Towards the safe introduction of transanal total mesorectal excision: the role of a clinical registry

Local Recurrence and Disease-Free Survival After Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Results From the International TaTME Registry

BACKGROUND

The oncologic safety of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer has recently been questioned, with high local recurrence (LR) rates reported in Dutch and Norwegian experiences. The objective of this study was to evaluate the oncologic safety of TaTME in a large cohort of patients with primary rectal cancer, primarily in terms of LR, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective international registry cohort study, including all patients who underwent TaTME for primary rectal adenocarcinoma from February 2010 through December 2018. The main endpoints were 2-year LR rate, pattern of LR, and independent risk factors for LR. Secondary endpoints included 2-year DFS and OS rates. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate actuarial LR, DFS, and OS rates.

RESULTS

A total of 2,803 patients receiving primary TaTME were included, predominantly men (71%) with a median age of 65 years (interquartile ratio, 57-73 years). After a median follow-up of 24 months (interquartile ratio, 12-38 months), the 2-year LR rate was 4.8% (95% CI, 3.8%-5.8%) with a unifocal LR pattern in 99 of 103 patients (96%). Independent risk factors for LR were male sex, threatened resection margin on baseline MRI, pathologic stage III cancer, and a positive circumferential resection margin on final histopathology. The 2-year DFS and OS rates were 77% (95% CI, 75%-79%) and 92% (95% CI, 91%-93%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This largest TaTME cohort to date supports the oncologic safety of the TaTME technique for rectal cancer in patients treated in units that contributed to an international registry, with an acceptable 2-year LR rate and a predominantly unifocal LR pattern.

Two-Year Follow-Up of the First Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME) Case Performed in Community Hospital in Hawai'i: A Case Report and Literature Review

Surgical management of rectal cancer has evolved with the advent of total mesorectal excision (TME) and neo-adjuvant treatment allowing for more sphincter-preserving proctectomies. The laparoscopic approach to TME has numerous advantages over the open approach, including faster recovery, fewer wound complications, and overall reduced morbidity. However, laparoscopic dissection around the distal portion of the rectum is particularly difficult, and thus makes achieving TME completeness and negative resection margins for low rectal tumors a challenge. Transanal TME (TaTME) is designed to overcome these difficulties. It is performed in addition to laparoscopic operation as a bottom-up approach facilitating dissection around the distal rectum. More importantly, TaTME has been shown to have the potential to improve oncological outcomes of minimally-invasive sphincter-preserving proctectomy by providing better TME specimen quality and resection margins. Although interest in TaTME has been growing worldwide, the technique is still relatively new, and adoption into routine practice may be challenging. Potential criteria for successful adoption of the TaTME technique include experience in laparoscopic rectal resection and transanal minimally-invasive surgery (TAMIS), cadaveric TaTME training, and a multidisciplinary approach to selection and management of patients with rectal cancer. Once these criteria are met, gradual and careful implementation of TaTME could be feasible. This report describes the 2-year follow-up of the first TaTME case in Hawai'i managed by a multidisciplinary oncological team in a community hospital setting.

Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare long-term oncological, functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were conducted on PubMed and Cochrane database. Non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) which compared TaTME with LaTME were included.

RESULTS

Ten non-randomized studies were identified, including a total of 638 patients (323 TaTME and 315 LaTME). Age, sex, body mass index, neoadjuvant treatment and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) staging of patients in the two groups were comparable in all included studies. The follow-up period was significantly shorter in the TaTME group than in the LaTME group. No significant differences in local (p = 0.71) and distant (p = 0.23) recurrence rate, 2-year disease-free (p = 0.86) and overall (p = 0.25) survival was found. Also, no significant differences in function outcomes and QoL, including the Wexner score (p = 0.48) or the International Prostate Syndrome Score (IPSS) (p = 0.64) were found. However, the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score was significantly higher in the TaTME group (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

TaTME and LaTME have similar long-term oncological and functional outcomes as well as QoL. The only exception is higher LARS scores after TaTME. The current data are based mainly on observational studies and further randomized controlled trials are required.

Transanal total mesorectal excision and low anterior resection syndrome

BACKGROUND

Bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery is common, with some experiencing low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is common after rectal cancer surgery. This study examined if transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has a similar risk of LARS and altered quality of life (QoL) as patients who undergo low anterior resection (LAR).

METHODS

Patients who underwent TaTME or traditionally approached total mesorectal excision in a prospective colorectal cancer cohort study (2014-2019) were propensity score matched in a 1 : 1 ratio. LARS and QoL scores were assessed before and after surgery with a primary endpoint of major LARS at 12 months analysed for possible association between factors by logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 61 TaTME and 317 LAR patients eligible, 55 from each group were propensity score matched. Higher LARS scores (30.6 versus 25.4, P = 0.010) and more major LARS (65 versus 42 per cent, P = 0.013; OR 2.64, 95 per cent c.i. 1.22 to 5.71) were reported after TaTME. Additionally, QoL score differences (body image, bowel frequency, and embarrassment) were worse in the TaTME group.

CONCLUSIONS

TaTME may be associated with more severe bowel dysfunction than traditional approaches to rectal cancer.

Laparoscopy-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision for lower rectal cancer: A feasible and innovative technique

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a new technique with many potential technical advantages. Laparoscopy-assisted taTME is a combination of transabdominal taTME and transluminal endoscopic surgery taTME. Laparoscopy-assisted taTME is a combination of techniques such as minimally invasive surgery, intersphincter-assisted resection, natural orifice extraction, ta minimally invasive surgery, and ultralow-level preservation of the anus.

