Quality-of-life impairment after endoluminal locoregional resection and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision

Local resection in rectal cancer: When, who and how?

Local resection (LR) in rectal cancer is indicated in stage T1N0M0 without unfavorable pathological factors, achieving oncologically satisfactory outcomes through transanal endoscopic surgery techniques. However, the initial step involves accurate staging and selection of these tumors through specific tests conducted in specialized colorectal units. For T2N0M0 tumors and T1 tumors with poor prognostic factors, the standard treatment is total mesorectal excision (TME), a procedure associated with high postoperative morbidity and mortality, functional impairments, and reduced quality of life. Therefore, new organ-preservation strategies are being explored as alternatives to TME. These include neoadjuvant therapy combined with LR, which has shown promising results, and neoadjuvant therapy followed by a "Watch and Wait" approach -where patients with complete clinical response are selected for strict surveillance- as an ideal future treatment, although there are still current challenges to be addressed.

Chinese national clinical practice guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of early colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC) in China are increasing in recent years. The clarified pathogenesis and detectable precancerous lesions of CRC make it possible to prevent, screen, and diagnose CRC at an early stage. With the development of endoscopic and surgical techniques, the choice of treatment for early CRC is also worth further discussion, and accordingly, a standard follow-up program after treatment needs to be established.

METHODS

This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed following the recommended process of the World Health Organization, adopting Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) in assessing evidence quality, and using the Evidence to Decision framework to formulate clinical recommendations, thereby minimizing bias and increasing transparency of the CPG development process. We used the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) as reporting and conduct guides to ensure the guideline's completeness and transparency.

RESULTS

This CPG comprises 46 recommendations concerning prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC. In these recommendations, we have indicated protective and risk factors for CRC and made recommendations for chemoprevention. We proposed a suitable screening program for CRC based on the Chinese context. We also provided normative statements for the diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of CRC based on existing clinical evidence and guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The 46 recommendations in this CPG are formed with consideration for stakeholders' values and preferences, feasibility, and acceptability. Recommendations are generalizable to resource-limited settings with similar CRC epidemiology pattern as China.

Short-term outcomes after primary total mesorectal excision (TME) versus local excision followed by completion TME for early rectal cancer: population-based propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening programmes have led to a shift towards early-stage colorectal cancer, which, in selected cases, can be treated using local excision. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision (two-stage approach) may be associated with less favourable outcomes than primary total mesorectal excision (one-stage approach). The aim of this population study was to determine the distribution of treatment strategies for early rectal cancer in the Netherlands and to compare the short-term outcomes of primary total mesorectal excision with those of local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision.

METHODS

Short-term data for patients with cT1-2 N0xM0 rectal cancer who underwent local excision only, primary total mesorectal excision, or local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision between 2012 and 2020 in the Netherlands were collected from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. Patients were categorized according to treatment groups and logistic regressions were performed after multiple imputation and propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the end-ostomy rate.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2020, the proportion for the two-stage approach increased from 22.3% to 43.9%. After matching, 1062 patients were included. The end-ostomy rate was 16.8% for the primary total mesorectal excision group versus 29.6% for the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (P < 0.001). The primary total mesorectal excision group had a higher re-intervention rate than the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (16.7% versus 11.8%; P = 0.048). No differences were observed with regard to complications, conversion, diverting ostomies, radical resections, readmissions, and death.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that, over time, cT1-2 rectal cancer has increasingly been treated using the two-stage approach. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision seems to be associated with an elevated end-ostomy rate. It is important that clinicians and patients are aware of this risk during shared decision-making.

Management after non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer

Since the introduction of population-based screening, increasing numbers of T1 rectal cancers are detected and removed by local endoscopic resection. Patients can be cured with endoscopic resection alone, but there is a possibility of residual tumor cells remaining after the initial resection. These can be located intraluminally at the resection site or extraluminally in the form of (lymph node) metastases. To decrease the risk of residual cells progressing towards more advanced disease, additional treatment is usually needed. However, with the currently available risk stratification models, it remains challenging to determine who should and should not be further treated after non-curative endoscopic resection. In this review, the different management strategies for patients with non-curatively treated T1 rectal cancers are discussed, along with the available evidence for each strategy and relevant considerations for clinical decision making. Furthermore, we provide practical guidance on the management and surveillance following non-curative endoscopic resection of T1 rectal cancer.

