Mesorectal grades predict recurrences after curative resection for rectal cancer

Peritonectomy and resection of mesentery during Visceral-Peritoneal Debulking (VPD) in patients with stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer: A phase I-II trial

OBJECTIVE

To describe the surgical technique, assess feasibility, efficacy, and safety of peritonectomy and/or resection of mesentery (P-Rme) during Visceral-Peritoneal Debulking (VPD) in patients with stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer (OC).

METHODS

In April 2009 we registered a protocol study on the safety and feasibility of P-Rme. In the period April 2009-December 2022, 687 patients with FIGO stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer underwent VPD. One hundred and twenty-nine patients (18.7%) had extensive disease on the mesentery and underwent P-Rme. Feasibility was assessed as the number of procedures completed. Efficacy was measured as the rate of Complete Resection (CR). Safety was defined by the intra- and post-operative morbidity rate specifically associated with these procedures.

RESULTS

In all patients P-Rme was successfully completed. P-me was performed in 82 patients and R-me in 47, both procedures in 23 patients. CR was achieved in all 129 patients with an efficacy of 100%. Intra-operatively 5 patients out of 129 experienced small bowel loop surgical devascularization. They required small bowel resection and anastomosis. The procedure specific morbidity was 3.8%. No post-operative complication was related to P-Rme. At 64 months median follow-up, survival outcomes in the study group were similar to patients in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Overall, almost 20% of the VPD patients needed P-Rme to obtain a CR. P-Rme was a safe and effective step during VPD. The rate of CR in the study group was 100% achieved thanks to the addition of the P-Rme. No procedure specific post-operative complications occurred but 3.8% of the patients had unplanned additional surgery related to these procedures.

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.

Outcomes Following Recent and Distant Neoadjuvant Radiation in Rectal Cancer: An Institutional Retrospective Review and Analysis of NSQIP

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is the standard of care in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). However, radiation therapy is thought to increase operative difficulty due to induction of fibrosis. Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) protocols increase the time between completion of radiation and surgical resection which may lead to increased operative difficulty and complications.

METHODS

A single institution retrospective review of patients ≥18 years with LARC undergoing nCRT from 2015 to 2022. Patients were dichotomized in 2 cohorts: <90 days from radiation to surgery (recent radiation), and ≥90 days from radiation to surgery (distant radiation). Institutional data was compared to National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) rectal cancer data from 2016 to 2020. Outcomes included intraoperative complications, 30-day morbidity, and oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-six institutional patients included, 120 had recent radiation, 26 had distant radiation. Thirty-day morbidity and intraoperative complications did not differ. There was greater radial margin positivity (7% vs. 24%), fewer lymph nodes harvested (17 ± 5 vs. 15 ± 6), and a lower rate of complete mesorectal dissection (88% vs. 65%,) in distant radiation patients 3059 patients were included in NSQIP analysis, 2029 completed radiation <90 days before surgery and 1030 without radiation 90 days before surgery. Patients without radiation 90 days preoperatively had more radial margin positivity (9.2% vs. 4.6%), organ space infection (8.6% vs. 6.4%), and pneumonia (2.2% vs. 0.9%).

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that increased time between radiation and surgery results in more challenging dissection with less complete mesorectal dissection and increased radial margin positivity without increasing technical complications.

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.

Does Completeness of the Mesorectal Excision Still Correlate With Local Recurrence?

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the standard surgical procedure for rectal cancer treatment. Several studies have shown a close correlation between the prognosis of patients with rectal cancer and the completeness of the mesorectal specimen.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the correlation between macroscopic assessment of mesorectal excision and long-term oncological outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of an Institutional Review Board-approved database.

SETTINGS

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients with rectal cancer who were operated on between March 2016 and October 2019 were classified into 3 groups based on the mesorectal specimen quality: complete, near complete, and incomplete. Only patients with a follow-up of ≥2 years and without signs of preoperative distant disease were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Relationship between total mesorectal excision and local and distant recurrence rates in patients with rectal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients (35.5% females) were included in the analysis, with a mean age of 58.1 (SD 12) years and a mean BMI of 26.4 (SD 4.59) kg/m². Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was administered to 71% of patients, whereas 13.7% received total neoadjuvant therapy. Restorative procedures were performed in 107 patients (86.3%), whereas 17 patients (13.7%) underwent abdominoperineal resection. The majority of mesorectal excision specimens (87.09%) were complete or near complete. Local recurrence rates were 6.3% (1/16) in the incomplete and 7.4% (8/108) in the complete/near complete group ( p = 0.86). Metachronous distant metastases occurred in 6 patients (37.5%) in the incomplete group and in 24 patients (22.2%) in the complete/near complete group (p = 0.18). Thus, specimen quality did not appear to impact disease-free survival.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, single-center study with relatively short follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of a multidisciplinary approach and extensive use of neoadjuvant therapy, macroscopic completeness of total mesorectal excision may not be as valuable a prognosticator as in the past. Larger studies with longer follow-ups are needed to clarify these preliminary findings. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C129.

