Feasibility of transanal total mesorectal excision in cases with challenging patient and tumor characteristics

Comparison of patient-reported quality of life and functional outcomes following laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer

Purpose

The effect of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) on patients' quality of life and functional outcomes is not fully understood. This study aimed to compare the quality of life and bowel, anorectal, and urogenital functions after laparoscopic and TaTME.

Methods

Laparoscopic or TaTME was performed for 202 propensity score-matched patient pairs with rectal cancer between January 2014 and December 2017 at the National Cancer Center, Korea. The outcomes for all patients were assessed using anorectal manometry, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and Colorectal Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-CR38), low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score, Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). This retrospective comparative study included patients who completed anorectal manometry and the questionnaires before treatment and at 1 year after surgery.

Results

The EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38 showed comparable outcomes regarding the quality of life in both groups. More patients experienced major LARS in the transanal group at 1 year postoperatively (31.0% vs. 6.8% in the laparoscopic group, P = 0.004). Multivariable analysis revealed no significant difference in the LARS score between the groups at 1 year postoperatively (odds ratio, 2.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.79–6.72; P = 0.127). Significant differences in the IPSS were not noted between the groups.

Conclusion

The quality of life and functional outcomes were comparable between the laparoscopic and transanal approaches; however, our findings suggest a higher rate of LARS after TaTME.

Short- and mid-term outcomes of transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Purpose

The current meta-analysis combining mid and low rectal cancer with no meta-analysis only for low rectal cancer was seen. This meta-analysis was to compare the short- and mid-term outcomes of the transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) vs. laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for low rectal cancer.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted using the web-based databases; China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese BioMedical Database, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Wanfang Database. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were evaluated using the Jadad scale and non-RCTs (NRCs) were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results

Ten studies (2 RCTs and 8 NRCs) involving 772 patients were included. Among them, 378 patients underwent TaTME and 394 patients underwent LaTME. Compared with the LaTME group, the conversion rate was low (risk ratio [RR], 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11–0.54; P < 0.001), the circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement was low (RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27–0.86; P = 0.010), and the hospital stay was short (mean difference, −1.72; 95% CI, −2.89 to −0.55; P = 0.004) in the TaTME group. No significant differences were seen in the mesorectal resection quality, CRM distance, distal resection margin (DRM) involvement, DRM distance, local R1 resection, intraoperative complications, morbidity, anastomotic leakage, severe morbidity, mortality, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, and local recurrence rate (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The TaTME is a promising surgical technique and is fully a safe and efficacious option in managing low rectal cancer.

Early Experience With Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Compared With Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision is widely used for rectal cancers; however, it is sometimes challenging, especially in obese patients with low tumors, particularly after chemoradiotherapy. Transanal total mesorectal excision was developed to overcome these limitations in terms of visualization, dissection, and stapling.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the pathologic and early oncologic outcomes of the laparoscopic and transanal approaches.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective comparative study using propensity score-matched analysis.

SETTING

The study was conducted at a tertiary hospital specializing in oncology.

PATIENTS

In total, 722 inpatients who underwent total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer from January 2014 to December 2017 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Laparoscopic (N = 514) and transanal (N = 208) total mesorectal excision were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was pathologic outcome including circumferential and distal resection margin involvement. The secondary outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications and overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and local recurrence rates.