Patients' perspectives and the perceptions of healthcare providers in the treatment of early rectal cancer; a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making has become of increased importance in choosing the most suitable treatment strategy for early rectal cancer, however, clinical decision-making is still primarily based on physicians' perspectives. Balancing quality of life and oncological outcomes is difficult, and guidance on patients' involvement in this subject in early rectal cancer is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to explore preferences and priorities of patients as well as physicians' perspectives in treatment for early rectal cancer.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were performed with early rectal cancer patients (n = 10) and healthcare providers (n = 10). Participants were asked which factors influenced their preferences and how important these factors were. Thematic analyses were performed. In addition, participants were asked to rank the discussed factors according to importance to gain additional insights.

RESULTS

Patients addressed the following relevant factors: the risk of an ostomy, risk of poor bowel function and treatment related complications. Healthcare providers emphasized oncological outcomes as tumour recurrence, risk of an ostomy and poor bowel function. Patients perceived absolute risks of adverse outcome to be lower than healthcare providers and were quite willing undergo organ preservation to achieve a better prospect of quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Patients' preferences in treatment of early rectal cancer vary between patients and frequently differ from assumptions of preferences by healthcare providers. To optimize future shared decision-making, healthcare providers should be aware of these differences and should invite patients to explore and address their priorities more explicitly during consultation. Factors deemed important by both physicians and patients should be expressed during consultation to decide on a tailored treatment strategy.

Completion Total Mesorectal Excision: A Case-Matched Comparison With Primary Resection

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative and oncological results of completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) versus primary total mesorectal excision (pTME).

Background

Early-stage rectal cancer can be treated by local excision alone, which is associated with less surgical morbidity and improved functional outcomes compared with radical surgery. When high-risk histological features are present, cTME is indicated, with possible worse clinical and oncological outcomes compared to pTME.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included all patients that underwent TME surgery for rectal cancer performed in 11 centers in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2017. After case-matching, we compared cTME with pTME. The primary outcome was major postoperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes included the rate of restorative procedures and 3-year oncological outcomes.

Results

In total 1069 patients were included, of which 35 underwent cTME. After matching (1:2 ratio), 29 cTME and 58 pTME were analyzed. No differences were found for major morbidity (27.6% vs 19.0%; P = 0.28) and abdominoperineal excision rate (31.0% vs 32.8%; P = 0.85) between cTME and pTME, respectively. Local recurrence (3.4% vs 8.6%; P = 0.43), systemic recurrence (3.4% vs 12.1%; P = 0.25), overall survival (93.1% vs 94.8%; P = 0.71), and disease-free survival (89.7% vs 81.0%; P = 0.43) were comparable between cTME and pTME.

Conclusions

cTME is not associated with higher major morbidity, whereas the abdominoperineal excision rate and 3-year oncological outcomes are similar compared to pTME. Local excision as a diagnostic tool followed by completion surgery for early rectal cancer does not compromise outcomes and should still be considered as the treatment of early-stage rectal cancer.

Clinical consequences of diagnostic variability in the histopathological evaluation of early rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

In early rectal cancer, organ sparing treatment strategies such as local excision have gained popularity. The necessity of radical surgery is based on the histopathological evaluation of the local excision specimen. This study aimed to describe diagnostic variability between pathologists, and its impact on treatment allocation in patients with locally excised early rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with locally excised pT1-2 rectal cancer were included in this prospective cohort study. Both quantitative measures and histopathological risk factors (i.e. poor differentiation, deep submucosal invasion, and lymphatic- or venous invasion) were evaluated. Interobserver variability was reported by both percentages and Fleiss' Kappa- (ĸ) or intra-class correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients were included. Ninety-four percent of the original histopathological reports contained all required parameters. In 73 of the 126 (57.9%) patients, at least one discordant parameter was observed, which regarded histopathological risk factors for lymph node metastases in 36 patients (28.6%). Interobserver agreement among different variables varied between 74% and 95% or ĸ 0.530-0.962. The assessment of lymphovascular invasion showed discordances in 26% (ĸ = 0.530, 95% CI 0.375-0.684) of the cases. In fourteen (11%) patients, discordances led to a change in treatment strategy.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that there is substantial interobserver variability between pathologists, especially in the assessment of lymphovascular invasion. Pathologists play a key role in treatment allocation after local excision of early rectal cancer, therefore interobserver variability needs to be reduced to decrease the number of patients that are over- or undertreated.

