Prognostic value of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis in rectal cancer

Morphology of the anterior mesorectum: a new predictor for local recurrence in patients with rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Pre-operative assessment with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is useful for assessing the risk of local recurrence (LR) and survival in rectal cancer. However, few studies have explored the clinical importance of the morphology of the anterior mesorectum, especially in patients with anterior cancer. Hence, the study aimed to investigate the impact of the morphology of the anterior mesorectum on LR in patients with primary rectal cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on 176 patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment and curative-intent surgery. Patients were divided into two groups according to the morphology of the anterior mesorectum on sagittal MRI: (1) linear type: the anterior mesorectum was thin and linear; and (2) triangular type: the anterior mesorectum was thick and had a unique triangular shape. Clinicopathological and LR data were compared between patients with linear type anterior mesorectal morphology and patients with triangular type anterior mesorectal morphology.

RESULTS

Morphometric analysis showed that 90 (51.1%) patients had linear type anterior mesorectal morphology, while 86 (48.9%) had triangular type anterior mesorectal morphology. Compared to triangular type anterior mesorectal morphology, linear type anterior mesorectal morphology was more common in females and was associated with a higher risk of circumferential resection margin involvement measured by MRI (35.6% [32/90] vs . 16.3% [14/86], P   =  0.004) and a higher 5-year LR rate (12.2% vs . 3.5%, P   =  0.030). In addition, the combination of linear type anterior mesorectal morphology and anterior tumors was confirmed as an independent risk factor for LR (odds ratio = 4.283, P  = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

The classification established in this study was a simple way to describe morphological characteristics of the anterior mesorectum. The combination of linear type anterior mesorectal morphology and anterior tumors was an independent risk factor for LR and may act as a tool to assist with LR risk stratification and treatment selection.

Staging of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Beyond TME

The management of rectal cancer is complex and continually evolving. With advancements in technology and the use of multidisciplinary teams to guide the treatment decision making, staging, oncologic, and functional outcomes are improving, and the management is moving toward personalized treatment strategies to optimize each individual patient's outcomes. Key in this evolution is imaging. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as the dominant method of pelvic imaging in rectal cancer, and use of MRI for staging is best practice in multiple international guidelines. MRI allows a noninvasive assessment of the tumor site, relationship to surrounding structures, and provides highly accurate rectal cancer staging, which is necessary for determining the appropriate treatment strategy. However, the applications of MRI extend far beyond pretreatment staging. MRI can be used to predict outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer and guide the surgical or nonsurgical plan, serving as a predictive and prognostic biomarker. With continued MRI hardware improvement and new sequence development, MRI may offer new perspectives in the assessment of treatment response and new innovations that could provide better insight into the staging, restaging, and outcomes with rectal cancer.

An up-to-date predictive model for rectal cancer survivorship reflecting tumor biology and clinical factors

INTRODUCTION

Our aim was to develop a nomogram taking into account factors such as tumor biology to predict overall and disease-free survival for patients with primary rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing curative intent surgical resection.

METHODS

Patients undergoing resection for primary rectal adenocarcinoma (2007-2017) were included. Factors reflecting tumor biology and important clinical prognosticators were included in nomogram development. Prognostic factors were assessed with multivariable analysis using Cox regression. The impact of each was assessed using Kaplan Meier survival curves.

RESULTS

Overall, 1688 patients (male, 61%) with a mean age of 59.8 years (±13.5) and a median follow-up of 34.8 months (range, 12-132) were included. The only significant factors affecting the overall and disease-free survival were age at diagnosis, pathological staging, regression grade, resection margin, and tumor deposits.

CONCLUSION

The current model incorporates histopathological and clinical factors. It emphasizes the importance of tumor biological factors like tumor deposits in predicting overall and disease-free survival in rectal cancer.

SUMMARY

Rectal cancer outcomes are associated with certain clinical and pathological factors that can be evaluated. Tumor deposits are one such factor that can affect overall and disease-free survival.

Can CRM Status on MRI Predict Survival in Rectal Cancers: Experience from the Indian Subcontinent

To determine the role of MRI as a predictor of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement. To study the impact of CRM status on MRI on recurrence and survival, in correlation with pathology. Analysis of a prospective database was performed over a period of 1 year. All patients with adenocarcinoma of rectum were included in the study. The MRI at presentation for all patients irrespective of stage (MRIT), pre-NACTRT MRI (MRI₁) for patients with locally advanced tumours, and post-NACTRT MRI (MRI₂) of these patients were analysed separately. The status of CRM on MRI was compared to that on histopathology and as a predictor of recurrence and survival. Two hundred twenty-one patients were included with a median follow-up 30 months. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy were 50%, 65.46%, 5.63%, 96.95% and 64.85% for MRIT; 50%, 55.32%, 5.97%, 95.12% and 55.03% for MRI1; and 77.78%, 63.29%, 10.77%, 98.04% and 64.07% for MRI2, respectively. On multivariate analysis, pathological positive margin alone predicted a poor overall survival (OS) whereas involved CRM on pathology and MRIT predicted poorer disease-free survival (DFS) and local recurrence. Pre-treatment and post-treatment MRI scans have a moderate sensitivity, specificity and accuracy and a high negative predictive value to predict CRM status on pathology. Pathological CRM status is the only factor to impact OS, DFS and LR on multivariate analysis. CRM status on MRI at presentation (MRI_T) does impact DFS and local recurrence but not OS.

Prognostic significance of a preoperative magnetic resonance imaging assessment of the distance of mesorectal extension in clinical T3 lower rectal cancer

PURPOSES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the mesorectal extensions on high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the prognosis of patients with clinical T3 lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients with clinical T3 lower rectal cancer were investigated using high-resolution MRI. One radiologist who was blinded to the clinicopathological findings retrospectively examined the MRI-predicted circumferential resection margin (mrCRM) and the distance of mesorectal extension (mrDME) on the scans. If the imaging showed a tumor ≤1 mm from the mesorectal fascia, then the mrCRM involvement was defined as potentially present. The tumors were divided into two groups: mrDME ≤4 mm and mrDME >4 mm.