AIM

To verify the feasibility and safety of an innovative technique of taTME for treatment of cancer located in the lower rectum.

METHODS

From January 2016 to March 2018, we attempted to perform laparoscopy-assisted taTME surgery in 24 patients with lower rectal cancer.

RESULTS

The new technique of laparoscopy-assisted taTME was successfully performed in all 24 patients. Mean operating time was 310.0 min and mean intraoperative blood loss was 69.1 mL. The mean time to passing of first flatus was 3.1 d, and mean postoperative hospital stay was 9.2 d. Two patients were given postoperative analgesics due to anal pain. Twenty-three patients were able to walk in first 2 d, and five patients had postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy-assisted taTME is suitable for selected patients with lower rectal cancer, and this technique is worthy of further recommendation.

Early Experience With Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Compared With Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision is widely used for rectal cancers; however, it is sometimes challenging, especially in obese patients with low tumors, particularly after chemoradiotherapy. Transanal total mesorectal excision was developed to overcome these limitations in terms of visualization, dissection, and stapling.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the pathologic and early oncologic outcomes of the laparoscopic and transanal approaches.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective comparative study using propensity score-matched analysis.

SETTING

The study was conducted at a tertiary hospital specializing in oncology.

PATIENTS

In total, 722 inpatients who underwent total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer from January 2014 to December 2017 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Laparoscopic (N = 514) and transanal (N = 208) total mesorectal excision were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was pathologic outcome including circumferential and distal resection margin involvement. The secondary outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications and overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and local recurrence rates.

RESULTS

The 2 groups of the cohort had several differences; thus, we performed propensity score matching. The circumferential resection margin was involved in 13.4% and 12.9% of the laparoscopic and transanal groups (p = 0.88). The distal resection margin was involved in 1% and 3% of the laparoscopic and transanal groups (p = 0.28). Complete or nearly complete total mesorectal excision was 98.0% and 96.5% in the laparoscopic and transanal groups (p = 0.41). Postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.54) but were significantly higher in patients with tumors <5 cm from the anal verge who underwent laparoscopy (laparoscopic group = 11.9%; transanal group = 1.7%; p = 0.04). There were no statistical differences in the 3-year overall survival, recurrence-free survival, or local recurrence rates between groups.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective study design with a short follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Early experience with the transanal approach showed similar pathologic outcomes as those of conventional laparoscopy; hence, it should be considered as a surgical option for lower rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B352. EXPERIENCIA TEMPRANA CON LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL TRANSANAL EN COMPARACIÓN CON LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL LAPAROSCÓPICA PARA EL CÁNCER DE RECTO: UN ANÁLISIS DE PUNTUACIÓN DE PROPENSIÓN: La escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica se usa ampliamente para los cánceres rectales; Sin embargo, a veces es un desafío, especialmente en pacientes obesos con tumores bajos, particularmente después de la quimiorradioterapia. La escisión mesorrectal total transanal se desarrolló para superar estas limitaciones en términos de visualización, disección y grapado.Comparar los resultados patológicos y oncológicos precoces de los enfoques laparoscópico y transanal.estudio comparativo retrospectivo con puntaje de propensión-análisis emparejadoHospital terciario especializado en oncología.En total, se incluyeron 722 pacientes hospitalizados que se sometieron a una escisión mesorrectal total por cáncer rectal desde Enero de 2014 hasta Diciembre de 2017.Se realizó escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica (n = 514) y transanal (n = 208).El resultado primario fue el resultado patológico, incluyendo el involucramiento del margen de resección circunferencial y distal. Los resultados secundarios fueron complicaciones intraoperatorias, postoperatorias y supervivencia general, supervivencia libre de recurrencia y tasas de recurrencia local.Los dos grupos de la cohorte tuvieron varias diferencias; así, realizamos un emparejamiento de puntuación de propensión. El margen de resección circunferencial estuvo involucrado en 13.4% y 12.9% de los grupos laparoscópico y transanal, respectivamente (p = 0.88). El margen de resección distal estuvo involucrado en 1% y 3% de los grupos laparoscópico y transanal, respectivamente (p = 0.28). La escisión mesorrectal total completa o casi completa fue de 98.0% y 96.5% en los grupos laparoscópico y transanal, respectivamente (p = 0.41). Las complicaciones postoperatorias con Clavien-Dindo grado ≥ III no difirieron significativamente entre los grupos (p = 0,54), pero fueron significativamente mayores en pacientes con tumores de < 5 cm del borde anal que se sometieron a laparoscopia (grupo laparoscópico, 11,9%; grupo transanal, 1,7%; p = 0,04). No hubo diferencias estadísticas en la supervivencia general a 3 años, la supervivencia libre de recurrencia y las tasas de recurrencia local entre los grupos.Diseño de estudio retrospectivo, corto período de seguimiento.La experiencia temprana con el enfoque transanal mostró resultados patológicos similares a los de la laparoscopia convencional; por lo tanto, debe considerarse como una opción quirúrgica para el cáncer rectal mas bajo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B352. (Traducción-Dr Yesenia Rojas-Khalil).

Development and early outcomes of the national training initiative for transanal total mesorectal excision in the UK

AIM

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has attracted substantial interest amongst colorectal surgeons but its technical challenges may underlie the early reports of visceral injuries and oncological concerns. The aim of this study was to report on the feasibility, development and the outcome of the national pilot training initiative for TaTME-UK.

