Oncological outcomes of local excision versus radical surgery for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Local resection (LR) methods for rectal cancer are generally considered in the palliative setting or for patients deemed a high anaesthetic risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare oncological outcomes of LR and radical resection (RR) for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance assessment.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Emcare databases was performed for studies that reported data on clinical outcomes for both LR and RR for early rectal cancer from January 1995 to April 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. The quality of assessment was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool for randomised controlled trials.

RESULTS

Twenty studies with 12,022 patients were included: 6,476 patients had LR and 5,546 patients underwent RR. RR led to an improvement in 5-year overall survival (OR 1.84; 95 % CI 1.54-2.20; p < 0.0001; I2 20 %) and local recurrence (OR 3.06; 95 % CI 2.02-4.64; p < 0.0001; I2 39 %) when compared to LR. However, when staging and surveillance methods were clearly adopted in LR cases, there was an improvement in R0 rates (96.7 % vs 85.6 %), 5-year disease-free survival (93.0 % vs 77.9 %) and overall survival (81.6 % vs 79.0 %) compared to when staging and surveillance was not reported/performed.

CONCLUSIONS

LR may be appropriate for selected patients without poor prognostic factors in early rectal cancer. This study also highlights that there is currently no single standardised staging or surveillance approach being adopted in the management of early rectal cancer. A more specified and standardised preoperative staging for patient selection as well as clinical and image-based surveillance protocols is needed.

Reoperation rates for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women after undergoing Mid-Urethral sling with or without concomitant colporrhaphy in academic centers within the United States

In this study, the rates of reoperation for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in women who underwent a mid-urethral sling (MUS) with or without concurrent colporrhaphy were evaluated. An academic faculty practice consortium database was used to identify a cohort of patients treated surgically for SUI with or without concurrent POP repair (apical, anterior, posterior, or a combination of the three) with or without hysterectomy between 2009 and 2011. A total of 20,484 patients matched the criteria. Of patients who underwent a MUS, 7.2% underwent secondary surgery, with a higher rate of 8.6% associated with those who underwent concurrent prolapse repair (Apical repair HR 1.84, p < .01; Anterior compartment repair HR 1.47, p < .01). Concurrent hysterectomy was associated with a lower hazard of secondary prolapse surgery (HR 0.48; p < .01) if the initial surgery involved a complete POP repair. Prolapse mesh repair resulted in a higher hazard of additional surgery (HR 1.43, p < .01). Medicaid insurance was also associated with an increased hazard ratio compared to commercial insurance for secondary surgery (HR 1.32, p < .01). For women undergoing MUS with complete prolapse repair, concurrent hysterectomy is associated with lower secondary surgery rates. Concurrent prolapse repair with mesh is associated with higher secondary surgery rates.Synopsis: For women undergoing MUS (mid-urethral sling) with complete prolapse repair, concurrent hysterectomy is associated with lower secondary surgery rates. Concurrent prolapse repair with mesh is associated with higher secondary surgery rates.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) can present at the same time and negatively impact patients' quality of life. There is little data regarding reoperation rates for patients who undergo both MUS and colporrhaphy in one setting.What do the results of this study add? This study found that patients who undergo concurrent MUS (mid-urethral sling) and complete POP repair with the addition of hysterectomy had a lower risk of secondary surgery.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Our data can be used by surgeons to counsel patients on the risks of re-operation for SUI for those who would like to undergo concurrent POP repair with or without hysterectomy.

The outcome of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with high-risk T1 rectal cancer

Introduction:

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is considered the technique of choice for adenoma and low-risk T1 rectal cancer. The adequacy of such treatment for high-risk T1 tumours, however, is still controversial. The aim of the study is to evaluate our results with local excision of high-risk T1 cancers.

Materials and Methods:

Demographic, clinical data pertaining to patients undergoing TEM for T1 rectal cancer between 1999 and 2015 was retrospectively collected. Long-term outcomes were assessed for the entire cohort. Patients were classified into two groups: favourable and high-risk cancer features.

Results:

Three hundred and fifty-five TEM procedures were recorded in the study period. Forty-three patients were included in the present study. There were 20 females and 23 males, the median age was 69 ± 9. The median tumour distance from the anal verge was 6 cm (range 1–13 cm). Post-operative histopathology showed well/moderately differentiated T1 adenocarcinoma in 30 patients and poorly differentiated in 13. The overall survival for patients with favourable and high-risk features groups were 93.5% and 77%, respectively, while the local recurrence (LR) was 3.5% and 23.1%, respectively. Nine patients with high-risk features received adjuvant radiotherapy; one (11.1%) of them experienced LR.

Conclusions:

Local excision by TEM augmented by adjuvant radiotherapy may be a feasible alternative for selected patients with high-risk T1 rectal cancer. The addition of radiotherapy seems to decrease the rates of LR.

Local excision for T1 rectal tumours: are we getting better?

AIM

The objective was to assess the effect of three different surgical treatments for T1 rectal tumours, radical resection (RR), open local excision (open LE) and laparoscopic local excision (laparoscopic LE), on overall survival (OS).

METHODS

Adults from the National Cancer Database (2008-2016) with a diagnosis of T1 rectal cancer were stratified by treatment type (LE vs RR). We assumed that laparoscopic LE equates to transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) or transanal endoscopic microsurgery. The primary outcome was 5-year OS. Subgroup analyses of the LE group stratified by time period [2008-2010 (before TAMIS) vs 2011-2016 (after TAMIS)] and approach (laparoscopic vs open) were performed.

RESULTS

Among 10 053 patients, 6623 (65.88%) underwent LE (74.33% laparoscopic LE vs 25.67% open LE) and 3430 (34.12%) RR. The use of LE increased from 52.69% in 2008 to 69.47% in 2016, whereas RR decreased (P < 0.001). In unadjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in 5-year OS between the LE and RR groups (P = 0.639) and between the two LE time periods (P = 0.509), which was consistent with the adjusted analysis (LE vs RR, hazard ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.92-1.20, P = 0.468; 2008-2010 LE vs 2011-2016 LE, hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.92-1.29, P = 0.321). Laparoscopic LE was associated with improved OS in the unadjusted analysis only (P = 0.006), compared to the open LE group (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% CI 0.78-1.12, P = 0.495).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the use of a LE approach for T1 rectal tumours as a strategy to reduce surgical morbidity without compromising survival.