RESULTS

A survival analysis showed that mrCRM-positive patients had a significantly poorer prognosis in the RFS (p < 0.01) and LRFS (p < 0.01). Patients with mrDME >4 mm revealed a significantly poorer prognosis than those with mrDME ≤4 mm in the OS (p = 0.04), RFS (p < 0.01), and LRFS (p = 0.04). A multivariate analysis revealed that both mrCRM and mrDME on MRI had a significant impact on the RFS (p = 0.01 and 0.03, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The mrDME, as well as the mrCRM, may be an important preoperative prognostic factor for patients with clinical T3 lower rectal cancer.

Characteristics and Prognostic Significance of Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Assessed Circumferential Margin in Rectal Cancer

Purpose. To study the characteristics and prognostic significance of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging- (MRI-) assessed circumferential margin (CRM) in rectal cancer. Methods. Patients underwent preoperative high resolution pelvic MRI, followed by resection of primary tumor. The relationship between MRI-assessed CRM and pathological CRM (pCRM) was studied, and survival analysis was used to determine the prognostic significance of MRI-assessed CRM. Results. Of all the 203 patients, the total accuracy of MRI-assessed CRM for predicting involvement of pCRM was 84.2%, sensitivity was 50%, and specificity was 86.8%. Anterior tumors were more possible to assess involvement of CRM by MRI, while the false positive rate was significantly higher than lateral or posterior tumor (87.5% versus 50%, p = 0.0002). The 3-year local recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 35.6%, 58.1%, and 85.2% in patients with involved mrCRM, compared with 8.9%, 78.9%, and 92.3% in patients with clear mrCRM. In multivariate analysis, MRI-assessed CRM found an independent risk factor for local recurrence, with a hazard ratio of 3.49 (p = 0.003). Conclusions. High resolution MRI was accurate to assess CRM preoperatively, while anterior tumor should be assessed more cautiously. Involvement of mrCRM was significantly associated with local recurrence regardless of pCRM status.

Effectiveness of MRI for the assessment of mesorectal fascia involvement in patients with rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Defining the most appropriate definition of mesorectal fascia involvement (MRF+) by reviewing literature and using new inclusion criteria to re-evaluate the effectiveness of MRI in the assessment of MRF+ for rectal cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched from 1999 to 2012. The bivariate random effects model was used to estimate the pooled outcomes of each subgroup. The definition of MRF+ in MRI and the influence of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neo-ChRT) were especially discussed.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies involving 1,600 patients were included. Different definitions of MRF+ (≤ 1, ≤ 2 and ≤ 5 mm) in MRI exhibited different pooled sensitivity (76, 79 and 92%), specificity (88, 66 and 48%) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) (22.4, 6.6 and 16.0). The definition of MRF+ at ≤ 1 mm showed the highest DOR. The specificity (88 vs. 93%, p = 0.026) and DOR (15.5 vs. 39.0, p = 0.001) were lower in patients who underwent neo-ChRT than those who did not while using ≤ 1 mm as the definition of MRF+. However, the sensitivity showed no significant difference (67 vs. 74%, p = 0.129).

CONCLUSIONS

MRI is valuable for the assessment of MRF. The most appropriate definition of MRF+ in MRI is ≤ 1 mm. The effectiveness is higher in patients who did not undergo neo-ChRT.

Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging assessment of circumferential resection margin predicts disease-free survival and local recurrence: 5-year follow-up results of the MERCURY study

PURPOSE

The prognostic relevance of preoperative high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement is unknown. This follow-up study of 374 patients with rectal cancer reports the relationship between preoperative MRI assessment of CRM staging, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM stage, and clinical variables with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and time to local recurrence (LR).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients underwent protocol high-resolution pelvic MRI. Tumor distance to the mesorectal fascia of ≤ 1 mm was recorded as an MRI-involved CRM. A Cox proportional hazards model was used in multivariate analysis to determine the relationship of MRI assessment of CRM to survivorship after adjusting for preoperative covariates.

RESULTS

Surviving patients were followed for a median of 62 months. The 5-year OS was 62.2% in patients with MRI-clear CRM compared with 42.2% in patients with MRI-involved CRM with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.97 (95% CI, 1.27 to 3.04; P < .01). The 5-year DFS was 67.2% (95% CI, 61.4% to 73%) for MRI-clear CRM compared with 47.3% (95% CI, 33.7% to 60.9%) for MRI-involved CRM with an HR of 1.65 (95% CI, 1.01 to 2.69; P < .05). Local recurrence HR for MRI-involved CRM was 3.50 (95% CI, 1.53 to 8.00; P < .05). MRI-involved CRM was the only preoperative staging parameter that remained significant for OS, DFS, and LR on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

High-resolution MRI preoperative assessment of CRM status is superior to AJCC TNM-based criteria for assessing risk of LR, DFS, and OS. Furthermore, MRI CRM involvement is significantly associated with distant metastatic disease; therefore, colorectal cancer teams could intensify treatment and follow-up accordingly to improve survival outcomes.

Rectal Cancer: MR imaging of the mesorectal fascia and effect of chemoradiation on assessment of tumor involvement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of chemoradiation on the reliability of MRI in assessing tumor involvement of the mesorectal fascia in patients with rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Presurgical MRI was performed in 150 patients; among them 85 had received neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation. A standardized imaging protocol (1.5 Tesla [T] system, image voxel size 0.6 × 0.4 × 3 mm(3) ), standardized surgery, and histopathological examination were applied for the entire patient population. Images were analyzed to identify potential tumor involvement of the mesorectal fascia (minimum tumor distance to fascia ≤1 mm) and compared with histopathology as the reference standard. Results of nonirradiated and irradiated patients were compared to define the impact of chemoradiation on imaging reliability.

