Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for the treatment of rectal cancer: comparison of wound complication rates with and without neoadjuvant radiation therapy. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:1081-1087. [PMID: 19263164 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-009-0326-5]

Rectal cancer - avoiding surgery?

Nonoperative treatment of rectal cancer is gaining popularity. Several trials recently demonstrated advantages in disease-free survival with total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) with the addition of the watch and wait (WW) strategy for locally advanced rectal cancer. On longer follow-up, an unexpected increased risk in local recurrence in the TNT group at the RAPIDO trial suggested early surgery for nonresponding tumours. The WW option is globally accepted for a complete clinical response; however, a high rate of regrowth was found in a registry with an increased risk of distant metastases, questioning the deleterious effect of deferral of surgery in this group. The short- and long-term toxic effects of neoadjuvant treatment are costs to consider in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines compared with the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines, which favour surgery alone if good mesorectal resection is assured with increasing surgical proficiency adjusted to the precise anatomical location.

Total mesorectal excision after rectal-sparing approach in locally advanced rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant treatment: a high volume center experience

Background

In patient with a complete or near-complete clinical response after neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer, the organ-sparing approach [watch & wait (W&W) or local excision (LE)] is a possible alternative to major rectal resection. Although, in case of local recurrence or regrowth, after these treatments, a total mesorectal excision (TME) can be operated.

Method

In this retrospective study, we selected 120 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) who had a complete or near-complete clinical response after neoadjuvant treatment, from June 2011 to June 2021. Among them, 41 patients were managed by W&W approach, whereas 79 patients were managed by LE. Twenty-three patients underwent salvage TME for an unfavorable histology after LE (11 patients) or a local recurrence/regrowth (seven patients in LE group - five patients in W&W group), with a median follow-up of 42 months.

Results

Following salvage TME, no patients died within 30 days; serious adverse events occurred in four patients; 8 (34.8%) patients had a definitive stoma; 8 (34.8%) patients undergone to major surgery for unfavorable histology after LE - a complete response was confirmed.

Conclusion

Notably active surveillance after rectal sparing allows prompt identifying signs of regrowth or relapse leading to a radical TME. Rectal sparing is a possible strategy for LARC patients although an active surveillance is necessary.

Clinical Tools for Rectal Cancer Response Assessment following Neoadjuvant Treatment in the Era of Organ Preservation

Local tumor response evaluation following neoadjuvant treatment(s) in rectal adenocarcinoma requires a multi-modality approach including physical and endoscopic evaluations, rectal protocoled MRI, and cross-sectional imaging. Clinical tumor response exists on a spectrum from complete clinical response (cCR), defined as the absence of clinical evidence of residual tumor, to near-complete response (nCR), which assumes a significant reduction in tumor burden but with increased uncertainty of residual microscopic disease, to incomplete clinical response (iCR), which incorporates all responses less than nCR that is not progressive disease. This article aims to review the clinical tools currently routinely available to evaluate treatment response and offers a potential management approach based on the extent of local tumor response.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Excision, and Observation for Early Rectal Cancer: The Phase II NEO Trial (CCTG CO.28) Primary End Point Results

PURPOSE

Organ-sparing therapy for early-stage I/IIA rectal cancer is intended to avoid functional disturbances or a permanent ostomy associated with total mesorectal excision (TME). The objective of this phase II trial was to determine the outcomes and organ-sparing rate of patients with early-stage rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by transanal excision surgery (TES).

METHODS

This phase II trial included patients with clinical T1-T3abN0 low- or mid-rectal adenocarcinoma eligible for endoscopic resection who were treated with 3 months of chemotherapy (modified folinic acid-fluorouracil-oxaliplatin 6 or capecitabine-oxaliplatin). Those with evidence of response proceeded to transanal endoscopic surgery 2-6 weeks later. The primary end point was protocol-specified organ preservation rate, defined as the proportion of patients with tumor downstaging to ypT0/T1N0/X and who avoided radical surgery.

RESULTS

Of 58 patients enrolled, all commenced chemotherapy and 56 proceeded to surgery. A total of 33/58 patients had tumor downstaging to ypT0/1N0/X on the surgery specimen, resulting in an intention-to-treat protocol-specified organ preservation rate of 57% (90% CI, 45 to 68). Of 23 remaining patients recommended for TME surgery on the basis of protocol requirements, 13 declined and elected to proceed directly to observation resulting in 79% (90% CI, 69 to 88) achieving organ preservation. The remaining 10/23 patients proceeded to recommended TME of whom seven had no histopathologic residual disease. The 1-year and 2-year locoregional relapse-free survival was, respectively, 98% (95% CI, 86 to 100) and 90% (95% CI, 58 to 98), and there were no distant recurrences or deaths. Minimal change in quality of life and rectal function scores was observed.

CONCLUSION

Three months of induction chemotherapy may successfully downstage a significant proportion of patients with early-stage rectal cancer, allowing well-tolerated organ-preserving surgery.

Achieving a Cure Without Total Mesorectal Excision in Rectal Adenocarcinoma

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.Rectal cancer is a curable disease, yet curing the disease can be associated with lifelong morbidity because of the nature of the curative-intent treatment strategies. A major focus of modern prospective trials has been to maintain current cure rates, while minimizing lifelong lifestyle alterations and maximizing quality of life. Navigating the complex landscape of therapeutic options for rectal adenocarcinoma with a focus to accomplish this quality-of-life improvement is a critical focus area for future clinical trials. Many challenges remain on the path to optimizing cure and minimizing morbidity, and include improving initial staging accuracy, more precise selection of neoadjuvant therapy used for each patient, choosing the optimal surgical management strategy, and ensuring modern radiation therapy approaches are being used. Finally, organ preservation strategies have moved to the forefront in the management of both early and locally advanced rectal cancers and hold the potential for significant changes to come for patients with rectal cancer. Herein, we highlight some of the challenges remaining in the field, progress made, and how the recent data from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group phase II trial can be put into context with the ACOSOG Z6041, CARTS, and GRECCAR2 trials.