METHODS

TaTME-UK was successfully launched in September 2017 in partnership with the healthcare industry and endorsed by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. This multi-modal training curriculum consisted of three phases: (i) set-up; (ii) selection of pilot sites; and (iii) formal proctorship programme. Bespoke Global Assessment Scoring (GAS) forms were designed and completed by both trainees and mentors. Data were collected on patient demographics, tumour characteristics and perioperative clinical and histological outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-four proctored cases were performed by 10 colorectal surgeons from five selected pilot sites. Median operative time was 331 ± 90 (195-610) min which was reduced to 283 ± 62 (195-340) min in the final case. Independent performance (GAS score of 5) was achieved for most operative steps by case 5. There was one conversion (4.2%), but no visceral injuries. Pathological data confirmed no bowel perforation and intact quality of the mesorectal TME specimens with clear distal margin in all cases and circumferential margins in 23/24 cases (96%).

CONCLUSION

This exploratory study demonstrates acceptable early outcomes in a small cohort suggesting that a competency-based multi-modal training programme for TaTME can be feasible and safe to implement at a national level.

International expert consensus guidance on indications, implementation and quality measures for transanal total mesorectal excision

AIM

To provide dynamic guidance from a rigorous and up-to-date consensus on the safe implementation and application of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) from an international panel of expert surgeons and educationalists supported by 14 international surgical societies.

METHOD

An adapted Delphi method and focus group discussion approach was implemented for this consensus process, with expert advice from a guidelines methodologist. Statements were generated focusing on three main topics relating to the safe implementation of TaTME: (1) indications, (2) quality and outcome measures, (3) training and implementation of TaTME.

RESULTS

Five rounds of the Delphi consensus process were completed over a 13-month period. A total of 56 surgeons experienced in TaTME and surgical education participated in this project. By Delphi round four, 80.0% or greater agreement was reached for all statements except for two, which were further reviewed during a fifth round. More complex cases that are likely to benefit from TaTME were identified, with the recommendation that they should be referred to TaTME expert centres. The most agreed upon definition of expert centres is outlined.

CONCLUSION

We have provided a current framework of best practice related to implementation of TaTME. The statements are not indefinite and will continue to be 'dynamic' and updated as new evidence emerges.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Description of the Technique

Surgery remains the gold standard for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer. The most effective approach to reduce locoregional recurrence is total mesorectal excision (TME). However, obtaining an optimal TME is demanding, especially in low rectal tumors and anatomically unfavorable pelvis. Transanal TME (taTME) was developed to facilitate low pelvis dissection and potentially provide optimal outcomes for oncologic resection. Current studies have reported satisfactory short-term outcomes. However, taTME is a technically challenging procedure and must be learned in an appropriate training process to allow for a safe implementation. Previous experience in laparoscopic and transanal surgery is strongly recommended. In this work, we provide a detailed discussion of the technique, based on the realization of more than 400 taTME interventions.

Learning Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision

A dynamic evolution is occurring in transanal surgery. Transanal techniques began with intraluminal surgical removal of rectal masses and have progressed to transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer. TaTME was first performed in 2009 by Sylla, Rattner, Delgado, and Lacy. This article documents the training pathway followed by pioneers in the taTME technique as well as consensus reports outlining the process of learning the taTME technique. A literature search was performed for taTME training, learning, and technique. Key elements in learning the taTME technique include appropriate indications, cadaver training, and outcomes reporting such as participating in a taTME registry. Consensus reports also agree on the following facets associated with improved outcomes: (1) appropriate case selection of mid and low rectal cancers, (2) prerequisite completion of an accredited training program in laparoscopic colorectal surgery and prior experience in transanal endoscopic surgery, (3) a two-team taTME approach from above and below is ideal, and (4) higher rectal cancer volume surgical practice. The unifying international recommendation for surgeons interested in learning the taTME technique conveys the following message: taTME is an advanced and complex technique that requires dedicated training and experience in TME surgery.

Summary of Oncologic and Functional Outcomes

Large cohort and collaborative studies to date have shown that the short-term oncological outcomes appear to be at least as good as traditional laparoscopic surgery. These results need confirmation in randomized controlled trials, which are currently underway (GRECCAR 11 and COLOR III). The functional data on transanal total mesorectal excision is still very scarce and more mature data on quality of life and function outcomes are eagerly awaited.

Transanal Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision: A Comparative Prospective Clinical Trial from Two Centers

Purpose: Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LapTME) faced many obstacles in obese male with narrow pelvis and bulky mesorectum with increased risk of incomplete mesorectal excision and positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and distal resection margin (DRM). Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is reported to result in a better quality total mesorectal excision (TME) specimen, lower incidence of CRM and DRM involvement, and higher rates of sphincter preservation. To date, there is still a debate about the feasibility and efficacy of transanal versus the laparoscopic approach for TME in middle and low rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective controlled clinical trial where 38 patients of middle or low rectal cancer from two tertiary centers were nonrandomly assigned to either TaTME or LapTME. Results: Eighteen patients were operated by TaTME versus 20 patients by LapTME. Mean body mass index was significantly higher in the TaTME group (30.74 ± 7.79) than in the LapTME group (25.99 ± 4.68) (P = .03). TaTME was associated with more transanal specimen extraction (55.5% versus 20%, P = .06). No significant differences were detected in CRM, DRM, peri- or postoperative complications, or conversion rates with more reported Clavien-Dindo grade III complications in the TaTME group (P = .29). Conclusions: TaTME facilitated rectal cancer surgery in obese patients and increased the chance of transanal specimen extraction with equivalent oncological outcomes to conventional LapTME. Further studies are recommended to build better evidence.

Open Versus Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Versus Transanal Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare techniques for rectal cancer resection.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Different surgical approaches exist for mesorectal excision.