Body Image Issues in Patients With Colorectal Cancer: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Stomas in colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors lead to body image problems. Advances in treatment help reduce the rate of stoma formation, but body image distress is still frequently experienced in CRC survivors.

OBJECTIVES

This review is aimed toward mapping and describing the state of knowledge regarding body image in patients with CRC.

METHODS

A systematic literature search complying with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines was conducted. Screening and data extraction were performed by 2 reviewers independently for all potentially eligible studies.

RESULTS

A total of 56 eligible articles were selected. The majority of these studies were quantitative studies (85%). The eligible studies were classified into 4 broad categories: instruments used to assess body image, prevalence of body image distress, factors related to body image, and impact of body image distress. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-CR38) colorectal questionnaire was the most common measurement tool found among the reviewed studies (70%), and body image distress was reported by 25.5% to 86% of participants. Excluding gender, age, type of surgery, adjuvant therapy, time from diagnosis, social support, and stoma status, changes in bowel habits was identified as affecting the body image of patients with CRC.

CONCLUSION

Changing bowel habits emerged as a significant factor causing body image distress for CRC survivors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Clinicians should raise awareness about body image distress in patients with CRC, focus on finding effective measures and interventions intended to help alleviate symptoms of bowel dysfunction, and prepare patients to adapt to altered bowel functions.

Long-term oncological outcomes after local excision of T1 rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

A growing proportion of patients with early rectal cancer is treated by local excision only. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term oncological outcomes and the impact of local recurrence on overall survival for surgical local excision in pT1 rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients who only underwent local excision for pT1 rectal cancer between 1997 and 2014 in two Dutch tertiary referral hospitals were included in this retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome was the local recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes were distant recurrence, overall survival and the impact of local recurrence on overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients (mean age 68.5 ± 10.7 years, 57.3% males) were included in the study. Median length of follow-up was 58.9 months (range 6-176 months). Local recurrence occurred in 22.7% (n = 34) of the patients, with a median time to local recurrence of 11.1 months (range 2.3-82.6 months). The vast majority of local recurrences were located in the lumen. Five-year overall survival was 82.0%, and landmark analyses showed that local recurrence significantly impacted overall survival at 6 and 36 months of follow-up (6 months, p = 0.034, 36 months, p = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

Local recurrence rates after local excision of early rectal cancer can be substantial and may impact overall survival. Therefore, clinical decision-making should be based on patient- and tumour characteristics and should incorporate patient preferences.

Risk of recurrence after local resection of T1 rectal cancer: a meta-analysis with meta-regression

BACKGROUND

T1 rectal cancer (RC) patients are increasingly being treated by local resection alone but uniform surveillance strategies thereafter are lacking. To determine whether different local resection techniques influence the risk of recurrence and cancer-related mortality, a meta-analysis was performed.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for T1RC patients treated with local surgical resection. The primary outcome was the risk of RC recurrence and RC-related mortality. Pooled estimates were calculated using mixed-effect logistic regression. We also systematically searched and evaluated endoscopically treated T1RC patients in a similar manner.

RESULTS

In 2585 unique T1RC patients (86 studies) undergoing local surgical resection, the overall pooled cumulative incidence of recurrence was 9.1% (302 events, 95% CI 7.3-11.4%; I2 = 68.3%). In meta-regression, the recurrence risk was associated with histological risk status (p < 0.005; low-risk 6.6%, 95% CI 4.4-9.7% vs. high-risk 28.2%, 95% CI 19-39.7%) and local surgical resection technique (p < 0.005; TEM/TAMIS 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0% vs. other local surgical excisions 10.8%, 95% CI 6.7-16.8%). In 641 unique T1RC patients treated with flexible endoscopic excision (16 studies), the risk of recurrence (7.7%, 95% CI 5.2-11.2%), cancer-related mortality (2.3%, 95% CI 1.1-4.9), and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence (30.0%, 95% CI 14.7-49.4%) were comparable to outcomes after TEM/TAMIS (risk of recurrence 7.7%, 95% CI 5.3-11.0%, cancer-related mortality 2.8%, 95% CI 1.2-6.2% and among patients with recurrence 35.6%, 95% CI 21.9-51.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with T1 rectal cancer may have a significantly lower recurrence risk after TEM/TAMIS compared to other local surgical resection techniques. After TEM/TAMIS and endoscopic resection the recurrence risk, cancer-related mortality and cancer-related mortality among patients with recurrence were comparable. Recurrence was mainly dependent on histological risk status.