Role of Local Excision for Suspected Regrowth in a Watch and Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer

Rectal cancer patients with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation are eligible for Watch and Wait (W&W). For local regrowth, total mesorectal excision (TME) is considered the standard of care. This study evaluated local excision (LE) for suspected local regrowth. From 591 patients prospectively entered into a national W&W registry, 77 patients with LE for regrowth were included. Outcomes analyzed included histopathologic findings, locoregional recurrence, long-term organ preservation, and colostomy-free and overall survival. In total, 27/77 patients underwent early LE (<6 months after neoadjuvant radiotherapy) and 50/77 underwent late LE (≥6 months). Median follow-up was 53 (39−69) months. In 28/77 patients the LE specimen was histopathologically classified as ypT0 (including 9 adenomas); 11/77 were ypT1, and 38/77 were ypT2−3. After LE, 13/77 patients with ypT2−3 and/or irradical resection underwent completion TME. Subsequently, 14/64 patients without completion TME developed locoregional recurrence, and were successfully treated with salvage TME. Another 8/77 patients developed distant metastases. At 5 years, overall organ preservation was 63%, colostomy-free survival was 68%, and overall survival was 96%. There were no differences in outcomes between early or late LE. In W&W for rectal cancer, LE can be considered as an alternative to TME for suspected regrowth in selected patients who wish to preserve their rectum or avoid colostomy in distal rectal cancer.

Transanal Local Excision of Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation: Is There a Place for It or Should Be Avoided at All Costs?

Tumor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) with tumor downsizing and downstaging has significantly impacted the number of patients considered to be appropriate candidates for transanal local excision (TLE). Some patients may harbor small residual lesions, restricted to the bowel wall. These patients, who exhibit major response ("near-complete") by digital rectal examination, endoscopic assessment, and radiological assessment may be considered for this approach. Although TLE is associated with minimal postoperative morbidity, a few clinical consequences and oncological outcomes must be evaluated in advance and with caution. In the setting of nCRT, a higher risk for clinically relevant wound dehiscences leading to a considerable risk for readmission for pain management has been observed. Worse anorectal function (still better than after total mesorectal excision [TME]), worsening in the quality of TME specimen, and higher rates of abdominal resections (in cases requiring completion TME) have been reported. The exuberant scar observed in the area of TLE also represents a challenging finding during follow-up of these patients. Local excision should be probably restricted for patients with primary tumors located at or below the level of the anorectal ring (magnetic resonance defined). These patients are otherwise candidates for abdominal perineal resections or ultra-low anterior resections with coloanal anastomosis frequently requiring definitive stomas or considerably poor anorectal function.

First Clinical Experience With Single-Port Robotic Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery: Phase II Trial of the Initial 26 Cases

BACKGROUND

Many transanal platforms have been developed to address the challenge of reach and vision when operating transanally. The single-port robot was specifically designed for narrow-aperture surgery and is a promising platform for minimally invasive transanal surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this phase II trial is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the initial clinical experience with single-port robot transanal minimally invasive surgery.

DESIGN

In a prospective phase II trial, patients with rectal neoplasms eligible for local excision were enrolled for single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery.

SETTING

The study was conducted between October 2018 and March 2020 at a tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS/INTERVENTION

Twenty-six consecutive patients underwent single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery resection of rectal lesions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point of the study was the efficacy and safety of single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery.

RESULTS

There were 13 men and 13 women, with an average lesion size of 2.9 cm (range, 1.0-6.0 cm) and average level of 4.8 cm from the anorectal ring (range, 0-30 cm). Ten patients had a preoperative diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, 7 of whom received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (range, 4500-5580 cGy with concurrent oral capecitabine). Eighty-eight percent of cases were completed by single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery; 2 were converted to transanal endoscopic microsurgery, and 1 patient underwent a low anterior resection. There were no piecemeal extractions, and all margins were negative on final pathology. There were no mortalities, and the morbidity rate was 15.4%. There have been no local recurrences, with a mean follow-up of 5.8 months (range, 0-15.9 months).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by small sample size, short-term follow up, and a single-surgeon experience.

CONCLUSION

Single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery procedures are safe and feasible in patients with select benign and malignant rectal lesions. Future trials will need to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B605.

PRIMERA EXPERIENCIA CLNICA CON CIRUGA MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA TRANSANAL ROBTICA DE PUERTO NICO ENSAYO DE FASE II DE LOS CASOS INICIALES

ANTECEDENTES:Se han desarrollado muchas plataformas transanales para abordar el desafío del alcance y la visión cuando se opera de manera transanal. El robot de un solo puerto fue diseñado específicamente para la cirugía de apertura estrecha y es una plataforma prometedora para la cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva.OBJETIVO:El propósito de este ensayo de fase II es evaluar la seguridad y viabilidad de la experiencia clínica inicial con la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal con robot de puerto único.DISEÑO:En un ensayo prospectivo de fase II, los pacientes con neoplasias rectales elegibles para la escisión local se inscribieron para la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único.AJUSTE:El estudio se realizó entre octubre de 2018 y marzo de 2020 en un hospital de referencia terciario.PACIENTES / INTERVENCIÓN:Veintiséis pacientes consecutivos fueron sometidos a cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único para resección de lesiones rectales.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El criterio de valoración principal del estudio fue la eficacia y seguridad de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único.RESULTADOS:Hubo 13 hombres y 13 mujeres, con un tamaño de lesión promedio de 2.9 cm (rango 1.0-6.0 cm) y un nivel promedio de 4.8 cm del anillo anorrectal (rango 0-30 cm). Diez pacientes tenían un diagnóstico preoperatorio de adenocarcinoma, 7 de los cuales recibieron quimiorradiación neoadyuvante (rango 4500-5580 cGy con capecitabina oral concurrente). El 88% de los casos se completaron mediante cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único; 2 se convirtieron a microcirugía endoscópica transanal y 1 se sometió a una resección anterior baja. No hubo extracciones parciales y todos los márgenes fueron negativos en la patología final. No hubo mortalidad y una tasa de morbilidad del 15,4%. No ha habido recidivas locales, con un seguimiento medio de 5,8 meses (rango 0-15,9 meses).LIMITACIONES:El estudio estuvo limitado por un tamaño de muestra pequeño, un seguimiento a corto plazo y la experiencia de un solo cirujano.CONCLUSIÓN:Los procedimientos de cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único son seguros y factibles en pacientes con lesiones rectales benignas y malignas seleccionadas. Los ensayos futuros deberán evaluar la seguridad y eficacia a largo plazo de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B605. (Traducción-Dr. Eduardo Londoño-Schimmer).