RESULTS

In nonirradiated patients, MRI was reliable in predicting or excluding tumor involvement of the mesorectal fascia, positive predictive value 80%, negative predictive value 89%. The frequency of overestimating tumor involvement was significantly higher in irradiated patients (P = 0.005, positive predictive value 42%).

CONCLUSION

Discussions about MRI assessment of tumor involvement of the mesorectal fascia as a basis for recommending neoadjuvant chemoradiation should focus on investigations that excluded irradiated patients, because MRI is less reliable after chemoradiation and tends to overestimate mesorectal tumor involvement.

Magnetic resonance imaging cannot predict histological tumour involvement of a circumferential surgical margin in rectal cancer

AIM

Several recent studies have attempted to evaluate the accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting the likelihood of tumour involvement of the postoperative circumferential resection margin (CRM) in rectal cancer with the intention of selecting patients who might benefit from neoadjuvant therapy and as a guide to surgery. The aim of this study was to assess whether such studies can provide a valid answer as to whether preoperative MRI can accurately predict CRM involvement by tumour.

METHOD

The study design and methodology of studies on this topic were critically examined.

RESULTS

Features identified as affecting the efficacy of these studies were: representativeness of patients, definition of the margin assessed by MRI and by histology, lack of blinding of surgeons and pathologists to MRI results, effect of neoadjuvant treatment, and number of patients studied.

CONCLUSION

Because of methodological inadequacies in studies completed to date, there is insufficient evidence of the ability of a positive MRI result to predict an involved CRM. Although MRI may be able to identify a tumour that has extended to the mesorectal fascia and/or intersphincteric plane, logically, it cannot indicate where the surgical boundary of the resection will ultimately lie, and therefore cannot validly predict an involved CRM and should not be relied upon for this purpose.

One millimetre is the safe cut-off for magnetic resonance imaging prediction of surgical margin status in rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

A pathologically involved margin in rectal cancer is defined as tumour within 1 mm of the surgical resection margin. There is no standard definition of a predicted safe margin on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The aim of this study was to assess which cut-off (1, 2 or 5 mm) was the best predictor of local recurrence based on preoperative MRI assessment of the circumferential resection margin (CRM).

METHODS

Data were collected prospectively on the distance between the tumour and mesorectal fascia for patients with documented radiological margin status in the MERCURY study. Positive margin and local recurrence rates were compared for MRI distances from the tumour to the mesorectal fascia of 1 mm or less, more than 1 mm up to 2 mm, more than 2 mm up to 5 mm, and more than 5 mm. The Cox proportional hazard regression method was used to determine the effect of level of margin involvement on time to local recurrence.

RESULTS

Univariable analysis showed that, relative to a distance measured by MRI of more than 5 mm, the hazard ratio (HR) for local recurrence was 3·90 (95 per cent confidence interval 1·99 to 7·63; P < 0·001) for a margin of 1 mm or less, 0·81 (0·36 to 1·85; P = 0·620) for a margin of more than 1 mm up to 2 mm, and 0·33 (0·10 to 1·08; P = 0·067) for a margin greater than 2 mm up to 5 mm. Multivariable analysis of the effect of MRI distance to the mesorectal fascia and preoperative treatment on local recurrence showed that a margin of 1 mm or less remained significant regardless of preoperative treatment (HR 3·72, 1·43 to 9·71; P = 0·007).

CONCLUSION

For preoperative staging of rectal cancer, the best cut-off distance for predicting CRM involvement using MRI is 1 mm. Using a cut-off greater than this does not appear to identify patients at higher risk of local recurrence.

3-T MRI with phased-array surface coil in the local staging of rectal cancer

PURPOSE

This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of surface-coil 3T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the preoperative study of patients with rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients with histologically proven rectal cancer underwent surface-coil 3T MR imaging with sagittal, paracoronal and para-axial T2-weighted turbo spin echo (TSE) sequences. Slice thickness was 3 mm without gap, field of view 24 cm, matrix 400 × 512. Images were assessed for infiltration of the rectal wall, perirectal fat and pelvic structures. Tumours were staged according to the TNM system, and the MR imaging results were correlated with histopathology.

RESULTS

In the patients who underwent MR imaging before and after radiotherapy (group 1), the diagnostic accuracy of 3T MR imaging was 88% for T2, 94% for T3 and 88% for T4 cancers. In those who underwent surgical treatment without preoperative radiotherapy (group 2), the diagnostic accuracy was 90% for T2, 87% for T3 and 87% for T4 cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

The high signal-to-noise ratio coupled with a large field of view enables surface-coil 3T MR imaging to achieve high levels of diagnostic accuracy in the local staging of rectal cancer, and in particular in assessing infiltration of mesorectum and mesorectal fascia.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in rectal cancer: a comprehensive review

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has established itself as the primary method for local staging in patients with rectal cancer. This is due to several factors, most importantly because of the ability to assess the status of circumferential resection margin. There are several newer developments being introduced continuously, such as diffusion-weighted imaging and imaging with 3 T. Assessment of loco-regional lymph nodes has also been investigated extensively using different approaches, but more work needs to be done. Finally, evaluation of tumours during or after preoperative treatment is becoming an everyday reality. All these new aspects prompt a review of the most recent advances and opinions. In this review, a comprehensive overview of the current status of MRI in the loco-regional assessment and management of rectal cancer is presented. The findings on MRI and their accuracy are reviewed based on the most up-to-date evidence. Optimisation of MRI acquisition and relevant regional anatomy are also presented, based on published literature and our own experience.

Total mesorectal excision: what are we doing?

The introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer has reduced local recurrence rates and improved oncologic outcomes, although complication rates such as anastomotic leak have also been a consequence. With the advent of neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer, many are questioning how this development may change the role of TME. This review presents a history of how TME evolved and a description of this technique. Complication rates, the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on local recurrence, variations of TME such as nerve-sparing proctectomy and cancer-specific mesorectal excision, and a review of functional outcomes for various methods of reconstruction are presented.

