Long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal endoscopic microsurgery for the treatment of rectal tumors

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal endoscopic surgery for the treatment of rectal neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Minimally invasive techniques offer alternatives to conventional surgery in the treatment of early-stage colorectal cancer, reducing morbidity. Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) and Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) are widely used, while Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) is gaining attention for its ability to achieve complete resection with low recurrence rates. This study compares the efficacy and safety of ESD with Transanal Endoscopic Surgery (TES).

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies involving patients with endoscopically resectable rectal lesions. Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and LILACS. Outcomes included recurrence rate, complete resection, en bloc resection, hospital stay, procedure time, and complication rate.

RESULTS

The analysis included ten observational studies and one Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) involving 1,094 patients. No significant differences were found in terms of recurrence rate, en bloc resection, R0 resection, and complications between techniques. The RCT showed a shorter procedure time in the TES (RD = 16.6; 95 % CI 8.88 to 24.32; p < 0.0001), whereas observational studies found no significant difference. In addition, observational studies found a shorter hospital stay duration in the ESD (MD = -1.22; 95 % CI -2.11 to -0.33; I2 = 82 %; p < 0.007), while the RCT found no difference.

CONCLUSION

ESD and TES are safe and effective for the treatment of early-stage rectal tumors. Rates of local recurrence, block resection, R0 resection, complications, and procedure time were similar. However, the RCT showed a shorter procedure time with TES, while observational studies showed a shorter hospital stay with ESD.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs transanal endoscopic surgery for rectal tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and transanal endoscopic submucosal dissection (TES) are widely employed surgical techniques. However, the comparative efficacy and safety of both remain inconclusive.

AIM

To comprehensively analyze and discern differences in surgical outcomes between ESD and TES.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and CINAHL from inception till August 2023. We analyzed outcomes including recurrence rate, en bloc resection, R0 resection rate, perforation rate, procedure length, and hospital stay length applying a random-effects inverse-variance model. We assessed publication bias by conducting an Egger's regression test and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

We pooled data from 11 studies involving 1013 participants. We found similar recurrence rates, with a pooled odds ratio of 0.545 (95%CI: 0.176-1.687). En bloc resection, R0 resection, and perforation rate values were also similar for both ESD and TES. The pooled analysis for procedure length indicated a mean difference of -4.19 min (95%CI: -22.73 to 14.35), and the hospital stay was on average shorter for ESDs by about 0.789 days (95%CI: -1.671 to 0.093).

CONCLUSION

Both ESD and TES displayed similar efficacy and safety profiles across multiple outcomes. Our findings show that individualized patient and surgeon preferences, alongside specific clinical contexts, can be considered when selecting between these two techniques.

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.

Impact of a Routine Colorectal Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in the Surgical Management of Nonmalignant Colorectal Lesions Treated in a Referral Cancer Center

BACKGROUND

Recent data show an increasing number of abdominal surgeries being performed for the treatment of nonmalignant colorectal polyps in the West but in settings in which colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection is not routinely performed. This study evaluated the number of nonmalignant colorectal lesions referred to surgical treatment in a tertiary cancer center that incorporated magnification chromoendoscopy and endoscopic submucosal dissection as part of the standard management of complex colorectal polyps.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to estimate the number of patients with nonmalignant colorectal lesions referred to surgical resection at our institution after the standardization of routine endoscopic submucosal dissection and to describe outcomes for patients undergoing colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.

DESIGN

Single-center retrospective study from a prospectively collected database of endoscopic submucosal dissections and colorectal surgeries performed between January 2016 and December 2019.

SETTING

Reference cancer center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive adult patients with complex nonmalignant colorectal polyps were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients with nonmalignant colorectal polyps were treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection or surgery (elective colectomy, rectosigmoidectomy, low anterior resection, or proctocolectomy).

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients referred to colorectal surgery for nonmalignant lesions.

RESULTS

In the study period, 1.1% of 825 colorectal surgeries were performed for nonmalignant lesions, and 97 complex polyps were endoscopically removed by endoscopic submucosal dissection. The en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates of endoscopic submucosal dissection were 91.7%, 83.5%, and 81.4%, respectively. The mean tumor size was 59 (SD 37.8) mm. Perforations during endoscopic submucosal dissection occurred in 3 cases, all treated with clipping. One patient presented with a delayed perforation 2 days after the endoscopic resection and underwent surgery. The mean follow-up period was 3 years, with no tumor recurrence in this cohort.

LIMITATIONS

Single-center retrospective study.