Long-term outcomes of transanal endoscopic microsurgery for clinical complete response after neoadjuvant treatment in T2-3 rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Organ sparing by the transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) procedure is a treatment for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and complete clinical response (cCR).

AIMS

To assess the surgical and long-term oncological outcomes of TEM for the treatment in T2-3 rectal cancer after CRT and cCR.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of a prospective database of patients with rectal cancer who underwent TEM after CRT and cCR from April 2011 to March 2020.

RESULTS

52 patients underwent TEM during a period of 9 years. This group of patients included 27 females and 25 males. The median age was 62 (32-86) years, lesion size was 2.5 (1-4) cm, and lesion distance from the anal verge 7.3 (4-10) cm. Median operative time was 79.5 (25-120) min and hospital stay was 1 day (14 h-4 days). Morbidity rate was 13.5% and reoperation rate due to major complications was 3.8%. Final histological findings confirmed 34 (65.4%) patients with ypT0, 7 (13.5%), 6 (11.5%), and 5 (9.6%) patients with carcinoma ypT1, ypT2, and ypT3, respectively. After a median follow-up period of 86 (5-107) months, 1 (2.4%) patient had local recurrences and 3 (7.3%) distant metastases. The 5-year disease-free survival was 91.7% and 5-year overall survival 89.5%.

CONCLUSION

Our experience has shown significant rates of ypT0 and ypT1 associated with excellent long-term results. Performing TEM to treat T2-3N0 rectal cancer after CRT and cCR appears to be an oncologically safe and effective procedure.

Endoscopic and MRI response evaluation following neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer: a pictorial review with matched MRI, endoscopic, and pathologic examples

A nonoperative management strategy, or Watch-and-Wait, following neoadjuvant therapies of locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma is increasingly considered for select patients. Yet, standardized tumor response assessment to best select and surveil suitable patients remains an unmet clinical challenge. Endoscopic and MRI currently provide the most reliable tumor response estimations. However, resources illustrating variable tumor responses to neoadjuvant therapies remain limited. This pictorial review aims to provide detailed and annotated examples of common endoscopic and MRI findings of rectal cancer treatment response, while also emphasizing their respective diagnostic shortcomings and consequently, the necessity for a multidisciplinary approach to optimally manage these patients.

Functional outcome and quality of life following treatment for rectal cancer

Introduction Over the last decades, treatment for rectal cancer has substantially improved with development of new surgical options and treatment modalities. With the improvement of survival, functional outcome and quality of life are getting more attention.

Study objective To provide an overview of current modalities in rectal cancer treatment, with particular emphasis on functional outcomes and quality of life.

Results Functional outcomes after rectal cancer treatment are influenced by patient and tumor characteristics, surgical technique, the use of preoperative radiotherapy and the method and level of anastomosis. Sphincter preserving surgery for low rectal cancer often results in poor functional outcomes that impair quality of life, referred to as low anterior resection syndrome. Abdominoperineal resection imposes the need for a permanent stoma but avoids the risk of this syndrome. Contrary to general belief, long-term quality of life in patients with a permanent stoma is similar to those after sphincter preserving surgery for low rectal cancer.

Conclusion All patients should be informed about the risks of treatment modalities. Decision on rectal cancer treatment should be individualized since not all patients may benefit from a sphincter preserving surgery “at any price”. Non-resection treatment should be the future focus to avoid the need of a permanent stoma and bowel dysfunction.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy affects postoperative outcomes and functional results in patients treated with transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to quantify the incidence of short-term postoperative complications and functional disorders at 1 year from transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for rectal neoplasms, to compare patients treated with TEM alone and with TEM after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and to analyse factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on all patients treated with TEM for rectal neoplasms at our institution in January 2000-December 2017. Data from a prospectively maintained database were retrospectively analysed. Patients were divided into two groups: adenoma or early rectal cancer (no CRT group) and locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer with major or complete clinical response after preoperative CRT (CRT group). Short-term postoperative mortality and morbidity and the functional results at 1 year were recorded. The two groups were compared, and a statistical analysis of factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes was performed. Functional outcome was also evaluated with the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score (0-20 no LARS, 21-29 minor LARS and 30-42 major LARS).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirteen patients (71 males, 42 females, median age 64 years [range 41-80 years]) were included in the study (46 in the CRT group). The overall postoperative complication rate was 23.0%, lower in the noCRT group (p < 0.001), but only 2.7% were grade ≥ 3. The most frequent complication was suture dehiscence (17.6%), which occurred less frequently in the noCRT group (p < 0.001). At 1 year from TEM, the most frequent symptoms was urgency (11.9%, without significant differences between the CRT group and the noCRT group); the noCRT group experienced a lower rate of soiling than the CRT group (0% vs. 7.7%; p: 0.027). The incidence of LARS was evaluated in 47 patients from May 2012 on and was 21.3% occurring less frequently in the noCRT group (10% vs. 41.2%; p: 0.012). Only 6.4% of the patients evaluated experienced major LARS. In multivariate analysis, preoperative CRT significantly worsened postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is a safe procedure associated with only low risk of severe postoperative complications and major LARS. Preoperative CRT seems to increase the rate of postoperative morbidity after TEM and led to worse functional outcomes at 1 year after surgery.