Multidisciplinary teams in the management of rectal cancer

A myriad of advances in the treatment of rectal cancer have been achieved over the last few decades. The introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) has resulted in significant improvements in local recurrence. Surgical education on the technique has made it the standard of care. Radiation and chemotherapy combined with TME have improved results even further with stage II and III cancers. Sphincter-sparing techniques, reservoir procedures, local treatment advances, minimally invasive techniques, surgery for metastatic disease, newer chemotherapies, and extended resections for locally advanced and recurrent lesions, have all benefited the patient with rectal cancer. The goal and responsibility of colorectal surgeons treating rectal cancer patients is to understand and coordinate the wide variety of modalities available to optimize survival, minimize morbidity, and maximize quality of life for those with this difficult problem. Coordination of specialists in this time of evolution in rectal cancer treatment becomes more important than ever. Here the authors briefly review the role of the multidisciplinary team, discuss a model multidisciplinary team approach and look at evidence supporting team use as we begin this issue devoted to the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer.

Rectal cancer staging

Rectal cancer staging provides critical information concerning the extent of the disease. The information gained from staging is used to determine prognosis, to guide management, and to assess response to therapy. Accurate staging is essential for directing the multidisciplinary approach to therapy. This article focuses on the evolution of staging systems, the rational for staging, and current methods used to stage rectal cancer.

Prospective assessment of imaging after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of imaging techniques in predicting pathologic tumor (ypT), node (ypN) stages and the circumferential resection margin (ypCRM) status of rectal cancers after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

Using pelvic computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and endorectal ultrasound (ERUS), 90 consecutive patients with locally advanced mid-to-low rectal cancer were prospectively assessed. Postirradiation T and N stages and infiltration of the CRM, as assessed by CT, MRI and ERUS, were compared with histopathologic findings.

RESULTS

The accuracy of ypT staging was low, whatever the imaging technique used (37% by CT, 34% by MRI, and 27% by ERUS), the most frequent inaccuracy being overstaging. Imaging showed a good specificity and good negative predictive values (NPV) when mural staging was grouped into ypT ≤ 3 and ypT4 categories; in particular, ERUS achieved a 92% specificity and 95% NPV. CRM involvement was correctly predicted in 71% of patients by CT (74% specificity; 93% NPV) and in 85% by MRI (88% specificity; 95% NPV). The accuracy for nodal staging was 62%, 68%, and 65% by CT, MRI and ERUS, respectively; the corresponding NPV were 88%, 78%, and 76%.

CONCLUSION

Current imaging techniques are inaccurate in restaging rectal cancer after CRT but are useful in predicting T ≤ 3 tumors, cases with negative nodes and tumor-free CRM. These findings may be of clinical relevance for planning less invasive surgery.

Morphology of the mesorectum in patients with primary rectal cancer

PURPOSE

The size and contents of the pelvis differ between the genders, and this may affect mesorectal size and shape. The aim of this prospective pilot study was to examine radiologically the applied anatomy of the mesorectum.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients (35 male, 23 female) with primary rectal cancer who had suitable high-resolution staging pelvic magnetic resonance images between November 2002 and July 2004 were studied. Ten variables of mesorectal morphology were measured on axial images at the ischial spines. The associations between morphologic variables and gender and body mass index were examined.

RESULTS

Compared with female patients, male patients had a larger area of overall mesorectal package (3,776 mm2 vs. 2,772 mm2, P = 0.001), larger area of mesorectal fat (2,562 mm2 vs. 1,842 mm2, P = 0.001), and higher ratio of anteroposterior to transverse diameter of the mesorectal package (0.82 vs. 0.56, P < 0.001). The anterior mesorectal fat buffer was significantly thinner in females than in males (2.9 mm vs. 7.8 mm, P < 0.001). Mesorectal fat area was greater in males with a body mass index >25 than with a body mass index <25.

CONCLUSIONS

Males have a larger overall mesorectal package compared with females, mainly caused by mesorectal fat. The anterior mesorectal fat is significantly thinner in females than in males. Such morphologic differences may affect resection margin status.

Preoperative staging of rectal cancer: pelvic MRI plus abdomen and pelvic CT. Does extrahepatic abdomen imaging matter? A case for routine thoracic CT

OBJECTIVE

To assess the quality of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) staging of rectal cancer, and the clinical significance of abdomen and pelvic computed tomogram (CT) scans in preoperative staging of rectal cancer in a district general hospital. We postulated that the 'metastatic yield' of extrahepatic abdominal imaging is poor, and rarely altered management of rectal cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of preoperative MRI, CT scans and postoperative histology results of patients who had definitive surgery for rectal cancer at the Mid-Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust over a 36-month period. Preoperative multiplanar pelvic MRI locoregional staging was compared with eventual histology. The incidence of and significance of abdomen and pelvic CT detected pathology (including metastasis) in the management of rectal cancers was also assessed.

RESULTS

Preoperative pelvic MRI correctly predicted 'clear' Circumferential resection margins, in 28 of 29 patients who had primary surgery. This is comparable with many published studies. Significant CT detected pathology (including metastasis) on preoperative abdomen and pelvic CT scans was uncommon, and did not influence management of any rectal cancer patient in our study.

DISCUSSION

Given that exclusive CT detected significant pathology caudal to the liver (extrahepatic abdomen) is rare, can full abdomen and pelvic CT scans be justified for preoperative staging of rectal cancers? - especially where chest X rays are employed for lung staging. Preoperative thoracic and upper abdomen CT scan may be a more productive use of resources. Full abdominal scans may be more appropriate for selection of rectal cancer patients with isolated liver metastasis for metastasectomy.

