Local resection compared with radical resection in the treatment of T1N0M0 rectal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Oncological outcomes of local excision versus radical surgery for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Local resection (LR) methods for rectal cancer are generally considered in the palliative setting or for patients deemed a high anaesthetic risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare oncological outcomes of LR and radical resection (RR) for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance assessment.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Emcare databases was performed for studies that reported data on clinical outcomes for both LR and RR for early rectal cancer from January 1995 to April 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. The quality of assessment was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool for randomised controlled trials.

RESULTS

Twenty studies with 12,022 patients were included: 6,476 patients had LR and 5,546 patients underwent RR. RR led to an improvement in 5-year overall survival (OR 1.84; 95 % CI 1.54-2.20; p < 0.0001; I2 20 %) and local recurrence (OR 3.06; 95 % CI 2.02-4.64; p < 0.0001; I2 39 %) when compared to LR. However, when staging and surveillance methods were clearly adopted in LR cases, there was an improvement in R0 rates (96.7 % vs 85.6 %), 5-year disease-free survival (93.0 % vs 77.9 %) and overall survival (81.6 % vs 79.0 %) compared to when staging and surveillance was not reported/performed.

CONCLUSIONS

LR may be appropriate for selected patients without poor prognostic factors in early rectal cancer. This study also highlights that there is currently no single standardised staging or surveillance approach being adopted in the management of early rectal cancer. A more specified and standardised preoperative staging for patient selection as well as clinical and image-based surveillance protocols is needed.

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (r-TAMIS): perioperative and short-term outcomes for local excision of rectal cancers

BACKGROUND

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is an advanced technique for excision of early rectal cancers. Robotic TAMIS (r-TAMIS) has been introduced as technical improvement and potential alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in early rectal cancers and in frail patients. This study reports the perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes of r-TAMIS for local excision of early-stage rectal cancers.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected r-TAMIS database (July 2021-July 2023). Demographics, clinicopathological features, short-term outcomes, recurrences, and survival were investigated.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were included. Median age and body mass index were 69.5 (62.0-77.7) years and 31.0 (21.0-36.5) kg/m2. Male sex was prevalent (n = 12, 60.0%). ASA III accounted for 66.7%. Median distance from anal verge was 7.5 (5.0-11.7) cm. Median operation time was 90.0 (60.0-112.5) minutes. Blood loss was minimal. There were no conversions. Median postoperative stay was 2.0 (1.0-3.0) days. Minor and major complication rates were 25.0% and 0%, respectively. Seventeen (85.0%) patients had an adenocarcinoma whilst three patients had an adenoma. R0 rate was 90.0%. Most tumours were pT1 (55.0%), followed by pT2 (25.0%). One patient (5.0%) had a pT3 tumour. Specimen and tumour maximal median diameter were 51.0 (41.0-62.0) mm and 21.5 (17.2-42.0) mm, respectively. Median specimen area was 193.1 (134.3-323.3) cm2. Median follow-up was 15.5 (10.0-24.0) months. One patient developed local recurrence (5.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

r-TAMIS, with strict postoperative surveillance, is a safe and feasible approach for local excision of early rectal cancer and may have a role in surgically unfit and elderly patients who refuse or cannot undergo TME surgery. Future prospective multicentre large-scale studies are needed to report the long-term oncological outcomes.

Overexpression of SYNGAP1 suppresses the proliferation of rectal adenocarcinoma via Wnt/β-Catenin signaling pathway

Rectal adenocarcinoma (READ) is a common malignant tumor of the digestive tract. Growing studies have confirmed Ras GTPase-activating proteins are involved in the progression of several tumors. This study aimed to explore the expression and function of Ras GTPase-activating proteins in READ. In this study, we analyzed RNA sequencing data from 165 patients with READ and 789 normal tissue samples, identifying 5603 differentially expressed genes (DEGs), including 2937 upregulated genes and 2666 downregulated genes. Moreover, we also identified two dysregulated genes, RASA4 and SYNGAP1, among six Ras GTPase-activating proteins. High NF1 expression was associated with longer overall survival, while high SYNGAP1 expression showed a trend towards extended overall survival. Further analysis revealed the mutation frequency and copy number variations of Ras GTPase-activating proteins in various cancer samples. Additionally, DNA methylation analysis demonstrated a negative correlation between DNA methylation of Ras GTPase-activating proteins and their expression. Moreover, among Ras GTPase-activating proteins, we focused on SYNGAP1, and experimental validation confirmed that the overexpression of SYNGAP1 in READ significantly suppressed READ cell proliferation and increased apoptosis via regulating the Wnt/β-Catenin signaling pathway. These findings underscored the potential significance of SYNGAP1 in READ and provide new insights for further research and treatment.

Early Rectal Cancer and Local Excision: A Narrative Review

A rise in the incidence of early rectal cancer consequent to bowel-screening programs around the world and an increase in the incidence in young adults has led to a growing interest in organ-sparing treatment options. The rectum, being the most distal portion of the large intestine, is a fertile ground for local excision techniques performed with endoscopic or surgical techniques. Moreover, the advancement in endoscopic optical evaluation and the better definition of imaging techniques allow for a more precise local staging of early rectal cancer. Although the local treatment of early rectal cancer seems promising, in clinical practice, a significant number of patients who could benefit from local excision techniques undergo total mesorectal excision (TME) as the first approach. All relevant prospective clinical trials were identified through a computer-assisted search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline databases until January 2024. This review is dedicated to endoscopic and surgical local excision in the treatment of early rectal cancer and highlights its possible role in current and future clinical practice, taking into account surgical completion techniques and chemoradiotherapy.

Evolution of surgical approach to rectal cancer resection: A multinational registry assessment

PURPOSE

Surgical approach to rectal cancer has evolved in recent decades, with introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and local excision. Since implementation might differ internationally, this study is aimed at evaluating trends in surgical approach to rectal cancer across different countries over the last 10 years and to gain insight into patient, tumour and treatment characteristics.

METHODS

Pseudo-anonymised data of patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer between 2010 and 2019 were extracted from clinical audits in the Netherlands (NL), Sweden (SE), England-Wales (EW) and Australia-New Zealand (AZ).

RESULTS

Ninety-nine thousand five hundred ninety-seven patients were included (38,413 open, 55,155 MIS and 5416 local excision). An overall increase in MIS was observed from 29.9% in 2010 to 72.1% in 2019, with decreasing conversion rates (17.5-9.0%). The MIS proportion was highly variable between countries in the period 2010-2014 (54.4% NL, 45.3% EW, 39.8% AZ, 14.1% SE, P < 0.001), but variation reduced over time (2015-2019 78.8% NL, 66.3% EW, 64.3% AZ, 53.2% SE, P < 0.001). The proportion of local excision for the two periods was highly variable between countries: 4.7% and 11.8% in NL, 3.9% and 7.4% in EW, 4.7% and 4.6% in AZ, 6.0% and 2.9% in SE.

CONCLUSIONS

Application and speed of implementation of MIS were highly variable between countries, but each registry demonstrated a significant increase over time. Local excision revealed inconsistent trends over time.

