Use of smooth muscle plasty after intersphincteric rectal resection to replace a partially resected internal anal sphincter: long-term follow-up

Transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Anus-preserving surgery for low rectal cancer has always been a serious difficulty for surgeons. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) are commonly used Anus-preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical use of two surgical methods.

METHODS

A total of 152 patients with low rectal cancer were treated with taTME in 75 cases and ISR in 77 cases. After propensity score matching, 46 patients in each group were included in the study. Perioperative outcomes, anal function scores (Wexner incontinence score) and quality of life scores (EORTC QLQ C30, EORTC QLQ CR38) at least 1 year after surgery were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of surgical outcomes, pathological examination of surgical specimens, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications, except for patients in the taTME group who had their indwelling catheters removed later. Anal Wexner incontinence score was lower in taTME group than ISR group (P < 0.05). On the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, the physical function and role function scores in the ISR group were lower than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05), while the fatigue, pain symptoms, and constipation scores in the ISR group were higher than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05). On the EORTC QLQ-CR38 scale, the scores of gastrointestinal symptoms and defecation problems in the ISR group were higher than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with ISR surgery, taTME surgery is comparable in terms of surgical safety and short-term efficacy, and has better long-term anal function and quality of life. From the perspective of long-term anal function and quality of life, taTME surgery is a better surgical method for the treatment of low rectal cancer.

Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate anus-sparing technique for low rectal cancer and is considered an oncologically safe alternative to abdominoperineal resection. The application of the robotic approach to ISR (RISR) has been described by few specialized surgical teams with several differences regarding approach and technique. This review aims to discuss the technical aspects of RISR by evaluating point by point each surgical controversy. Moreover, a systematic review was performed to report the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of RISR. Postoperative morbidities after RISR are acceptable. RISR allows adequate surgical margins and adequate oncological outcomes. RISR may result in severe bowel and genitourinary dysfunction affecting the quality of life in a portion of patients.

Anus-Preserving Surgery in Advanced Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: A Perspective on Oncological Safety of Intersphincteric Resection

The surgical management of low-lying rectal cancer, within 5 cm from the anal verge (AV), is challenging due to the possibility, or not, to preserve the anus with its sphincter muscles maintaining oncological safety. The standardization of total mesorectal excision, the adoption of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the implementation of rectal magnetic resonance imaging, and the evolution of mechanical staplers have increased the rate of anus-preserving surgeries. Moreover, extensive anatomy and physiology studies have increased the understanding of the complexity of the deep pelvis. Intersphincteric resection (ISR) was introduced nearly three decades ago as the ultimate anus-preserving surgery. The definition and indication of ISR have changed over time. The adoption of the robotic platform provides excellent perioperative results with no differences in oncological outcomes. Pushing the boundaries of anus-preserving surgeries has risen doubts on oncological safety in order to preserve function. This review critically discusses the oncological safety of ISR by evaluating the anatomical characteristics of the deep pelvis, the clinical indications, the role of distal and circumferential resection margins, the role of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the outcomes between surgical approaches (open, laparoscopic, and robotic), the comparison with abdominoperineal resection, the risk factors for oncological outcomes and local recurrence, the patterns of local recurrences after ISR, considerations on functional outcomes after ISR, and learning curve and surgical education on ISR.

Latest Advances in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer

Background

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been a preferable alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for anal preservation in patients with low rectal cancer. Laparoscopic ISR and robotic ISR have been widely used with the proposal of 2 cm or even 1 cm rule of distal free margin and the development of minimally invasive technology. The aim of this review was to describe the newest advancements of ISR.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify studies on ISR techniques, preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT), complications, oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes and thereby to summarize relevant information and controversies involved in ISR.

Results

Although PCRT is employed to avoid positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and decrease local recurrence, it tends to engender damage of anorectal function and patients' quality of life (QoL). Common complications after ISR include anastomotic leakage (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), urinary retention, fistula, pelvic sepsis, and prolapse. CRM involvement is the most important predictor for local recurrence. Preoperative assessment and particularly rectal endosonography are essential for selecting suitable patients. Anal dysfunction is associated with age, PCRT, location and growth of anastomotic stoma, tumour stage, and resection of internal sphincter.

