Oncological safety of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer: mid-term results of a prospective multicentre study

Functional Outcomes After Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME) for Rectal Cancer: Results From the Phase II North American Multicenter Prospective Observational Trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate fecal incontinence and defecatory, urinary, and sexual functional outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME).

BACKGROUND

Proctectomy for rectal cancer may result in alterations in defecatory, urinary, and sexual function that persist beyond 12 months. The recent multicenter phase II taTME trial demonstrated the safety of taTME in patients with stage I to III tumors.

METHODS

Prospectively registered self-reported questionnaires were collected from 100 taTME patients. Fecal continence [Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life (FIQL), Wexner], defecatory function [Colorectal Functional Outcome (COREFO)], urinary function (International Prostate Symptom Score), and sexual function (Female Sexual Function Index-female, International Index of Erectile Function-male) were assessed preoperatively (PQ), 3 to 4 months postileostomy closure (FQ1), and 12 to 18 months post-taTME [postoperative questionnaire 2 (FQ2)].

RESULTS

Among 83 patients who responded at all 3 time points, FIQL, Wexner, and COREFO significantly worsened postileostomy closure. Between FQ1 and FQ2, FIQL lifestyle and coping, Wexner, and COREFO incontinence, social impact, frequency, and need for medication significantly improved, while FIQL depression and embarrassment did not change. International Prostate Symptom Score did not change relative to preoperative scores. For females, Female Sexual Function Index declined for desire, orgasm, and satisfaction between PQ and FQ1, and did not improve between FQ1 and FQ2. In males, International Index of Erectile Function declined with no change between FQ1 and FQ2.

CONCLUSIONS

Although taTME resulted in initial decline in defecatory function and fecal continence, most functional domains improved by 12 months after ileostomy closure, without returning to preoperative status. Urinary function was preserved while sexual function declined without improvement by 18 months post-taTME. Our results address patient expectations and inform shared decision-making regarding taTME.

Oncologic outcomes following transanal total mesorectal excision: the United States experience

AIM

The benefits and short-term outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer have been demonstrated previously, but questions remain regarding the oncologic outcomes following this challenging procedure. The purpose of this study was to analyze the oncologic outcomes following taTME at high-volume centers in the USA.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, retrospective observational study of 8 tertiary care centers. All consecutive taTME cases for primary rectal cancer performed between 2011 and 2020 were included. Clinical, histopathologic, and oncologic data were analyzed. Primary endpoints were rate of local recurrence, distal recurrence, 3-year disease recurrence, and 3-year overall survival. Secondary endpoints included perioperative complications and TME specimen quality.

RESULTS

A total of 391 patients were included in the study. The median age was 57 years (IQR: 49, 66), 68% of patients were male, and the median BMI was 27.4 (IQR: 24.1, 31.0). TME specimen was complete or near complete in 94.5% of cases and the rates of positive circumferential radial margin and distal resection margin were 2.0% and 0.3%, respectively. Median follow-up time was 30.7 months as calculated using reverse-KM estimator (CI 28.1-33.8) and there were 9 cases (2.5%) of local recurrence not accounting for competing risk. The 3-year estimated rate of disease recurrence was 19% (CI 15-25%) and the 3-year estimated overall survival was 90% (CI 87-94%).

CONCLUSION

This large multicenter study confirms the oncologic safety and perioperative benefits of taTME for rectal cancer when performed by experienced surgeons at experienced referral centers.

Is survival after transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) worse than that after traditional total mesorectal excision? A retrospective propensity score-adjusted cohort study

PURPOSE

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) was developed to provide better vision during resection of the mesorectum. Conflicting results have shown an increase in local recurrence and shorter survival after taTME. This study compared the outcomes of taTME and abdominal (open, laparoscopic, robotic) total mesorectal excision (abTME).