Local staging of rectal cancer using the black lumen magnetic resonance imaging technique

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The treatment of rectal cancer is comprised of surgery and possible adjuvant therapy depending on the stage of the tumour. This prospective study evaluates the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer using an endorectal and intravenous contrast.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

37 consecutive patients with rectal cancer were imaged using a mixture of ferumoxsil and methylcellulose endorectally, and a gadolinium contrast intravenously. 33 tumours were resected and 4 tumours were considered unresectable during operation. The images were reviewed for local staging of the tumours. A tumour confined to the rectal wall was classified as a negative finding and a tumour invading through muscularis propria as a positive finding. The results were correlated with the histopathologic t stage (n = 33), or the clinical status (n = 4).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

of 37 cases, 20 (51 %) were true positive, and 11 (28%) were true negative. There were 3 false negative and 3 false positive cases. The sensitivity was 87%, specificity 79%, and diagnostic accuracy 84%. for the non-contrast images the figures were 78%, 79% and 78%, respectively. We consider black lumen magnetic resonance imaging to be a useful method for preoperative local staging of rectal cancer.

The diagnosis and management of rectal cancer: expert discussion and recommendations derived from the 9th World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2007

Knowledge of the biology and management of rectal cancer continues to improve. A multidisciplinary approach to a patient with rectal cancer by an experienced expert team is mandatory, to assure optimal diagnosis and staging, surgery, selection of the appropriate neo-adjuvant and adjuvant strategy and chemotherapeutic management. Moreover, optimal symptom management also requires a dedicated team of health care professionals. The introduction of total mesorectal excision has been associated with a decrease in the rate of local failure after surgery. High quality surgery and the achievement of pathological measures of quality are a prerequisite to adequate locoregional control. There are now randomized data in favour of chemoradiotherapy or short course radiotherapy in the preoperative setting. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is more beneficial and has less toxicity for patients with resectable rectal cancer than postoperative chemoradiotherapy. Furthermore chemoradiotherapy leads also to downsizing of locally advanced rectal cancer. New strategies that decrease the likelihood of distant metastases after initial treatment need be developed with high priority. Those involved in the care for patients with rectal cancer should be encouraged to participate in well-designed clinical trials, to increase the evidence-based knowledge and to make further progress. Health care workers involved in the care of rectal cancer patients should be encouraged to adopt quality control processes leading to increased expertise.

Imaging and management of rectal cancer

Local staging and management of rectal cancer has evolved during the past decade. Imaging modalities used for staging rectal cancer include CT, endoscopic ultrasound, pelvic phased-array coil MRI, endorectal MRI, and PET. Each modality has its strengths and limitations. Evidence supports the use of both endoscopic ultrasound and CT in staging rectal cancer. MRI is the only reliable tool for determining the status of the circumferential resection margin, which is important for the assessment of the risk of local recurrence.

The multidisciplinary management of gastrointestinal cancer. Multimodal treatment of rectal cancer

Greater understanding of the natural history of rectal cancer, and the knowledge that a histologically involved circumferential margin due to inadequate lateral dissection confers a high risk of local recurrence have driven technical advances in surgical technique with meticulous surgical dissection along embryological planes. Significant improvements in local control and overall survival have been seen for patients with resectable rectal cancer. However, even high-quality surgery cannot always achieve a curative resection for locally advanced cancers that extend below the levators, having transgressed the mesorectal fascia. Magnetic resonance imaging is now accepted as a practical method of clinical staging, and can accurately predict pre-operatively the likelihood of achieving a clear circumferential margin. Technological advances in radiation planning and new effective cytotoxic drugs also give scope for dealing with unresectable rectal cancer, and the potential for controlling distant micrometastases. Hence, modern multimodal treatment of rectal cancer attempts to integrate surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, and address the two distinct problems of local recurrence and metastatic disease. Multidisciplinary teams achieve the best results. This paper discusses the surgical management of rectal cancer, the pathology, the principles of imaging, and the lessons learnt from randomized trials of radiotherapy and chemoradiation.

Effect of using endorectal coil in preoperative staging of rectal carcinomas by pelvic MR imaging

PURPOSE

To assess the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging with pelvic phased-array and endorectal coils prospectively, and evaluate if endorectal coil provides any additional information to high resolution pelvic MR imaging in rectal carcinoma staging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Preoperative MRI of 25 patients with rectal carcinoma was performed with pelvic phased-array coil alone, and with both phased-array coil and endorectal coil placed. Staging was made by evaluating images obtained by using both coils prospectively, and correlated with histopathologic staging. The images were then assessed separately, and compared to each other retrospectively.

RESULTS

Two and 3 of the 5 histopathologically proved T1 tumors were staged correctly on MRI with pelvic phased-array coil alone and after the endorectal coil placement, respectively. Histopathologically identified five T2 tumors were staged correctly as T2 in 4 of the cases, 1 was understaged and 10 of 14 patients who had T3 tumor were staged as T3, 4 of them were understaged as T2 on both techniques. Specificity, sensitivity and accuracy rates for staging of T3 tumors were found as 71%, 100% and 84%, respectively, for each technique. Sensitivity and positive predictive value of N staging were both 88% on both techniques.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic MR imaging after the placement of endorectal coil in addition to the phase-array coil was not superior to the imaging with phased-array coil alone in T staging of rectal carcinomas and the latter achieved better visualization of the lymph nodes by means of larger field of view.

Rectal Cancer: MR Imaging before Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy for Prediction of Tumor-Free Circumferential Resection Margins and Long-term Survival1

PURPOSE

To retrospectively evaluate the prognostic importance of involvement of the circumferential resection margin predicted by using magnetic resonance (MR) imaging before neoadjuvant treatment in patients with rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The local institutional review board approved the retrospective analysis of the data and waived informed consent. Sixty-eight patients (52 men, 16 women; mean age +/- standard deviation, 58.9 years +/- 9.4) with cT3 NX M0 tumors were included. T2-weighted MR images were analyzed in consensus by two radiologists with respect to the shortest distance between the outermost parts of the tumor to the adjacent mesorectal fascia (as the potential circumferential resection margin in total mesorectal excision). Histopathologic and follow-up data were available for all patients (mean follow-up time, 54 months; range, 31-77 months). To compare local recurrence and survival rates, the population was divided into three groups categorized according to the minimum distance of the tumor to the mesorectal fascia (group 1, <or=1 mm; group 2, >1 to 5 mm; group 3, >5 mm). Univariate Cox and multivariate proportional hazard regression models were used to test the prognostic importance of clinical, histopathologic regression, and histopathologic tumor parameters.