METHODS

Systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials included, reporting on 6237 participants, comparing: open versus laparoscopic versus robotic versus transanal mesorectal excision. No significant differences identified between treatments in intraoperative morbidity, conversion rate, grade III/IV morbidity, reoperation, anastomotic leak, nodes retrieved, involved distal margin, 5-year overall survival, and locoregional recurrence. Operative blood loss was less with laparoscopic surgery compared with open, and with robotic surgery compared with open and laparoscopic. Robotic operative time was longer compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal. Laparoscopic operative time was longer compared with open. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in lower overall postoperative morbidity and fewer wound infections compared with open. Robotic surgery had fewer wound infections compared with open. Time to defecation was longer with open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic. Hospital stay was longer after open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic, and after laparoscopic surgery compared with robotic. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in more incomplete or nearly complete mesorectal excisions compared with open, and in more involved circumferential resection margins compared with transanal. Robotic surgery resulted in longer distal resection margins compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal.

CONCLUSIONS

The different techniques result in comparable perioperative morbidity and long-term survival. The laparoscopic and robotic approaches may improve postoperative recovery, and the open and transanal approaches may improve oncological resection. Technique selection should be based on expected benefits by individual patient.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Anastomotic Failure in 1594 Patients Treated by Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Results From the International TaTME Registry

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of anastomotic-related morbidity following Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME) and identify independent risk factors for failure.

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak and its sequelae are dreaded complications following gastrointestinal surgery. TaTME is a recent technique for rectal resection, which includes novel anastomotic techniques.

METHODS

Prospective study of consecutive reconstructed TaTME cases recorded over 30 months in 107 surgical centers across 29 countries. Primary endpoint was "anastomotic failure," defined as a composite endpoint of early or delayed leak, pelvic abscess, anastomotic fistula, chronic sinus, or anastomotic stricture. Multivariate regression analysis performed identifying independent risk factors of anastomotic failure and an observed risk score developed.

RESULTS

One thousand five hundred ninety-four cases with anastomotic reconstruction were analyzed; 96.6% performed for cancer. Median anastomotic height from anal verge was 3.0 ± 2.0 cm with stapled techniques accounting for 66.0%. The overall anastomotic failure rate was 15.7%. This included early (7.8%) and delayed leak (2.0%), pelvic abscess (4.7%), anastomotic fistula (0.8%), chronic sinus (0.9%), and anastomotic stricture in 3.6% of cases. Independent risk factors of anastomotic failure were: male sex, obesity, smoking, diabetes mellitus, tumors >25 mm, excessive intraoperative blood loss, manual anastomosis, and prolonged perineal operative time. A scoring system for preoperative risk factors was associated with observed rates of anastomotic failure between 6.3% to 50% based on the cumulative score.

CONCLUSIONS

Large tumors in obese, diabetic male patients who smoke have the highest risk of anastomotic failure. Acknowledging such risk factors can guide appropriate consent and clinical decision-making that may reduce anastomotic-related morbidity.

Transanal transabdominal TME: how far can we push it?

Over many decades, advances in surgical technology, such as the use of the electrocautery Bovie, development of minimally invasive and advanced endoscopic platforms and the ability to create and maintain pneumorectum have propelled surgical techniques forward to today, with development of the transanal total mesorectal excision TME (taTME) for en bloc resection of rectal cancers. The transanal platform offers, for now, a viable alternative to perform safe and oncologically sound TME, especially favorable in cases of low rectal lesions in a narrow pelvis post neoadjuvant treatment. The aspiration of the colorectal community remains to continue to push the operative boundaries whilst maintaining safe oncological principals with the best possible functional outcomes for patients. In this article we review this evolving technique and focus on future directions.

Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Every colorectal surgeon during his or her career is faced with anastomotic leakage (AL); one of the most dreaded complications following any type of gastrointestinal anastomosis due to increased risk of morbidity, mortality, overall impact on functional and oncologic outcome and drainage on hospital resources. In order to understand and give an overview of the AL risk factors in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, we carried out a careful review of the existing literature on this topic and found several different definitions of AL which leads us to believe that the lack of a consensual, standard definition can partly explain the considerable variations in reported rates of AL in clinical studies. Colorectal leak rates have been found to vary depending on the anatomic location of the anastomosis with reported incidence rates ranging from 0 to 20%, while the laparoscopic approach to colorectal resections has not yet been associated with a significant reduction in AL incidence. As well, numerous risk factors, though identified, lack unanimous recognition amongst researchers. For example, the majority of papers describe the risk factors for left-sided anastomosis, the principal risk being male sex and lower anastomosis, while little data exists defining AL risk factors in a right colectomy. Also, gut microbioma is gaining an emerging role as potential risk factor for leakage.

St.Gallen consensus on safe implementation of transanal total mesorectal excision

Background

The management of rectal cancer has evolved over the years, including the recent rise of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME). TaTME addresses the limitations created by the bony confines of the pelvis, bulky tumours, and fatty mesorectum, particularly for low rectal cancers. However, guidance is required to ensure safe implementation and to avoid the pitfalls and potential major morbidity encountered by the early adopters of TaTME. We report a broad international consensus statement, which provides a basis for optimal clinical practice.

Methods

Forty international experts were invited to participate based on clinical and academic achievements. The consensus statements were developed using Delphi methodology incorporating three successive rounds. Consensus was defined as agreement by 80% or more of the experts.