METHODS

Patients who underwent taTME or abTME for stages I-III rectal cancer and who received an anastomosis were included. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively conducted database was performed. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Risk factors were adjusted by propensity score matching (PSM). The secondary endpoints were local recurrence rates and combined poor pathological outcomes.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2020, a total of 189 patients underwent taTME, and 119 underwent abTME; patients were followed up for a mean of 54.7 (SD 24.2) and 78.4 (SD 34.8) months, respectively (p < 0.001). The 5-year survival rates after taTME and abTME were not significantly different after PSM: OS: 78.2% vs. 88.6% (p = 0.073), CSS: 87.4% vs. 92.1% (p = 0.359), and DFS: 69.3% vs. 80.9% (p = 0.104), respectively. No difference in the local recurrence rate was observed (taTME, n = 10 (5.3%); abTME, n = 10 (8.4%); p = 0.280). Combined poor pathological outcomes were more frequent after abTME (n = 36, 34.3%) than after taTME (n = 35, 19.6%) (p = 0.006); this difference was nonsignificant according to multivariate analysis (p = 0.404).

CONCLUSION

taTME seems to be a good treatment option for patients with rectal cancer and is unlikely to significantly affect local recurrence or survival. However, further investigations concerning the latter are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT0496910).

Inflammatory stress response after transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a cohort study based on the TaLaR trial

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a novel approach to radical surgery for low rectal cancer; however, it is not clear whether taTME causes a more severe inflammatory stress response than laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME). Therefore, the authors conducted this study to address this question, with the secondary objective of analyzing the predictive effect of inflammatory indexes on postoperative infective complications between laTME and taTME.

METHODS

A total of 545 cases of laTME and 544 cases of taTME from the TaLaR randomized controlled trial were included. Inflammatory stress response was assessed via C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell count, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-monocyte ratio, and prognostic nutritional index. Inflammatory indexes were measured and calculated preoperatively (t1) and on postoperative days one (t2) and seven (t3). The accuracy of inflammatory indexes as predictor of infective complications was evaluated by areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

Preoperative blood parameters were comparable between the two surgical methods. There were no significant differences in CRP, white blood cell count, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-monocyte ratio, or prognostic nutritional index between the two surgical methods at any time point ( P >0.05). Among the inflammatory indexes at three time points, CRP on the first postoperative day was the most accurate predictor of infective complications, which is suitable for two surgical methods. The AUC was 0.7671 ( P <0.0001) with a cutoff of 39.84 mg/l, yielding 94% sensitivity and 47% specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with laTME, taTME surgery has no obvious disadvantage with respect to the postoperative inflammatory stress response. In addition, inflammatory indexes were favorable in predicting infective complications, with the best results for CRP on the first postoperative day. Defining the specific predictors for laTME and taTME is unnecessary.

The role of transanal compared to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (taTME vs. lapTME) for the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer in obese patients: outcomes of a multicenter propensity-matched analysis

To compare the rate of sphincter-saving interventions between transanal and laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision in this particular group of patients. A multicentre observational study was conducted using a prospective database, including patients diagnosed with rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, who underwent minimally invasive elective surgery over a 5-year period. Exclusion criteria were (1) sphincter and/or puborectalis invasion; (2) multi-visceral resections; (3) palliative surgeries. The study population was divided into two groups according to the intervention: transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. The primary outcome was the rate of sphincter-saving surgery. Secondary outcomes included conversion, postoperative complications, quality of the specimen, and survival. A total of 93 patients were included; 40 (43%) transanal total mesorectal excision were compared to 53 (57%) laparoscopic. In addition, 35 cases of transanal approach were case-matched with an equal number of laparoscopic approaches, based on gender, tumor's height, and neoadjuvant therapy. In both groups, 43% of the patients had low rectal cancer; however, the rate of sphincter-saving surgery was significantly higher in the transanal group (97% vs. 71%, p = 0.003). There were no conversions to open surgery in the transanal group, compared to 2 cases in the laparoscopic group (6%) (p = 0.246). The percentage of major complications was similar, including the rate of anastomotic leakage (10% transanal vs. 19% laparoscopic, p = 0.835). In our experience, higher percentages of sphincter-saving procedures and lower conversion rates are potential benefits of using the transanal approach in a complex surgical setting population of obese patients with mid-low rectal tumors when compared to laparoscopic.

Multicenter phase II trial of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: preliminary results

BACKGROUND

Transanal TME (taTME) combines abdominal and transanal dissection to facilitate sphincter preservation in patients with low rectal tumors. Few phase II/III trials report long-term oncologic and functional results. We report early results from a North American prospective multicenter phase II trial of taTME (NCT03144765).