First clinical experience with single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) for benign rectal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The new da Vinci Single-Port (SP) robot is a single-arm four-channel robotic system well suited for endoluminal surgery. We report our initial experience performing SP robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) for rectal neoplasms.

METHODS

Under Institutional Review Board approval, two patients with rectal neoplasms were prospectively enrolled for elective SP rTAMIS. The primary endpoint was to report the safety and feasibility of successful procedure completion with the SP robot. Secondary endpoints included patient characteristics and perioperative metrics.

RESULTS

Both patients underwent successful SP rTAMIS resection of rectal neoplasms without intraoperative complications or conversions. The lesions were 4.0 cm and 3.0 cm in size, located 6 cm and 7 cm cephalad to the anorectal ring. Excisions were full thickness with no piecemeal extractions or specimen fragmentation. Estimated blood loss was 0 mL and 30 mL. The mean excised area was 13.4 cm² (22.7 cm² and 9.0 cm²). The mean docking time was 5.25 min (range 2-8 min) and mean console time was 122.5 min (98 min and 147 min). Patients tolerated a liquid diet on postoperative day (POD) 0 and were discharged on POD 1 after tolerating a low residue diet and having bowel function. Pathology showed two adenomas with negative margins. There was no immediate or delayed morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience indicates that SP rTAMIS is a safe and feasible approach for local excision of rectal lesions. While SP rTAMIS is very promising, more experience with this approach is necessary to determine its widespread applicability.

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in T2-T3 rectal cancer: current status and critical appraisal

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer is an organ-preserving procedure which aims at reducing morbidity and functional disorders associated with total mesorectal excision (TME) in selected patients. Although TME after chemoradiotherapy remains the gold standard for locally advanced mid and low rectal cancer, in the last years multicenter research trials have offered encouraging oncologic results which have allowed to preserve the rectum in patients with a pathologic complete response after chemoradiotherapy. A review of the available literature on this topic was conducted to define the state of the art of this conservative approach and to focus on the most controversial aspects concerning local excision performed after chemoradiotherapy, in particular tumor scatter and lymph node status, completion and salvage surgery, morbidity and quality of life. The analysis of these topics should be considered, in trial setting or in current practice, for their clinical implications. Oncologic outcomes of recent trials are encouraging for part of the patients presenting T2 rectal cancer; however, TME still remains the standard treatment in clinical practice. In such cases, local excision should include a surgical safety margin of at least 1 cm from the resection margin to achieve a true negative margin from residual tumor cells. The selection of the patients should be carefully performed and their consensus extremely detailed because TME is necessary in about 30% of cases. Failing that, morbidity and quality of life are negatively affected. However, about half of these patients refuse radical surgery (45%), thus undergoing only palliative care.

How can we utilize local excision to help, not harm, geriatric patients with rectal cancer?

A majority of the morbidity and mortality burden of rectal cancer is distributed within the geriatric age group. Current surgical and medical treatment modalities pose significant challenges in treating complications specifically in the already pre-disposed senior population with baseline dysfunction. This chapter reviews the work-up, management, current data and oncologic outcomes of treating rectal cancer in the senior adult.

Quality of Life After Radiotherapy for Rectal and Anal Cancer

Purpose of Review

With advances in radiation therapy (RT) techniques for rectal and anal cancers allowing for the modulation of critical normal tissues, there has been an increased emphasis on improving the quality of life (QOL) of cancer survivors. Herein, we review the literature to examine the impact of RT on QOL and patient reported outcomes (PROs) to better inform providers about the challenges of survivorship.

Recent Findings

Large systematic reviews, recent studies and long-term follow-up of pivotal clinical trials have shown that RT impacts QOL, particularly fecal continence and sexual function. Modern preoperative RT techniques allow for decreased dose to organs-at-risk will likely improve QOL.

Summary

RT, though critical in the treatment of rectal and anal cancer, has a profound impact on QOL for some patients. Recent studies have included PROs and validated QOL metrics to better inform providers and patients.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.

"Watch and Wait" for complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer

The management of rectal cancer has evolved substantially over recent decades, becoming increasingly complex. This was once a disease associated with high mortality and limited treatment options that typically necessitated a permanent colostomy, has now become a model for multidisciplinary evaluation, treatment and surgical advancement. Despite advances in the rates of total mesorectal excision, decreased local recurrence and increased 5-year survival rates, the multimodal treatment of rectal cancer is associated with a significant impact on long-term functional and quality of life outcomes including risks of bowel, bladder and sexual dysfunction, and potential need for a permanent stoma. There is great interest in strategies to decrease the toxicity of treatment, including selective use of radiation, chemotherapy or even surgery. The modern concept of selective use of surgery for patients with rectal cancer are based on the observed pathological complete response in approximately 10-20% of patients following long-course chemoradiation therapy. While definitive surgical resection remains the standard of care for all patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer, a growing number of studies are providing supportive evidence for a watch-and-wait, organ preserving approach in highly selected patients with rectal cancer. However, questions regarding the heterogeneity of patient selection, optimal method for inducing pathological complete response, methods and intervals for assessing treatment response and adequacy of follow-up remain unanswered. The aim of this review is to provide an up-to-date summary of the current evidence for the watch-and-wait management of rectal cancer following a complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Individual participant data pooled-analysis of risk factors for recurrence after neoadjuvant radiotherapy and transanal local excision of rectal cancer: the PARTTLE study

BACKGROUND

An organ-preserving strategy may be a valid alternative in the treatment of selected patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Preoperative assessment of the risk for tumor recurrence is a key component of surgical planning. The aim of the present study was to increase the current knowledge on the risk factors for tumor recurrence.