Results

A total of 37 colorectal surgeons from 20 countries and 5 continents (Europe, Asia, North and South America, Australasia) contributed to the consensus. Participation to the iterative Delphi rounds was 100%. An expert radiologist, pathologist, and medical oncologist provided recommendations to maximize relevance to current practice. Consensus was obtained on all seven different chapters: patient selection and surgical indication, perioperative management, patient positioning and operating room set up, surgical technique, devices and instruments, pelvic anatomy, TaTME training, and outcomes analysis.

Conclusions

This multidisciplinary consensus statement achieved more than 80% approval and can thus be graded as strong recommendation, yet acknowledging the current lack of high level evidence. It provides the best possible guidance for safe implementation and practice of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Why, When, and How

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has evolved over the past decade fueled by advances in minimally invasive surgery. The technique aims to overcome the constraints posed by a narrow rigid pelvis and poor TME visualization that are encountered during "top-down" rectal surgery. A more accurate pelvic dissection should subsequently result in safer oncological resections and better preservation of pelvic autonomic nerves. taTME is an advanced complex technique that requires dedicated training and experience in TME surgery. Initial results from small cohorts are promising and confirmation by randomized controlled trials is eagerly awaited.

Uptake of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision in North America: Initial Assessment of a Structured Training Program and the Experience of Delegate Surgeons

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision is a new approach to curative-intent rectal cancer surgery. Training and surgeon experience with this approach has not been assessed previously in America.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to characterize a structured training program and to determine the experience of delegate surgeons.

DESIGN

Data were assimilated from an anonymous, online survey delivered to attendees on course completion. Data on surgeon performance during hands-on cadaveric dissection were collected prospectively.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a single tertiary colorectal surgery referral center, and cadaveric hands-on training was conducted at a specialized surgeon education center.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measurement was the use of the course and surgeon experience posttraining.

RESULTS

During a 12-month period, eight 2-day transanal total mesorectal excision courses were conducted. Eighty-one colorectal surgeons successfully completed the course. During cadaveric dissection, 71% achieved a complete (Quirke 3) specimen; 26% were near complete (Quirke 2), and 3% were incomplete (Quirke 1). A total of 9.1% demonstrated dissection in the incorrect plane, whereas 4.5% created major injury to the rectum or surrounding structures, excluding the prostate. Thirty eight (46.9%) of 81 surgeon delegates responded to an online survey. Of survey respondents, 94.6% believed training should be required before performing transanal total mesorectal excision. Posttraining, 94.3% of surgeon delegates planned to use transanal total mesorectal excision for distal-third rectal cancers, 74.3% for middle-third cancers, and 8.6% for proximal-third cancers. The most significant complication reported was urethral injury; 5 were reported by the subset of survey respondents who had performed this operation postcourse.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by inherent reporting bias, including observer and recall biases.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this structured training program for transanal total mesorectal excision was found to be useful by the majority of respondents, the risk of iatrogenic injury after training remains high, suggesting that this training pedagogy alone is insufficient. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A335.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: International Registry Results of the First 720 Cases

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to report short-term clinical and oncological outcomes from the international transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME) registry for benign and malignant rectal pathology.

BACKGROUND

TaTME is the latest minimally invasive transanal technique pioneered to facilitate difficult pelvic dissections. Outcomes have been published from small cohorts, but larger series can further assess the safety and efficacy of taTME in the wider surgical population.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from 66 registered units in 23 countries. The primary endpoint was "good-quality TME surgery." Secondary endpoints were short-term adverse events. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of poor specimen outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 720 consecutively registered cases were analyzed comprising 634 patients with rectal cancer and 86 with benign pathology. Approximately, 67% were males with mean BMI 26.5 kg/m. Abdominal or perineal conversion was 6.3% and 2.8%, respectively. Intact TME specimens were achieved in 85%, with minor defects in 11% and major defects in 4%. R1 resection rate was 2.7%. Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 0.5% and 32.6% respectively. Risk factors for poor specimen outcome (suboptimal TME specimen, perforation, and/or R1 resection) on multivariate analysis were positive CRM on staging MRI, low rectal tumor <2 cm from anorectal junction, and laparoscopic transabdominal posterior dissection to <4 cm from anal verge.

CONCLUSIONS

TaTME appears to be an oncologically safe and effective technique for distal mesorectal dissection with acceptable short-term patient outcomes and good specimen quality. Ongoing structured training and the upcoming randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the technique further.

Evolution of Surgical Treatment for Rectal Cancer: a Review

Surgery that produces an optimal total mesorectal excision (TME) resection specimen remains the cornerstone of curative rectal cancer management. In the modern era, despite the results of recent randomised trials, laparoscopic TME is a crucial technique in the TME surgery armamentarium. Laparoscopic surgery offers the benefit of magnified views that aid sharp and precise dissection. However operating in the confines of a narrow pelvis, particularly when the mesorectum is bulky, requires significant technical skill. This is compounded by limited angulation of laparoscopic instruments and staplers. The final challenge is to preserve the integrity of the mesorectum during delivery of the specimen. The principles of TME surgery, on which Bill Heald founded the Basingstoke Colorectal unit, can equally be applied to laparoscopic, transanal and robotic TME, but great care must be taken to preserve the key principle-that no steps are taken that have the potential to shed tumour cells or compromise the quality of the mesorectal specimen.

Consensus on structured training curriculum for transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME)

BACKGROUND

The interest and adoption of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is growing amongst the colorectal surgical community, but there is no clear guidance on the optimal training framework to ensure safe practice for this novel operation. The aim of this study was to establish a consensus on a detailed structured training curriculum for TaTME.