METHODS

100 patients with stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma located ≤ 10 cm from the anal verge (AV) were enrolled across 11 centers. Primary and secondary endpoints were TME quality, pathologic outcomes, 30-day and 90-day outcomes, and stoma closure rate. Univariable regression analysis was performed to assess risk factors for incomplete TME and anastomotic complications.

RESULTS

Between September 2017 and April 2022, 70 males and 30 females with median age of 58 (IQR 49-62) years and BMI 27.8 (IQR 23.9-31.8) kg/m2 underwent 2-team taTME for tumors located a median 5.8 (IQR 4.5-7.0) cm from the AV. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was completed in 69%. Intersphincteric resection was performed in 36% and all patients were diverted. Intraoperative complications occurred in 8% including 3 organ injuries, 2 abdominal and 1 transanal conversion. The 30-day and 90-day morbidity rates were 49% (Clavien-Dindo (CD) ≥ 3 in 28.6%) and 56% (CD ≥ 3 in 30.4% including 1 mortality), respectively. Anastomotic complications were reported in 18% including 10% diagnosed within 30 days. Higher anastomotic risk was noted among males (p = 0.05). At a median follow-up of 5 (IQR 3.1-7.4) months, 98% of stomas were closed. TME grade was complete or near complete in 90%, with positive margins in 2 cases (3%). Risk factors for incomplete TME were ASA ≥ 3 (p = 0.01), increased time between NRT and surgery (p = 0.03), and higher operative blood loss (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

When performed at expert centers, 2-team taTME in patients with low rectal tumors is safe with low conversion rates and high stoma closure rate. Mid-term results will further evaluate oncologic and functional outcomes.

Discordance in Total Mesorectal Excision Specimen Grading in a Prospective Phase 2 Multicenter Rectal Cancer Trial: Are We Overestimating the Quality of Our Resections?

OBJECTIVES

To report the results of a rigorous quality control (QC) process in the grading of total mesorectal excision (TME) specimens during a multicenter prospective phase 2 trial of transanal TME.

BACKGROUND

Grading of TME specimens is based on the macroscopic assessment of the mesorectum and standardized through synoptic pathology reporting. TME grade is a strong predictor of outcomes with incomplete (IC) TME associated with increased rates of local recurrence relative to complete or near complete (NC) TME. Although TME grade serves as an endpoint in most rectal cancer trials, in protocols incorporating centralized review of TME specimens for quality assurance, discordance in grading and the management thereof has not been previously described.

METHODS

A phase 2 prospective transanal TME trial was conducted from 2017 to 2022 across 11 North American centers with TME quality as the primary study endpoint. QC measures included (1) training of site pathologists in TME protocols, (2) blinded grading of de-identified TME specimen photographs by central pathologists, and (3) reconciliation of major discordance before trial reporting. Cohen Kappa statistic was used to assess agreement in grading.

RESULTS

Overall agreement in grading of 100 TME specimens between site and central reviewer was rated as fair, (κ = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.10-0.61; P < 0.0001). Concordance was noted in 54%, with minor and major discordance in 32% and 14% of cases, respectively. Upon reconciliation, 13/14 (93%) major discordances were resolved. Pre versus postreconciliation rates of complete or NC and IC TME are 77%/16% and 7% versus 69%/21% and 10%. Reconciliation resulted in a major upgrade (IC-NC; N = 1) or major downgrade (NC/C-IC, N = 4) in 5 cases overall (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A 14% rate of major discordance was observed in TME grading between the site and central reviewers. The resolution resulted in a major change in final TME grade in 5% of cases, which suggests that reported rates or TME completeness are likely overestimated in trials. QC through a central review of TME photographs and reconciliation of major discordances is strongly recommended.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a technique where rectal dissection is begun transanally in a "bottom-up" fashion. This technique facilitates dissection of the most distal part of the rectum and allows the establishment of the distal margin for rectal cancer. TaTME has proven its utility in facilitating low rectal dissection with significantly lower conversion rates and acceptable perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes. However, taTME remains a challenging technique to learn and adopt. This article describes the technique, indications, and outcomes of taTME in rectal cancer during the last decade.