METHODS

The present study included individual participant data of published studies on rectal cancer surgery. The literature was reviewed according to according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data checklist (PRISMA-IPD) guidelines. Series of patients, whose data were collected prospectively, having neoadjuvant radiotherapy followed by transanal local excision for rectal cancer were reviewed. Three independent series of univariate/multivariate binary logistic regression models were estimated for the risk of local, systemic and overall recurrence, respectively.

RESULTS

We identified 15 studies, and 7 centers provided individual data on 517 patients. The multivariate analysis showed higher local and overall recurrences for ypT3 stage (OR 4.79; 95% CI 2.25-10.16 and OR 6.43 95% CI 3.33-12.42), tumor size after radiotherapy > 10 mm (OR 5.86 95% CI 2.33-14.74 and OR 3.14 95% CI 1.68-5.87), and lack of combined chemotherapy (OR 3.68 95% CI 1.78-7.62 and OR 2.09 95% CI 1.10-3.97), while ypT3 was the only factor correlated with systemic recurrence (OR 5.93). The analysis of survival curves shows that the overall survival is associated with ypT and not with cT.

CONCLUSIONS

Local excision should be offered with caution after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to selected patients with rectal cancers, who achieved a good response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for Local Excision of Benign and Malignant Rectal Neoplasia: Outcomes From 200 Consecutive Cases With Midterm Follow Up

OBJECTIVE

This study describes the outcomes for 200 consecutive transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) local excision (LE) for rectal neoplasia.

BACKGROUND

TAMIS is an advanced transanal platform that can result in high quality LE of rectal neoplasia.

METHODS

Consecutive patients from July 1, 2009 to December 31, 2015 from a prospective institutional registry were analyzed. Indication for TAMIS LE was endoscopically unresectable benign lesions or histologically favorable early rectal cancers. The primary endpoints were resection quality, neoplasia recurrence, and oncologic outcomes. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used to describe disease-free survival (DFS) for patients with rectal adenocarcinoma that did not receive immediate salvage radical surgery.

RESULTS

There were 200 elective TAMIS LE procedures performed in 196 patients for 90 benign and 110 malignant lesions. Overall, a 7% margin positivity and 5% fragmentation rate was observed. The mean operative time for TAMIS was 69.5 minutes (SD 37.9). Postoperative morbidity was recorded in 11% of patients, with hemorrhage (9%), urinary retention (4%), and scrotal or subcutaneous emphysema (3%) being the most common. The mean follow up was 14.4 months (SD 17.4). Local recurrence occurred in 6%, and distant organ metastasis was noted in 2%. Mean time to local recurrence for malignancy was 16.9 months (SD 13.2). Cumulative DFS for patients with rectal adenocarcinoma was 96%, 93%, and 84% at 1-, 2-, and 3-years.

CONCLUSIONS

For carefully selected patients, TAMIS for local excision of rectal neoplasia is a valid option with low morbidity that maintains the advantages of organ preservation.

For Patients with Early Rectal Cancer, Does Local Excision Have an Impact on Recurrence, Survival, and Quality of Life Relative to Radical Resection?

BACKGROUND

The most appropriate treatment for early-stage rectal cancers is controversial. The advantages of local excision regarding morbidity and function must be weighed against poorer oncologic efficacy. This study aimed to clarify further the role for local excision in the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases was conducted. Relevant studies were selected using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data addressing five key questions about outcomes of local versus radical resection of rectal cancer were analyzed.

RESULTS

The 16 studies identified by this study were mostly retrospective, and none were randomized. Local excision was associated with fewer complications and better functional outcome than radical resection. Of 12 studies evaluating local recurrence, 6 showed a higher local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision. Two additional studies showed no increase in local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision of T1 lesions but a significantly higher local recurrence rate among those who underwent local excision of T2 lesions. High histologic grade, angiolymphatic invasion, perineural invasion, and depth within submucosa were features associated with a higher risk of local recurrence. In 7 of 15 studies, long-term survival was reduced compared with that of patients who underwent radical resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local excision for early-stage rectal cancer is associated with increased local recurrence and decreased overall survival compared with radical resection, local excision may be appropriate for select individuals who have T1 tumors with no adverse pathologic features.

Local excision for rectal cancer: a minimally invasive option

Transanal excision (TAE) with conventional retractors and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) are two well established minimally invasive surgical options for the treatment of selected rectal cancers. TEM is nowadays considered the standard of care for the transanal excision of rectal tumors, since it is associated with significantly better quality of excision and lower rates of recurrence than TAE. When compared with rectal resection and total mesorectal excision, TEM has lower postoperative morbidity and better functional outcomes, with similar long-term survival rates in selected early rectal cancers. More recently, transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) has been developed as an alternative to TEM. Possible benefits of TAMIS are under evaluation.

Outcomes of Closed Versus Open Defects After Local Excision of Rectal Neoplasms: A Multi-institutional Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

The management of the rectal wall defect after local excision of rectal neoplasms remains controversial, and the existing data are equivocal.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the effect of open versus closed defects on postoperative outcomes after local excision of rectal neoplasms.

DESIGN

Data from 3 institutions were analyzed. Propensity score matching was performed in one-to-one fashion to create a balanced cohort comparing open and closed defects.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at high-volume specialist referral hospitals.

PATIENTS

Adult patients undergoing local excision via transanal endoscopic surgery from 2004 to 2016 were included. Patients were assigned to open- and closed-defect groups, and further stratified by full- or partial-thickness excision.

INTERVENTION

Closure of the rectal wall defect was performed at the surgeon's discretion.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measured was the incidence of 30-day complications.