METHODS

A consensus process to agree on the framework of the TaTME training curriculum was conducted, seeking views of 207 surgeons across 18 different countries, including 52 international experts in the field of TaTME. The process consisted of surveying potential learners of this technique, an international experts workshop and a final expert's consensus to draw an agreement on essential elements of the curriculum.

RESULTS

Appropriate case selection was strongly recommended, and TaTME should be offered to patients with mid and low rectal cancers, but not proximal rectal cancers. Pre-requisites to learn TaTME should include completion of training and accreditation in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, with prior experience in transanal surgery. Ideally, two surgeons should undergo training together in centres with high volume for rectal cancer surgery. Mentorship and multidisciplinary training were the two most important aspects of the curriculum, which should also include online modules and simulated training for purse-string suturing. Mentors should have performed at least 20 TaTME cases and be experienced in laparoscopic training. Reviewing the specimens' quality, clinical outcome data and entering data into a registry were recommended. Assessment should be an integral part of the curriculum using Global Assessment Scales, as formative assessment to promote learning and competency assessment tool as summative assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

A detailed framework for a structured TaTME training curriculum has been proposed. It encompasses various training modalities and assessment, as well as having the potential to provide quality control and future research initiatives for this novel technique.

A two-centre experience of transanal total mesorectal excision

AIM

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) offers a promising alternative to the standard surgical abdominopelvic approach for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to report a two-centre experience of this technique, focusing on the short-term and oncological outcome.

METHOD

From May 2013 to May 2015, 40 selected patients with histologically proven rectal adenocarcinoma underwent TaTME in two institutions and were prospectively entered on an online international registry.

RESULTS

Forty patients (80% men, mean body mass index 27.4 kg/m² ) requiring TME underwent TaTME. Procedures included low anterior resection (n = 31), abdominoperineal excision (n = 7) and proctocolectomy (n = 2). A minimally invasive approach was attempted in all cases, with three conversions. The mean operation time was 368 min and 16 patients (40%) had a synchronous abdominal and transanal approach. There was no mortality and 16 postoperative complications occurred, of which 68.8% were minor. The median length of stay was 7.5 (3-92) days. A complete or near-complete TME specimen was delivered in 39 (97.5%) cases with a mean number of 20 lymph nodes harvested. R0 resection was achieved in 38 (95%) patients. After a median follow-up of 10.7 months, there were no local recurrences and six (15%) patients had developed distant metastases.

CONCLUSION

TaTME appears to be feasible, safe and reproducible, without compromising the oncological principles of rectal cancer surgery. It is an attractive option for patients for whom laparoscopy is likely to be particularly difficult. These encouraging results should encourage larger studies with assessment of long-term function and the oncological outcome.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the journey towards a new technique and its current status

INTRODUCTION

The surgical approach to total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer has undergone a substantial evolution with the adoption of more minimally invasive procedures. Transanal TME (taTME) is the latest advanced technique pioneered to tackle difficult pelvic dissections. Areas covered: The evolution of TME surgery from open to laparoscopic, robotic and transanal techniques was explored in this review. The outcomes to date on the latest approach, taTME, are reviewed and the future direction of rectal cancer surgery proposed. A literature search was performed using Embase, Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane databases for articles published between January 2005 to May 2016 using the keywords 'transanal', 'TME', 'laparoscopy', 'robotics', 'minimally invasive', 'outcomes' and 'training'. Expert commentary: Surgical experience in taTME is growing and randomised controlled trials have been planned and initiated worldwide. However, the learning curve for this procedure remains to be established and a structured training programme is necessary to ensure safe introduction and dissemination of the technique in the clinical setting. Further innovation including stereotactic navigation and more specialised transanal equipment are currently being explored and are likely to enhance the technique further.

Stereotactic navigation for TAMIS-TME

Stereotactic navigation allows for real-time, image-guided surgery, thus providing an augmented working environment for the operator. This technique can be applied to complex minimally invasive surgery for fixed anatomic targets. Transanal minimally invasive surgery represents a new approach to rectal cancer surgery that is technically demanding and introduces the potential for procedure-specific morbidity. Feasibility of stereotactic navigation for TAMIS-TME has been demonstrated, and this could theoretically translate into improved resection quality by improving the surgeon's spatial awareness. The future of minimally invasive surgery as it relates to augmented reality and image-guided surgery is discussed.

Critical concepts and important anatomic landmarks encountered during transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME): toward the mastery of a new operation for rectal cancer surgery

Over the past 3 years, colorectal surgeons have begun to adapt the technique of transanal total mesorectal excision. As international experience has been quickly forged, an improved recognition of the pitfalls and the practical details of this disruptive technique have been realized. The purpose of this technical note was to express the various nuances of transanal total mesorectal excision as learned during the course of its clinical application and international teaching, so as to rapidly communicate and share important insights with other surgeons who are in the early adoption phase of this approach. The technical points specific to transanal total mesorectal excision are addressed herein. When correctly applied, these will likely improve the quality of surgery and decrease morbidity attributable to inexperience with the transanal approach to total mesorectal excision.

Transanal rectal resection: an initial experience of 20 cases

AIM

Low anterior resection (LAR) can present a formidable surgical challenge, particularly for tumours located in the distal third of the rectum. Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) aims to overcome some of these difficulties. We report our initial experience with this technique.

METHOD

From June 2013 to September 2014, 20 selected patients underwent transanal rectal resection for various malignant and benign low rectal pathologies. All patients with rectal cancer were discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting. Data were entered into a prospective managed international database.

