Laparoscopic Total Pelvic Exenteration for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Current status of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer and the expanding indications of the transanal approach for extended pelvic surgeries

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has been rapidly accepted as a promising surgical approach to the distal rectum. The benefits include ease of access to the bottom of the deep pelvis linearly over a short distance in order to easily visualize the important anatomy. Furthermore, the distal resection margins can be secured under direct vision. Additionally, a two-team approach combining taTME with a transabdominal approach could decrease the operative time and conversion rate. Although taTME was expected to become more rapidly popularized worldwide, enthusiasm for it has stalled due to unfamiliar intraoperative complications, a lack of oncologic evidence from randomized trials, and the widespread use of robotic surgery. While international registries have reported favorable short- and medium-term outcomes from taTME, a Norwegian national study reported a high local recurrence rate of 9.5%. The characteristics of the recurrences included rapid, multifocal growth in the pelvis, which was quite different from recurrences following traditional transabdominal TME; thus, the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Group reached a consensus for a temporary moratorium on the performance of taTME. To ensure acceptable baseline quality and patient safety, taTME should be performed by well-trained colorectal surgeons. Although the appropriate indications for taTME remain controversial, the transanal approach is extremely important as a means of goal setting in difficult TME cases and as an aid to the transabdominal approach in various types of extended pelvic surgeries. The benefits in transanal lateral lymph node dissection and pelvic exenteration are presented herein.

Minimally invasive surgery for maximally invasive tumors-pelvic exenterations for rectal cancers: are we prepared?

Despite the public awareness of colorectal cancer screening with more and more early premalignant or malignant lesions detected, surgeons still face the challenges of operating for a patient suffering from locally advanced rectal carcinoma which required pelvic exenterations, and surgical outcomes mostly influenced by margin status, adjuvant chemotherapy, positive lymph nodes and liver metastasis, etc. Open pelvic exenteration has been the adopted approach in the past and laparoscopic surgery is another option in expert centers. A study in this issue of the Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery demonstrated promising results of minimally invasive approaches for pelvic exenteration in patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma, with overall complication rate of 28.2% with a 7.3% circumferential resection margin positivity and with no distal margin involvement, with local recurrence rate of 8.1% and overall survival of 85.2% by 2-year follow-up. We are expecting more results in the future to support the routine implementation of minimally invasive pelvic exenterations.

Combined transabdominal and transperineal endoscopic pelvic exenteration for colorectal cancer: feasibility and safety of a two-team approach

Purpose

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a highly invasive procedure with high morbidity and mortality rates. Promising options to reduce this invasiveness have included laparoscopic and transperineal approaches. The aim of this study was to identify the safety of combined transabdominal and transperineal endoscopic PE for colorectal malignancies.

Methods

Fourteen patients who underwent combined transabdominal and transperineal PE (T group: 2-team approach, n = 7; O group: 1-team approach, n = 7) for colorectal malignancies between April 2016 and March 2020 in our institutions were included in this study. Clinicopathological features and perioperative outcomes were compared between groups.

Results

All patients successfully underwent R0 resection. Operation time tended to be shorter in the T group (463 minutes) than in the O group (636 minutes, P = 0.080). Time to specimen removal was significantly shorter (258 minutes vs. 423 minutes, P = 0.006), blood loss was lower (343 mL vs. 867 mL, P = 0.042), and volume of blood transfusion was less (0 mL vs. 560 mL, P = 0.063) in the T group, respectively. Postoperative complications were similar between groups.

Conclusion

Combined transabdominal and transperineal PE under a synchronous 2-team approach was feasible and safe, with the potential to reduce operation time, blood loss, and surgeon stress.