RESULTS

MR imaging led to accurate prediction of a histologically involved circumferential resection margin (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 88%). The rates for local recurrence (group 1, 33%; group 2, 5%; group 3, 6%; P<.02) and 5-year overall survival (group 1, 39%; group 2, 70%; group 3, 90%; P<.001) differed significantly among the predefined groups. The distance to the mesorectal fascia was an independent prognostic parameter in multivariate analysis (P<.001), and histopathologic response to treatment provided no additional information.

CONCLUSION

Prediction of the tumor-free circumferential resection margin assessed with MR imaging before initiation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy proved to be a prognostic factor in rectal cancer.

Diagnostic precision of magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative prediction of the circumferential margin involvement in patients with rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Circumferential margin involvement (CMI) is an important prognostic indicator for patients with rectal cancer. This meta-analysis aims at evaluating the diagnostic precision of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the preoperative evaluation of CMI in patients with rectal cancer.

METHOD

Quantitative meta-analysis was performed comparing MRI against histology after total mesorectal excision. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated for each study. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves and subgroup analysis were undertaken. Study quality and heterogeneity were evaluated. Meta-regression meta-analysis was used to evaluate the significance of the difference in relative DORs.

RESULTS

Nine studies evaluating 529 patients were included. Pooled results showed an overall sensitivity and specificity for MRI detecting CMI preoperatively of 94% and 85% respectively. The SROC analysis demonstrated an overall weighted area under the curve (AUC) of 0.92 (DOR 57.21, 95% CI 18.21-179.77), without significant heterogeneity between the studies (Q-value 14.66, P = 0.06). Good study quality further increased the sensitivity and specificity of MRI. The use of a 1.5 Tesla coil, a phased array coil and the inclusion of two interpreters also resulted in high preoperative diagnostic precision. Meta-regression meta-analysis showed a significant difference in the DOR for studies published in or since 2003 (P = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

Magnetic resonance imaging can accurately predict CMI preoperatively for rectal cancer in single units and this is reproducible across different centres. This strategy has important implications for selection of patients for adjuvant therapy prior to surgery.

MRI after preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer; correlation with histopathology and the role of volumetry

The objective is to assess if tumor size after radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer can be assessed by a second magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), after radiotherapy prior to surgery and to correlate changes observed on MRI with findings at histopathology at surgery. Twenty-five patients with MRI before and after radiotherapy were included. Variables studied were changes in tumor size, T-staging and distance to the circumferential resection margin (CRM). RVs was measured as tumor volume at surgery (Vs) divided by tumor volume at the initial MRI (Vi) in percent. RVm was defined as the tumor volume at the second MRI (Vm) divided by Vi in percent. The ypT-stage was the same or more favorable than the initial MRI T-stage in 24 of 25 patients. The second MRI was not more accurately predictive than the initial MRI for ypT-staging or distance to CRM (p > 0.05). Vm correlated significantly to Vs, as did RVs to RVm, although the former was always smaller than the latter. Vm and RVm correlated well with ypT-stage (p < 0.001). Volumetry seems to correlate with ypT-stage after preoperative radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer. The value of a second MRI after radiotherapy for assessment of distance to CRM and ypT-staging is, however, not apparent.

Significance of mesorectal volume in staging of rectal cancer with magnetic resonance imaging and the assessment of involvement of the mesorectal fascia

The aim was to study the influence of mesorectal volume, as estimated by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), that is to be removed during total mesorectal excision (TME), on the accuracy of the first preoperative MRI of rectal cancer compared to histopathology, and its correlation to locoregional prognostic factors. A total of 267 rectal cancer patients from a multinational study (MERCURY or MRI equivalence study) had their mesorectal volume retrospectively estimated by researchers without knowledge of the assessments made by the radiologist or the pathologist. The evaluations made by the pathologist and the radiologist were then compared, including T- and N-staging, assessment of extent of extramural tumor invasion (the largest portion of the tumor beyond the muscularis propria or EMI) and distance to mesorectal fascia; the discrepancies in the results were correlated to the mesorectal volume. T- or N-staging accuracy by MRI and the difference between the EMI as measured by the pathologist and the radiologist were not dependent on individual mesorectal volume. There was no correlation between assessment of involvement of mesorectal fascia or local neighboring organs by MRI and histopathology with mesorectal volume. Mesorectal volume does not affect locoregional prognostic factors or the accuracy of local staging of rectal cancer.

Prognostic significance of circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to evaluate the prognostic value of circumferential resection margin (CRM) in rectal cancer patients who underwent curative resection with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

We studied 504 patients who underwent total mesorectal excision with adjuvant CRT for rectal cancer between 1997 and 2001. The patients were divided into two groups: a negative CRM group (CRM > 1 mm) and a positive CRM group (CRM <or= 1 mm). The survival rates, local recurrence rates, and systemic recurrence rates were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The negative CRM group had 460 patients and the positive CRM group had 44 patients. The 5-year local and systemic recurrence rates were 11.3 and 25.3%, respectively, in the negative CRM group and 35.2 and 60.8% in the positive CRM group, respectively. The cancer-specific 5-year survival rates for the two groups were 72.5 and 26.9% (P < .001), respectively. CRM was found to be an independent prognostic factor by multivariate analyses which were adjusted for known outcome predictors (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Oncological outcome for patients in the positive CRM group is less favorable than for those in the negative CRM group. Adjuvant CRT is not a definite treatment modality that can be used to compensate for a positive CRM following TME and adjuvant CRT in patients with TNM stage II or III rectal cancer.