Multidisciplinary management of early rectal cancer - The role of surgical local excision in current and future clinical practice

The implementation of bowel cancer screening programs has led to a rise in the incidence of early rectal cancer. The combination of increased incidence and the growing interest in organ-sparing treatment options has led to an amplified importance of local excision techniques in treatment strategies for early rectal cancer. In addition, developments in new technologies of single-port surgery have popularized surgical techniques. Although local treatment of early rectal cancer seems promising, a multidisciplinary approach is necessary and awareness of the oncological robustness is warranted to enable shared decision-making. This review illustrates the position of surgical local excision in the treatment of early rectal cancer and reflects on its role in current and future clinical practice.

A Meta-analysis of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery versus Total Mesorectal Excision in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer

Background  Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) has been suggested as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in the treatment of early rectal cancers. The extended role of TEMS for higher stage rectal cancers after neoadjuvant therapy is also experimented. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the oncological outcomes and report on the evidence-based clinical supremacy of either technique.

Methods  Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for the randomized controlled trials comparing the oncological and perioperative outcomes of TEMS and a radical TME. A local recurrence and postoperative complications were analyzed as primary end points. Intraoperative blood loss, operation time, and duration of hospital stay were compared as secondary end points.

Results  There was no statistical difference in the local recurrence or postoperative complications with a risk ratio of 1.898 and 0.753 and p -values of 0.296 and 0.306, respectively, for TEMS and TME. A marked statistical significance in favor of TEMS was observed for secondary end points. There was standard difference in means of −4.697, −6.940, and −5.685 with p -values of 0.001, 0.005, and 0.001 for blood loss, operation time, and hospital stay, respectively.

Conclusion  TEMS procedure is a viable alternative to TME in the treatment of early rectal cancers. An extended role of TEMS after neoadjuvant therapy may also be offered to a selected group of patients. TME surgery remains the standard of care in more advanced rectal cancers.

Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older patients, current guidelines do not incorporate optimal treatment recommendations for the elderly and address only partially the associated specific challenges encountered in this population. This results in a wide variation and disparity in delivering a standard of care to this subset of patients. As the burden of rectal cancer in the elderly population continues to increase, it is crucial to assess whether current recommendations on treatment strategies for the general population can be adopted for the older adults, with the same beneficial oncological and functional outcomes. This multidisciplinary experts' consensus aims to refine current rectal cancer-specific guidelines for the elderly population in order to help to maximize rectal cancer therapeutic strategies while minimizing adverse impacts on functional outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

METHODS

The discussion among the steering group of clinical experts and methodologists from the societies' expert panel involved clinicians practicing in general surgery, colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, gastroenterologists, radiologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, and endoscopists. Research topics and questions were formulated, revised, and unanimously approved by all experts in two subsequent modified Delphi rounds in December 2020-January 2021. The steering committee was divided into nine teams following the main research field of members. Each conducted their literature search and drafted statements and recommendations on their research question. Literature search has been updated up to 2020 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. A modified Delphi methodology was implemented to reach agreement among the experts on all statements and recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 SICG-SIFIPAC-SICE-WSES consensus for the multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer aims to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: epidemiology, pre-intervention strategies, diagnosis and staging, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgery, watch and wait strategy, adjuvant chemotherapy, synchronous liver metastases, and emergency presentation of rectal cancer.

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.

Local recurrence after local excision of early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of completion TME, adjuvant (chemo)radiation, or no additional treatment

BACKGROUND

The risks of local recurrence and treatment-related morbidity need to be balanced after local excision of early rectal cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer followed by no additional treatment (NAT), completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (aCRT).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was local recurrence. Statistical analysis included calculation of the weighted average of proportions.