Endoscopic and trans-anal local excision vs. radical resection in the treatment of early rectal cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The management of early-stage rectal cancer in clinical practice is controversial. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare oncological and postoperative outcomes for T1T2N0M0 rectal cancers managed with local excision in comparison to conventional radical resection.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, Embase and Cochrane electronic databases was performed. Relevant studies were selected using PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes measured were 5-year local recurrence and overall survival. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative complication, 30-day mortality, positive margin and permanent stoma formation.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials and 27 observational studies contributed 8570 patients for analysis. Radical resection was associated with reduced 5-year local recurrence in comparison to local excision. This was statistically significant in comparison to trans-anal local excision (odds ratio (OR) 0.23; 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.30) and favourable in comparison to endoscopic techniques (OR 0.40; 95% confidence interval 0.13-1.23) although this did not reach clinical significance. Positive margin rates were lowest for radical resection. However, 30-day mortality rates, perioperative complications and permanent stoma rates all favoured local excision with no statistically significant difference between endoscopic and trans-anal techniques.

CONCLUSION

Radical resection of early rectal cancer is associated with the lowest 5-year local recurrence rates and the lowest rate of positive margins. However, this must be balanced with its higher 30-day mortality and complication rates as well as the increased risk of permanent stoma. The emerging potential role of neoadjuvant therapy prior to local resection, and the heterogeneity of its use, as an alternative treatment for early rectal cancer further complicates the treatment paradigm and adds to controversy in this field.

Local versus radical surgery for early rectal cancer with or without neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the standard of care for stage I rectal cancer. Despite major advances and increasing enthusiasm for modern endoscopic local excision (LE), uncertainty remains regarding its oncologic equivalence and safety relative to radical resection (RR).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the oncologic, operative, and functional outcomes of modern endoscopic LE compared to RR surgery in adults with stage I rectal cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to present), four trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials database), two thesis and proceedings databases, and relevant scientific societies' publications in February 2022. We performed handsearching and reference checking and contacted study authors of ongoing trials to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in people with stage I rectal cancer comparing any modern LE techniques to any RR techniques with or without the use of neo/adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) and standard errors for time-to-event data and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes, using generic inverse variance and random-effects methods. We regrouped surgical complications from the included studies into major and minor according to the standard Clavien-Dindo classification. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework.

MAIN RESULTS

Four RCTs were included in data synthesis with a combined total of 266 participants with stage I rectal cancer (T1-2N0M0), if not stated otherwise. Surgery was performed in university hospital settings. The mean age of participants was above 60, and median follow-up ranged from 17.5 months to 9.6 years. Regarding the use of co-interventions, one study used neoadjuvant CRT in all participants (T2 cancers); one study used short-course radiotherapy in the LE group (T1-T2 cancers); one study used adjuvant CRT selectively in high-risk patients undergoing RR (T1-T2 cancers); and the fourth study did not use any CRT (T1 cancers). We assessed the overall risk of bias as high for oncologic and morbidity outcomes across studies. All studies had at least one key domain with a high risk of bias. None of the studies reported separate outcomes for T1 versus T2 or for high-risk features. Low-certainty evidence suggests that RR may result in an improvement in disease-free survival compared to LE (3 trials, 212 participants; HR 1.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 4.24). This would translate into a three-year disease-recurrence risk of 27% (95% CI 14 to 50%) versus 15% after LE and RR, respectively. Regarding sphincter function, only one study provided objective results and reported short-term deterioration in stool frequency, flatulence, incontinence, abdominal pain, and embarrassment about bowel function in the RR group. At three years, the LE group had superiority in overall stool frequency, embarrassment about bowel function, and diarrhea. Local excision may have little to no effect on cancer-related survival compared to RR (3 trials, 207 participants; HR 1.42, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; very low-certainty evidence). We did not pool studies for local recurrence, but the included studies individually reported comparable local recurrence rates for LE and RR (low-certainty evidence). It is unclear if the risk of major postoperative complications may be lower with LE compared with RR (risk ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.28; low-certainty evidence; corresponding to 5.8% (95% CI 2.4% to 14.1%) risk for LE versus 11% for RR). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that the risk of minor postoperative complications is probably lower after LE (risk ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.85); corresponding to an absolute risk of 14% (95% CI 8% to 26%) for LE compared to 30.1% for RR. One study reported an 11% rate of temporary stoma after LE versus 82% in the RR group. Another study reported a 46% rate of temporary or permanent stomas after RR and none after LE. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of LE compared with RR on quality of life. Only one study reported standard quality of life function, in favor of LE, with a 90% or greater probability of superiority in overall quality of life, role, social, and emotional functions, body image, and health anxiety. Other studies reported a significantly shorter postoperative period to oral intake, bowel movement, and off-bed activities in the LE group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-certainty evidence, LE may decrease disease-free survival in early rectal cancer. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that LE may have little to no effect on cancer-related survival compared to RR for the treatment of stage I rectal cancer. Based on low-certainty evidence, it is unclear if LE may have a lower major complication rate, but probably causes a large reduction in minor complication rate. Limited data based on one study suggest better sphincter function, quality of life, or genitourinary function after LE. Limitations exist with respect to the applicability of these findings. We identified only four eligible studies with a low number of total participants, subjecting the results to imprecision. Risk of bias had a serious impact on the quality of evidence. More RCTs are needed to answer our review question with greater certainty and to compare local and distant metastasis rates. Data on important patient outcomes such as sphincter function and quality of life are very limited. Results of currently ongoing trials will likely impact the results of this review. Future trials should accurately report and compare outcomes according to the stage and high-risk features of rectal tumors, and evaluate quality of life, sphincter, and genitourinary outcomes. The role of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy as an emerging co-intervention for improving oncologic outcomes after LE needs to be further defined.

Long-term results of minimally invasive transanal surgery for rectal tumors in 249 consecutive patients

PURPOSE

To delineate the long-term results of minimally invasive transanal surgery (MITAS) for selected rectal tumors.

METHODS

We analyzed data, retrospectively, on consecutive patients who underwent MITAS between 1995 and 2015, to establish the feasibility, excision quality, and perioperative and oncological outcomes of this procedure.

RESULTS

MITAS was performed on 243 patients. The final histology included 142 cancers, 47 adenomas, and 52 neuroendocrine tumors (NET G1). A positive margin of 1.6% and 100% en bloc resection were achieved. The mean operative time was 27.4 min. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 7% of patients, with 0% mortality. The median follow-up was 100 months (up to ≥ 5 years or until death in 91.8% of patients). Recurrence developed in 2.9% of the patients. The 10-year overall survival rate was 100% for patients with NET G1 and 80.3% for those with cancer. The 5-year DFS was 100% for patients with Tis cancer, 90.6% for those with T1 cancer, and 87.5% for those with T2 or deeper cancers. MITAS for rectal tumors ≥ 3 cm resulted in perioperative and oncologic outcomes equivalent to those for tumors < 3 cm.