International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons survey of surgeons' preference on rectal cancer treatment

PURPOSE

Rectal cancer treatment has a wide range of possible approaches from radical extirpative surgery to nonoperative watchful waiting following chemoradiotherapy, with or without, additional chemotherapy. Our goal was to assess the personal opinion of active practicing surgeons on rectal cancer treatment if he/she was the patient.

METHODS

A panel of the International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ISUCRS) selected 10 questions that were included in a questionnaire that included other items including demographics. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to ISUCRS fellows and other surgeons included in our database and remained open from April 16 to 28, 2020.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-three specialists completed the survey. The majority of surgeons (n=65, 39.9%) chose the minimally invasive (laparoscopic) surgery for their personal treatment of rectal cancer. For low-lying rectal cancer T1 and T2, the treatment choice was standard chemoradiation+local excision (n=60, 36.8%) followed by local excision±chemoradiotherapy if needed (n=55, 33.7%). In regards to locally advanced low rectal cancer T3 or greater, the preference of the responders was for laparoscopic surgery (n=65, 39.9%). We found a statistically significant relationship between surgeons' age and their preference for minimally invasive techniques demonstrating an age-based bias on senior surgeons' inclination toward open approach.

CONCLUSION

Our survey reveals an age-based preference by surgeons for minimally invasive surgical techniques as well as organ-preserving techniques for personal treatment of treating rectal cancer. Only 1/4 of specialists do adhere to the international guidelines for treating early rectal cancer.

Long-term outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in Denmark: A prospective multicenter study from the late implementation phase

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term surgical and oncological outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer during an implementation phase on a national level.

METHOD

This is a retrospective review of prospectively recorded data. Registration was initiated by the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group in order to assess the quality of care during the implementation of TaTME in Denmark. Data from four centers were pooled for simultaneous analysis. Short-term data was available from a prior study, and long-term data regarding recurrences, chemotherapy, and mortality was collected.

RESULTS

From August 2016 to April 2019, 115 TaTME procedures were registered. Patients were predominantly male (n = 85, 74%) with mid-rectal (n = 88, 77%) tumors. The overall local recurrence rate was 7.8% (n = 9) of which six patients also had systemic recurrence. Mean long-term follow-up was 59.4 months, and median time to local recurrence was 24.9 months. Local recurrences occurred predominantly among initial implementation cases. The overall mortality rate was 13% (n = 15). Of the 17 patients with recurrence, 35% (n = 6) died and developed either solely distant recurrence (n = 2, 12%) or in combination with local recurrence (n = 4, 24%).

CONCLUSION

We found acceptable long-term oncological results after TaTME during the implementation phase in Denmark. There was an accumulation of local recurrences in the early phase of the study which emphasizes the importance of thorough training and proctoring when starting the approach.

Current status of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer and the expanding indications of the transanal approach for extended pelvic surgeries

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has been rapidly accepted as a promising surgical approach to the distal rectum. The benefits include ease of access to the bottom of the deep pelvis linearly over a short distance in order to easily visualize the important anatomy. Furthermore, the distal resection margins can be secured under direct vision. Additionally, a two-team approach combining taTME with a transabdominal approach could decrease the operative time and conversion rate. Although taTME was expected to become more rapidly popularized worldwide, enthusiasm for it has stalled due to unfamiliar intraoperative complications, a lack of oncologic evidence from randomized trials, and the widespread use of robotic surgery. While international registries have reported favorable short- and medium-term outcomes from taTME, a Norwegian national study reported a high local recurrence rate of 9.5%. The characteristics of the recurrences included rapid, multifocal growth in the pelvis, which was quite different from recurrences following traditional transabdominal TME; thus, the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Group reached a consensus for a temporary moratorium on the performance of taTME. To ensure acceptable baseline quality and patient safety, taTME should be performed by well-trained colorectal surgeons. Although the appropriate indications for taTME remain controversial, the transanal approach is extremely important as a means of goal setting in difficult TME cases and as an aid to the transabdominal approach in various types of extended pelvic surgeries. The benefits in transanal lateral lymph node dissection and pelvic exenteration are presented herein.