RESULTS

The 2 groups of the cohort had several differences; thus, we performed propensity score matching. The circumferential resection margin was involved in 13.4% and 12.9% of the laparoscopic and transanal groups (p = 0.88). The distal resection margin was involved in 1% and 3% of the laparoscopic and transanal groups (p = 0.28). Complete or nearly complete total mesorectal excision was 98.0% and 96.5% in the laparoscopic and transanal groups (p = 0.41). Postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.54) but were significantly higher in patients with tumors <5 cm from the anal verge who underwent laparoscopy (laparoscopic group = 11.9%; transanal group = 1.7%; p = 0.04). There were no statistical differences in the 3-year overall survival, recurrence-free survival, or local recurrence rates between groups.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective study design with a short follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Early experience with the transanal approach showed similar pathologic outcomes as those of conventional laparoscopy; hence, it should be considered as a surgical option for lower rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B352. EXPERIENCIA TEMPRANA CON LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL TRANSANAL EN COMPARACIÓN CON LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL LAPAROSCÓPICA PARA EL CÁNCER DE RECTO: UN ANÁLISIS DE PUNTUACIÓN DE PROPENSIÓN: La escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica se usa ampliamente para los cánceres rectales; Sin embargo, a veces es un desafío, especialmente en pacientes obesos con tumores bajos, particularmente después de la quimiorradioterapia. La escisión mesorrectal total transanal se desarrolló para superar estas limitaciones en términos de visualización, disección y grapado.Comparar los resultados patológicos y oncológicos precoces de los enfoques laparoscópico y transanal.estudio comparativo retrospectivo con puntaje de propensión-análisis emparejadoHospital terciario especializado en oncología.En total, se incluyeron 722 pacientes hospitalizados que se sometieron a una escisión mesorrectal total por cáncer rectal desde Enero de 2014 hasta Diciembre de 2017.Se realizó escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica (n = 514) y transanal (n = 208).El resultado primario fue el resultado patológico, incluyendo el involucramiento del margen de resección circunferencial y distal. Los resultados secundarios fueron complicaciones intraoperatorias, postoperatorias y supervivencia general, supervivencia libre de recurrencia y tasas de recurrencia local.Los dos grupos de la cohorte tuvieron varias diferencias; así, realizamos un emparejamiento de puntuación de propensión. El margen de resección circunferencial estuvo involucrado en 13.4% y 12.9% de los grupos laparoscópico y transanal, respectivamente (p = 0.88). El margen de resección distal estuvo involucrado en 1% y 3% de los grupos laparoscópico y transanal, respectivamente (p = 0.28). La escisión mesorrectal total completa o casi completa fue de 98.0% y 96.5% en los grupos laparoscópico y transanal, respectivamente (p = 0.41). Las complicaciones postoperatorias con Clavien-Dindo grado ≥ III no difirieron significativamente entre los grupos (p = 0,54), pero fueron significativamente mayores en pacientes con tumores de < 5 cm del borde anal que se sometieron a laparoscopia (grupo laparoscópico, 11,9%; grupo transanal, 1,7%; p = 0,04). No hubo diferencias estadísticas en la supervivencia general a 3 años, la supervivencia libre de recurrencia y las tasas de recurrencia local entre los grupos.Diseño de estudio retrospectivo, corto período de seguimiento.La experiencia temprana con el enfoque transanal mostró resultados patológicos similares a los de la laparoscopia convencional; por lo tanto, debe considerarse como una opción quirúrgica para el cáncer rectal mas bajo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B352. (Traducción-Dr Yesenia Rojas-Khalil).

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.

Computed tomography based cross-sectional anatomy of the pelvis predicts surgical outcome after rectal cancer surgery

Purpose

Narrow pelvis has been considered an adverse factor for postoperative and oncologic outcomes after rectal cancer surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the validity of using only axial CT scan images to calculate the pelvic cross-sectional area for the prediction of adverse outcomes after rectal cancer surgery.

Methods

The medical records of patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively. Axial images of CT scan were used to measure the pelvic cross-sectional area. Pelvic surgical site infection (SSI), positive resection margin, and early local recurrence were adopted as end-points to analyze the impact of pelvimetry on surgical outcome.

Results

The mean pelvic cross-sectional area was 84.3 ± 10.9 cm². Males had significantly smaller pelvic areas than females (P < 0.001). Comparing pelvic cross-sectional areas according to the surgical outcomes, the results indicated that patients with pelvic SSI and local failure (positive resection margin or local recurrence within 1 year) have significantly smaller cross-sectional-area than SSI and local failure-free patients (P = 0.013 and P = 0.031). A calculated cross-sectional area of 88.8 cm² was determined as the cutoff value for the prediction of pelvic SSI and/or local failure, which was significant in a validating analysis.

Conclusion

The pelvic cross-sectional area obtained from a routine axial CT scan image was associated with pelvic SSI, positive resection margin, and early local recurrence. It might be an intuitive, feasible, and easily adoptable method for predicting surgical outcomes.