RESULTS

Some 73 studies comprising 4674 patients were included in the analysis. Sixty-two evaluated NAT, 13 cTME and 28 aCRT. The local recurrence rate for NAT among low-risk pT1 tumours was 6·7 (95 per cent c.i. 4·8 to 9·3) per cent. There were no local recurrences of low-risk pT1 tumours after cTME or aCRT. The local recurrence rate for high-risk pT1 tumours was 13·6 (8·0 to 22·0) per cent for local excision only, 4·1 (1·7 to 9·4) per cent for cTME and 3·9 (2·0 to 7·5) per cent for aCRT. Local recurrence rates for pT2 tumours were 28·9 (22·3 to 36·4) per cent with NAT, 4 (1 to 13) per cent after cTME and 14·7 (11·2 to 19·0) per cent after aCRT.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial risk of local recurrence in patients who receive no additional treatment after local excision, especially those with high-risk pT1 and pT2 rectal cancer. The lowest recurrence risk is provided by cTME; aCRT has outcomes comparable to those of cTME for high-risk pT1 tumours, but shows a higher risk for pT2 tumours.

Organ-saving surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation: Analysis of failures and long-term results

BACKGROUND

To analyze long-term results and risk of relapse in the clinical TNM stages II and III, mid-low rectal cancer patients (RC pts), treated with transanal local excision (LE) after major response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (n-CRT).

METHODS

Thirty-two out of 345 extraperitoneal cT3-4 or N+ RC pts (9.3%) underwent LE.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

extraperitoneal RC, adenocarcinoma, ECOG Performance Status ≤2. Pts with distant metastases were excluded.

RESULTS

All pts showed histologically clear margins of resection and 81.2% were restaged ypT0/mic/1. Nine out of 32 (28.1%) pts relapsed: 7 (21.8%) showed a local recurrence, of which 5 (15.6%) at the endorectal suture, 1 (3.1%) pelvic and 1 (3.1%) mesorectal. Two pts (6.2%) relapsed distantly. Among the pT0/1, 11.5% relapsed vs 100% of the pT2 and pT4 ones. The six pts relapsing locally or in the mesorectal fat underwent a salvage total mesorectal excision surgery. The old patient with pelvic recurrence relapsed after 108 months and underwent a re-irradiation; the two pts with distant metastases were treated with chemotherapy followed by radical surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Presently combined approach seems a valid option in major responders, confirming its potential curative impact in the ypT0/mic/1 pts. A strict selection of pts is basic to obtain favourable results.

Systematic review of functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery: a word of caution

PURPOSE

The introduction of transanal endoscopic or minimally invasive surgery has allowed organ preservation for rectal tumors with good oncological results. Data on functional and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes are scarce and controversial. This systematic review sought to synthesize fecal continence, QoL, and manometric outcomes after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) or transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted searching for articles reporting on functional outcomes after TEM or TAMIS between January 1995 and June 2018. The evaluated outcome parameters were pre- and postoperative fecal continence (primary endpoint), QoL, and manometric results. Data were extracted using the same scales and measurement units as from the original study.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies comprising 1297 patients were included. Fecal continence outcomes were evaluated in 23 (79%) studies with a wide variety of assessment tools and divergent results. Ten studies (34%) analyzed QoL changes, and manometric variables were assessed in 15 studies (51%). Most studies reported some deterioration in manometric scores without major QoL impairment. Due to the heterogeneity of the data, it was not possible to perform any pooled analysis or meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These techniques do not seem to affect continence by themselves except in minor cases. The possibility of worsened function after TEM and TAMIS should not be underestimated. There is a need to homogenize or standardize functional and manometric outcomes assessment after TEM or TAMIS.

A Decalogue to Avoid Routine Ileostomy in Selected Patients With Border Line Risk to Develop Anastomotic Leakage After Minimally Invasive Low-Anterior Resection: A Pilot Study

Purpose. Protective ileostomy (PI) during anterior resection (AR) for rectal cancer decreases the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) and its subsequent complications, but it may itself be the cause of morbidity. The aim is to report our protocol in the management of selected patients with borderline risk to develop AL after laparoscopic AR and ghost ileostomy (GI) creation. Methods. Patients who underwent AR were stratified based on the risk to develop AL. Steps to avoid PI were splenic flexure mobilization, reduced pelvic bleeding, to employ different stapler charge if neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy is performed, to perform a horizontal section of the rectum, to evaluate the anastomotic vascularization with a fluorescence angiography, to perform a side-to-end anastomosis, intraoperative methylene blue test, pelvic and transanal drainage tubes placement, and the GI creation. After surgery, inflammatory blood markers were monitored to detect potential leakages. Results. Twelve patients were included. In one case, the specimen proximal section was changed after fluorescence angiography. There were no conversions in this group of patients. One postoperative AL occurred and was treated with radiological drainage placement, not being necessary to convert the GI. PI was avoided in 100% of cases. Conclusions. Patients' characteristics cannot be changed, but several steps were used to avoid routine PI creation. The present protocol could be a valuable option to avoid PI in selected patients. Further studies with a wider sample size, and defined criteria to stratify the patients based on the risk to develop AL, are required.