RESULTS

A total of 991 patients were eligible (593 full-thickness excision with 114 open and 479 closed, and 398 partial-thickness excision with 263 open and 135 closed). After matching, balanced cohorts consisting of 220 patients with full-thickness excision and 210 patients with partial-thickness excision were created. Operative time was similar for open and closed defects for both full-and partial-thickness excision. The incidence of 30-day complications was similar for open and closed defects after full- (15% vs. 12%, p = 0.432) and partial-thickness excision (7% vs 5%, p = 0.552). The total number of complications was also similar after full- or partial-thickness excision. Patients undergoing full-thickness excision with open defects had a higher incidence of clinically significant bleeding complications (9% vs 3%, p = 0.045).

LIMITATIONS

Data were obtained from 3 institutions with different equipment and perioperative management over a long time period.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in overall complications between open and closed defects for patients undergoing local excision of rectal neoplasms, but there may be more bleeding complications in open defects after full-thickness excision. A selective approach to defect closure may be appropriate. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A470.

Organ-Preserving Strategies for the Management of Near-Complete Responses in Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation

In recent years, organ preservation has been considered a feasible alternative to total mesorectal excision for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. However, the degree of tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy is variable. A fraction of the patients who did not achieve a complete response had grossly visible tumors. These patients, with clearly incomplete clinical response, need a total mesorectal excision. In addition, some patients with a significant tumor response still have some abnormalities in the bowel wall, such as superficial ulceration or tissue nodularity, which, while not conclusive for the presence of a tumor, are indicative of the possibility of a residual tumor in the bowel wall or in mesorectal lymph nodes. The management of patients with a so-called near-complete clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy is controversial. In this article, we will review the clinical and radiological criteria that define a clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy, possible treatment strategies, and follow-up protocols. We will also discuss patient and tumor characteristics that in our opinion can be useful in selecting the most appropriate treatment alternative. Although organ preservation and quality of life are important, the primary goal of treatment for these patients should be local tumor control and long-term survival.

Local Excision and Endoscopic Resections for Early Rectal Cancer

Radical surgery is considered as the standard treatment for rectal cancer. Transanal local excision has been considered an interesting alternative for the management of selected patients with rectal cancers for many decades. Different approaches had been considered for local excision, from endoscopic submucosal dissection to resections using platforms, such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery or transanal minimally invasive surgery. Identifying the ideal candidate for this approach is crucial, as a local failure after local excision is associated with poor outcomes, even for an initial early rectal tumor. In this article, the diagnostic tools and criteria to select patients for local excision, the different modalities used, and the outcomes are discussed.

Chemoradiation and Local Excision for T2N0 Rectal Cancer Offers Equivalent Overall Survival Compared to Standard Resection: a National Cancer Database Analysis

BACKGROUND

Local excision (LE) alone is associated with worse survival compared to radical surgery (RS) for T2 rectal cancer, but LE with additional chemoradiation (CRT) may improve outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare combined CRT and LE versus RS for T2 rectal cancer.

METHODS

The 2004-2014 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with T2N0M0 rectal cancer undergoing LE with neoadjuvant(NA-CRT + LE) or adjuvant(LE + Adj-CRT) CRT, or RS. The main outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards was used to determine the independent effect of treatment on OS.

RESULTS

A total of 4822 patients were included (4367 RS, 242 CRT + LE, 213 LE + Adj-CRT). Mean follow-up was 48.6 (SD28.5) months. There were no differences in patient characteristics, but more high-risk features in the LE + Adj-CRT group. There were no differences in 90-day mortality. Five-year OS was similar (RS 77.4% vs. CRT + LE 76.1% vs. LE + Adj-CRT 79.7%, p = 0.786). Older age, male gender, and higher Charlson score were independently associated with worse OS, whereas treatment type was not. If 90-day mortality was excluded, LE + Adj-CRT was independently associated with worse OS compared to RS.

CONCLUSIONS

CRT with LE for T2N0M0 rectal cancer was not associated with worse OS compared to RS, and may be a viable treatment modality.

New Strategies in Rectal Cancer

In recent years, our understanding of rectal cancer has improved, including how locally advanced disease responds to chemotherapy and radiation. This has led to new innovations and advances in the treatment of rectal cancer, which includes organ-preserving strategies for responsive disease, and minimally invasive approaces for the performance of total mesorectal excision/protectomyh for persistently advanced disease. This article discusses new strategies for rectal cancer therapy, including Watch and Wait, local excision, minimally invasive proctectomy, and transanal total mesorectal excision particularly in the setting of preoperative multimodality treatment.

Magnetic resonance imaging following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer

AIM

Full-thickness local excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for patients with rectal cancer and incomplete clinical response has been a treatment strategy for organ preservation. Follow-up of these patients is challenging since anatomic distortion and postoperative changes may be clinically indistinguishable from tumour recurrence. MRI may have a role in detecting recurrence. The aim of this study was to describe the MRI findings during follow-up in patients having local excision following CRT with and without local recurrence.

METHOD

The data were collected retrospectively from a single centre. Fifty-three patients with rectal cancer who had full-thickness local excision after neoadjuvant CRT and near-complete response were eligible for the study. Patients with local recurrence were treated by radical salvage surgery. The main outcome was local MRI assessment findings during follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (five who developed local recurrence and 10 with no evidence of local recurrence) had MR images available for review and were included in the study. High signal intensity and thickening of the rectal wall were present in all patients with recurrent disease within the rectal wall. Overall, 80% of the patients with recurrence showed diffusion restriction. MRI mesorectal fascia status and circumferential resection margin showed agreement in all cases. A low signal intensity scar was seen in all patients without recurrent disease.

CONCLUSION

MRI shows high signal intensity and thickening of the rectal wall in recurrent disease in comparison to a low signal intensity fibrotic scar in non-recurrent disease. These findings may be useful in surveillance of these patients.

