The Rationale for Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) in rectal cancer treatment within an expert center

The objective of this study was to evaluate treatment outcomes in patients who underwent the TaTME procedure for cancer of the middle and low rectum in an expert center. Prospective analysis of the outcomes of all consecutive patients treated using the TaTME technique for cancer of the middle and distal rectum at the our medical center between March 1, 2015, and March 31, 2022. A total of 128 patients (34 women, 94 men; mean age 66.01 [38-85] years) with cancer of the middle and distal rectum qualified for TaTME. TaTME procedures were performed in 127/128 (99.22%) patients. Complications of surgery were observed in 22/127 (17.32%) patients. Negative proximal and distal margins were confirmed in all 127 patients. Complete (R0) resection of the mesorectum was confirmed in 125/127 (98.43%) and nearly complete (R1) resection was confirmed in 2/127 (1.57%) patients. The average follow-up period was 795 days (296-1522) days. Local recurrence was detected during the follow-up period in 2/127 (1.57%) patients. This study showed that the TaTME procedure is an effective and safe method for the minimally invasive treatment of middle and low rectal cancers, particularly within an expert center setting.

[Full-wall semi-circular mobilization of posterior wall of the lower ampullar rectum for complex recurrent anorectal fistula]

OBJECTIVE

To describe a new technique for closure of sphincter complex defects after excision of recurrent high rectal fistulas and compare with other traditional techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients operated on for recurrent posterior rectal fistula. All patients underwent fistulectomy and one of the methods for defect closure after excision of the fistula: sphincter suturing, muco-muscular flap or full-wall semicircular mobilization of the lower ampullar rectum. The last method implemented the principle of inter-sphincter resection in rectal cancer. We developed this method as an alternative to muco-muscular flap in patients with fibrosis of anal canal to form a full-thickness well-vascularized flap without tissue tension.

RESULTS

Between 2019 and 2021, 6 patients underwent fistulectomy with sphincter suturing, 5 patients - closure with muco-muscular flap, 3 males underwent full-wall semicircular mobilization of the lower ampullar rectum. There was a tendency to better continence after a year (1 (0, 1.5), 1 (0, 1.5) and 3 (1, 3) points, respectively). Postoperative follow-up period was 12.5 (10, 15), 12 (9, 15) and 16 (12, 19) months, respectively. None patient had signs of recurrence throughout the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Original technique can be considered as an alternative to standard approaches in patients with high recurrent posterior anorectal fistulas, when traditional displaced endorectal flap is ineffective or impossible due to excessive scarring and anatomical changes in the anal canal.

Total mesorectal excision laparoscopic versus transanal approach for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Total mesorectal excision (TME) performed for the first time by Held through an open approach, it has become the standard technique for the surgical treatment of rectal cancer. The aim the of this meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes provided by TaTME than LaTME.

Material and methods

In this meta-analysis, we included all comparative studies, prospective and retrospective, which addressed in low and middle rectal cancer, a comparison between TaTME and LaTME. A search was performed through MEDLINE and Cochrane Database. 846 records were identified.

Results

Eight relevant studies have been included in this meta-analysis. The studies were from France, Russia, USA, Netherlands, Taiwan, Egypt. The eight studies including 471 patients with middle or low rectal cancer.

Conclusion

The meta-analysis confirmed safety of TaTME for low and middle rectal cancer. TaTME can lead to a high quality of rectal cancer resection specimen.

•

The aim the of this meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes provided by TaTME than LaTME.

•

We included all comparative studies, which addressed in low and middle rectal cancer.

•

Eight relevant studies have been included.

•

The meta-analysis confirmed safety of TaTME for rectal cancer.

Development and validation of a transanal endoscopic rectal purse string simulator

BACKGROUND

Rectal purse string placement for transanal mesorectal excision is challenging, and practice is difficult. The objective of this study is to build an endoscopic rectal purse string simulator and provide evidence for the validity of its use.

METHODS

A low-cost transanal endoscopic rectal purse string simulator was created and used to measure the performance of participants. Participants included general surgery residents, fellows, and staff surgeons from several Canadian university-affiliated institutions across Canada. The performance of the rectal purse string placement was measured by the time to completion of the task as well scoring with a modified objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) score and a modified advanced laparoscopic suturing (ALS) score.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine participants were recruited into the study. Participants were split into three groups, based on prior experience with laparoscopic suturing, for the analysis of suturing a rectal purse string on the simulator based on three performance measures. There was a significant difference found in all three measures of performance in the three groups (time to completion p = 0.014, mean blinded OSATS score p = 0.007, mean blinded ALS score p = 0.020). Participants with previous laparoscopic suturing had significantly faster times to completion and higher skills scores when compared to residents (time: 5.1 ± 1.4 min vs 9.0 ± 4.8 min, p = 0.005; OSATS: 19.7 ± 2.8 vs 13.0 ± 5.8, p = 0.00398, ALS: 27.4 ± 4.0 vs 18.9 ± 8.5, p = 0.0151).

CONCLUSIONS

A transanal endoscopic purse string simulator was constructed and preliminary testing has shown variable performance based on prior laparoscopic suturing experience.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Treatment of Carcinoma in the Middle or Lower Third Rectum: the Technical Feasibility of the Procedure, Pathological Results, and Clinical Outcome

We are trying to illustrate operative, short-term, and pathological outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) as a surgical procedure for patients who are suffering cancer in the lower or middle rectum. This study included 25 consecutive patients who underwent TaTME for the mid and low cancer rectum. The primary outcome measures included frequency of postoperative (PO) bleeding, leakage, ileus, days to regain bowel function, days for Foley's removal, and erectile function. The secondary outcome measures included operation time, status of resection margins, number, the quality of TME, and duration PO hospital stay. No recorded intraoperative complications. The mean hospital stay was 6.9 ± 2.6 days. The mean duration need for urinary catheter removal and flatus passage were 2.4 ± 2.1 and 1.5 + 0.9 days, respectively. The mean IPSS was returned to normal 12 months after surgery. The mean distal margin distance was 1.9 ± 1.1. Circumferential margin distance was > 1 mm in 23 (92%) patients. The mesorectum was complete in 22 (88%) patients. The survival rate was 88% over 3 years. TaTME could be considered as a safe, feasible, and effective surgical modality for patients who had mid and lower rectal tumors with an excellent pathological outcome.