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.

Quality of life and fear of cancer recurrence in T1 colorectal cancer patients treated with endoscopic or surgical tumor resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To optimize therapeutic decision-making in early invasive colorectal cancer (T1 CRC) patients, it is important to elicit the patient's perspective next to considering medical outcome. Because empirical data on patient-reported impact of different treatment options are lacking, we evaluated patients' quality of life, perceived time to recovery, and fear of cancer recurrence after endoscopic or surgical treatment for T1 CRC.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we selected patients with histologically confirmed T1 CRC who participated in the Dutch Bowel Cancer Screening Programme and received endoscopic or surgical treatment between January 2014 and July 2017. Quality of life was measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment 30-item Core Quality of Life Questionnaire and the 5-level EuroQoL 5-dimension questionnaire. We used the Cancer Worry Scale (CWS) to evaluate patients' fear of cancer recurrence. A question on perceived time to recovery after treatment was also included in the set of questionnaires sent to patients.

RESULTS

Of all 119 eligible patients, 92.4% responded to the questionnaire (endoscopy group, 55/62; surgery group, 55/57). Compared with the surgery group, perceived time to recovery was on average 3 months shorter in endoscopically treated patients after adjustment for confounders (19.9 days vs 111.3 days; P = .001). The 2 treatment groups were comparable with regard to global quality of life, functioning domains, and symptom severity scores. Moreover, patients in the endoscopy group did not report more fear of cancer recurrence than those in the surgery group (CWS score, 0-40; endoscopy 7.6 vs surgery 9.7; P = .140).

CONCLUSIONS

From the patient's perspective, endoscopic treatment provides a quicker recovery than surgery, without provoking more fear of cancer recurrence or any deterioration in quality of life. These results contribute to the shared therapeutic decision-making process of clinicians and T1 CRC patients.

Quality of life in patients with loco-regional rectal cancer after ELRR by TEM versus VLS TME after nChRT: long-term results

BACKGROUND

Endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) may be an alternative treatment option to Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME), in selected patients with N0 rectal cancer. Post-operative quality of life (QoL) evaluation is an important parameter of outcomes related to high percentage of functional sequelae. We reported, in a previous paper, the short and medium term results of QoL in patients who underwent ELRR or LTME. The aim is to evaluate the 3 year QoL in patients with iT2-T3 N0/+ rectal cancer who underwent ELRR by TEM or LTME after neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy (nChRT) in a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

METHODS

We enrolled in this study, 39 patients with iT2-T3 rectal cancer who underwent ELRR (n = 19) or LTME (n = 20), according to predefined criteria. QoL was evaluated by EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38 questionnaires at admission, after n-RCT and 1, 6, 12, and 36 months after surgery.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences in QoL evaluation were observed between the two groups, both at admission and after n-RCT. In short term (1-6 months) period, significantly better results were observed in ELRR group by QLQ-C30 in global health status (p = 0.03), physical functioning (p = 0.026), role functioning (p = 0.04), emotional functioning (p = 0.04), cognitive functioning, fatigue (p < 0.05), dyspnoea (p < 0.001), insomnia (p < 0.05), appetite loss (p < 0.05), constipation (≤ 0.05), and by QLQ-CR38 in: body image (p = 0.03) and defecation (p = 0.025). At 1 year, the two groups were homogenous as assessed by QLQ-C30, whereas the QLQCR38 still showed better results of ELRR versus LTME in body image (p = 0.006), defecation problems (p = 0.01), and weight loss (p = 0.005). At 3 years, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients with rectal cancer, who underwent ELRR by TEM or LTME, QoL tests at 3 years do not show any statistical differences on examined items.

Synthetic Versus Biological Mesh-Related Erosion After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

This review reports the incidence of mesh-related erosion after ventral mesh rectopexy to determine whether any difference exists in the erosion rate between synthetic and biological mesh.

METHODS

A systematic search of the MEDLINE and the Ovid databases was conducted to identify suitable articles published between 2004 and 2015. The search strategy capture terms were laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, laparoscopic anterior rectopexy, robotic ventral rectopexy, and robotic anterior rectopexy.