Neoadjuvant therapy and transanal endoscopic surgery in T2-T3 superficial, N0, M0 rectal tumors. Local recurrence, complete clinical and pathological response

INTRODUCTION

The association of preoperative chemoradiotherapy and transanal endoscopic surgery in T2 and superficial T3 rectal cancers presents promising results in selected patients. The main objective is to evaluate the long-term loco-regional and systemic recurrence and, as secondary objectives, to provide results of postoperative morbidity and the correlation between complete clinical and pathological response.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study including a consecutive series of patients with T2-T3 superficial rectal cancer, N0, M0 who refused radical surgery (2008-2016). The treatment consisted of preoperative chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) combined with radiotherapy (50, 4Gy) and transanal endoscopic surgery after 8weeks. Preoperative, surgical, pathological and long-term oncologic results were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were included in the study. Two of them required rescue radical surgery for unfavorable pathological results. A local recurrence (4.5%) was observed and 2patients presented systemic recurrence (9%), with a median follow-up of 45 months. A complete clinical tumor response was achieved in 12 patients (50%), and complete pathological tumor response in 9 patients (37.5%). Postoperative complications were observed in 5 patients (20.8%), and they were mild except one. There was no postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this stage of rectal cancer, our results seem to support this strategy, mainly when a complete pathological response is achieved. The complete clinical tumor response does not coincide with the pathological tumor response. Randomized prospective studies should be performed to standardize this treatment.

Impact of Organ-Preserving Strategies on Anorectal Function in Patients with Distal Rectal Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

Organ-preserving strategies have been considered for patients with distal rectal cancer and complete or near-complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation to avoid the functional consequences of radical surgery. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery and no immediate surgery (watch and wait) have been considered in selected patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare anorectal function following these 2 organ-preserving strategies (transanal endoscopic microsurgery and watch and wait) for rectal cancer with complete or near-complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

DESIGN

This study is based on the comparison of prospectively collected data.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a single center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation (50.4-54 Gy and 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) were prospectively studied. Patients with complete clinical response were managed by watch and wait. Patients with near-complete response (≤3 cm, ycT1-2N0) were managed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Functional outcomes were determined by anorectal manometry and Fecal Incontinence Index and Quality of Life assessment.

RESULTS

Two groups of patients were included in the study. Twenty-nine patients with near-complete response undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery and 53 with complete response after watch and wait were assessed. Baseline features were similar between groups. Patients undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery had worse resting/squeeze pressures (p = 0.004) and rectal capacity (p = 0.002). In addition, their incontinence scores (2.3 vs. 6.5; p < 0.001) and quality-of-life questionnaire responses (in all domains; p ≤ 0.01) were significantly worse in comparison with patients undergoing watch and wait.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the small sample size and the absence of baseline anorectal function information.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonoperative management of patients with complete clinical response following chemoradiation results in better anorectal function in comparison with patients with near-complete response managed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery. In the absence of clinically detectable residual cancer, this latter approach may result in significant worsening of anorectal function.

Postoperative complications in the treatment of rectal neoplasia by transanal endoscopic microsurgery: a prospective study of risk factors and time course

PURPOSE

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a safe and efficient minimally invasive treatment for rectal benign and early malignant neoplasia, but postoperative complications may be severe. We aimed to evaluate the risk factors related to the incidence, severity, and time course of postoperative complications of TEM.

METHODS

This is a prospective study of postoperative complications in 53 patients (>18 years old) with benign or early rectal neoplasia who underwent TEM with curative intention or, for higher stages, palliation. Outcome measures included age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, lesion height and size, pathologic margins, tumor histology, and suture type.

RESULTS

Overall morbidity was 50 %. Temporary fecal incontinence was the most frequent complication (17.3 %). Complication rates of Clavien-Dindo grades I and II were 21.1 % and those of grades III and IV 3.8 %. Of patients with complications, more had lesions under the first rectal valve than over the first valve (61.54 % vs 38.46 %, p = 0.04). Patients submitted to chemoradiotherapy had a 24-fold greater chance of presenting grade II complications (p = 0.002). When the surgical defect was treated using the TEM device to perform the suture, the chance of having grade III complications was reduced 16-fold (p = 0.04). Fifty-three percent of complications occurred in the first 10 days and 95 % within 20 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative complications after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for the treatment of rectal neoplasia are frequent, acceptable, and usually controllable with pharmacologic treatment. Over time the nature of complications is continuous, centered on the first 20 days after surgery.

Transanal Endoscopic Operation under spinal anaesthesia

Background

Transanal Endoscopic Operation (TEO®) for rectal benign lesions and early rectal cancer may provide better oncological outcomes than flexible endoscopy. The major advantage of flexible endoscopy is that it does not require general anaesthesia. This prospective observational study assessed the feasibility and safety of TEO® performed under spinal anaesthesia.

Methods

The study population comprised eligible consecutive patients who underwent TEO® under spinal anaesthesia with curative or palliative intent for rectal neoplasms larger than 20 mm in diameter or for recurrent lesions of any size. The primary endpoints were feasibility and safety; secondary endpoints were postoperative pain, as measured on a visual analogue scale, heart rate, systolic and diastolic BP, opioid requested, postoperative nausea or vomiting, and urinary retention.

Results

The study included 50 patients (median age 70 years; 29 men and 21 women). No intraoperative complications occurred. The median duration of operation was 60 (range 20–165) min. No opioids were requested during the perioperative or postoperative period. The median postoperative pain score was 0 at 4, 8, 24 and 48 h after surgery. There were no significant fluctuations in heart rate, systolic and diastolic BP up to 48 h after the procedure (P = 0·379, P = 0·386 and P = 0·617 respectively). Postoperative nausea and vomiting occurred in one patient, and urinary retention in four.