CONCLUSIONS

A workflow that includes assessment of the lesions with magnification chromoendoscopy and resection through endoscopic submucosal dissection can lead to a very low rate of abdominal surgery for nonmalignant colorectal lesions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C123 .

IMPACTO DE LA DISECCIN SUBMUCOSA ENDOSCPICA COLORRECTAL DE RUTINA EN EL MANEJO QUIRRGICO DE LESIONES COLORRECTALES NO MALIGNAS TRATADAS EN UN CENTRO ONCOLGICO DE REFERENCIA

ANTECEDENTES:Datos recientes muestran un número cada vez mayor de cirugías abdominales realizadas para el tratamiento de pólipos colorrectales no malignos en Occidente, pero no en los entornos donde la disección submucosa endoscópica colorrectal se realiza de forma rutinaria. El estudio evaluó el número de lesiones colorrectales no malignas referidas a tratamiento quirúrgico en un centro oncológico terciario, que incorporó cromoendoscopia de aumento y disección submucosa endoscópica como parte del manejo estándar de pólipos colorrectales complejos.OBJETIVO:Estimar el número de pacientes con lesiones colorrectales no malignas referidos para resección quirúrgica en nuestra institución, después de la estandarización de la disección submucosa endoscópica de rutina y describir los resultados para los pacientes sometidos a disección submucosa endoscópica colorrectal.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro, a partir de una base de datos recolectada prospectivamente de disecciones submucosas endoscópicas y cirugías colorrectales realizadas entre enero de 2016 y diciembre de 2019.AJUSTE:Centro oncológico de referencia.PACIENTES:Pacientes adultos consecutivos con pólipos colorrectales no malignos complejos.INTERVENCIONES:Pacientes con pólipos colorrectales no malignos tratados mediante disección submucosa endoscópica o cirugía (colectomía electiva, rectosigmoidectomía, resección anterior baja o proctocolectomía).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La medida de resultado primario fue el porcentaje de pacientes remitidos a cirugía colorrectal por lesiones no malignas.RESULTADOS:En el período, 1,1% de 825 cirugías colorrectales fueron realizadas por lesiones no malignas y 97 pólipos complejos fueron extirpados por. disección submucosa endoscópica. Las tasas de resección en bloque, R0 y curativa de disección submucosa endoscópica fueron 91,7%, 83,5% y 81,4%, respectivamente. El tamaño tumoral medio fue de 59 (DE 37,8) mm. Se produjeron perforaciones durante la disección submucosa endoscópica en 3 casos, todos tratados con clipaje. Un paciente presentó una perforación diferida 2 días después de la resección endoscópica y fue intervenido quirúrgicamente. El seguimiento medio fue de 3 años, sin recurrencia tumoral en esta cohorte.LIMITACIONES:Estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro.CONCLUSIONES:Un flujo de trabajo que incluye la evaluación de las lesiones con cromoendoscopia de aumento y resección a través de disección submucosa endoscópica, puede conducir a una tasa muy baja de cirugía abdominal para lesiones colorrectales no malignas. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C123 . (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Comparison of the efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection and transanal endoscopic microsurgery in the treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors ≤ 2 cm

INTRODUCTION

Currently, complete tumor resection is considered the most effective treatment for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) are recommended for rectalNETs ≤2 cm, but it is not clear which method is better. Thus, we evaluated the efficacy of ESD and TEM in the treatment of rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) ≤ 2 cm.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study between 2010 and 2021 of rectal NETs ≤ 2 cm in 114 patients with long-term follow-up data who were divided into ESD (n=55) and TEM groups (n=59). Our study assessed differences between groups in the complete resection rate of lesions, recurrence rate, surgical complications, procedure time, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

The co-primary outcomes were the complete resection rate of lesions and the recurrence rate. Compared to that in the ESD group, the complete resection rate was significantly higher in the TEM group (91.5% vs. 70.9%, p=0.005). The median follow-up time was 22 months in our study, and the follow-up outcomes suggested that the rates of recurrence were 1.8% (1/55) and 6.8% (4/59) in the ESD and TEM groups, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups. The secondary outcomes of the evaluation were surgical complications, procedural time, and length of hospital stay. The rate of complications (gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation) was low in both the ESD (7.3%, 4/55) and TEM (5.1%, 3/59) groups. No difference in hospitalization duration was observed between the two groups in our study. However, the procedure time was significantly shorter in the ESD group than in the TEM group (27.5 min vs. 56 min, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the rate of complete resection in the TEM group was higher than that in the ESD group, there was no difference in recurrence rates between the two modalities during long-term follow-up. Depending on the qualities of the available hospital resources in the area, one of the two approaches can be adopted.

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.