Conclusions

The ISR technique seems feasible for selected patients with low rectal cancer. However, the postoperative QoL as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

Laparoscopic Ultra Low Anterior Resection: Single Center, 6-Year Study

Background: This study represents a prospective analysis of a series of laparoscopic ultra low anterior resection (ULAR) done at a laparoscopic surgical center to assess the surgical outcome, oncological efficacy, and quality of life after surgery. Methods: Over a period of 6 years (2013-2018), 43 patients aged between 40 and 68 years, with very low rectal cancers (3-6 cm from the anal verge), within T3N1M0 stage, assessed by positron emission tomography-computed tomography and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by laparoscopic ULAR and simultaneous diversion ileostomy. Results: The overall complication rate was low and there was an overall leak rate of 9.3% with a radiological leak (Grade A) in 3 of the 43 patients (7%), but only 1 (2.3%) patient required a local lavage and a resuturing for secondary hemorrhage. Recurrence was seen in 2/43 (4.7%), one of whom had a conversion to abdominoperineal resection. The other had distant metastasis and refused further treatment. The functional outcome is assessed in 41 (95.3%) patients by low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score and a reasonable quality of life with major LARS was seen in only 7.3% of the patients at a follow-up ranging from 1 to 6 years. Conclusion: The nCRT followed by laparoscopic ULAR is a feasible option for operable very low rectal cancers and is associated with minimal postoperative events, a low local recurrence and less incidence of LARS.

Sphincter-Preserving Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer: Do We Overshoot the Mark?

PURPOSE

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is an alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for a selected subset of patients with low rectal cancer, combining equivalent oncological outcome and sphincter preservation. However, functional results are heterogeneous and often imperfect. The aim of the present investigation was to determine the long-term functional results and quality of life after ISR.

METHODS

One hundred forty-three consecutive patients who underwent surgery for low rectal cancer were analysed. Sixty patients received ISR and 83 patients APR, respectively. Kaplan-Meier estimate was used to analyse patients' survival. The EORTC QLQ-C30, -C29 and the Wexner score were used to determine functional outcome and quality of life.

RESULTS

ISR and APR were both associated with comparable morbidity and no mortality. Patients' disease- and recurrence-free survival after ISR and APR were similar (p = 0.2872 and p = 0.4635). Closure of ileostomy was performed in 73% of all patients after ISR. Long-term outcome showed a rate of incontinence (Wexner score ≥10) in 66% of the patients. Despite this, patients' quality of life was significantly better after ISR compared to APR in terms of abdominal complaints and psycho-emotional functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

ISR is technically feasible with acceptable postoperative morbidity rates. Functional results following ISR are compromised by incontinence as the most important complication. However, long-term quality of life is superior to APR, which should be considered when selecting patients for ISR.

Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: A review of the updated literature

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has rapidly increased worldwide including laparoscopic surgery. However, there are some concerns for the definition of ISR, surgical technique, oncological outcome, anal function, and quality of life (QoL). The aim of the present study is to evaluate those issues. A review of this surgical technique was carried out by searching English language literature of the PubMed online database and appropriate articles were identified. With regard to open‐ISR, the morbidity rate ranged from 7.5% to 38.3%, with lower mortality rates. Local recurrence rates varied widely from 0% to 22.7%, with a mean follow‐up duration of 40–94 months. Disease‐free and overall 5‐year survival rates were 68–86% and 76–97%, respectively. Those outcomes were equivalent to laparoscopic‐ISR. Surgical and oncological outcomes of ISR were generally acceptable. However, accurate evaluation of anal function and QoL was difficult because of a lack of standard assessment of various patient‐related factors. The surgical and oncological outcomes after ISR seem to be acceptable. The ISR technique seems to be valid as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection in selected patients with a very low rectal cancer. However, both necessity for ISR and expectations of QoL impairment as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