A pilot study on preoperative vascular anatomy and clinical application in rectal cancer resection

AIM

To assess the utility of preoperatively evaluating the vascular anatomy using multisection spiral computed tomography angiography (CTA) and image fusion technology in the treatment of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic radical resection for rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomised prospective study included 56 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: the fusion imaging group (preoperative CTA and image fusion reconstruction [n=28]) and the control group (not performed CTA and image fusion reconstruction before the operation [n=28]). Duration of surgery was defined as the primary endpoint, and the volume of bleeding, the number of lymph node dissections, conversion to laparotomy, time to recovery of postoperative flatus, length of hospitalisation as well as perioperative complications were defined as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, the duration of surgery in the image fusion group was shorter, bleeding volume was reduced, and the number of lymph node dissections was greater (p<0.05); however, there was no significant differences between the two groups regarding time to postoperative flatus recovery, conversion to laparotomy, length of hospitalisation, and perioperative complications (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative assessment of the vascular anatomy was an effective method and avoided some invisible risks during surgery, and resulted in a better therapeutic effect.

How to perform an anastomosis following a low anterior resection by transanal total mesorectal excision surgery: from top to bottom techniques

AIM

The aim was to describe the range of possibilities and our group's clinical outcomes when performing different types of anastomosis during transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME).

METHOD

A retrospective analysis was performed based on four taTME series from 2016 to 2021. Inclusion criteria were patients with rectal cancer in whom a sphincter-saving low anterior resection by taTME was performed. Four different techniques were employed for the anastomosis construction: (A) abdominal view, (B) transanal view, (C) hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis and (D) pull-through. Intra-operative and postoperative data were collected and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients were included. Tumour height was lower in groups C and D (4 [3-5] vs. 7 [6-8] group A vs. 6 [5-7] group B, P = 0.000), requiring a hand-sewn anastomosis. A transanal extraction of the specimen was more commonly performed in groups C and D (over 60% vs. 30% in groups A and B, P = 0.000). The rate of temporary stoma was similar between groups A, B and C (ranging from 84% to 98%) but was significantly lower in group D (P = 0.000). The overall rate of complications was similar between groups; however, group D had longer length of stay (15 days vs. 5-6 in groups A, B and C, P = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Every type of anastomosis construction after a taTME procedure seems to be safe and feasible and should be chosen based on surgeon's experience, tumour height and the length of the rectal cuff after the rectal transection. Colorectal surgeons should be familiar with these techniques in order to choose the one that benefits each patient the most.

Limitations and Concerns with Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) was developed to overcome the technical challenges of a minimally invasive (ultra-) low anterior resection. This new technique has recently come under careful scrutiny as technical pitfalls were reported, in specific relation to the transanal approach. Patients are at risk for urologic lesions. Moreover, carbon dioxide embolism is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication. The benefit of TaTME from an oncological point of view has neither been clarified. Hypothetically, better visualization of the lower rectum could lead to better dissection and total mesorectal excision (TME) specimens, resulting in better oncologic results. Up until now, retrospective multicenter reports seem to show that short-term oncologic results are not inferior after TaTME as compared with after laparoscopic TME. Alarming reports have however been published from Norway suggesting a high incidence and particular multifocal pattern of early local recurrence. In this article, a balanced overview is given of the most important technical pitfalls and oncological concerns arising with this new procedure.

Clinical Status and Future Prospects of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision

Low rectal cancer has always posed surgical challenges to gastrointestinal surgeons. Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a novel approach to radical resection for low rectal cancer. Compared with conventional laparoscopic TME (laTME), taTME is relevant to the benefits of better vision of the mesorectal plane, feasibility of operating in a narrow pelvis, and exact definition of distal resection margin, which may lead to a higher possibility of free circumferential resection margin, better quality of TME specimen, and lower conversion rate. Although there are concerns about its long-term oncological outcomes and complex learning curve, taTME is a promising alternative for rectal cancer. In this review, we discuss the application status and prospects of taTME.

Statistical, Clinical, Methodological Evaluation of Local Recurrence Following Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A recent Norwegian moratorium challenged the status quo of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer by reporting increased early multifocal local recurrences.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the local recurrence rates following transanal total mesorectal excision as well as to assess statistical, clinical, and methodological bias in reports published to date.

DATA SOURCES

The PubMed and MEDLINE (via Ovid) databases were systematically searched.

