The multidisciplinary approach to the treatment of rectal cancer: 2015 update

Effect of laparoscopic versus open surgery on postoperative wound complications in patients with low rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of microinvasive and open operations on postoperative wound complications in low rectal carcinoma patients. Research on limited English has been conducted systematically in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. The date up to the search was in August 2023. Following review of the classification and exclusion criteria for this research and the evaluation of its quality in the literature, there were a total of 266 related papers, which were reviewed for inclusion in the period from 2004 to 2017. A total of 1774 cases of low rectal cancer were enrolled. Of these 913 cases, the laparoscopic operation was performed on 913 cases, while 861 cases were operated on low rectal carcinoma. The overall sample was between 10 and 482. Five trials described the efficacy of laparoscopy have lower risk than open on postoperative wound infection in patients with low rectal cancer (OR, 0.72;95 % CI, 0.48,1.09 p = 0.12). Three studies results showed that the anastomotic leak was not significantly different between open and laparoscopy (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.58,1.26 p = 0.44). Six surgical trials in low rectal cancer patients reported haemorrhage, and five cases of surgical time were reported, with laparoscopy having fewer bleeding compared with open surgery (MD, -188.89; 95% CI, -341.27, -36.51 p = 0.02). Compared with laparoscopy, the operation time was shorter for the open operation (MD, 33.06; 95% CI, 30.56, 35.57 p < 0.0001). Overall, there is no significant difference between laparoscopy and open surgery in terms of incidence of infection and anastomosis leak. However, the rate of haemorrhage in laparoscopy is lower，and operation time in open surgery is lower.

Laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery in T4 rectal cancer: A case-control study

Background:

Laparoscopic surgery (LAS) for T4 rectal cancer (RC) is still controversial. This study aims to compare LAS with conventional open surgery in patients with T4 RC.

Patients and Methods:

Patients undergoing laparoscopic or open curative resection for T4 RC from January 2010 to September 2014 in our hospital were enrolled. Patients’ clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes were collected and compared. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0.

Results:

A total of 125 patients (39 open, 86 LAS) were included in this study finally. The baseline information between the two groups were comparable except that LAS group had a more anterior resection (P = 0.012) and less combined resection (P = 0.003). The results demonstrated that patients in LAS group had less blood loss (P < 0.001), smaller incision length (P < 0.001), faster time to first soft diet (P = 0.010) and less incidence of post-operative complications, although it was not significantly different (P = 0.063). In addition, the operative time was also comparable (P = 0.140) and the conversion rate was low (2/86). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 71.8%, 79.1% in open, LAS group respectively and the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 66.7%, 68.6% in open, laparoscopic group, respectively. The Kaplan curves demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the two groups in OS (P = 0.981) or DFS (P = 0.900).

Conclusions:

LAS is safe and feasible in selected patients with T4 RC. It can achieve a better perioperative outcomes, and the long-time survival is not inferior to open surgery. Prospective studies should be conducted in the future to reduce the selection bias.

GOLPH3 overexpression correlates with poor response to neoadjuvant therapy and prognosis in locally advanced rectal cancer

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) combined with surgery is a standard therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The aim of this study was to assess the expression of GOLPH3 (Golgi phosphoprotein 3), a newly found oncogene, in LARC as well as its relationship with nCRT sensitivity and prognosis. We retrospectively analyzed 148 LARC cases receiving nCRT and total mesorectal excision (TME). Immunohistochemistry was used to assess GOLPH3 and mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) in tumor tissues. Then, the associations of GOLPH3 with pathological characteristics and prognosis of rectal cancer were assessed. The 148 cases included 77 with high GOLPH3 expression (52.03%), which was associated with tumor invasive depth and lymphatic metastasis. Cases with high GOLPH3 expression had 2.58 and 2.71 fold higher local relapse and distant metastasis rates compared with the low expression group. Correlation analyses showed that GOLPH3 was an independent indicator for judging tumor down-staging and postoperative TRG (tumor regression grade), indicating it could predict nCRT sensitivity. In addition, GOLPH3 expression was associated with mTOR levels. Multiple-factor analysis indicated that GOLPH3 was an independent prognosis indicator for 5 year-DFS (disease free survival) and OS (overall survival) in LARC. These results reveal that GOLPH3 is an independent predictive factor for nCRT sensitivity and prognosis in LARC, with a mechanism related to mTOR.

Recent advances in multidisciplinary approach for rectal cancer

Surgery is a major treatment option for rectal cancer, and total mesorectal excision has been demonstrated to be advantageous in terms of oncological outcome and thus has been the standard surgical approach. Radiotherapy before or after radical surgery is the optimal treatment to control local recurrence of advanced rectal cancer. To date, in many countries, the combination of neoadjuvant concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy is considered the standard therapy. A more recent interest in neoadjuvant therapy has been the use of oxaliplatin or targeted agents for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. However, despite many trials of oxaliplatin and targeted agents, 5-FU-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy has remained the only standard treatment option. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or induction chemotherapy with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy may further improve patient survival, as some clinical studies recently indicated. In Japan, neoadjuvant therapy is not the standard treatment method, because surgery with lateral lymph node dissection is usually performed and this type of surgery may reduce recurrence rate as does radiation therapy. The phase III study to evaluate the oncological effect of the Japanese standard operation (mesorectal excision, ME) with lateral lymph node dissection in comparison with ME alone for clinical stage II and III lower rectal cancer is currently ongoing.