Role of intraoperative frozen section for assessing distal resection margin after anterior resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The use of neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT), shorter distal safety margins (DSMs) and stapled or intersphincteric resections has increased sphincter preservation rates. While intraoperative frozen section (IOFS) is not mandatory, it helps achieve negative distal resection margins (DRMs). Our aim was to audit the role of IOFS for DRM assessment while performing sphincter-saving rectal surgery and to identify those subgroups that would benefit the most from IOFS analysis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery between 2009 and 2013 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients who intraoperatively underwent an IOFS for DRM assessment were included in the study. Factors associated with a positive margin on IOFS were analysed. The sensitivity and specificity of IOFS were also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 250 patients, who had an anterior resection with an IOFS, 12 had an involved DRM. Of these patients, eight were involved by adenocarcinoma, two by acellular mucin, one by moderate dysplasia and one by adenoma confirmed on paraffin section. Positive margins had a 100 % intervention rate. There were two false negative on IOFS. IOFS had a sensitivity of 85.17 % with a specificity of 100 % and a negative predictive value of 99.16 %. Specimens with a positive IOFS were lower rectal (P < 0.05), poorly differentiated and post LCRT locally advanced tumours.

CONCLUSIONS

IOFS to confirm negative DRM is recommended in lower rectal tumours irrespective of DSM. It can be considered for locally advanced post LCRT poorly differentiated mid rectal tumours and avoided for upper rectal tumours.

Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage After Intersphincteric Resection Without a Protective Defunctioning Stoma for Lower Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is performed as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection for super-low rectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) after ISR without a defunctioning stoma for lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between 1995 and 2012, 135 consecutive patients with lower rectal cancer underwent curative ISR without a protective defunctioning stoma. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the risk factors for AL.

RESULTS

The radiological and symptomatic AL rate was 17.0 % (23/135). Univariate analysis demonstrated that male sex (P = 0.030), preoperative chemotherapy (P = 0.016), partial ISR (P < 0.001), lateral lymph-node dissection (P = 0.042), distal tumor distance from the dentate line (P = 0.007), and straight reconstruction (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with AL. Severe AL requiring re-laparotomy developed in 13 (9.6 %) patients. Univariate analysis demonstrated that male sex (P = 0.006), partial ISR (P < 0.001), distal tumor distance from the dentate line (P = 0.002), and straight reconstruction (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with AL requiring relaparotomy. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that partial ISR [odds ratio (OR) 6.701; P = 0.001] and straight reconstruction (OR 5.552; P = 0.002) were independently predictive of AL.

CONCLUSIONS

Partial ISR and straight reconstruction increased the risk of AL after ISR without a protective defunctioning stoma. A defunctioning stoma might be mandatory in patients with the risk factors identified in this analysis.

Long-term outcomes after intersphincteric resection for low-lying rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

As an anus-preserving surgery for very low rectal cancer, intersphincteric resection (ISR), has advanced markedly over the last 20 years. We investigated long-term oncologic, functional, and quality of life (QOL) outcomes after ISR with or without partial external sphincter resection (PESR).

METHODS

A series of 199 patients underwent curative ISR with or without PESR between 2000 and 2008, with 49 receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT group) and 150 undergoing surgery first (surgery group). Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local relapse-free survival (LFS) rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Wexner incontinence score. QOL was investigated using the Short-Form 36 questionnaire (SF-36) and modified fecal incontinence quality of life (mFIQL) scale.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 78 months (range 12-164 months), estimated 7-year OS, DFS, and LFS rates were 78, 67, and 80 %, respectively. LFS was better in the CRT group than in the surgery group (p = 0.045). Patients with PESR or positive circumferential resection margins showed significantly worse survival. The median Wexner incontinence score at >5 years was 8 in the surgery group and 10 in the CRT group (p = 0.01). QOL was improved in all physical and mental subscales of the SF-36 at >5 years. Although the mFIQL showed a relatively good score in all groups at >5 years, a significant difference existed between the CRT and surgery groups (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

With long-term follow-up, oncologic, functional, and QOL results after ISR appear acceptable, although CRT is associated with disturbance.

Patient-reported outcomes after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: a systematic review

Neoadjuvant therapy followed by total mesorectal excision is standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer. However, this approach has been previously shown to be associated with high rate of morbidity and it may have a negative effect on patients' reported outcomes (PROs). In order to summarize findings on the effect of the neoadjuvant approach on PROs, we systematically reviewed articles published in the last five years. Thirty-five articles met the inclusion criteria. Ten articles compared the effect of surgery with and without neoadjuvant therapy, six articles compared different neoadjuvant therapies, ten articles reported on patients who were all treated with neoadjuvant therapy, and nine articles examined the effect of neoadjuvant therapy in the analyses. The results are summarized by function investigated and critically commented.

