Who should be followed up after transanal endoscopic resection of rectal tumours?

Risk of recurrence after local resection of T1 rectal cancer: a meta-analysis with meta-regression

BACKGROUND

T1 rectal cancer (RC) patients are increasingly being treated by local resection alone but uniform surveillance strategies thereafter are lacking. To determine whether different local resection techniques influence the risk of recurrence and cancer-related mortality, a meta-analysis was performed.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for T1RC patients treated with local surgical resection. The primary outcome was the risk of RC recurrence and RC-related mortality. Pooled estimates were calculated using mixed-effect logistic regression. We also systematically searched and evaluated endoscopically treated T1RC patients in a similar manner.

RESULTS

In 2585 unique T1RC patients (86 studies) undergoing local surgical resection, the overall pooled cumulative incidence of recurrence was 9.1% (302 events, 95% CI 7.3-11.4%; I2 = 68.3%). In meta-regression, the recurrence risk was associated with histological risk status (p < 0.005; low-risk 6.6%, 95% CI 4.4-9.7% vs. high-risk 28.2%, 95% CI 19-39.7%) and local surgical resection technique (p < 0.005; TEM/TAMIS 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0% vs. other local surgical excisions 10.8%, 95% CI 6.7-16.8%). In 641 unique T1RC patients treated with flexible endoscopic excision (16 studies), the risk of recurrence (7.7%, 95% CI 5.2-11.2%), cancer-related mortality (2.3%, 95% CI 1.1-4.9), and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence (30.0%, 95% CI 14.7-49.4%) were comparable to outcomes after TEM/TAMIS (risk of recurrence 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0%, cancer-related mortality 2.8%, 95% CI 1.2-6.2% and among patients with recurrence 35.6%, 95% CI 21.9-51.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with T1 rectal cancer may have a significantly lower recurrence risk after TEM/TAMIS compared to other local surgical resection techniques. After TEM/TAMIS and endoscopic resection the recurrence risk, cancer-related mortality and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence were comparable. Recurrence was mainly dependent on histological risk status.

Transanal endoscopic surgery: past, present and future

Transanal endoscopic surgery is a safe, established technique to remove lesions in the rectum via the anus. This article reviews its evolution, approaches, indications and evidence for its role in treating benign rectal polyps. The future of transanal endoscopic surgery in rectal cancer and inflammatory bowel disease is also explored.

Impact of technology on indications and limitations for transanal surgical removal of rectal neoplasms

Transanal surgery has and continues to be well accepted for local excision of benign rectal disease not amenable to endoscopic resection. More recently, there has been increasing interest in applying transanal surgery to local resection of early malignant disease. In addition, some groups have started utilizing a transanal route in order to accomplish total mesorectal excision (TME) for more advanced rectal malignancies. We aim to review the role of various transanal and endoscopic techniques in the local resection of benign and malignant rectal disease based on published trial data. Preliminary data on the use of transanal platforms to accomplish TME will also be highlighted. For endoscopically unresectable rectal adenomas, transanal surgery remains a widely accepted method with minimal morbidity that avoids the downsides of a major abdomino-pelvic operation. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery offer improved visualization and magnification, allowing for finer and more precise dissection of more proximal and larger rectal lesions without compromising patient outcome. Some studies have demonstrated efficacy in utilizing transanal platforms in the surgical management of early rectal malignancies in selected patients. There is an overall higher recurrence rate with transanal surgery with the concern that neither chemoradiation nor salvage surgery may compensate for previous approach and correct the inferior outcome. Application of transanal platforms to accomplish transanal TME in a natural orifice fashion are still in their infancy and currently should be considered experimental. The current data demonstrate that transanal surgery remains an excellent option in the surgical management of benign rectal disease. However, care should be used when selecting patients with malignant disease. The application of transanal platforms continues to evolve. While the new uses of transanal platforms in TME for more advanced rectal malignancy are exciting, it is important to remain cognizant and not sacrifice long term survival for short term decrease in morbidity and improved cosmesis.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery: a review

Rectal adenomas and cancers occur frequently. Small adenomas can be removed colonoscopically, whereas larger polyps are removed via conventional transanal excision. Owing to technical difficulties, adenomas of the mid- and upper rectum require radical resection. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) was first designed as an alternative treatment for these lesions. However, since its development TEM has been also used for a variety of rectal lesions, including carcinoids, rectal prolapse and diverticula, early stage carcinomas and palliative resection of rectal cancers. The objective of this review is to describe the current status of TEM in the treatment of rectal lesions. Since the 1980s, TEM has advanced substantially. With low recurrence rates, it is the method of choice for resection of endoscopically unresectable adenomas. Some studies have shown benefits to its use in treating early T1 rectal cancers compared with radical surgery in select patients. However, for more advanced rectal cancers TEM should be considered palliative or experimental. This technique has also been shown to be safe for the treatment of other uncommon rectal tumours, such as carcinoids. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery may allow for new strategies in the treatment of rectal pathology where technical limitations of transanal techniques have limited endoluminal surgical innovations.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) is a well established method of accurate resection of specimens from the rectum under binocular vision. This review examines its role in the treatment of benign conditions of the rectum and the evidence to support its use and compliment existing endoscopic treatments. The evolution of TEMS in early rectal cancer and the concepts and outcomes of how it has been utilised to treat patients so far are presented. The bespoke nature of early rectal cancer treatment is changing the standard algorithms of rectal cancer care. The future of TEMS in the organ preserving treatment of early rectal cancer is discussed and how as clinicians we are able to select the correct patients for neoadjuvant or radical treatments accurately. The role of radiotherapy and outcomes from combination treatment using TEMS are presented with suggestions for areas of future research.

Incidence, treatment and outcome of rectal stenosis following transanal endoscopic microsurgery

BACKGROUND

As an alternative to more radical abdominal surgery, transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) offers a minimally invasive solution for the excision of certain rectal polyps and early-stage rectal tumours. The patient benefits of TEM as compared to radical abdominal surgery are clear; nevertheless, some drawback is possible. The aim of our study was to determine the risk factors, treatment and outcomes of rectal stenosis following TEM.

METHODS

We analysed a series of 354 consecutive patients who underwent TEM for benign or malignant rectal tumours between 1997 and 2009. We recorded the maximum histological diameter of the lesion, and whether the lesion was circumferential. Rectal stenosis was defined as a rectal narrowing not allowing passage of a 12 mm sigmoidoscope.

RESULTS

Histological results with a measured specimen diameter were available in 304 of the 354 cases. There were 11 stenoses in total (3.6%), 7 stenoses due to 9 circumferential lesions (78%) and 4 due to lesions with a maximum diameter ≥ 5 cm (3.2%). Two patients presented as emergencies, and the other 9 patients reported symptoms of increased stool frequency at follow-up. Three of the stenoses were associated with recurrent disease. All stenoses were treated by a combination of endoscopic/radiological balloon dilatation or surgically with Hegar's dilators. A median of two procedures were required to treat stenoses until resolution of symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal stenosis following TEM excision is rare. It is predictable in patients with circumferential lesions but is rare in patients with non-circumferential lesions with a maximum diameter ≥ 5 cm. It is effectively treated with surgical or balloon dilatation. Most patients require repeated treatments.