RESULTS

Eight studies (3,956 patients) were included in this review. Of those patients, 3,517 patients underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) using synthetic mesh and 439 using biological mesh. Sixty-six erosions were observed with synthetic mesh (26 rectal, 32 vaginal, 8 recto-vaginal fistulae) and one (perineal erosion) with biological mesh. The synthetic and the biological mesh-related erosion rates were 1.87% and 0.22%, respectively. The time between rectopexy and diagnosis of mesh erosion ranged from 1.7 to 124 months. No mesh-related mortalities were reported.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of mesh-related erosion after LVR is low and is more common after the placement of synthetic mesh. The use of biological mesh for LVR seems to be a safer option; however, large, multicenter, randomized, control trials with long follow-ups are required if a definitive answer is to be obtained.

Quality of life in non-early rectal cancer treated by neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy and endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

In selected patients with N0 rectal cancer, endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) may be an alternative treatment option to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME). Aim of this study is to evaluate the short- and medium-term quality of life (QoL) from a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in patients with iT2-iT3 N0-N+ rectal cancer, who underwent ELRR by TEM or LTME after neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy (n-RCT).

METHODS

Thirty patients with iT2-iT3 rectal cancer who underwent ELRR by TEM (n = 15) or LTME (n = 15) were enrolled in this study. The choice for one operation or the other was made on the basis of predefined criteria. QoL was evaluated by EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38 questionnaires at admission, after n-RCT and 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences in QoL evaluation were observed between the two groups, both at admission and after n-RCT. At 1 month after surgery, significantly better results in the ELRR group were observed by QLQ-C30 in: Nausea/Vomiting (p = 0.05), Appetite Loss (p = 0.003), Constipation (p = 0.05), and by QLQ-CR38 in: Body Image (p = 0.05), Sexual Functioning (p = 0.03), Future Perspective (p = 0.05) and Weight Loss (p = 0.036). At 6 months after surgery, a statistically significant worse impact after LTME was observed by QLQ-C30 in: Global Health Status (p = 0.05), Emotional Functioning (p = 0.021), Dyspnea (p = 0.008), Insomnia (p = 0.012), Appetite Loss (p = 0.014) and by QLQ-CR38 in Body Image (p = 0.05) and Defecation Problems (p = 0.001). At 1 year, the two groups were homogenous as assessed by QLQ-C30, whereas the QLQ-CR38 still showed better results of ELRR versus LTME in Body Image (p = 0.006), Defecation Problems (p = 0.01), and Weight Loss (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the present series, in selected patients, earlier restoration of patients' functions is observed after ELRR by TEM than after LTME.

Risk of complications and long-term functional alterations after local excision of rectal tumors with transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM)

INTRODUCTION

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a consolidated technique for the excision of rectal tumors. However, many aspects relating to its morbidity, risk of functional alterations, and therapeutic outcomes are still unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the rate of morbidity and fecal incontinence after TEM, and to identify associated risk factors.

METHODS

We prospectively recorded the clinical data of 157 patients who underwent TEM from 1996 to 2013. Among these, 89 patients answered a questionnaire for the assessment of fecal continence at a median follow-up time of 40 months.

RESULTS

Intraoperative and postoperative TEM complication rates were 3.8 and 20.4%. The mortality rate was 0.6%. A distance from the anal verge of more than 6 cm correlated with a higher risk of perforation, while patients with cancer were more likely to have postoperative bleeding. Incontinence was reported by 32 (36%) patients, of which 7 (8%) experienced transitory symptoms only, while 25 (28%) reported persistent symptoms. We found a correlation between patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (RT) and the development of fecal incontinence. The recurrence rate was 3% (1/32) in pT1, 80% (4/5) in pT2, and 100% (1/1) in pT3. After radiotherapy, 7% (1/9) showed a good response (pT0-1), and 18% (2/7) showed no response (pT2-3).

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is associated with low morbidity but the risk of developing functional alterations is not negligible and should be discussed with the patient before the operation. Good oncological outcomes are possible for early invasive cancers and for selected advanced cancers following a good response to preoperative RT.

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.

Evaluation of quality of life and function at 1 year after transanal endoscopic microsurgery

AIM

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) enables organ preservation after rectal tumour surgery. Its application is being expanded using adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments. Our objective was to evaluate the changes over time in anorectal function, urinary symptoms and quality of life (QoL) in patients who had TEM surgery for a rectal tumour.