CONCLUSION

MITAS is feasible for the local excision (LE) of selected rectal tumors, including tumors ≥ 3 cm. It reduces operative time and secures excision quality and long-term oncological outcomes.

Current Surgical Methods in Local Rectal Excision

Background

The treatment of rectal cancer has evolved with the advancement of surgical techniques. Less invasive approaches are becoming more accepted as the primary treatment method.

Summary

Such methods as transanal excision, transanal endoscopic microsurgery, and transanal minimally invasive surgery can reduce morbidity and mortality rates. However, not all patients are suitable candidates for these procedures, and proper diagnostics are necessary to establish indications. Compared to total mesorectal excision, transanal excision techniques have been shown to have fewer complications and comorbidities while still being able to remove cancerous tissue entirely. Transanal excision is the simplest method, where the operator removes visible rectal lesions. The basic principle of transanal endoscopic microsurgery is to dilate the rectum mechanically and by air insufflation and then use special surgical instruments to remove suspicious lesions under the vision of a telescope. Transanal minimally invasive surgery combines transanal endoscopic microsurgery and single-incision laparoscopic surgery, making the hard-to-reach proximal rectum accessible to classic laparoscopic instruments.

Key Message

Local excision techniques, when used as a monotherapy for treating patients with rectal cancer, have established themselves as a curative and less radical treatment for strictly selected patients with early rectal carcinoma, leading to improved quality of life. When combined with other modalities such as neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, total neoadjuvant therapy, and immunotherapy, transanal surgery can be offered to patients with locally advanced rectal cancer as part of the organ preservation strategy. This review will discuss the patient selection and technical aspects of transanal surgery, showcasing its current role in treating rectal carcinoma.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery Versus Total Mesorectal Excision in ypT0-1 Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Radiochemotherapy: Postoperative Morbidity, Functional Results, and Long-term Oncologic Outcome

BACKGROUND

In patients with locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer, a multidisciplinary approach represents the standard treatment. However, considering the favorable prognosis in patients with major or complete response, radical surgery might represent overtreatment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate postoperative short-term morbidity, functional outcome, and oncologic long-term outcome in patients with rectal cancer treated with local excision by transanal endoscopic microsurgery or radical surgery and to determine who achieved a complete or major pathological response (ypT0-1) after neoadjuvant treatment.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTING

The study was conducted at a single center.

PATIENTS

Patients who had received neoadjuvant treatment by local excision with a major or complete pathological response at histological examination (transanal endoscopic microsurgery group) were compared to patients treated by radical surgery with the same pathological response (total mesorectal excision group).

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions included local excision by transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery with total mesorectal excision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative short-term morbidity, functional outcome 1 year after surgery, and oncologic long-term outcome were measured.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients were included in the study (35 in the transanal endoscopic microsurgery group and 58 in the mesorectal excision group). In the total mesorectal excision group, a sphincter-saving approach was possible in 89.7% (vs 100%; p = 0.049); a protective temporary stoma was necessary in 74.1% of radical procedures (vs 0%; p < 0.001), and 13.8% of these became permanent. Short-term postoperative morbidity was lower after local excision (14.3% vs 46.6%; p = 0.002). One year after surgery, the transanal endoscopic microsurgery group recorded better evacuation and continence function than the total mesorectal excision group. Oncologic outcome was similar between the groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study had a retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

If a major or complete pathological response occurs after neoadjuvant treatment, an organ-sparing approach by local excision seems to offer the same oncologic results as radical surgery, but it has a better postoperative morbidity rate and better functional results. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B901 .Microcirugía endoscópica transanal versus escisión total del mesorrecto en cáncer de recto ypT0-1 después de radioquimioterapia preoperatoria: morbilidad posoperatoria, resultados funcionales y resultado oncológico a largo plazo.

ANTECEDENTES

En pacientes con cáncer rectal extraperitoneal localmente avanzado, un abordaje multidisciplinario con radioquimioterapia preoperatoria y cirugía con escisión total del mesorrecto representa el tratamiento estándar. En pacientes que obtienen una respuesta mayor o completa, la cirugía radical puede representar un sobretratamiento, considerando el pronóstico favorable de estos casos.

OBJETIVO

Evaluar la morbilidad posoperatoria a corto plazo, el resultado funcional y el resultado oncológico a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer de recto tratados con escisión local mediante microcirugía endoscópica transanal o mediante cirugía radical y que obtuvieron una respuesta patológica completa o mayor (ypT0-1) después del tratamiento neoadyuvante.

DISEO

Este fue un estudio retrospectivo.

AJUSTE

El estudio se realizó en un solo centro.

ESCENARIO

El estudio se realizó en un solo centro.

PACIENTES

Se comparó a los pacientes tratados, tras tratamiento neoadyuvante (1996-2016), mediante escisión local con respuesta patológica mayor o completa al examen histológico (grupo de microcirugía endoscópica transanal), con los pacientes tratados mediante cirugía radical con la misma respuesta patológica (grupo de escisión mesorrectal total).

INTERVENCIONES

Extirpación local mediante microcirugía endoscópica transanal y cirugía radical con escisión mesorrectal total.

PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO

Morbilidad posoperatoria a corto plazo, resultado funcional a un año después de la cirugía (evaluado con una puntuación de evacuación y continencia) y resultado oncológico a largo plazo.

LIMITACIONES

Las limitaciones de este estudio incluyen su diseño retrospectivo.

CONCLUSIN

Si se produce una respuesta patológica mayor o completa después del tratamiento neoadyuvante, un abordaje con preservación de órganos mediante escisión local parece ofrecer los mismos resultados oncológicos que la cirugía radical, pero tiene una menor tasa de morbilidad postoperatoria y mejores resultados funcionales un año después de la cirugía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B901 . (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio ).

Radical vs. Local Excision in Rectal Carcinoma T1N0M0: Recurrence and Mortality Rates

Local transanal excision of early rectal carcinoma is an appealing treatment because of its low morbidity rates and better functional results than radical resection. However, this treatment approach is controversial due to its association with local recurrence when compared to the latter. This review aims to compare the local recurrence and mortality rates of local vs. radical excision in patients with T1N0M0 rectal carcinoma, based on data in the literature in the last 20 years. A PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar search of published literature in the last 20 years was performed. A total of 12 studies were identified. Three were prospective, one was a population-based propensity matching study, one was a nationwide cohort study, one was a meta-analysis, and the remaining studies were retrospective/observational. The mean local recurrence rate within five years from the studies selected for local excision (LE: 12.8%) was nearly double that of radical excision (RAD: 5.0%). The five-year mean survival rate for both LE and RAD groups from the studies selected was 86%, which was equal for both groups. The main predictors of poor outcomes were older age and the presence of two or more comorbid conditions. There is a consensus amongst studies that LE is associated with inferior oncological outcomes such as postoperative complications and recurrence when compared to RAD. The higher local recurrence rates in LE are attributed to occult lymph node disease and inadequate adjunctive therapy due to suboptimal staging. There is no difference in the five-year survival rate when compared to RAD. A longer follow-up period is needed to determine whether the survival rates diverge after five years.