STUDY SELECTION

Descriptive or comparative studies reporting rates of local recurrence at a median follow-up of 6 months (or more) after transanal total mesorectal excision were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients underwent transanal total mesorectal excision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Local recurrence was any recurrence located in the pelvic surgery site. The untransformed proportion method of 1-arm meta-analysis was utilized. Untransformed percent proportion with 95% confidence interval was reported. Ad hoc meta-regression with the Omnibus test was utilized to assess risk factors for local recurrence. Among-study heterogeneity was evaluated: statistically by I2 and τ2, clinically by summary tables, and methodologically by a 33-item questionnaire.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies totaling 2906 patients were included. The pooled rate of local recurrence was 3.4% (2.7%-4.0%) at an average of 20.1 months with low statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). Meta-regression yielded no correlation between complete total mesorectal excision quality (p = 0.855), circumferential resection margin (p = 0.268), distal margin (p = 0.886), and local recurrence rates. Clinical heterogeneity was substantial. Methodological heterogeneity was linked to the excitement of novelty, loss aversion, reactivity to criticism, indication for transanal total mesorectal excision, nonprobability sampling, circular reasoning, misclassification, inadequate follow-up, reporting bias, conflict of interest, and self-licensing.

LIMITATIONS

The studies included had an observational design and limited sample and follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review found a pooled rate of local recurrence of 3.4% at 20 months. However, given the substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity across the studies, the evidence for or against transanal total mesorectal excision is inconclusive at this time.

Laparoscopic versus open rectal resection: a 1:2 propensity score-matched analysis of oncological adequateness, short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resections for rectal cancer are routinely performed in high-volume centres. Despite short-term advantages have been demonstrated, the oncological outcomes are still debated. The aim of this study was to compare the oncological adequateness of the surgical specimen and the long-term outcomes between open (ORR) and laparoscopic (LRR) rectal resections.

METHODS

Patients undergoing laparoscopic or open rectal resections from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2019, were enrolled. A 1:2 propensity score matching was performed according to age, sex, BMI, ASA score, comorbidities, distance from the anal verge, and clinical T and N stage.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight ORR were matched to 50 LRR. No differences were observed in terms of operative time (224.9 min. vs. 230.7; p = 0.567) and postoperative morbidity (18.6% vs. 20.8%; p = 0.744). LRR group had a significantly earlier soft oral intake (p < 0.001), first bowel movement (p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001). Oncological adequateness was achieved in 85 (86.7%) open and 44 (88.0%) laparoscopic resections (p = 0.772). Clearance of the distal (99.0% vs. 100%; p = 0.474) and radial margins (91.8 vs. 90.0%, p = 0.709), and mesorectal integrity (94.9% vs. 98.0%, p = 0.365) were comparable between groups. No differences in local recurrence (6.1% vs.4.0%, p = 0.589), 3-year overall survival (82.9% vs. 91.4%, p = 0.276), and disease-free survival (73.1% vs. 74.3%, p = 0.817) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

LRR is associated with good postoperative results, safe oncological adequateness of the surgical specimen, and comparable survivals to open surgery.

Controversies and consensus in transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME): Is it a valid choice for rectal cancer?

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a novel approach to radical surgery for low rectal cancer. taTME is associated with the benefits of a higher rate of free distal resection margins (DRM) under direct visualization, better visualization of the mesorectal plane, and the feasibility of overcoming the restriction of the distal pelvis. Thus, it is increasingly used globally. In this review, we investigated whether taTME yields better short- and long-term outcomes than laparoscopic TME.

Initial Experience with the Safe Implementation of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME) as a Standardized Procedure for Low Rectal Cancer

