Exfoliated cancer cells during intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer

Long-term results of minimally invasive transanal surgery for rectal tumors in 249 consecutive patients

PURPOSE

To delineate the long-term results of minimally invasive transanal surgery (MITAS) for selected rectal tumors.

METHODS

We analyzed data, retrospectively, on consecutive patients who underwent MITAS between 1995 and 2015, to establish the feasibility, excision quality, and perioperative and oncological outcomes of this procedure.

RESULTS

MITAS was performed on 243 patients. The final histology included 142 cancers, 47 adenomas, and 52 neuroendocrine tumors (NET G1). A positive margin of 1.6% and 100% en bloc resection were achieved. The mean operative time was 27.4 min. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 7% of patients, with 0% mortality. The median follow-up was 100 months (up to ≥ 5 years or until death in 91.8% of patients). Recurrence developed in 2.9% of the patients. The 10-year overall survival rate was 100% for patients with NET G1 and 80.3% for those with cancer. The 5-year DFS was 100% for patients with Tis cancer, 90.6% for those with T1 cancer, and 87.5% for those with T2 or deeper cancers. MITAS for rectal tumors ≥ 3 cm resulted in perioperative and oncologic outcomes equivalent to those for tumors < 3 cm.

CONCLUSION

MITAS is feasible for the local excision (LE) of selected rectal tumors, including tumors ≥ 3 cm. It reduces operative time and secures excision quality and long-term oncological outcomes.

Rectal washout during abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer has no impact on the oncological outcome

AIM

Intraoperative rectal washout is performed to eliminate exfoliated intraluminal cancer cells and thereby decrease the risk of local recurrence. Rectal washout in abdominoperineal resection has not been studied. The aim of this study was to assess the oncological outcome after rectal washout in abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer and to find evidence as to whether rectal washout should be performed or not.

METHOD

Data for all patients registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry who underwent elective surgery with abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer (TNM Stages I-III) between 2007 and 2013 were analysed using multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

No significant differences were shown between the rectal washout group and the no rectal washout group for local recurrence [10/265 (3.8%) vs. 87/2160 (4.0%), p = 0.84], distant metastasis [51/265 (19.2%) vs. 476/2160 (22.0%), p = 0.29] or overall recurrence [53/265 (20.0%) vs. 505/2160 (23.4%), p = 0.21]. In multivariable analysis, rectal washout did not significantly affect the oncological outcome in terms of local recurrence, distant metastasis, overall recurrence or 5-year overall or relative survival.

CONCLUSION

Our results do not support routine rectal washout during abdominoperineal resection in order to improve the oncological outcome.

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

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

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

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