Critical and Challenging Issues in the Surgical Management of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer

Comparison of Outcomes for Abdominoperineal Resection versus Low Anterior Resection for Very-Low Rectal Cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 2024:S1091-255X(24)00500-6. [PMID: 38897287 DOI: 10.1016/j.gassur.2024.06.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

BACKGROUND

Management of very-low rectal cancer is one of the most challenging issues faced by general and colorectal surgeons. Many feel compelled to pursue abdominoperineal over low anterior resection to optimize oncologic outcomes. This study aims to determine differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between patients undergoing abdominoperineal or low anterior resection for very-low rectal cancer.

METHODS

The US Rectal Cancer Consortium (2010-2016) was queried for adults who underwent either abdominoperineal resection (APR) or low anterior resection (LAR) for Stage I-III rectal cancers <5cm from anorectal junction and met inclusion criteria. Primary outcome was disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, length of stay, complications, recurrence location, and perioperative factors.

RESULTS

431 patients with very-low rectal cancer who underwent APR or LAR were identified. 154 (35.7%) underwent abdominoperineal resection. The overall recurrence rate was 19.6%. Median follow-up was 42.5 months. An analysis adjusted for demographics and pathologic stage observed no difference in disease-free survival between operative types (APR-HR=0.90, 95% CI [0.53-1.52], p=0.70). Secondary outcomes demonstrated no significant difference between operation types, including overall survival (HR=1.29, 95% CI [0.71-2.32], p=0.39), complications (OR = 1.53, 95% CI [0.94 - 2.50], p=0.12) or length of stay (Estimate: 0.04, Std. error = 0.25, p=0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed no significant difference in disease-free survival or overall survival between patients undergoing abdominoperineal or low anterior resection for very-low rectal cancer. This analysis supports the treatment of very-low rectal cancer, without sphincter involvement, by either abdominoperineal or low anterior resection.

Complications Rate and Related Factors After Laparoscopic Sphincter-Preserving Total Mesorectal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Study in Vietnam

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is a significant health concern. Surgery remains a critical component of the multimodal treatment strategy. The laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision (TME) is increasingly utilized and effective, offering enhanced quality of life for patients compared to previous traditional methods.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to determine the rate of complications and the related factors associated with complications following laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted at the University Medical Center of Ho Chi Minh City from March 2022 to March 2023. It included patients aged 18 years and older diagnosed with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision. Data on patient demographics, surgical details, and postoperative complications were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Follow-ups were conducted up to six months after surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 83 patients included, the postoperative complications rate was 14.5%. The complications observed included surgical wound infections (five cases), anastomotic leaks (five cases, including three recto-vaginal fistulas and two pelvic abscesses), urinary retention (one case), and pneumonia (one case). A significant finding was the higher rate of distant metastases in patients with complications compared to those without (p=0.033).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer is safe and effective, with a high success rate and low complication rate during or after surgery. Anastomotic leakage remains the most significant complication. Despite advancements in surgery, modern suturing tools, and preoperative patient optimization, complications are avoidable. Therefore, understanding the related factors and implementing preventive interventions is crucial.

Clinical efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy combined with Laparoscopic Surgery in patients with Middle and Low Rectal Cancer and its Effect on serum VEGF Levels and quality of life

Objective

To observe the clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with laparoscopic surgery in patients with middle and low rectal cancer and its effect on serum VEGF level and quality of life.

Methods

Retrospective analysis was performed on 80 patients with middle and low rectal cancer admitted to Baoding No.1 Central Hospital from June 2018 to June 2020.They were randomly divided into two groups. Patients in the control group underwent laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery, while those in the experimental group underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery. The differences of various surgical indicators between the two groups were compared. The incidence of surgical complications, the serum VEGF levels and the improvement of quality of life were compared. The differences in local recurrence, metastasis and overall survival with in two years after surgery were compared.

Results

The various surgical indicators of the experimental group were significantly better than the control group (p<0.05). After treatment, the VEGF levels in the experimental group were significantly lower than those in the control group (p=0.00), while the SF-36 score was significantly higher than that of the control group (p=0.00). The total incidence of surgical complications in experimental group was significantly lower (p=0.03), the local recurrence rate was significantly lower (p=0.02), and the overall survival rate was significantly higher than that in control group (p=0.04).

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with laparoscopic surgery is superior to direct surgery alone in the treatment of middle and low rectal cancer and it needs to be promoted.

