Preoperative endoscopic tattooing technique improved lymph node retrieval in rectal cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy

Association between the number of retrieved lymph nodes and demographic/tumour-related characteristics in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Clinical practice guidelines recommend retrieving at least 12 lymph nodes for correct staging in colorectal cancer. However, it is difficult to retrieve adequate lymph nodes because of various factors. We aimed to evaluate the association between the number of retrieved lymph nodes and demographic/tumour-related characteristics in colorectal cancer.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of primary studies.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched from January 2016 to June 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Studies that evaluated the association between retrieved lymph nodes and demographic/tumour-related characteristics in colorectal cancer were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

OR with 95% conference intervals was extracted and pooled.

RESULTS

A total of 54 studies containing 2 05 821 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that fewer nodes were retrieved from elderly patients (OR=0.70, 95% CI (0.54 to 0.90), p=0.005), and from tumours located in the left colon than in the right colon (OR=0.43, 95% CI (0.33 to 0.56), p<0.001). More lymph nodes were obtained from females than males (OR=1.15, 95% CI (1.04 to 1.28), p=0.006), from the advanced T stage (T3+T4) than T1+T2 stage (OR=1.57, 95% CI (1.25 to 1.97), p<0.001) and from the N2 stage than N0 stage (OR=1.32, 95% CI (1.15 to 1.51), p<0.001). Body mass index, ethnicity, N1 stage, M stage, tumour differentiation and lymph-vascular invasion were not significantly associated with the lymph node yield.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results suggest that clinicians have an increased opportunity to retrieve sufficient lymph nodes for accurate pathological staging to guide treatment decisions in patients with colorectal cancer who are young, female, with tumours located in the right colon, advanced T stage and N2 stage.

Recommendations for Optimal Endoscopic Localization of Colorectal Neoplasms: A Delphi Consensus of National Experts

BACKGROUND

Colonoscopy is the standard of care for diagnosis and evaluation of colorectal cancers before surgery. However, varied practices and heterogenous documentation affects communication between endoscopists and operating surgeons, hampering surgical planning.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop recommendations for the use of standardized localization and reporting practices for colorectal lesions identified during lower GI endoscopy.

DESIGN

A systematic review of existing endoscopy guidelines and thorough narrative review of the overall endoscopy literature were performed to identify existing practices recommended globally.

SETTING

An online Delphi process was used to establish consensus recommendations based on a literature review.

PATIENTS

Colorectal surgeons and gastroenterologists from across Canada who had previously demonstrated leadership in endoscopy, managed large endoscopy programs, produced high-impact publications in the field of endoscopy, or participated in the development of endoscopy guidelines were selected to participate.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were colorectal lesion localization and documentation practice recommendations important to planning surgical or advanced endoscopic excisions.

RESULTS

A total of 129 of 197 statements achieved consensus after 3 rounds of voting by 23 experts from across Canada. There was more than 90% participation in each round. Recommendations varied according to lesion location in the cecum, colon, or rectum and whether the referral was planned for surgical or advanced endoscopic resection. Recommendations were provided for appropriate documentation, indications, location, and method of tattoo placement, in addition to photograph and real-time 3-dimensional scope configuration device use.

LIMITATIONS

Because of a paucity of evidence, recommendations are based primarily on expert opinion. There may be bias, as all representatives were based in Canada.

CONCLUSIONS

Best practices to optimize endoscopic lesion localization and communication are not addressed in previous guidelines. This consensus involving national experts in colorectal surgery and gastroenterology provides a framework for efficient and effective colorectal lesion localization. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C71 .

RECOMENDACIONES PARA LA LOCALIZACIN ENDOSCPICA PTIMA DE LAS NEOPLASIAS COLORRECTALES UN CONSENSO DELPHI DE EXPERTOS NACIONALES

ANTECEDENTES:La colonoscopia es el estándar de atención para el diagnóstico y la evaluación de los cánceres colorrectales antes de la cirugía. Sin embargo, las prácticas variadas y la documentación heterogénea afectan la comunicación entre los endoscopistas y los cirujanos operadores, lo que dificulta la planificación quirúrgica.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo desarrollar recomendaciones para el uso de prácticas estandarizadas de localización y notificación de lesiones colorrectales identificadas en la endoscopia gastrointestinal inferior.DISEÑO:Se realizó una revisión sistemática de las pautas de endoscopia existentes y una revisión narrativa exhaustiva de la literatura general sobre endoscopia para identificar las prácticas existentes recomendadas a nivel mundial. Se utilizó un proceso Delphi en línea para establecer recomendaciones de consenso basadas en la revisión de la literatura.PARTICIPANTES:Se seleccionaron para participar cirujanos colorrectales y gastroenterólogos de todo Canadá que previamente habían demostrado liderazgo en endoscopia, manejado grandes programas de endoscopia, producido publicaciones de alto impacto en el campo de la endoscopia o que habían participado en el desarrollo de pautas de endoscopia.RESULTADOS:Localización de lesiones colorrectales y recomendaciones prácticas de documentación importantes para planificar escisiones quirúrgicas o endoscópicas avanzadas.RESULTADOS:129 de 197 declaraciones lograron consenso después de tres rondas de votación de 23 expertos de todo Canadá. Hubo >90% de participación en cada ronda. Las recomendaciones variaron según la ubicación de la lesión en el ciego, colon o recto, y si se planificó la derivación para resección quirúrgica o endoscópica avanzada. Se proporcionaron recomendaciones para la documentación adecuada, las indicaciones, la ubicación y el método de colocación del tatuaje, además de la fotografía y el uso del dispositivo de configuración del alcance 3D en tiempo real.LIMITACIONES:Debido a la escasez de evidencia, las recomendaciones se basan principalmente en la opinión de expertos. Puede haber sesgo, ya que los representantes tenían su sede en Canadá.CONCLUSIONES:Las mejores prácticas para optimizar la localización y comunicación de lesiones endoscópicas no se abordan en las guías anteriores. Este consenso que involucra a expertos nacionales en cirugía colorrectal y gastroenterología proporciona un marco para la localización eficiente y efectiva de lesiones colorrectales. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C71 . (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

