperative sphincter function should undergo a resection with primary anastomosis.

Outcome of salvage abdominoperineal resection after failed endocavitary radiation in patients with rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Endocavitary radiation is a treatment option for selected patients with rectal cancer, but concern exists for the effectiveness of salvage abdominoperineal resection. This study was designed to examine outcomes after salvage abdominoperineal resection for recurrence after endocavitary radiation.

METHODS

A prospective database was used to identify patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection after endocavitary radiation from 1985 to 2001. Office records and a tumor registry were used for disease status and survival data. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and groups compared using the Mantel-Haenszel test.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients underwent salvage abdominoperineal resection. The mean time to recurrence after completion of endocavitary radiation was 21 +/- 27 months, with 29 percent having persistent disease, 63 percent recurrent disease, and 8 percent a second primary. At abdominoperineal resection, 47 percent had tumor transection, specimen perforation, or injury to the genitourinary or gynecologic tract. Nine patients (24 percent) had positive radial margins. The mean time to perineal wound healing was 56 +/- 74.1 days postoperatively, with 36.8 percent taking more than 60 days. Seventeen patients (45 percent) re-recurred at a mean of 21 +/- 25 months after salvage, with a local control rate of 26 percent at 45 +/- 37 months of follow-up. Median disease-specific survival from completion of endocavitary radiation was 115.5 months, with a five-year, disease-specific survival rate of 66 percent. Patients with recurrent disease after endocavitary radiation had significantly (P = 0.025) better disease-specific survival than those with persistent disease (median survival 115 vs. 25 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Although technically difficult and associated with a high morbidity, abdominoperineal resection can salvage a significant fraction (55 percent) of patients failing endocavitary radiation. A high index of suspicion for recurrence and a tenacious approach to its diagnosis are essential for optimal outcomes.

Local resection of rectal tumours using the Salvati operating proctoscope--a safe and effective technique

BACKGROUND

Per-anal excision can be an effective method for treating large rectal adenomas and selected rectal cancers. This procedure is suitable for adenomas that are too large for colonoscopic excision and for early rectal cancers in patients that are unfit for major resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 37 patients (16 male, 21 female) that had a local resection using a Salvati operating proctoscope. Fifteen had rectal cancer and 22 had rectal adenoma and all have been followed-up for a median of 14 months (range 2-65). Most cancers were staged pre-operatively with endorectal ultrasound and 6 cancer patients received adjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

There were no intra-operative complications, 6 minor postoperative complications, none requiring re-intervention (1 peri-anal haematoma, 2 postoperative anaemia, 2 chest complications, 1 secondary haemorrhage) and no peri-operative deaths. Lesions were histologically completely excised in 33 (89%). Thirty-four (92%) did not have any recurrence, 2 (5%) adenomas recurred (both successfully treated with further local resection) and 1 (3%) failed to attend for follow-up. Six have since died, all from comorbid conditions.

CONCLUSION

Local resection of rectal tumours using the operating proctoscope is a low cost technique with a low complication rate. Outcome of this treatment is good, and similar to other surgical modalities. Local tumour recurrences are uncommon and can be successfully treated with further local treatment.

Surgical Issues in Rectal Cancer: A 2004 Update

Rectal cancer is a major health concern in the United States, with an estimated 40,570 new cases diagnosed in 2004. There are 4 major goals in the treatment of a patient with rectal cancer: local control; long-term survival; preservation of anal sphincter, bladder, and sexual function; and maintenance or improvement in quality of life. Recent advances have been made in preoperative staging, local and radical surgical therapy, the importance of distal and circumferential resection margins, postoperative preservation of the anal sphincter mechanism and genitourinary function, and the role of laparoscopy in the treatment of these patients. Our aim is to outline some of the important surgical issues surrounding the management of patients with early-stage (T1/T2 N0) or locally advanced (T3/T4 and/or N1) rectal cancer.