Critical and Challenging Issues in the Surgical Management of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer

Despite innovative advancements, the management of distally located rectal cancer (RC) remains a formidable endeavor. The critical location of the tumor predisposes it to a circumferential resection margin that tends to involve the sphincters and surrounding organs, pelvic lymph node metastasis, and anastomotic complications. In this regard, colorectal surgeons should be aware of issues beyond the performance of total mesorectal excision (TME). For decades, abdominoperineal resection had been the standard of care for low-lying RC; however, its association with high rates of tumor recurrence, tumor perforation, and poorer survival has stimulated the development of novel surgical techniques and modifications, such as extralevator abdominoperineal excision. Similarly, difficult dissections and poor visualization, especially in obese patients with low-lying tumors, have led to the development of transanal TME or the "bottom-to-up" approach. Additionally, while neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has allowed for the execution of more sphincter-saving procedures without oncologic compromise, functional outcomes remain an issue. Nevertheless, neoadjuvant treatment can lead to significant tumor regression and complete pathological response, permitting the utilization of organ-preserving strategies. At present, an East and West dualism pervades the management of lateral lymph node metastasis, thereby calling for a more global and united approach. Moreover, with the increasing importance of quality of life, a tailored, individualized treatment approach is of utmost importance when taking into account oncologic and anticipated functional outcomes.

Using cadaveric simulation to introduce the concept and skills required to start performing transanal total mesorectal excision

AIM

The aim was to document the outcomes of surgeons attending a cadaveric simulation course designed to provide an introduction to transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME).

METHOD

This was a prospective observational study documenting the outcomes from classroom and wet lab activities. Follow-up questionnaires were used to monitor clinical activity after the course.

RESULTS

Outcomes of 65 delegates from 12 different countries attending seven cadaveric simulation courses are described. Median time to insert and close the rectal purse-string was 15 min (range 7-50 min) and median time to complete the transanal mesorectal dissection was 105 min (range 60-260 min). Objective assessment of specimen quality showed that 42% of specimens were complete, 47% nearly complete and 11% were incomplete. Failure of the intraluminal rectal purse-string was the most common difficulty encountered. Within 6 months of attending the course, nearly half (26/55; 47%) of the surgeons who responded had performed between 1 and 13 TaTMEs. Only 8/26 (31%) of the surgeons had arranged mentoring for their first case.

CONCLUSION

This training model provides high levels of trainee satisfaction and the knowledge and technical skills to enable them to start performing TaTME. There is still work to do to provide adequate supervision and mentorship for surgeons early on their learning curve that is essential for the safe introduction of this new technique.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and perioperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision

Background

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is an emerging surgical technique for rectal cancer. However, the oncological and perioperative outcomes are controversial when compared with conventional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME).

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane database. All original studies published in English that compared taTME with laTME were included for critical appraisal and meta-analysis. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

A total of seven studies including 573 patients (taTME group = 270; laTME group = 303) were included in our meta-analysis. Concerning the oncological outcomes, no differences were observed in harvested lymph nodes, distal resection margin (DRM) and positive DRM between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed a higher rate of achievement of complete grading of mesorectal quality (OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.02–3.01, P = 0.04), a longer circumferential resection margin (CRM) and less involvement of positive CRM (CRM: WMD = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.60–1.31, P <0.01; positive CRM: OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.17–0.86, P = 0.02). Concerning the perioperative outcomes, the results for hospital stay, intraoperative complications and readmission were comparable between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed shorter operation times (WMD = –23.45, 95% CI = –37.43 to –9.46, P <0.01), a lower rate of conversion (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.11–0.81, P = 0.02) and a higher rate of mobilization of the splenic flexure (OR = 2.34, 95% CI = 0.99–5.54, P = 0.05). Although the incidence of anastomotic leakage, ileus and urinary morbidity showed no difference between the groups, a significantly lower rate of overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.45–0.95, P = 0.03) was observed in the taTME group.

Conclusions

In comparison with laTME, taTME seems to achieve comparable technical success with acceptable oncologic and perioperative outcomes. However, multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of taTME.

Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection: indications and results

Surgical treatment of distal rectal cancer has long been based only on abdominoperineal excision, resulting in a permanent stoma and not always offering a definitive local control. Sphincter saving surgery has emerged in the last 20 years and can be offered also to patients with low lying tumours, provided that the external sphincter is not involved by the disease. An intersphincteric resection (ISR) is based on the resection of the rectum with a distal dissection proceeding into the space between the internal and the external anal sphincter. Originally described as an open procedure, it has also been developed with the laparoscopic approach, and also this technically demanding procedure is inscribed among those offered to the patient by a minimally invasive surgery. Indications have to be strict and patient selection is crucial to obtain both oncological and functional optimal results. The level of distal dissection and the extent of internal sphincter resected are chosen according to the distal margin of the tumour and is based on MRI findings: accurate imaging is therefore mandatory to better define the surgical approach. We here present our actual indications for ISR, results in terms of operative time, median hospital stay for ISR in our experience and review the updated literature.