Variations in Care and Real World Outcomes in those with Rectal Cancer: A protocol for the Ontario Rectal Cancer Cohort (OntaReCC) (Preprint)

Background

Individuals with rectal cancer require a number of pretreatment investigations, often require multidisciplinary treatment, and require ongoing follow-ups after treatment is completed. Due to the complexity of treatments, large variations in practice patterns and outcomes have been identified. At present, few comprehensive, population-level data sets are available for assessing interventions and outcomes in this group.

Objective

Our study aims to create a comprehensive database of individuals with rectal cancer who have been treated in a single-payer, universal health care system. This database will provide an excellent resource that investigators can use to study variations in the delivery of care to and real-world outcomes of this population.

Methods

The Ontario Rectal Cancer Cohort database will include comprehensive details about the management and outcomes of individuals with rectal cancer who have been diagnosed in Ontario, Canada (population: 14.6 million), between 2010 and 2019. Linked administrative data sets will be used to construct this comprehensive database. Individual and care provider characteristics, investigations, treatments, follow-ups, and outcomes will be derived and linked. Surgical pathology details, including the stage of disease, histopathology characteristics, and the quality of surgical excision, will be included. Ethics approval for this study was obtained through the Queen’s University Health Sciences and Affiliated Teaching Hospitals Research Ethics Board.

Results

Approximately 20,000 individuals who meet the inclusion criteria for this study have been identified. Data analysis is ongoing, with an expected completion date of March 2023. This study was funded through the Canadian Institute of Health Research Operating Grant.

Conclusions

The Ontario Rectal Cancer Cohort will include a comprehensive data set of individuals with rectal cancer who received care within a single-payer, universal health care system. This cohort will be used to determine factors associated with regional variability and adherence to recommended care, and it will allow for an assessment of a number of understudied areas within the delivery of rectal cancer treatment.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR1-10.2196/38874

SEOM-GEMCAD-TTD clinical guidelines for localized rectal cancer (2021)

The management of localized rectal cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach to optimize outcomes, reduce morbidity and prevent under or overtreatments. While early stages may obtain benefit of local resections without any additional therapies, locally advanced rectal cancer becomes a challenge defining the better sequential strategy of surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The latest results of international phase III studies have positioned the total neoadjuvant therapy as a potential new standard of care in high risk rectal cancers, however, the best schedule is still not well defined.

New Frontiers in Management of Early and Advanced Rectal Cancer

It is important to understand advances in treatment options for rectal cancer. We attempt to highlight advances in rectal cancer treatment in the form of a systematic review. Early-stage rectal cancer focuses on minimally invasive endoluminal surgery, with importance placed on patient selection as the driving factor for improved outcomes. To achieve a complete pathologic response, various neoadjuvant chemoradiation regimens have been employed. Short-course radiation therapy, total neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and others provide unique advantages with select patient populations best suited for each. With a clinical complete response, a "watch and wait" non-operative surveillance has been introduced with preliminary equivalency to radical resection. Various modalities for total mesorectal excision, such as robotic or transanal, have advantages and can be utilized in select patient populations. Tumors demonstrating solid organ or peritoneal spread, traditionally defined as unresectable lesions conveying a terminal diagnosis, have recently undergone advances in hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy. Hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy has demonstrated clear advantages in 5-year survival over standard chemotherapy. With the peritoneal spread of colorectal cancer, HIPEC with cytoreductive therapy has emerged as the preferred treatment. Understanding the various therapeutic interventions will pave the way for improved patient outcomes.

Rectal cancer: Maximizing local control and minimizing toxicity

Adoption of multimodality treatment approach for rectal cancer has resulted in significant improvements in oncologic outcomes. The roles of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery in rectal cancer treatment are continuously evolving with the goal of achieving the best possible oncologic and functional outcome while minimizing treatment toxicity. The aim of this review is to summarize the most recent trials focusing on organ-sparing treatment strategies and the optimal selection of patients for neoadjuvant radiation therapy.

Predictors of lymph-node metastasis in surgically resected T1 colorectal cancer in Western populations

Background

The risk of lymph-node metastasis (LNM) in T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) has not been well documented in heterogeneous Western populations. This study investigated the predictors of LNM and the long-term outcomes of patients by analysing T1 CRC surgical specimens and patients’ demographic data.

Methods

Patients with surgically resected T1 CRC between 2004 and 2014 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Patients with multiple primary cancers, with neoadjuvant therapy, or without a confirmed histopathological diagnosis were excluded. Multivariate logistic-regression analysis was used to identify the predictors of LNM.

Results

Of the 22,319 patients, 10.6% had a positive lymph-node status based on the final pathology (nodal category: N1 9.6%, N2 1.0%). Younger age, female sex, Asian or African-American ethnicity, poor differentiation, and tumor site outside the rectum were significantly associated with LNM. Subgroup analyses for patients stratified by tumor site suggested that the rate of positive lymph-node status was the lowest in the rectum (hazard ratio: 0.74; 95% confidence interval: 0.63–0.86).

Conclusion

The risk of LNM was potentially lower in Caucasian patients than in API or African-American patients with surgically resected T1 CRC. Regarding the T1 CRC site, the rectum was associated with a lower risk of LNM.

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.

Management of Early-Stage Rectal Cancer

A 59-year-old man underwent screening colonoscopy that identified a 2-cm rectal polyp in the posterior midline, 7 cm from the anal verge. Biopsy revealed a tubular adenoma with high-grade dysplasia. The patient underwent a robotic-assisted transanal minimally invasive surgery with full-thickness excision (Fig. 1). Final pathology confirmed a well-differentiated adenocarcinoma extending into the submucosa (sm2). There was no lymphovascular or perineural invasion, and the radial margin was 5 mm.

Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radical surgery after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for intermediate pathological risk early rectal cancer: A single-center experience with long-term surveillance

BACKGROUND

The choice of subsequent treatment for intermediate-risk rectal tumors after transanal endoscopic microsurgery between adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision is controversial. The present study aimed to compare survival and functional outcome between these 2 strategies.

METHODS

This retrospective study included intermediate-risk patients with early rectal cancer after transanal endoscopic microsurgery in our center between 2010 and 2017. Patients were divided into adjuvant treatment and total mesorectal excision groups. Intermediate risk was defined as pT1 with lymphovascular invasion, poor differentiation, or large diameter (3-5 cm) or pT2 with small diameter (<3 cm). The study was based on follow-up data on survival and results from distributed validated scales for functional outcome.

RESULTS

Postoperative overall survival and disease-free survival were comparable between the groups (P = .619 and P = .712, respectively). Pathological T stage was an independent risk factor for disease-free survival (hazard ratio 3.09, 95% confidence interval 1.66-4.18, P = .044). Anorectal symptoms, such as buttock pain, were significantly prevalent in the total mesorectal excision group (P = .030). In addition, the total mesorectal excision group presented with poorer bowel function, including stool urgency (P < .001), bowel frequency (P = .016), severity of low anterior resection syndrome (P = .039) and total low anterior resection syndrome score (P = .040). Except for a lower score of vaginal lubrication in the total mesorectal excision versus the adjuvant treatment group, sexual function was similar between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Similar to total mesorectal excision, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is an alternative option for intermediate-risk early rectal cancer after transanal endoscopic microsurgery and is associated with similar survival outcomes and better bowel function.

Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older patients, current guidelines do not incorporate optimal treatment recommendations for the elderly and address only partially the associated specific challenges encountered in this population. This results in a wide variation and disparity in delivering a standard of care to this subset of patients. As the burden of rectal cancer in the elderly population continues to increase, it is crucial to assess whether current recommendations on treatment strategies for the general population can be adopted for the older adults, with the same beneficial oncological and functional outcomes. This multidisciplinary experts' consensus aims to refine current rectal cancer-specific guidelines for the elderly population in order to help to maximize rectal cancer therapeutic strategies while minimizing adverse impacts on functional outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

METHODS

The discussion among the steering group of clinical experts and methodologists from the societies' expert panel involved clinicians practicing in general surgery, colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, gastroenterologists, radiologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, and endoscopists. Research topics and questions were formulated, revised, and unanimously approved by all experts in two subsequent modified Delphi rounds in December 2020-January 2021. The steering committee was divided into nine teams following the main research field of members. Each conducted their literature search and drafted statements and recommendations on their research question. Literature search has been updated up to 2020 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. A modified Delphi methodology was implemented to reach agreement among the experts on all statements and recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 SICG-SIFIPAC-SICE-WSES consensus for the multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer aims to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: epidemiology, pre-intervention strategies, diagnosis and staging, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgery, watch and wait strategy, adjuvant chemotherapy, synchronous liver metastases, and emergency presentation of rectal cancer.

Completion total mesorectal excision following transanal endoscopic microsurgery does not compromise outcomes in patients with rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) represents a choice of treatment in patients with neoplastic lesions in the rectum. When TEM fails, completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is often required. However, a concern is whether cTME increases the rate of abdominoperineal resections (APR) and is associated with higher risk of incomplete mesorectal fascia (MRF) resection. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of cTME with primary TME (pTME) in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a nationwide study on all patients with cTME from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database between 2005 and 2015. Patients with cTME were compared to patients with pTME after propensity score matching (matching ratio 1:2). Matching variables were age, gender, tumor distance from anal verge, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients with cTME were compared with 120 patients with pTME. Patients with cTME experienced more intraoperative complications as compared to pTME patients (18.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.021). However, there was no difference in the rate of perforations at or near the tumor/previous TEM site (6.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.224), conversion to open surgery (p = 0.733) or 30-day morbidity (p = 0.86). On multivariate analysis, cTME was not a risk factor for APR (OR 2.49; 95% CI 0.95-6.56; p = 0.064) or incomplete MRF (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.48-3.63; p = 0.596). There was no difference in the rate of local recurrence between cTME and pTME (5.2% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.1), distant metastases (6.8% vs. 6.8%, p = 1), or survival (p = 0.081). The mean follow-up time was 6 years.

CONCLUSION

In our study, the largest so far on the subject, we find no difference in postoperative short- or long-term outcomes between cTME and pTME.

Oncological outcome after local treatment for early stage rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Treatment of early rectal cancer is evolving towards organ-preserving therapy which includes endoscopic resection and transanal approaches. We aimed to explore the role of local treatments such as endoscopic polypectomy (Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) or Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD)) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery/ transanal minimal invasive surgery (TEM/TAMIS) in patients who had early rectal cancer. We considered these outcomes alongside conventional major surgery using total mesorectal excision (TME) for early stage disease.

METHODS

All patients identified at MDT with early stage rectal cancer at our institution between 2010 and 2019 were included. Long-term outcomes in terms of local recurrence, survival and procedure-specific morbidity were analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 536 patients with rectal cancer were identified, of which 112 were included based on their pre-operative identification at the MDT on the basis that they had node-negative early rectal cancer. Among these, 30 patients (27%) had the lesion excised by flexible endoscopic polypectomy techniques (EMR/ESD), 67 (60%) underwent TEM/TAMIS and 15 (13%) had major surgery. There were no differences in patient demographics between the three groups except for TEM/TAMIS patients being more likely to be referred from another hospital (p < 0.001) and they were less active (WHO performance status p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in overall survival rates and cancer-specific survival between the three treatment groups. The 5-year overall survival rate for endoscopic polypectomy, TEM/TAMIS or major resection was 96% versus 90% and 88%, respectively (p = 0.89). The 5- year cancer-specific survival rate was 96%, versus 96% and 100%, respectively (p = 0.74).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic polypectomy by EMR/ESD is an appropriate local treatment for early stage rectal cancer in selected patients. It is possible to achieve good oncological outcomes with a polypectomy similar to TEM/TAMIS and major surgery; however, a multidisciplinary approach is necessary enabling close surveillance and the use of adjuvant radiotherapy.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy affects postoperative outcomes and functional results in patients treated with transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to quantify the incidence of short-term postoperative complications and functional disorders at 1 year from transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for rectal neoplasms, to compare patients treated with TEM alone and with TEM after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and to analyse factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on all patients treated with TEM for rectal neoplasms at our institution in January 2000-December 2017. Data from a prospectively maintained database were retrospectively analysed. Patients were divided into two groups: adenoma or early rectal cancer (no CRT group) and locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer with major or complete clinical response after preoperative CRT (CRT group). Short-term postoperative mortality and morbidity and the functional results at 1 year were recorded. The two groups were compared, and a statistical analysis of factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes was performed. Functional outcome was also evaluated with the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score (0-20 no LARS, 21-29 minor LARS and 30-42 major LARS).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirteen patients (71 males, 42 females, median age 64 years [range 41-80 years]) were included in the study (46 in the CRT group). The overall postoperative complication rate was 23.0%, lower in the noCRT group (p < 0.001), but only 2.7% were grade ≥ 3. The most frequent complication was suture dehiscence (17.6%), which occurred less frequently in the noCRT group (p < 0.001). At 1 year from TEM, the most frequent symptoms was urgency (11.9%, without significant differences between the CRT group and the noCRT group); the noCRT group experienced a lower rate of soiling than the CRT group (0% vs. 7.7%; p: 0.027). The incidence of LARS was evaluated in 47 patients from May 2012 on and was 21.3% occurring less frequently in the noCRT group (10% vs. 41.2%; p: 0.012). Only 6.4% of the patients evaluated experienced major LARS. In multivariate analysis, preoperative CRT significantly worsened postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is a safe procedure associated with only low risk of severe postoperative complications and major LARS. Preoperative CRT seems to increase the rate of postoperative morbidity after TEM and led to worse functional outcomes at 1 year after surgery.