The effect of preoperative endoscopic tattooing on lymph node retrieval in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The effect of preoperative endoscopic tattooing (ET) on accurate colorectal cancer localization and resection has been well established. However, its effect on lymph node (LN) retrieval remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to systematically compare LN retrieval between patients with colorectal cancer who underwent preoperative ET and those who did not.

METHODS

A systematic search for relevant studies was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Studies that compared LN retrieval in patients with colorectal cancer with and without preoperative ET were included. Weighted pooled odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all outcomes using the random-effects model were calculated.

RESULTS

10 studies, including 2231 patients with colorectal cancer were included. Six studies reported total LN yield and showed significantly higher LN yield in the tattooed group (MD:2.61; 95% CI:1.01-4.21, P=0.001). Seven studies reported the number of patients with adequate LN retrieval and showed a significantly higher number of patients with adequate LN retrieval in the tattooed group (OR:1.89, 95% CI:1.08-3.32, P=0.03). However, subgroup analysis revealed that both outcomes were only statistically significant in patients with rectal cancer, and not in patients with colon cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that preoperative ET is associated with increased LN retrieval in patients with rectal cancer, but not in colon cancer. Further large-scale randomized control trials are necessary to validate our findings.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer Achieves Satisfactory Tumour Regression and Local Recurrence - Result of a Dedicated Multi-disciplinary Approach from a South Asian Centre

BACKGROUND

Pre-operative long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for rectal cancer has resulted in improvement in rates of restorative rectal resection and local recurrence by inducing tumour downstaging and downsizing. Total mesorectal excision (TME) is a standardised surgical technique of low anterior resection aimed at the prevention of local tumour recurrence. The purpose of this study was to evaluate tumour response following CRT in a standardised group of patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-one patients (79 male; 52 female, median age 57; interquartile range 47-62 years) of 153 with rectal cancer who underwent pre-operative long-course CRT were treated by standardised open low anterior resection at a median of 10 weeks post-CRT. Sixteen of 131 (12%) were 70 years or older. Median follow-up at the time of analysis was 15 months (interquartile range 6-45 months). Pathology reports were analysed based on AJCC-UICC classification using the TNM system. Data recorded were overall/subgrades of tumour regression; good, moderate or poor, lymph node harvest, local recurrence, disease-free and overall survival using standard statistical methods.

RESULTS

78% showed tumour regression post-CRT; 43% displayed good tumour regression/response while 22% had poor tumour regression/response. All patients had a pre-operative T-stage of either T3 or T4. Post-operation, good responders had a median T stage of T2 vs. T3 in poor responders (P = 0.0002). Overall, the median lymph node harvest was < 12. There was no difference in the number of nodes harvested in good vs. poor responders (Good/moderate-6 nodes vs. Poor- 8; P = 0.31). Good responders tended to have a lesser number of malignant nodes vs. poor responders (P = 0.31). Overall, local recurrence was 6.8% and the anal sphincter preservation rate was 89%. Predicted 5-year disease-free and overall survival were similar between good and poor responders.

CONCLUSION

Long-course CRT resulted in satisfactory tumour regression and enabled consideration for safe, sphincter-saving resection in rectal cancer. A dedicated multi-disciplinary team approach achieved a global benchmark for local recurrence in a resource-limited setting.

Assessing the Association Between Endoscopic Tattooing and Lymph Node Yield in Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative endoscopic tattooing is an effective tool for intraoperative tumor localization in colon cancer. Endoscopic tattooing in rectal cancer may have unidentified benefits on lymph node yield, making it easier for pathologists to identify nodes during histopathologic assessment. There remains concern that tattoo ink may alter anatomical planes, increasing surgical difficulty.