Surgical outcomes of hybrid hand-assisted laparoscopic pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer: Initial experience

INTRODUCTION

Hybrid hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) combines better visualization of laparoscopic surgery with the advantages of open surgery. The aim of this study was to describe important technical considerations of HALS and to assess the feasibility of hybrid HALS pelvic exenteration (PE) for primary advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

From May 2012 to August 2018, we retrospectively analyzed 11 patients who underwent PE for primary advanced rectal cancer (< 10 cm from the anal verge). Patients were divided into the open PE group (n = 5) and the hybrid HALS PE group (n = 6).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in patient characteristics between the two groups, and all included patients were male. Tumor invasion to adjacent organs was mostly anterior invasion. In addition, four patients (66%) in the hybrid HALS PE group and two (40%) in the open PE group received neoadjuvant therapy (P = .3).

CONCLUSION

Compared to open surgery, hybrid HALS has the advantages of less bleeding and less invasion, and can achieve the same results in the short-term. It was a reasonable procedure which was easy and safe dissection of internal iliac vessels and dorsal vein complex. Thus, hybrid HALS may become a useful approach for PE.

Feasibility of laparoscopic-assisted transanal pelvic exenteration in locally advanced rectal cancer with anterior invasion

BACKGROUND

Transanal (Ta) pelvic exenteration is a promising, minimally invasive method for treating locally advanced colorectal cancer. However, since it is technically difficult to perform, Ta pelvic exenteration is rarely reported in locally advanced T4 rectal cancer cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of transabdominal laparoscopy-assisted Ta pelvic exenteration.

METHODS

Six patients (4 males and 2 females) had laparoscopy-assisted Ta total or posterior pelvic exenteration for locally advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer cases at the Nagasaki University Hospital between September 2018 and August 2019. Clinical and pathological outcomes were measured and analyzed.

RESULTS

The median operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 481 (range 456-709) minutes and 352.5 (range 257-1660) ml, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in all cases, and no patient required open surgery. Two patients had grade 3 complications (Clavien-Dindo) or higher. There was no mortality, and no reoperation was required.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that laparoscopic-assisted Ta pelvic exenteration is an acceptable procedure, may help overcome the current technical difficulties, and may improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Laparoscopic total pelvic exenteration using transanal minimal invasive surgery technique with en bloc bilateral lymph node dissection for advanced rectal cancer

A 59-year-old man presenting with fecal occult blood visited our hospital. He was diagnosed with advanced lower rectal cancer, which was contiguous with the prostate and the left seminal vesicle. There were no metastatic lesions with lymph nodes or other organs. We performed laparoscopic total pelvic exenteration (LTPE) using transanal minimal invasive surgery technique with bilateral en bloc lateral lymph node dissection for advanced primary rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The total operative time was 760 min, and the estimated blood loss was 200 ml. LTPE is not well established technically, but it has many advantages including good visibility of the surgical field, less blood loss, and smaller wounds. A laparoscopic approach may be an appropriate choice for treating locally advanced lower rectal cancer, which requires TPE.

Technical feasibility of laparoscopic extended surgery beyond total mesorectal excision for primary or recurrent rectal cancer

Relatively little is known about the oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery for advanced rectal cancer. Recently, large randomized clinical trials showed that laparoscopic surgery was not inferior to open surgery, as evidenced by survival and local control rates. However, patients with T4 tumors were excluded from these trials. Technological advances in the instrumentation and techniques used by laparoscopic surgery have increased the use of laparoscopic surgery for advanced rectal cancer. High-definition, illuminated, and magnified images obtained by laparoscopy may enable more precise laparoscopic surgery than open techniques, even during extended surgery for T4 or locally recurrent rectal cancer. To date, the quality of evidence regarding the usefulness of laparoscopy for extended surgery beyond total mesorectal excision has been low because most studies have been uncontrolled series, with small sample sizes, and long-term data are lacking. Nevertheless, laparoscopic extended surgery for rectal cancer, when performed by specialized laparoscopic colorectal surgeons, has been reported safe in selected patients, with significant advantages, including a clear visual field and less blood loss. This review summarizes current knowledge on laparoscopic extended surgery beyond total mesorectal excision for primary or locally recurrent rectal cancer.