METHOD

Between September 2009 and October 2012, a consecutive series of 102 patients underwent TEM at a single institution. Patients were asked to fill out standardized questionnaires at baseline and then at 6, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after surgery. The QoL among these patients was assessed using one generic (EQ-5D) and two disease-specific [European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29] questionnaires. Anorectal and urinary symptoms were studied using the COlo-REctal Functional Outcome (COREFO) and the International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS) questionnaires, respectively.

RESULTS

The response rate was 90% (92/102 patients). Postoperative complications occurred in 14% (13/92) of patients. The general QoL (as assessed using the EQ-5D) was lower 6 and 12 weeks after TEM compared with baseline QoL (P < 0.05) but returned towards baseline after 26 weeks. Anorectal function (determined using the COREFO) was worse 6 weeks postoperatively (P < 0.01) but had normalized by 12 weeks. Urinary function (determined using the I-PSS) was not affected at any time point after surgery. The total COREFO score and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score were correlated with the deterioration in QoL.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates that TEM has a temporary and reversible impact on QoL and anorectal function. Intensive interrogation of QoL and function using appropriate questionnaires will help to define the role of organ-preserving surgery for rectal cancer before and after chemoradiotherapy.

Long-term changes in physical capacity after colorectal cancer treatment

Older patients with colorectal cancer are faced with the dilemma of choosing between the short-term risks of treatment and the long-term risks of insufficiently treated disease. In addition to treatment-related morbidity and mortality, patients may suffer from loss of physical capacity. The purpose of this review was to gather all available evidence regarding long-term changes in physical functioning and role functioning after colorectal cancer treatment, by performing a systematic Medline and Embase search. This search yielded 27 publications from 23 studies. In 16 studies addressing physical functioning after rectal cancer treatment, a median drop of 10% (range -26% to -5%) in the mean score for this item at three months. At six months, mean score was still 7% lower than baseline (range -18% to 0%) and at twelve months 5% lower (range -13% to +5%). For role functioning (i.e. ability to perform daily activities) after rectal cancer treatment, scores were -18% (range -39% to -2%), -8% (range -23% to +6%) and -5% (range -17% to +10%) respectively. Elderly patients experience the greatest and most persistent decline in self-care capacity (up to 61% at one year). This systematic review demonstrates that both physical functioning and role functioning are significantly affected by colorectal cancer surgery. Although initial losses are recovered partially during follow-up, there is a permanent loss in both aspects of physical capacity, in patients of all ages but especially in the elderly. This aspect should be included in patient counselling regarding surgery.

Tricks to decrease the suture line dehiscence rate during endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM)

BACKGROUND

ELRR by TEM is a valid alternative to TME in selected patients with early low rectal cancer, with similar long-term oncological results and better Quality of Life. The authors' policy is to close the residual defect, with possibly a higher risk of dehiscence from tension on the suture line. Aim is to evaluate if a modified technique may reduce the risk of dehiscence.

METHODS

The latest series of 50 patients undergoing ELRR was analyzed and patients were divided in two consecutive groups. In Group A, 25 patients underwent ELRR by TEM with the authors' standard technique. In Group B, a subsequent series of 25 patients also underwent ELRR, but the perirectal residual cavity was filled with a hemostatic agent prior to rectal wall closure. After suture completion, the rectal ampulla was stuffed with gauzes to avoid the formation of a perirectal fluid collection, by enlarging the volume of the residual rectal ampulla. A transanal Foley catheter was positioned for gas evacuation.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in mean tumor distance from the anal verge, mean lesion diameter, mean operative time, and pathological staging between the two groups. Neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy (n-RCT) in Groups A and B was performed in 6 and 2 patients, respectively. Suture line dehiscence in Group A occurred in 3 patients (12%) and in group B it was nil. In patients who experienced a dehiscence, mean lesion diameter was 6.3 cm (range 6-7). None of these patients had undergone n-RCT.

CONCLUSION

After ELRR by TEM, suture line dehiscence is presumably related to the wider size of the residual cavity. Obliteration of the residual perirectal space with hemostatic agent and by gauzes' introduction in the rectal ampulla may reduce the risk of postoperative perirectal abscess and thus reduce the suture line dehiscence rate.