Oncological Outcomes of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery Plus Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Patients with High-Risk T1 and T2 Rectal Cancer

Background: Radical surgery is recommended for high-risk pathological stage T1 (pT1) or pT2 rectal cancer after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). However, in clinical practice, many patients may unfit or decline radical surgery. In recent years, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) after TEM was considered as an alternative to radical surgery for these patients. This study aimed to assess oncological outcomes of adjuvant CRT after TEM for high-risk early rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: We collected retrospectively data of 97 patients who underwent TEM with pT1 and pT2 between January 2008 and December 2018. Of these, 35 patients were excluded. Of the remaining 62 patients, 42 were managed by TEM alone and 20 by TEM plus adjuvant CRT. Demographics, recurrence, and survival were analyzed between the two groups. Results: At a median follow-up of 52.5 months, the 3-year local recurrence-free survival and disease-free survival (DFS) in TEM alone group were significantly lower than those in TEM+CRT group (66.6% versus 93.3%, P = .035; 63.7% versus 93.3%, P = .022). Although the 3-year overall survival in TEM+CRT group was higher than TEM alone group (100% versus 83.3%), the difference was not statistically significant (P = .13). The local recurrence rate in TEM alone was 31%, compared with 5% in TEM+CRT group (P = .025). Multivariate analysis showed that adjuvant CRT was an independent prognostic factor for DFS (hazard ratio: 0.094; 95% confidence interval: 0.001-0.764; P = .027). Conclusions: Our study suggests that adjuvant CRT after TEM may be an alternative for pT1 high-risk and T2 rectal cancer who are not suitable or unwilling to undergo salvage radical surgery.

Current Surgical Strategies for the Treatment of Rectal Adenocarcinoma and the Risk of Local Recurrence

BACKGROUND

Despite new medical and surgical strategies, 5-year local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma was reported in up to 25% of cases. Therefore, we aimed to review surgical strategies for the prevention of local recurrences in rectal cancer.

SUMMARY

After implementation of the total mesorectal excision (TME), surgical resection of rectal adenocarcinoma with anterior resection or abdominoperineal excision (APE) allowed decrease in local recurrence (3% at 5 years). More recently, extralevator APE was described as an alternative to APE, decreasing specimen perforation and recurrence rate. Moreover, technique modifications were developed to optimize rectal resection, such as the laparoscopic or robotic approach, and transanal TME. However, the technical advantages conferred by these techniques did not translate into a decreased recurrence rate. Lateral lymph node dissection is another technique, which aimed at improving the long-term outcomes; nevertheless, there is currently no evidence to recommend its routine use. Strategies to preserve the rectum are also emerging, such as local excision, and may be beneficial for subgroups of patients. Key Messages: Rectal cancer management requires a multidisciplinary approach, and surgical strategy should be tailored to patient factors: general health, previous perineal intervention, anatomy, preference, and tumor characteristics such as stage and localization.

Biology-and Location-Oriented Precision Treatment of Rectal Cancer: Present and Future

BACKGROUND

The surgical approach in rectal cancer treatment has evolved in the last decades and a standardized surgical technique for tumor resection - total mesorectal excision - has been established.

SUMMARY

In a multidisciplinary effort with the use of total mesorectal excision in combination with adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments to compliment surgery disease management can achieve excellent long-term local control and improved patient survival. Further improvements in imaging techniques and the ability to identify prognostic factors such as tumor regression, extramural venous invasion, and threatened margins have introduced the concept of decision-making based on preoperative staging information.

KEY MESSAGE

Therefore, in the modern era treatment algorithms are based on high-resolution imaging to plan neoadjuvant therapy and precision surgery followed by pathological and molecular analysis to stratify patients for the need of adjuvant chemotherapy. Despite excellent results with guideline structured treatment pathways, there is still a need to improve long-term results especially for individuals with locally advanced or metastatic tumors.

Early-rectal Cancer Treatment: A Decision-tree Making Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Local excision (LE) has arisen as an alternative to total mesorectal excision for the treatment of early rectal cancer. Despite a decreased morbidity, there are still concerns about LE outcomes. This systematic-review and meta-analysis design is based on the "PICO" process, aiming to answer to three questions related to LE as primary treatment for early-rectal cancer, the optimal method for LE, and the potential role for completion treatment in high-risk histology tumors and outcomes of salvage surgery. The results revealed that reported overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were 71%-91.7% and 80%-94% for LE, in contrast to 92.3%-94.3% and 94.4%-97% for radical surgery. Additional analysis of National Database studies revealed lower OS with LE (HR: 1.26; 95%CI, 1.09-1.45) and DSS (HR: 1.19; 95%CI, 1.01-1.41) after LE. Furthermore, patients receiving LE were significantly more prone develop local recurrence (RR: 3.44, 95%CI, 2.50-4.74). Analysis of available transanal surgical platforms was performed, finding no significant differences among them but reduced local recurrence compared to traditional transanal LE (OR:0.24;95%CI, 0.15-0.4). Finally, we found poor survival outcomes for patients undergoing salvage surgery, favoring completion treatment (chemoradiotherapy or surgery) when high-risk histology is present. In conclusion, LE could be considered adequate provided a full-thickness specimen can be achieved that the patient is informed about risk for potential requirement of completion treatment. Early-rectal cancer cases should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team, and patient's preferences must be considered in the decision-making process.

A Comprehensive Review of Randomized Clinical Trials Shaping the Landscape of Rectal Cancer Therapy

Colorectal carcinoma is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States, with rectal cancer accounting for approximately one third of newly diagnosed cases. Surgery remains the cornerstone of curative therapy, with total mesorectal excision being the standard of care. Although minimally invasive procedures might be appropriate for a subset of patients with early-stage, superficial tumors, the standard of care for medically operable patients with nonmetastatic rectal cancer includes a comprehensive multimodality approach of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, surgery with total mesorectal excision, and systemic chemotherapy. However, the morbidity and mortality related to both local and distant organ relapse have remained challenging. In the present review, we have discussed the trial-level evidence that has shaped the current clinical practice patterns in the treatment of curable, nonmetastatic rectal cancer. In addition, we have discussed the anticipated results of ongoing clinical trials and outlined pragmatic opportunities for future investigation to optimize the current status quo and, hopefully, provide prospective validation of novel approaches in the treatment of rectal cancer.

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.

Comparison of the transanal surgical techniques for local excision of rectal tumors: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In order to assess the various surgical modalities for local resection of rectal tumors, a systematic review of the current literature and a network meta-analysis (NMA) was designed and conducted.

METHODS

The present study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions principles. Scholar databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science) were systematically screened up to 23/12/2019. A Bayesian NMA, implementing a Markov chain Monte Carlo analysis, was introduced for the probability ranking of the available surgical methods. Odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) of the categorical and continuous variables, respectively, were reported with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI).

RESULTS

Overall, 16 studies and 2146 patients were introduced in our study. Transanal minimal invasive surgery (TAMIS) displayed the highest performance regarding the overall postoperative morbidity, the perioperative blood loss, the length of hospitalization, and the peritoneal violation rate. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) was the most efficient modality for resecting an intact specimen. Although transanal local excision (TAE) had the highest ranking considering operative duration, it was associated with a significant risk for positive resection margins and tumor recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, TEM and TAMIS display superior oncological results over TAE. Due to several limitations, validation of these results requires further RCTs of a higher methodological level.