Specific Septic Complications after Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Critical Multicentre Study

The postoperative septic complications in gastrointestinal surgery impact immediate as well as long-term outcomes, which lead to reinterventions and additional costs. The authors presented the experience of three surgery clinics in Romania regarding the specific septic complications occurring in patients operated on for rectal cancer. The study group comprised 2674 patients who underwent surgery over a 5-year period (2017-2021). Neoplasms of the middle and lower rectum (76%) were the majority. There were 85% rectal resections and 15% abdominoperineal excisions of the rectum. In total, 68.54% of patients were operated on laparoscopically, and 31.46% received open surgery. Without taking wound infections into account, 97 (3.67%) patients had abdominal-pelvic septic complications. The aim was to evaluate the causes of the complications. The percentage of suppurations after surgery of the rectum treated by radiochemotherapy was considerably higher than after surgery of the non-radiated upper rectum. The fatality rate was 5.15%. The risk of fistulas was significantly associated with the preoperative treatment, tumour position and type of intervention. Sex, age, TNM stage or grade were not significant at 0.05 the threshold. The risk of fistulas is reduced with low anterior resection, but the gravity of these complications is higher in the lower rectum compared with the superior rectum. Preoperative radiochemotherapy is a contributing factor to septic complications.

Assessment of mesorectal fascia status in MRI compared with circumferential resection margin after total mesorectal excision and predictors of involved margins

BACKGROUND

Circumferential resection margin is an important prognosticator for total mesorectal excision outcome. We investigated the status of mesorectal fascia on magnetic resonance imaging compared with circumferential resection margin on pathology and factors associated with status change.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database of rectal cancer patients who underwent surgery. Mesorectal fascia status on magnetic resonance imaging done before neoadjuvant therapy and circumferential resection margin status on pathology were compared. The study outcomes were factors associated with a margin status conversion between magnetic resonance imaging and pathology, and predictors of involved circumferential resection margin.

RESULTS

In total, 244 patients (average follow-up of 25.4 months) were included. Eighty-one (33.2%) patients had potentially involved mesorectal fascia in magnetic resonance imaging and 12 (4.9%) had involved circumferential resection margin in pathology. A total of 2.8% of patients had a conversion of clear mesorectal fascia in magnetic resonance imaging to involved circumferential resection margin. Abdominoperineal resection was significantly associated with this status change (odds ratio: 25, 95% confidence interval: 2.4-255.8, P = .007). In total, 7.4% of patients with potentially involved mesorectal fascia had persistently involved circumferential resection margin. Lack of total neoadjuvant therapy was associated with higher, yet statistically insignificant, odds of persistently involved circumferential resection margin (odds ratio: 12, 95% confidence interval: 0.65-220.8, P = .09). The significant independent predictors of involved circumferential resection margin were body mass index (odds ratio: 1.2, P = .016) and abdominoperineal resection (odds ratio: 4.22, P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Change of clear mesorectal fascia in magnetic resonance imaging to an involved circumferential resection margin in pathology was recorded in 2.8% of patients; abdominoperineal resection might be associated with this change. Approximately 7% of patients had persistent involvement of circumferential resection margin as determined by pathology. Omission of total neoadjuvant therapy might be associated with persistent margin involvement.

Fragmentation of care and colorectal cancer survival in South Korea: comparisons according to treatment at multiple hospitals

PURPOSE

Fragmented cancer care (FC) means that patients visit multiple providers for treatment, which is common in cancer care. While FC is associated with poor health outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide, there is still a lack of evidence in South Korea. We investigated the association between FC and 5-year morality in patients with CRC using population-based claims data.

METHODS

The study population was followed up from 2002 to 2015. Data were collected from Korea National Health Insurance claims. Participants comprised patients with CRC diagnosed with International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 (C18.x-C20.x) and a special claim code for cancer (V193). Data were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier curve with a log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard model. The effect of FC on patients' 5-year survival was examined.

RESULTS

Of 3467 patients with CRC, 20.0% had experienced FC. FC was significantly associated with an increased risk of 5-year mortality (hazard ratio 1.516, 95% confidence interval 1.274-1.804). FC was prevalent in those who had a low income level, underwent chemotherapy, did not undergo radiation therapy, and did not visit a tertiary hospital for their first treatment.

CONCLUSION

Efforts to decrease FC and integrate complex cancer care within appropriate healthcare delivery systems may improve survivorship among patients with CRC.

Report of 13-year survival of patients with colon and rectal cancers; lessons from Shiraz colorectal cancer surgery registry system of a level three medical center

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer in women and the third most common cancer in men worldwide, with an increasing trend in its incidence in Asian countries. In the present study, we aimed to describe the 13-year results of patients with CRC based on the Shiraz Colorectal Cancer Surgery (SCORCS) registry system in patients with a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of colon cancer (CC) and rectal cancer (RC) undergoing surgery.

Methods

Between 2007 and 2020, 811 patients, including 280 patients with CC and 531 patients with RC, registered in SCORCS, were included in the present study. The information collected for this study included demographic characteristics of the patients, primary clinical presentations, laboratory findings before surgery, radiologic and colonoscopy results, and surgical procedures. Death was confirmed by the physician as “CRC-related”. The data were analyzed by SPSS software version 21; life table and Kaplan-Meier curve were used for evaluating the overall survival, recurrence, and metastasis rates and Log-Rank test or Breslow test to check significant differences between the subgroups. The Cox proportional regression model was fitted to evaluate the prognostic factors of survival recurrence and metastasis.