Long-term results of intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to investigate the long-term therapeutic outcome of intersphincteric resection (ISR) as the treatment of ultra-low rectal cancer.

METHODS

During January 2004 and October 2010, ISR was performed in 60 patients with ultra-low rectal cancer and their survival, local recurrence, and functional outcome were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients with tumors at a median distance of 42 (range 30-50) mm from the anal verge underwent ISR. Three cases developed anastomotic leakage and two cases developed anastomotic stenosis postoperatively. After a median follow-up of 49 (range 18-90) months, local and distant recurrence occurred in six and four patients, respectively. Five-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 90.0% and 83.3%. Among them, the functional results of 53 patients suggested the mean stool frequency were 3.8 ± 1.3 (range 3-10) per 24 hr. According to Kirwan classification, good continence was shown in 73.6% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary study indicated that ISR might be a candidate technique in treating patients with ultra-low rectal cancer and achieved satisfactory long-term results in functional and oncologic respects.

Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: a systematic review

Radical surgical treatment for very low rectal cancer near the anus has generally involved abdominoperineal resection. Various sphincter-saving operations have been developed for such tumors to optimize the patients' postoperative quality of life. Current protocols focus on intersphincteric resection (ISR), which differs from conventional hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA) after low anterior resection. However, the efficacy of ISR remains unclear. The surgical, oncologic, and functional outcomes after intersphincteric resection (ISR) were reviewed. This review of the current literature was conducted by searching the PubMed online database. Articles focusing specifically on conventional hand-sewn CAA were excluded from this study. The mean mortality rate is <2 %, and the mean morbidity rate ranges from 7.7 to 38.3 %. The mean local recurrence rate varies widely from 0 to 22.7 %, with a mean follow-up duration of 40-94 months. The mean disease-free and overall 5-year survival rates are 69-86 and 79-97 months, respectively. Functional outcomes are generally acceptable, but accurate evaluation is extremely difficult due to the absence of unified appraisal methods. ISR appears surgically, oncologically and functionally acceptable. However, more experience and better understanding of the oncology, anal physiology, and pelvic anatomy are necessary to achieve successful outcomes without complications, and to improve patient survival.

Intersphincteric resection and coloanal anastomosis in treatment of distal rectal cancer

In the treatment of distal rectal cancer, abdominoperineal resection is traditionally performed. However, the recognition of shorter safe distal resection line, intersphincteric resection technique has given a chance of sphincter-saving surgery for patients with distal rectal cancer during last two decades and still is being performed as an alternative choice of abdominoperineal resection. The first aim of this study is to assess the morbidity, mortality, oncological, and functional outcomes of intersphincteric resection. The second aim is to compare outcomes of patients who underwent intersphincteric resection with the outcomes of patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection.

Systematic review of outcomes after intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

For a select group of patients proctectomy with intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer may be a viable alternative to abdominoperineal resection, with good oncological outcomes while preserving sphincter function. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence regarding oncological outcomes, morbidity and mortality, and functional outcomes after ISR for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to evaluate evidence regarding oncological outcomes, morbidity and mortality after ISR for low rectal cancer. Three major databases (PubMed, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library) were searched. The review included all original articles reporting outcomes after ISR, published in English, from January 1950 to March 2011.

RESULTS

Eighty-four studies were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 14 studies involving 1289 patients were included (mean age 59.5 years, 67.0 per cent men). R0 resection was achieved by ISR in 97.0 per cent. The operative mortality rate was 0.8 per cent and the cumulative morbidity rate 25.8 per cent. Median follow-up was 56 (range 1-227) months. The mean local recurrence rate was 6.7 (range 0-23) per cent. Mean 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 86.3 and 78.6 per cent respectively. Functional outcome was reported in eight studies; among these, the mean number of bowel motions in a 24-h period was 2.7.

CONCLUSION

Oncological outcomes after ISR for low rectal cancer are acceptable, with diverse, often imperfect functional results. These data will aid the clinician when counselling patients considering an ISR for management of low rectal cancer.