Association of a Preoperative Leisure-Time Physical Activity With Short- and Long-term Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Curative Resection for Stage I to III Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Physical activity might be directly or indirectly linked to the risk of colorectal cancer and the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to elucidate whether preoperative physical activity plays a role in reducing short-term postoperative complications and improving long-term survival of patients with colorectal cancer.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a department of colorectal surgery in a tertiary teaching hospital between January 1995 and December 2016.

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent curative resection for stage I to III primary colorectal cancer were enrolled. According to the preoperative leisure-time weekly metabolic equivalent of task values, patients were divided into 2 groups: the metabolic equivalent of task <12 group and the metabolic equivalent of task ≥12 group. A 1:1 propensity score matching was used to reduce imbalance and selection biases based on 6 covariates, namely, age, sex, BMI, tumor location, tumor stage, and adjuvant chemotherapy administration.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

χ tests were used to analyze short-term postoperative complications. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to evaluate disease-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

In the matched cohort patients, significant differences in overall postoperative complications and mortality were observed in favor of the metabolic equivalent of task ≥12 group, although there was no difference in any single item of postoperative morbidity. The results of the Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test demonstrated a significant survival benefit in the metabolic equivalent of task ≥12 group compared with the metabolic equivalent of task <12 group both for disease-free and overall survival.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by its retrospective nature.

CONCLUSIONS

This single-institute study provides evidence of the association of preoperative leisure-time physical activity with short-term postoperative morbidity and mortality, as well as long-term survival. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B189. ASOCIACIÓN DE ACTIVIDAD FÍSICA DE TIEMPO LIBRE PREOPERATORIA CON RESULTADOS A CORTO Y LARGO PLAZO DE PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A RESECCIÓN CURATIVA POR CÁNCER COLORRECTAL EN ESTADIO I-III: UN ANÁLISIS DE COINCIDENCIA DE PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIÓN ANTECEDENTES: LA ACTIVIDAD FíSICA PUEDE ESTAR DIRECTA O INDIRECTAMENTE RELACIONADA CON EL RIESGO DE CÁNCER COLORRECTAL Y EL PRONÓSTICO DE LOS PACIENTES CON CÁNCER COLORRECTAL.: Este estudio tuvo como objetivo dilucidar si la actividad física preoperatoria desempeña un papel en la reducción de las complicaciones postoperatorias a corto plazo y en mejorar la supervivencia a largo plazo de los pacientes con cáncer colorrectal.Este fue un análisis retrospectivo de datos recolectados prospectivamente.Este estudio se realizó en un departamento de cirugía colorrectal en un hospital universitario terciario entre Enero de 1995 y Diciembre de 2016.Se incluyeron pacientes sometidos a resección curativa por cáncer colorrectal primario en estadio I-III. De acuerdo con el equivalente metabólico semanal en el tiempo libre de los valores de la tarea preoperatorio, los pacientes se dividieron en dos grupos: el equivalente metabólico del grupo de tarea <12 y el equivalente metabólico del grupo de tarea ≥ 12. Se utilizó una coincidencia de puntaje de propensión 1: 1 para reducir los desequilibrios y los sesgos de selección basados en seis covariables, principalmente, edad, sexo, índice de masa corporal, ubicación del tumor, estadio del tumor y administración de quimioterapia adyuvante.Las pruebas de Chi-cuadrado se utilizaron para analizar las complicaciones postoperatorias a corto plazo. Los análisis de Kaplan-Meier se utilizaron para evaluar la supervivencia libre de enfermedad y la supervivencia general.en los pacientes de la cohorte emparejada, se observaron diferencias significativas en las complicaciones postoperatorias generales y la mortalidad a favor del equivalente metabólico del grupo de tareas ≥ 12, aunque no hubo diferencias en ningún elemento único de morbilidad postoperatoria. Los resultados del análisis de Kaplan-Meier y la prueba de log-rank demostraron un beneficio de supervivencia significativo en el equivalente metabólico del grupo tarea ≥ 12 en comparación con el equivalente metabólico del grupo tarea <12 tanto para la supervivencia libre de enfermedad como para la supervivencia general.Este estudio está limitado por su naturaleza retrospectiva.Este estudio de instituto único proporciona evidencia de la asociación de la actividad física preoperatoria en el tiempo libre con la morbilidad y mortalidad postoperatorias a corto plazo, así como la supervivencia a largo plazo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B189. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Kahlil).

Primary local excision of stage 1 rectal cancer is not associated with worse oncological outcomes when compared with major resection

PURPOSE

Primary local excision (PLE) for early rectal cancers is associated with decreased surgical morbidity and mortality compared with major resection (MR). However, it is thought to be associated with poorer oncological outcomes. There is a paucity of data regarding PLE within the Australasian population. We present comparative post-operative and survival outcomes for stage 1 rectal cancers treated with PLE or MR from three Western Australian hospitals.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing PLE or MR for stage 1 rectal cancers between February 1996 and May 2019.

RESULTS

Of the 533 patients, 81 underwent PLE. Median post-operative admission was shorter for those undergoing PLE, with no significant difference in post-operative complication rate. Five-year overall survival was greater following MR (89.6% CI 86.1-92.3) compared with PLE (84.6% CI 73.8-91.2; p = 0.0003). There was no significant difference in 5-year cancer-specific survival (MR, 94.4% CI 91.5-96.3; PLE, 95.3% CI 86.0-98.5; p = 0.98) or 5-year disease-free survival (MR, 92.3% CI 89.1-94.7; PLE, 89.1% CI 78.5-94.7; p = 0.36). Local excision provided poorer local tumour control with an inferior 5-year local recurrence rate (MR, 2.16% CI 1.08-4.28; PLE, 10.9% CI 5.30-21.6; p = 0.0002). After controlling for confounders, PLE was significantly associated with worse local recurrence but did not significantly impact overall survival, cancer-specific survival, overall recurrence, or metastatic recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Local excision of early rectal cancer remains a viable alternative, in those unwilling or unable to undergo MR. Patients should be informed that while PLE is associated with poorer local pelvic control, this does not translate to worse survival.

Survival analysis of local excision vs total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer in pT1/pT2 stage and intermediate pathological risk

Background

Local excision (LE) is a feasible treatment approach for rectal cancers in stage pT1 and presents low pathological risk, whereas total mesorectal excision (TME) is a reasonable treatment for more advanced cancers. On the basis of the pathology findings, surgeons may suggest TME for patients receiving LE. This study compared the survival outcomes between LE with/without chemoradiation and TME in mid and low rectal cancer patients in stage pT1/pT2, with highly selective intermediate pathological risk.

Methods

This retrospective study included 134 patients who received TME and 39 patients who underwent LE for the treatment of intermediate risk (pT1 with poor differentiation, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, relatively large tumor, or small-sized pT2 tumor) rectal cancer between 1998 and 2016.