RESULTS

Of the 20 patients (14 male), seventeen (85%) had rectal cancer lying at a median distance of 2 cm (range 0-7) from the anorectal junction. The operations performed included LAR (16). Abdominoperineal excision (2) and completion proctectomy (2), all of which were performed by a minimally invasive approach with three conversions. The mean operation time was 315.3 min. There were six postoperative complications of which two (10%) were Clavien-Dindo Grade IIIb (pelvic haematoma and a late contained anastomotic leakage). The median length of stay was 7 days. The TME specimen was intact in 94.1% of cancer cases. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 23.2. There was only one positive circumferential resection margin (tumour deposit; R1 rate 5.9%). One patient developed a distant recurrence (median follow-up 10 months, range 6-21).

CONCLUSION

TaTME was safe in this small series of patients. It is especially attractive in patients with a narrow and irradiated pelvis and a tumour in the lower third of the rectum. TaTME is technically demanding, but the good outcomes should prompt randomized studies and prospective registration of all taTME cases in an international registry.

A systematic review of transanal total mesorectal excision: is this the future of rectal cancer surgery?

AIM

The surgical technique used for transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) was reviewed including the oncological quality of resection and the peri-operative outcome.

METHOD

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify studies reporting on TaTME.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies (eight case reports, 24 case series and four comparative studies) were identified, reporting 510 patients who underwent TaTME. The mean age ranged from 43 to 80 years and the mean body mass index from 21.7 to 31.8 kg/m(2) . The mean distance of the tumour from the anal verge ranged from 4 to 9.7 cm. The mean operation time ranged from 143 to 450 min and mean operative blood loss from 22 to 225 ml. The ratio of hand-sewn coloanal to stapled anastomoses performed was 2:1. One death was reported and the peri-operative morbidity rate was 35%. The anastomotic leakage rate was 6.1% and the reoperation rate was 3.7%. The mean hospital stay ranged from 4.3 to 16.6 days. The mesorectal excision was described as complete in 88% cases, nearly complete in 6% and incomplete in 6%. The circumferential resection margin was negative in 95% of cases and the distal resection margin was negative in 99.7%.

CONCLUSION

TaTME is a feasible and reproducible technique, with good quality of oncological resection. Standardization of the technique is required with formal training. Clear indications for this procedure need to be defined and its safety further assessed in future trials.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a training pathway

BACKGROUND

With increasing interest in natural orifice surgery, there has been a dramatic evolution of transanal and endoluminal surgical techniques. These techniques began with transanal endoluminal surgical removal of rectal masses and have progressed to transanal radical proctectomy for rectal cancer. The first transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) was performed in 2009 by Sylla, Rattner, Delgado, and Lacy. The improved visibility and working space associated with the taTME technique is intriguing. This video manuscript outlines the training pathway followed by pioneers in the taTME technique, the process of implementation into clinical practice, and initial case report.

METHODS

A double board-certified colorectal surgeon with expertise in rectal cancer, minimally invasive total mesorectal excision, transanal endoscopic surgery (TES), and intersphincteric dissection, underwent taTME training in male cadaver models. Institutional review board (IRB) approval for a phase I clinical trial was achieved. The entire operative team including surgeons, nurses, and operative staff underwent taTME cadaver training the day prior to the first clinical case. The case was proctored by an expert in taTME.

RESULTS

A 66-year-old male with uT3N1M0 rectal cancer located in the posterior distal rectum, underwent taTME with laparoscopic abdominal assistance, hand sewn coloanal anastomosis, and diverting loop ileostomy. The majority of the TME was performed transanally with laparoscopic assistance for exposure, splenic flexure mobilization, and high ligation of the vascular pedicles. Operative time was 359 min. There were no intraoperative complications. Pathology revealed a ypT2N1 moderately differentiated invasive adenocarcinoma, grade I TME, 1 cm circumferential radial margin, and 2/13 positive lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of taTME into practice can be achieved by surgeons with expertise in minimally invasive TME, TES, pre-clinical taTME training in cadavers, case observation, proctoring, and ongoing mentorship. IRB peer review process and participation in a clinical registry are additional measures that should be employed.

Endoscopically assisted extralevator abdominoperineal excision

AIM

Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) has been advocated to optimize clearance of lower third rectal cancers with an involved or threatened circumferential resection margin. ELAPE could reduce positive margins and specimen perforation compared with standard abdominoperineal excision. However, there can be difficulties with ELAPE, particularly in identifying the anterior plane in male patients. Usually, the dissection is performed in the prone position, which can be hazardous, particularly in obese patients in whom wound problems are commonly encountered. We describe an endoscopically assisted approach for ELAPE in the lithotomy position.

METHOD

Three male patients with a rectal tumour located at the anorectal junction underwent an endoscopically assisted ELAPE in the lithotomy position after preoperative radiotherapy.

RESULTS

All the procedures were performed successfully with operation times of 180, 390 and 420 mins. There were no instances of intra-operative perforation or other complications. One patient developed postoperative intestinal obstruction which resolved on conservative management. There were no wound complications. Histopathological examination demonstrated clear margins and intact mesorectal planes in each patient.

CONCLUSION

We report a good outcome in three patients after endoscopically assisted ELAPE. This approach allows the patient to be operated on in the lithotomy position giving excellent views of the anterior dissection.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: A valid option for rectal cancer?

Low anterior resection can be a challenging operation, especially in obese male patients and in particular after radiotherapy. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) might offer technical advantages over laparoscopic or open approaches particularly for tumors in the distal third of the rectum. The aim of this article is to review the current experience with TaTME. The limits and future developments are also explored. Although the experience with TaTME is still limited, it might be a promising alternative to laparoscopic TME, especially for difficult cases where laparoscopy is too demanding. The preliminary data on complications and short-term oncological outcomes are good, but also emphasize the importance of careful patient selection. Finally, there is a need for large-scale trials focusing on long-term outcomes and oncological safety before widespread adoption can be recommended.