The clinical significance of the circumferential resection margin following preoperative pelvic chemo-radiotherapy in rectal cancer: why we need a common language

OBJECTIVE

The presence of microscopic tumour cells within 1 mm of the circumferential surgical resection margin (CRM) is the endpoint most strongly associated with local recurrence in rectal cancer and doubles the risk of developing distant metastases. Reporting on the CRM can monitor surgical quality assurance and over the past two decades has driven advances in surgical technique with the increasing use of total mesorectal excision. The aim of this review was to use the evidence from both phase II and phase III randomized trials of preoperative radiotherapy and chemoradiation in rectal cancer, to assess how often CRM involvement is currently documented and examine its utility as an early predictor of both disease-free and overall survival.

METHOD

A literature search identified both randomized and nonrandomized trials of preoperative radiation therapy and chemoradiation therapy in rectal cancer since 1993. The aim was to find those studies, which documented the distance from the periphery of the tumour and the CRM. Small trials treating < 20 patients were excluded.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-seven phase II and 28 phase III trials of preoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiation were identified. Most trials documented the degree of response but only 10 of 187 phase II/retrospective studies and four of 28 phase III trials presented data on the achievement of a negative CRM. Few defined this early pathological endpoint prospectively with accurate measurements. However, the majority of studies did use the definition of <or= 1 mm as an involved CRM. Discussion Pathological parameters have been used as early endpoints to compare studies of preoperative radiotherapy or chemoradiation. It remains uncertain whether the degree of response to chemoradiation (e.g. complete pathological response, downsizing the primary tumour, sterilizing the regional nodes, tumour regression grades or residual cell density) or the achievement of a curative resection (uninvolved CRM) is the best early clinical endpoint. Retrospective studies in rectal cancer have confirmed a strong association between the presence of microscopic tumour cells within 1 mm of the CRM and increased risks of both local recurrence and distant metastases. However, as yet this early pathological endpoint lacks structured measurement and analysis techniques to control for intra- and inter-observer variation and has not been validated as a potential surrogate for local control and survival. Recommendations are made as to the most appropriate information, which should be documented in future trials.

CONCLUSION

The CRM status predicts outcome after surgery alone, preoperative radiotherapy and preoperative chemoradiation. Yet CRM status and its measurement has been poorly documented in the literature, and rarely as a prospective measure of outcome. The CRM should be measured and documented in all cases, using the definition of <or= 1 mm to denote an involved CRM. This definition should also be incorporated into future rectal cancer studies with the use of a standardized proforma.

Curative resection for low rectal adenocarcinoma: abdomino-perineal vs anterior resection

OBJECTIVE

Local recurrence after abdomino-perineal excision of the rectum for tumours has been reported to occur in up to a third of patients in contrast to 4% after restorative anterior resection.

METHOD

Low rectal tumours were defined as tumours within 8 cm of the anal verge and were treated by either stapled low anterior resection (SLAR) or abdomino-perineal excision of the rectum (APER). One hundred and seventy-eight patients with tumours in the lower third of the rectum (30% of 591 rectal cancers) underwent surgical resection between 1980 and 2001. Data were collected prospectively; 68 (38%) had SLAR and 110 (62%) had APER with median follow up of approximately 12 years; 54 SLAR (79%) and 76 APER (69%) had curative procedures on clinical and pathological criteria.

RESULTS

Local and distant recurrence occurred in seven (13%) and eight (15%) patients in the SLAR group and six (8%) and 14 (18%) patients in the APER group, respectively. Overall 5-year survival was 63% and 60% in the SLAR and APER groups, respectively

CONCLUSION

For rectal cancers within 8 cm of the anal verge, both procedures achieved equivalent results measured by low local recurrence rates and overall survival.

Local staging of rectal cancer: the current role of MRI

With the advent of powerful gradient coil systems and high-resolution surface coils, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has recently extended its role in the staging of rectal cancer. MRI is superior to endorectal ultrasound, the most widely used staging modality in patients with rectal tumors, in that it visualizes not only the intestinal wall but also the surrounding pelvic anatomy. The crucial advantage of MRI is not that it enables exact T-staging but precise evaluation of the topographic relationship of a tumor to the mesorectal fascia. This fascia is the most important anatomic landmark for the feasibility of total mesorectal excision, which has evolved into the standard operative procedure for the resection of cancer located in the middle or lower third of the rectum. MRI is currently the only imaging modality that is highly accurate in predicting whether or not it is likely that a tumor-free margin can be achieved and thus provides important information for planning of an effective therapeutic strategy, especially in patients with advanced rectal cancer.

Imaging for Predicting the Risk Factors—the Circumferential Resection Margin and Nodal Disease—of Local Recurrence in Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

The aim of the present study was to conduct a meta-analysis of English literature on the accuracy of preoperative imaging in predicting the two most important risk factors for local recurrence in rectal cancer, the circumferential resection margin (CRM) and the nodal status (N-status). Articles published between 1985 and August 2004 that report on the diagnostic accuracy of endoluminal ultrasound (EUS), computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of lymph node involvement were included. A similar search was done for the assessment of the circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer in the period from January 1985 till January 2005. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) more than 20 patients with histologically proven rectal cancer were included, (2) histology was used as the gold standard, and (3) results were given in a 2 x 2 contingency table or this table could otherwise be extracted from the article by two independent readers. Based on the results summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed. Only 7 articles matching inclusion criteria were found concerning the CRM. The meta-analysis shows that MRI is rather accurate in diagnosing a close or involved CRM. For nodal status 84 articles could be included. The diagnostic odds ratio of EUS is estimated at 8.83. For MRI and CT, the diagnostic odds ratio are 6.53 and 5.86, respectively. The results show that EUS is slightly, but not significantly, better than MRI or CT for identification of nodal disease. There is no significant difference between the different modalities with respect to staging nodal status. At present, MRI is the only modality that predicts the circumferential resection margin with good accuracy, making it a good tool to identify high and low risk patients. Predicting the N-status remains a problem for the radiologist for every modality, although considering the new developments in MR imaging, this may change in the near future.

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer depends on location of the tumor

PURPOSE

This study was designed to evaluate prospectively magnetic resonance imaging for the prediction of the circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer to identify in which patient magnetic resonance imaging could accurately assess the circumferential resection margin before surgery and in which patients it could not.