METHODS

Retrospective chart reviews from 2016 to 2021 of n = 170 patients presenting with rectal cancer were divided into two groups: with (n = 79) and without (n = 91) endoscopic tattoos. Demographics, operative details, tumor characteristics, prior chemoradiation, and pathologic details were collected. Primary outcome was total lymph node yield. Secondary outcomes were rates of adequate (> 12) nodes, margin status, and operative variables including operative time.

RESULTS

No differences between pathologic stage, tumor height, high inferior mesenteric artery ligation, operative times, conversion rate, or surgical approach (open versus minimally invasive) were noted between groups. Receipt of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was less frequent in the endoscopic tattooing group (53.2% versus 76.9%, P ≤ 0.001). Total node number and rate of adequate lymph node yield were higher with endoscopic tattooing (20.5 ± 7.6 versus 16.8 ± 6.6 lymph nodes and 100.0% versus 83.5% adequate lymph node harvest, both P ≤ 0.001). Rates of positive circumferential and distal margins and complete total mesorectal excision were also similar. Regression analysis identified endoscopic tattooing (Incidence Risk Ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.31) and operative time more than 300 min (Incidence Risk Ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.99) had significant effects on lymph node harvest. Removal of patients with inadequate lymph node yield resulted in similar rates of total and positive lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic rectal tattooing is associated with increased lymph node yield (including after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy) without sacrificing oncologic or perioperative outcomes, although this effect is inconsistent when only considering patients with an adequate lymph node yield.

Inking outside the box: systematic review on the utility of tattooing lesions in rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Endoscopic tattooing in rectal cancer is infrequently utilized for fear of tattoo ink obscuring anatomical planes, increasing the difficulty of surgical excision. Colon cancer tattooing has demonstrated increased lymph node yields and increased accuracy in establishing adequate margins. Rectal cancer tattooing may be especially helpful after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, where complete clinical responses could limit lesion identification and lymph node yields are typically less robust. We seek to review and identify the effects of tattooing in rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and SCOPUS. Studies on endoscopic tattooing with cohorts consisting of at least ≥ 25% of rectal cancer patients were selected. Studies focusing solely on rectal cancer were also reviewed separately.

RESULTS

Of 416 studies identified, 10 studies encompassing 2460 patients were evaluated. Seven studies evaluated lymph node yields; five reported beneficial effects of endoscopic tattooing, while two reported no significant difference. Among four studies reporting lesion localization, successful localization rates were between 63 and 100%. Rates of intraoperative endoscopy performed to reevaluate lesion location ranged from 5.7 to 20%. The distal margin was evaluated in two studies, which reported more accurate placement of the distal resection margin after tattooing. When complications of tattooing were documented (7 studies with 889 patients), only five direct complications of endoscopic tattooing were observed (0.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the data is heterogenous, it suggests that endoscopic tattooing in rectal cancer may improve lymph node yields and assist in determining accurate distal margins without high rates of complication. Further research must be completed before practice management guidelines can change.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

No. CRD42021271784.

Biomarkers of Favorable vs. Unfavorable Responses in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death globally. The gold standard for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) nowadays is preoperative concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT). Approximately three quarters of LARC patients do not achieve pathological complete response and hence suffer from relapse, metastases and inevitable death. The exploration of trustworthy and timely biomarkers for CCRT response is urgently called for. This review focused upon a broad spectrum of biomarkers, including circulating tumor cells, DNA, RNA, oncogenes, tumor suppressor genes, epigenetics, impaired DNA mismatch repair, patient-derived xenografts, in vitro tumor organoids, immunity and microbiomes. Utilizing proper biomarkers can assist in categorizing appropriate patients by the most efficient treatment modality with the best outcome and accompanied by minimal side effects. The purpose of this review is to inspect and analyze accessible data in order to fully realize the promise of precision oncology for rectal cancer patients.

When and How To Use Endoscopic Tattooing in the Colon: An International Delphi Agreement

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is a lack of clinical studies to establish indications and methodology for tattooing, therefore technique and practice of tattooing is very variable. We aimed to establish a consensus on the indications and appropriate techniques for colonic tattoo through a modified Delphi process.

METHODS

The baseline questionnaire was classified into 3 areas: where tattooing should not be used (1 domain, 6 questions), where tattooing should be used (4 domains, 20 questions), and how to perform tattooing (1 domain 20 questions). A total of 29 experts participated in the 3 rounds of the Delphi process.

RESULTS

A total of 15 statements were approved. The statements that achieved the highest agreement were as follows: tattooing should always be used after endoscopic resection of a lesion with suspicion of submucosal invasion (agreement score, 4.59; degree of consensus, 97%). For a colorectal lesion that is left in situ but considered suitable for endoscopic resection, tattooing may be used if the lesion is considered difficult to detect at a subsequent endoscopy (agreement score, 4.62; degree of consensus, 100%). A tattoo should never be injected directly into or underneath a lesion that might be removed endoscopically at a later point in time (agreement score, 4.79; degree of consensus, 97%). Details of the tattoo injection should be stated clearly in the endoscopy report (agreement score, 4.76; degree of consensus, 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

This expert consensus has developed different statements about where tattooing should not be used, when it should be used, and how that should be done.