Optimal dissection for transanal total mesorectal excision using modified CO2 insufflation and smoke extraction

AIM

The new approach of transanal total mesorectal excision is technically challenging and demands a stable field of dissection with optimal view of anatomical landmarks. We aimed to describe and demonstrate a modification of both the insufflation of carbon dioxide and smoke evacuation, in order to optimize dissection.

METHOD

The comparison of standard insufflation to an AirSeal platform demonstrates a clear difference. This is shown in the accompanying video-recordings.

RESULTS

A more stable pneumorectum and better smoke evacuation as well as more convenient and precise dissection were achieved with the AirSeal platform.

CONCLUSION

Using the technique outlined, the operating surgeon is able to perform the surgical dissection in a stable operating environment with increased visibility compared to the standard approach.

Promises and pitfalls of total mesorectal excision: getting the best outcomes

The management of patients with rectal cancer has seen a number of important advances over the past 30 years. The most important of these has been the improvement and standardization of surgical technique. Combined with advances in preoperative imaging, neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies and expert pathological assessment, widespread adoption of total mesorectal excision has led to improved results for this challenging but eminently curable cancer.

Low rectal cancer: Sphincter preserving techniques-selection of patients, techniques and outcomes

Low rectal cancer is traditionally treated by abdominoperineal resection. In recent years, several new techniques for the treatment of very low rectal cancer patients aiming to preserve the gastrointestinal continuity and to improve both the oncological as well as the functional outcomes, have been emerged. Literature suggest that when the intersphincteric resection is applied in T1-3 tumors located within 30-35 mm from the anal verge, is technically feasible, safe, with equal oncological outcomes compared to conventional surgery and acceptable quality of life. The Anterior Perineal PlanE for Ultra-low Anterior Resection technique, is not disrupting the sphincters, but carries a high complication rate, while the reports on the oncological and functional outcomes are limited. Transanal Endoscopic MicroSurgery (TEM) and TransAnal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) should represent the treatment of choice for T1 rectal tumors, with specific criteria according to the NCCN guidelines and favorable pathologic features. Alternatively to the standard conventional surgery, neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy followed by TEM or TAMIS seems promising for tumors of a local stage T1sm2-3 or T2. Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision should be performed only when a board approved protocol is available by colorectal surgeons with extensive experience in minimally invasive and transanal endoscopic surgery.

Natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) represents one of the most significant innovations in surgery to emerge since the advent of laparoscopy. A decade of progress with this approach has now been catalogued, and yet its clinical application remains controversial.

METHODS

A PubMed search was carried out for articles describing NOTES in both the preclinical and the clinical setting. Public perceptions and expert opinion regarding NOTES in the published literature were analysed carefully.

RESULTS

Two hundred relevant articles on NOTES were studied and the outcomes reviewed. A division between direct- and indirect-target NOTES was established. The areas with the most promising clinical application included direct-target NOTES, such as transanal total mesorectal excision and peroral endoscopic myotomy. The clinical experience with distant-target NOTES, such as for appendicectomy and cholecystectomy, showed feasibility; however, NOTES-specific morbidity was introduced and this represents an important limitation.

CONCLUSION

NOTES experimentation in the preclinical setting has increased substantially. There has also been a significant increase in the application of NOTES in humans in the past decade. Enthusiasm for NOTES should be tempered by the risk of incurring NOTES-specific morbidity. Surgeons should carefully consider patient preferences regarding this new minimally invasive option, as opinions are not unanimously supportive of NOTES. As technical limitations are overcome, the clinical application of NOTES is predicted to increase. It is paramount that, when this complex technique is performed on humans, it is applied judiciously by appropriately trained experts with outcomes recorded in a registry.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: a systematic review of the experimental and clinical evidence

Achieving a clear distal or circumferential resection margins with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) may be laborious, especially in obese males and when operating on advanced distal rectal tumors with a poor response to neoadjuvant treatment. Transanal (TaTME) is a new natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery modality in which the rectum is mobilized transanally using endoscopic techniques with or without laparoscopic assistance. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review of publications on this new technique in PubMed and Embase databases from January, 2008, to July, 2014. Experimental and clinical studies written in English were included. Experimental research with TaTME was done on pigs with and without survival models and on human cadavers. In these studies, laparoscopic or transgastric assistance was frequently used resulting in an easier upper rectal dissection and in a longer rectal specimen. To date, 150 patients in 16 clinical studies have undergone TaTME. In all but 15 cases, transabdominal assistance was used. A rigid transanal endoscopic operations/transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEO/TEM) platform was used in 37 patients. Rectal adenocarcinoma was the indication in all except for nine cases of benign diseases. Operative times ranged from 90 to 460 min. TME quality was deemed intact, satisfactory, or complete. Involvement in circumferential resection margins was detected in 16 (11.8 %) patients. The mean lymph node harvest was equal or greater than 12 in all studies. Regarding morbidity, pneumoretroperitoneum, damage to the urethra, and air embolism were reported intraoperatively. Mean hospital stay varied from 4 to 14 days. Postoperative complications occurred in 34 (22.7 %) patients. TaTME with TEM is feasible in selected cases. Oncologic safety parameters seem to be adequate although the evidence relies on small retrospective series conducted by highly trained surgeons. Further studies are expected.