Conclusion

TEO® under spinal anaesthesia was safe and feasible with no conversions to general anaesthesia.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) was developed by Professor Gerhard Buess 30 years ago at the dawn of minimally invasive surgery. TEM utilizes a closed proctoscopic system whereby endoluminal surgery is accomplished with high-definition magnification, constant CO2 insufflation, and long-shafted instruments. The end result is a more precise excision and closure compared to conventional instrumentation. Virtually any benign lesion can be addressed with this technology; however, proper patient selection is paramount when using it for cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Local Excision in Early Stage Rectal Cancer

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection are considered standard treatments for early rectal cancer but may be associated with morbidity in selected patients who are candidates for early distal lesions amenable to local excision (LE). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a LE approach. Patients who may be candidates for LE alone include those with small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. Several surgical approaches can be utilized for LE however none include lymph node evaluation. Adjuvant radiation±chemotherapy may be warranted depending on the risk of nodal metastases. Patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors not amenable to radical surgery may also benefit from adjuvant treatment; however, patients with positive margins or T3 lesions should be offered abdominoperineal resection or low anterior resection. Neoadjuvant radiation±chemotherapy followed by LE in higher risk patients results in excellent local control, but it is not clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

Local excision by transanal endoscopic surgery

Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) consists of a series of anorectal surgical procedures using different devices that are introduced into the anal canal. TES has been developed significantly since it was first used in the 1980s. The key point for the success of these techniques is how accurately patients are selected. The main indication was the resection of endoscopically unresectable adenomas. In recent years, these techniques have become more widespread which has allowed them to be applied in conservative rectal procedures for both benign diseases and selected cases of rectal cancer. For more advanced rectal cancers it should be considered palliative or, in some controlled trials, experimental. The role of newer endoscopic techniques available has not yet been defined. TES may allow for new strategies in the treatment of rectal pathology, like transanal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery or total mesorectal excision.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Radical rectal resection following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer is accompanied by relatively high morbidity. Local excision of rectal cancer may be more appropriate for some frail patients with severe comorbidities. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), consisting of local excision of selected rectal cancers, has been associated with low rates of postoperative complications. Because neoadjuvant CRT for rectal cancer may be associated with increased complications, the suitability of TEM following CRT is still unclear. In this study we aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing TEM following neoadjuvant CRT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed all patients undergoing TEM for malignant rectal tumor in our institution between 2004 and 2010. They were divided into those who received CRT (CRT group) and those without CRT (non-CRT group). Demographics and clinical data were compared.

RESULTS

Forty-four of 97 patients who underwent TEM were included: 13 CRT and 31 non-CRT. Age, comorbidities, and the duration of the procedure were similar for both groups. There were no significant group differences in tumor diameter (2.1 cm [range, 0.5-3.5 cm] and 2.9 cm [range, 0.5-4.2 cm], respectively; P=.125) or distance of the lower part of the tumor from the anal verge (6.7 cm [range, 5-10 cm] and 7.7 cm [range, 5-15 cm], respectively; P=.285). Two non-CRT patients had peritoneal entry, and 1 of them underwent protective ileostomy because of insecure rectal defect closure. One non-CRT patient underwent a re-operation for postoperative bleeding. The other perioperative complications were minor and included urinary retention requiring catheter placement (2 patients in each group), pulmonary edema (1 non-CRT patient), and pneumonia (1 non-CRT patient). All complications were managed conservatively. There was no wound disruption, major complication, or mortality in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

With proper patient selection, TEM can be performed safely following CRT, without major complication or increased postoperative morbidity.

Nonoperative management of rectal cancer: identifying the ideal patients

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) is considered one of the preferred treatment strategies for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. This strategy may lead to significant tumor regression, ultimately leading to a complete pathologic response in up to 42% of patients. Assessment of tumor response following CRT and before radical surgery may identify patients with a complete clinical response who could possibly be managed nonoperatively with strict follow-up (watch-and-wait strategy). The present article deals with critical issues regarding appropriate selection of patients for this approach.

Organ preservation in rectal cancer: current status and future perspectives

With the introduction of population screening initiatives, more patients may be amenable to local, transanal excision (LE) of early-stage rectal cancer. The most important drawback of LE is the risk of understaging node-positive disease. The most powerful predictors of node-positive disease are lymphatic invasion, submucosal invasion depth and width, tumor budding and poor differentiation. Therefore, LE should be reserved for low-risk T1 tumors in those reluctant or unable to undergo major surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by LE for T2 tumors allows adequate local control, and is currently being compared with anterior resection alone in randomized trials. A mere watchful waiting approach has been proposed in clinical complete responders to chemoradiation. However, given the very poor accuracy of current imaging modalities to predict a true pathological complete response, this strategy should not be offered outside of well-controlled trials.

Chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer in the distal rectum followed by organ-sparing transanal endoscopic microsurgery (CARTS study)

BACKGROUND

This prospective multicentre study was performed to quantify the number of patients with minimal residual disease (ypT0-1) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients with clinically staged T1-3 N0 distal rectal cancer were treated with long-course chemoradiotherapy. Clinical response was evaluated 6-8 weeks later and TEM performed. Total mesorectal excision was advocated in patients with residual disease (ypT2 or more).

RESULTS

The clinical stage was cT1 N0 in ten patients, cT2 N0 in 29 and cT3 N0 in 16 patients. Chemoradiotherapy-related complications of at least grade 3 occurred in 23 of 55 patients, with two deaths from toxicity, and two patients did not have TEM or major surgery. Among 47 patients who had TEM, ypT0-1 disease was found in 30, ypT0 N1 in one, ypT2 in 15 and ypT3 in one. Local recurrence developed in three of the nine patients with ypT2 tumours who declined further surgery. Postoperative complications grade I-IIIb occurred in 13 of 47 patients after TEM and in five of 12 after (completion) surgery. After a median follow-up of 17 months, four local recurrences had developed overall, three in patients with ypT2 and one with ypT1 disease.

CONCLUSION

TEM after chemoradiotherapy enabled organ preservation in one-half of the patients with rectal cancer.