METHODS

During a 17-month period, a preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of circumferential resection margin was obtained prospectively in 38 patients with mid or low rectal cancer. The agreement of magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic examination for assessment of circumferential resection margin was analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, magnetic resonance imaging agreed with histologic examination of the circumferential resection margin assessment in 28 patients (73 percent; kappa = 0.47). In all cases of disagreement between magnetic resonance imaging and pathology, magnetic resonance imaging overestimated the circumferential resection margin involvement. For the 11 patients with mid rectal cancer, circumferential resection margin was well predicted by magnetic resonance imaging in all cases (kappa = 1). For 27 patients with low rectal tumor, overall agreement between magnetic resonance imaging and histologic assessment was 63 percent (kappa = 0.35). Agreement was 22 percent (kappa = 0.03) for the 9 patients with low anterior and 83 percent (kappa = 0.67) for the 18 patients with low posterior rectal tumor. Univariate analysis revealed that only low and anterior rectal tumor was risk factor of overestimation of the circumferential resection margin by magnetic resonance imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Although magnetic resonance imaging remains the best imaging tool for the preoperative assessment of the circumferential resection margin in patients with rectal cancer, it can overestimate the circumferential resection margin involvement in low and anterior tumor with the risk of overtreating the patients.

Pre-operative assessment of extramural invasion and sphincteral involvement in rectal cancer by magnetic resonance imaging with phased-array coil

OBJECTIVE

Pre-operative staging of rectal cancer should identify patients with extrarectal spread, who might benefit from pre-operative radiotherapy, and patients with minimal sphincteral involvement, who can avoid permanent colostomy. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) to predict tumour stage and sphincter status.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients with a rectal tumour were pre-operatively assessed by MRI with a phased-array coil. Imaging results were correlated with the final pathological findings.

RESULTS

The overall accuracy of pre-operative staging with MRI was 88% (k = 0.75) for extramural tumour invasion and 59% (k = 0.26) for lymph node metastases. MRI correctly evaluated the infiltration of the anal sphincters in 87% of patients (7 of 8 patients with low rectal tumour).

CONCLUSION

MRI provides the surgeon with valuable information regarding extramural tumour spread and sphincteral involvement, enabling appropriate selection of patients for pre-operative adjuvant therapy or sphincter-saving surgery.

How accurate is magnetic resonance imaging in restaging rectal cancer in patients receiving preoperative combined chemoradiotherapy?

PURPOSE

Preoperative combined chemoradiotherapy is currently the main neoadjuvant therapy used to treat locally advanced middle and low rectal adenocarcinoma. A restaging work-up with magnetic resonance imaging was hoped to provide information about the effects related to combined chemoradiotherapy. The goal was to evaluate the correlation between pathologically verified tumor stages and clinical stages predicted by magnetic resonance imaging after combined chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

Between August 2000 and June 2003, 50 patients with biopsy-proven middle and lower rectal adenocarcinoma, with initial stage T3-T4 or N+, M0, were recruited in this series. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging was used to stage the tumor before and after combined chemoradiotherapy. A protocol of the standard external radiation dose and oral combined uracil and 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin was used. The results of magnetic resonance imaging restaging after combined chemoradiotherapy were correlated with the pathologic staging.

RESULTS

The overall predictive accuracy in T stage was 52 percent, whereas overstaging and understaging occurred in 38 percent and 10 percent of patients, respectively. Most of the inaccurate T staging was a result of the overstaging of superficial tumors (T0-T2). In N stage, accurate staging was noted in 68 percent of all patients, whereas 24 percent were overstaged and 8 percent were understaged.

CONCLUSION

In restaging irradiated tumors, magnetic resonance imaging had the accuracy of 52 percent in T stage and 68 percent in N stage. Poor agreement between post-combined chemoradiotherapy magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic staging was observed in both T (k = 0.017) and N (k = 0.031) stages. Most of the inaccuracy in both T and N stages was caused by overstaging. The problem with magnetic resonance imaging was believed to be that it could not completely differentiate fibrosis from viable residual tumors.

Evaluation of a pre-operative staging protocol in the management of colorectal carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The optimum strategy for pre-operative staging of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) has yet to be defined. A protocol for staging CRC patients was set up in this hospital in 1998. The protocol included complete colonic visualization together with assessment of the liver and lung for potential metastatic disease. Pelvic imaging was required to assess the local spread of rectal tumours. Our aim was to evaluate prospectively this protocol.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from all patients diagnosed with primary CRC between January 1999 and December 2002 were prospectively collected and analysed.

RESULTS

There were 295 patients; 56 (19%) patients presented as an emergency and were excluded. The study group consisted of 239 patients (206 had elective surgery and 33 had no resectional surgery). In the patients who presented electively; 88% had complete colonic imaging; 87% chest imaging; 90% had liver imaging; 91% of rectal tumours had pelvic imaging. Overall 75% of the elective patients completed the staging protocol. Reasons for incomplete staging were numerous and most were justifiable. Findings which influenced clinical management included alteration in surgical approach (14), lung metastases (7), primary lung cancers (2), definite liver metastases (25), possible liver metastases (8), neo-adjuvant radiotherapy required (27), advanced local disease (9) and other incidental findings (12).

CONCLUSION

Our protocol influenced further management decisions in 39% of patients. Better stratification of patient care is possible, with the ultimate aim to avoid unnecessary surgery. However, complete staging is not always possible to perform.

Treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer

Historically, locally advanced rectal cancer is known for its dismal prognosis. The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is subject to continuous change due to development of new and better diagnostic tools, radiotherapeutic techniques, chemotherapeutic agents and understanding of the subject. It is clear, that a multimodality approach is the only way to achieve satisfactory local recurrence and survival rates in this type of cancer. However, which multimodality strategy is to be used still remains a point of controversy. This review summarises recent developments in imaging, (neo-) adjuvant therapy and surgical techniques in the treatment of primary locally advanced rectal cancer.