Results

Laparoscopy was performed in 60% of patients (66% in RC and 51% in CC), laparotomy in 32% (27% in RC and 41% in CC), and 7% required conversion. The median time of follow-up was 29 months in all patients; 28 months in patients with RC, and 33 months in patients with CC; 1, 3, and 5 years’ survival rate was 90, 70, and 63% for all the patients, 89%, 67%, and 58% for RC and 90%, 74%, and 71% for CC, respectively (P = 0.009). The Cox regression analysis revealed tumor stages II, (P = 0.003, HR:2.45, 95% CI;1.34–4.49), III, (P ≤ 0.001, HR:3.46, 95% CI;1.88–6.36) and IV, (P ≤ 0.001, HR:6.28, 95% CI;2.73–14.42) in RC and stage IV, (P = 0.03, HR:9.33, 95% CI;1.1-76.37) in CC were the significant survival prognostic factors. The metastasis and recurrence of the tumors occurred earlier in patients with RC than CC (P = 0.001 and 0.03, respectively).

Conclusions

Long-term follow-up of patients with CRC in an Iranian population indicated the significance of screening for diagnosis of early stages and improved survival of the patients.

Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates

Despite innovative advancements, distally located rectal cancer remains a critical disease of challenging management. The crucial location of the tumor predisposes it to a circumferential resection margin (CRM) that tends to involve the anal sphincter complex and surrounding organs, with a high incidence of delayed anastomotic complications and the risk of the pelvic sidewall or rarely inguinal lymph node metastases. In this regard, colorectal surgeons should be aware of other issues beyond total mesorectal excision (TME) performance. For decades, the concept of extralevator abdominoperineal resection to avoid compromised CRM has been introduced. However, the complexity of deep pelvic dissection with poor visualization in low-lying rectal cancer has led to transanal TME. In contrast, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) has allowed for the execution of more sphincter-saving procedures without oncologic compromise. Significant tumor regression after NCRT and complete pathologic response also permit applying the watch-and-wait protocol in some cases, now with more solid evidence. This review article will introduce the current surgical treatment options, their indication and technical details, and recent oncologic and functional outcomes. Lastly, the novel characteristics of distal rectal cancer, such as pelvic sidewall and inguinal lymph node metastases, will be discussed along with its tailored and individualized treatment approach.

A Modified Technique of Laparoscopic Lateral Lymph Node Dissection Combining Fascia-Oriented Dissection and Routine Upfront Distal Visceral Vessels Ligation for Mid- to Low-Lying Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Lateral pelvic recurrence can be a cause of local failure after surgery for low rectal cancer. Lateral lymph node dissection is often performed in East Asia for patients with enlarged lateral lymph nodes or because of the presence of risk factors. However, the outcomes of the conventional lateral lymph node dissection are unsatisfactory, with a considerably high local recurrence rate for patients with positive lateral nodes. Here, we introduce a modified technique to improve lateral nodes clearance.

TECHNIQUE

This modified technique has 4 key steps: 1) separation of the ureterohypogastric nerve fascia medially, 2) identification of the visceral pelvic fascia and dissection along the inferior vesical or vaginal veins down to the pelvic floor, 3) division of the distal ends of visceral vessels according to the orientation of ureterohypogastric nerve fascia and visceral pelvic fascia for better nerve preservation, and 4) en bloc dissection through a lateral approach over the surfaces of the sacral plexus and piriformis muscle to reveal the course of distal internal iliac vessels before the division of visceral veins.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients underwent laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection successively with no conversion. The median blood loss for each lateral procedure was 37.5 mL (range, 0-300.0 mL). Eleven lateral nodes (median; range, 1-22 lateral nodes) were harvested for each lateral side. There was no perioperative mortality, and 4 patients developed major complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV).

CONCLUSION

This modified technique characterized by the routine division of visceral vessels based on ureterohypogastric nerve fascia and visceral pelvic fascia is feasible and safe. It provides good lymph node harvest, autonomic nerve preservation, and improved bleeding control. Additional investigation is warranted to evaluate the safety, functional outcomes, and oncologic outcomes.

The challenges in colorectal cancer management during COVID-19 epidemic

It has been over 2 months since the start of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. The epidemic stage of COVID-19 has brought great challenges to the diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Symptoms, such as fever and cough caused by cancer, and the therapeutic process (including chemotherapy and surgery) should be differentiated from some COVID-19 related characteristics. Besides, clinical workers should not only consider the therapeutic strategy for cancer, but also emphasize COVID-19's prevention. Moreover, the detailed therapeutic regimens of CRC patients may be different from the usual. Also, treatment principles may various for CRC patients with or without severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, as well as patients with or without an emergency presentation. In this paper, we want to discuss the above-mentioned problems based on previous guidelines, the current working status and our experiences, to provide a reference for medical personnel.