Results

Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and cumulative recurrence rate (CRR) were similar between the LE (3-year DFS 92%) and TME (3-year DFS 91%) groups. Following subgrouping into an LE with adjuvant therapy group and a TME without adjuvant therapy group, the compared survival outcomes (OS, DFS, and CRR) were found not to be statistically different. The temporary and permanent ostomy rates were higher in the TME group than in the LE group (p < 0.001). Rates of early and late morbidity following surgery were higher in the TME group (p = 0.005), and LE had similar survival compared with TME.

Conclusion

For patients who had mid and low rectal cancer in stage pT1/pT2 and intermediate pathological risk, LE with chemoradiation presents an alternative treatment option for selected patients.

Report from the 20th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference; Saskatoon, Saskatchewan; 28-29 September 2018

The 20th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference was held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, 28-29 September 2018. This interactive multidisciplinary conference is attended by health care professionals from across Western Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) who are involved in the care of patients with gastrointestinal cancers. In addition, invited speakers from other provinces participate. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists, and allied health care professionals participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management of colorectal cancers.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer: what the radiologist should know

Despite advances in surgical techniques and chemoradiation therapy, recurrent rectal cancer remains a cause of morbidity and mortality. After successful treatment of rectal cancer, patients are typically enrolled in a surveillance strategy that includes imaging as studies have shown improved prognosis when recurrent rectal cancer is detected during imaging surveillance versus based on development of symptoms. Additionally, patients who experience a complete clinical response with chemoradiation therapy may elect to enroll in a "watch-and-wait" strategy that includes imaging surveillance rather than surgical resection. Factors that increase the likelihood of recurrence, patterns of recurrence, and the imaging appearances of recurrent rectal cancer are reviewed with a focus on CT, PET CT, and MR imaging.

Can less be more? Organ preservation strategies in the management of rectal cancer

Background

Total mesorectal excision (tme) is the current standard of care for the treatment of rectal cancer. However, that surgery is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Clinicians and patients are seeking alternatives to radical resection. Currently, prevalent organ-sparing strategies under investigation include local excision and nonoperative management (nom).

Methods

We reviewed the current evidence in the literature to create an overview of the use of transanal endoscopic surgery and watch-and-wait strategies in the modern management of rectal cancer.

Results

Compared with radical resection, transanal endoscopic surgery in patients with early rectal cancer (cT1) having favourable histopathologic features is associated with an increased risk of local recurrence, but no difference in 5-year survival. In patients with T2 or early T3 cancer, strategies that use neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy as adjuncts to local excision are under evaluation. Nonoperative management is a new option for patients who experience a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (ncrt). The selection criteria that will appropriately identify patients for whom nom will succeed are not established.

Conclusions

Local excision is appropriate for early rectal cancer with favourable histopathologic features. Although organ-preserving strategies are promising, the quality of the evidence to date is insufficient to replace the current standard care in most patients. Patients should be offered nom in the safe setting of a clinical trial or registry. Rigorous follow-up, including endoscopy and imaging at frequent intervals is recommended when radical resection is forgone.

Locally Excised T1 Rectal Cancers: Need for Specialized Surveillance Protocols

BACKGROUND

Local excision of T1 rectal cancers helps avoid major surgery, but the frequency and pattern of recurrence may be different than for patients treated with total mesorectal excision.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate pattern, frequency, and means of detection of recurrence in a closely followed cohort of patients with locally excised T1 rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This study is a retrospective review.

SETTINGS

Patients treated by University of Minnesota-affiliated physicians, 1994 to 2014, were selected.

PATIENTS

Patients had pathologically confirmed T1 rectal cancer treated with local excision and had at least 3 months of follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients underwent local excision of T1 rectal cancer, followed by multimodality follow-up with physical examination, CEA, CT, endorectal ultrasound, and proctoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the presence of local recurrence and the means of detection of recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients met the inclusion criteria. The local recurrence rate was 11.4%, and the rate of distant metastasis was 2.6%. Local recurrences occurred up to 7 years after local excision. Of the 14 patients with recurrence, 10 of the recurrences were found by ultrasound and/or proctoscopy rather than by traditional methods of surveillance such as CEA or imaging. Of these 10 patients, 4 had an apparent scar on proctoscopy, and ultrasound alone revealed findings concerning for recurrent malignancy. One had recurrent malignancy demonstrated on ultrasound, but no concurrent proctoscopy was performed.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective review, and the study was conducted at an institution where endorectal ultrasound is readily available.

CONCLUSIONS

Locally excised T1 rectal cancers should have specific surveillance guidelines distinct from stage I cancers treated with total mesorectal excision. These guidelines should incorporate a method of local surveillance that should be extended beyond the traditional 5-year interval of surveillance. An ultrasound or MRI in addition to or instead of flexible sigmoidoscopy or proctoscopy should also be strongly considered. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A979. CÁNCERES RECTALES T1 EXTIRPADOS LOCALMENTE: NECESIDAD DE PROTOCOLOS DE VIGILANCIA ESPECIALIZADOS: La escisión local de los cánceres de recto T1 ayuda a evitar una cirugía mayor, pero la frecuencia y el patrón de recurrencia pueden ser diferentes a los de los pacientes tratados con escisión mesorectal total.

OBJETIVO

Evaluar el patrón, la frecuencia y los medios de detección de recidiva en una cohorte de pacientes con cáncer de recto T1 extirpado localmente bajo un régimen de seguimiento especifico. DISEÑO:: Revisión retrospectiva.

AJUSTES

Pacientes tratados por hospitales afiliados a la Universidad de Minnesota, 1994-2014 PACIENTES:: Pacientes con cáncer de recto T1 confirmado patológicamente, tratados con escisión local y con al menos 3 meses de seguimiento.

INTERVENCIONES

Extirpación local del cáncer de recto T1, con un seguimiento multimodal incluyendo examen físico, antígeno carcinoembrionario (CEA), TC, ecografía endorrectal y proctoscopia.

PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO

Presencia de recurrencia local y medios de detección de recurrencia.

RESULTADOS

Un total de 114 pacientes cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión. La tasa de recurrencia local fue del 11,4% y la tasa de metástasis a distancia fue del 2,6%. Las recurrencias locales se presentaron hasta 7 años después de la escisión local. De los 14 pacientes con recurrencia, 10 de las recurrencias se detectaron por ultrasonido y / o proctoscopia en lugar de los métodos tradicionales de vigilancia, como CEA o imágenes. De estos diez pacientes, cuatro tenían una cicatriz aparente en la proctoscopia y el ultrasonido solo reveló hallazgos relacionados con tumores malignos recurrentes. En una ecografía se demostró malignidad recurrente, pero no se realizó proctoscopia concurrente.

LIMITACIONES

Revisión retrospectiva; estudio realizado en una institución donde se dispone fácilmente de ultrasonido endorrectal CONCLUSIONES:: Los cánceres de recto T1 extirpados localmente deben tener una vigilancia específica distinta de los cánceres en etapa I tratados con TME. El régimen de seguimiento deberá de extender más allá del intervalo tradicional de 5 años de vigilancia. También se debe considerar la posibilidad de realizar una ecografía o una resonancia magnética (IRM) además de la sigmoidoscopía flexible o la proctoscopía. Vea el Resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A979.