Introduction: The laparoscopic approach for TME is proven to be non-inferior in oncological outcome compared to open surgery. Anatomical limitations in the male and obese pelvis with resulting pathological shortcomings and high conversion rates were stimuli for alternative approaches. The transanal approach for TME (TaTME) was introduced to overcome these limitations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of TaTME for mid and low rectal cancer at our center. Methods: TaTME is a hybrid procedure of simultaneously laparoscopic and transanal mesorectal excision. A retrospective analysis of all consecutive TaTME procedures performed at our center for mid and low rectal cancer between December 2014 and January 2020 was conducted. Results: A total of 157 patients underwent TaTME, with 72.6% receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Mean tumor height was 6.1 ± 2.3 cm from the anal verge, 72.6% of patients had undergone neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and 34.2% of patients presented with a threatened CRM upon pretherapeutic MRI. Abdominal conversion rate was 5.7% with no conversion for the transanal dissection. Early anastomotic leakage occurred in 7.0% of the patients. Mesorectum specimen was complete in 87.3%, R1 resection rate was 4.5% (involved distal resection margin) and in 7.6%, the CRM was positive. The three-year local recurrence rate of 58 patients with a follow-up ≥ 36 months was 3.4%. Overall survival was 92.0% after 12 months, and 82.2% after 36 months. Conclusion: TaTME can be performed safely with acceptable long-term oncological outcome. Low rectal cancer can be well addressed by TaTME, which is an appropriate alternative with low conversion, local recurrence, adequate mesorectal quality and CRM positivity rates.

Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in the management of locally advanced low rectal cancer: Summary of the current evidence

Lateral pelvic lymph nodes (LPLN) are a major site for local recurrence following curative resection for low locally advanced rectal cancer. Ongoing advances in imaging techniques have improved predicting LPLN metastasis (LPLNM) during pre-operative staging. However, there is ongoing debate on optimal management of this subgroup of patients with variation between guidance of different societies. In Japan, LPLNM is considered as local disease and addressed by lateral pelvic node dissection (LPLND) in addition to total mesorectal excision (TME). However, in the west, LPLNM is considered as metastatic disease and those patients are offered neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by TME surgery. The potential surgical risks and morbidity associated with LPLND as well as the uncertainty of the oncological outcome have raised the concern that patients with locally advanced low rectal cancer with LPLNM could be over or under-treated. A comprehensive review of literature was performed, summarizing the current evidence on available modalities for predicting LPLNM, the role of LPLND in the management of advanced low rectal cancer and the available surgical approaches with their impact on surgical and oncological outcomes. LPLND is associated with increased operative time, blood loss and post-operative morbidity. The potential benefits for local disease control and survival still awaits high quality studies. There has been increasing number of reports of the use minimally invasive approaches in LPLND in an attempt to reduce post-operative complications. There is need for high quality evidence to define the role of LPLND in management of patients with advanced low rectal cancer.

[Transanal total mesorectal excision-Indications, technique and results]

Total mesorectal excision (TME) has become the standard treatment for rectal cancer in the middle and lower third. Meanwhile, many international trials have confirmed the noninferiority of laparoscopic TME compared to the open technique. Nevertheless, in the presence of anatomical limitations, such as narrow, obese, male pelvises as well as large rectal tumors, the adequate resection of the lower third of the rectum according to oncological criteria, is still challenging even for specialized colorectal surgeons. Therefore, the implementation of innovative approaches, such as robotic-assisted and transanal TME (TaTME) should shed light on this anatomically complex region and guarantee an oncological radical resection and the best possible preservation of neural structures. The advantages of this technique have so far only been provided by retrospective cohort studies by large international centers. Therefore, international prospective randomized trials are currently recruiting patients to analyze the surgical and oncological outcome of TaTME compared to conventional techniques. This article describes the TaTME technique per se, the fields of application and the current data situation. Practical recommendations for the safe implementation of this operative procedure are also presented. The TaTME procedure is reserved for highly specialized colorectal centers with a high volume of rectal cancer cases and appropriate expertise in minimally invasive visceral surgery.Die totale mesorektale Exzision (TME) ist der Goldstandard im Kontext der multimodalen Behandlung des Rektumkarzinoms im mittleren und unteren Drittel. Der transanale Zugang ist eine Ergänzung des zunehmend laparoskopischen Vorgehens, welcher gerade bei anatomischen Limitationen bei der onkologisch adäquaten Resektion des distalen Rektums Abhilfe schaffen soll. Die Nichtunterlegenheit in chirurgischen und onkologischen Parametern wird gegenüber konventionellen (laparoskopisch/offen) Operationsmethoden derzeit intensiv beforscht. Eine sichere Implementation dieser herausfordernden Technik ist an ein modulares Trainingskurrikulum gebunden.