LA INTEGRIDAD DE LA ESCISIN MESORRECTAL TODAVA SE CORRELACIONA CON LA RECURRENCIA LOCAL

ANTECEDENTES:La escisión total desl mesorrecto es el estándar de oro para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto. Varios estudios han demostrado una estrecha correlación entre el pronóstico de los pacientes con cáncer de recto y la integridad espécimen mesorrectal.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la correlación entre la evaluación macroscópica de la escisión mesorrectal y los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer de recto.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos aprobada por el IRB.ENTORNO CLINICO:El estudio se realizó en un centro de referencia terciario de una sola institución.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes con cáncer de recto operados entre 3/2016-10/2019. Los pacientes se clasificaron en 3 grupos, según la calidad del espécimen mesorrectal: completo, casi completo e incompleto. Solo se incluyeron pacientes con seguimiento >2 años y sin signos de enfermedad a distancia preoperatoria.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Identificar la relación entre la escisión mesorrectal total y las tasas de recurrencia local y a distancia en pacientes con cáncer de recto.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron 124 pacientes (35,5% mujeres) con una edad media de 58,1 años (DE 12) y un índice de masa corporal medio de 26,4 (DE 4,59). Se administró quimiorradiación neoadyuvante al 71% de los pacientes, mientras que el 13,7% recibió terapia neoadyuvante total. Se realizaron procedimientos de restauración en 107 pacientes (86,3%), mientras que 17 pacientes (13,7%) se sometieron a resección abdominoperineal. La mayoría (87,09%) de los especímenes de escisión mesorrectal fueron completas o casi completas. Las tasas de recurrencia local fueron 1/16 (6,3%) en el grupo incompleto y 8/108 (7,4%) en el grupo completo/casi completo ( p = 0,86). Se produjeron metástasis a distancia metacrónicas en 6 pacientes (37,5%) en el grupo incompleto y 24 (22,2%) en el grupo completo/casi completo ( p = 0,18). Por lo tanto, la calidad del espécimen no pareció afectar la supervivencia libre de enfermedad.LIMITACIONES:Estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro con pequeño número de casos y seguimiento relativamente corto.CONCLUSIÓN:En la era de un enfoque multidisciplinario y el uso extensivo de la terapia neoadyuvante, la integridad macroscópica de la escisión total del mesorrecto, puede no ser un pronóstico tan valioso como en el pasado. Se necesitan estudios más amplios con períodos de seguimiento más prolongados para aclarar estos hallazgos preliminares. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C129 . (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Effect of interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery on disease recurrence and survival in rectal cancer: long-term results of a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of surgery following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is controversial. This trial aimed to assess disease recurrence and survival rates between patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (LARC) who underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) after a waiting interval of 8 weeks or less (classic interval; CI) versus more than 8 weeks (long interval; LI) following preoperative CRT.

METHODS

This was a phase III, single-centre, randomized clinical trial. Patients with LARC situated within 12 cm of the anal verge (T3-T4 or N+ disease) were randomized to undergo TME within or after 8 weeks after CRT.

RESULTS

Between January 2006 and January 2017, 350 patients were randomized, 175 to each group. As of February 2022, the median follow-up time was 80 (6-174) months. Among the 322 included patients (CI, 159; LI, 163) the cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence at 5 years was 10.1 per cent in the CI group and 6.9 per cent in the LI group (P = 0.143). The cumulative incidence of distant metastasis at 5 years was 30.8 per cent in the CI group and 18.6 per cent in the LI group (sub-HR = 1.78; 95 per cent c.i. 1.14 to 2.78, P = 0.010). The disease-free survival (DFS) in each group was 59.7 and 69.9 per cent respectively (P = 0.157), and overall survival (OS) rates at 5 years were 73.6 versus 77.9 per cent (P = 0.476).

CONCLUSION

Incidence of distant metastasis decreased with an interval between CRT and surgery exceeding 8 weeks, but this did not impact on DFS or OS.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03287843 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Understanding the Philosophy, Anatomy, and Surgery of the Extra-TME Plane of Locally Advanced and Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer; Single Institution Experience with International Benchmarking

Simple Summary

Worldwide there is still unwarranted variation in peri-operative management and subsequently oncological outcome following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. The major contributing factor seems to be a difference in treatment strategy with many centres aiming for more neoadjuvant treatment and less radical surgery. However, a radical resection with clear operative margins remains the single most important prognostic factor for survival and therefore an aggressive, radical approach is justified for an optimal oncological outcome and remains the gold standard of care.

Abstract

Pelvic exenteration surgery has become a widely accepted procedure for treatment of locally advanced (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). However, there is still unwarranted variation in peri-operative management and subsequently oncological outcome after this procedure. In this article we will elaborate on the various reasons for the observed differences based on benchmarking results of our own data to the data from the PelvEx collaborative as well as findings from 2 other benchmarking studies. Our main observation was a significant difference in extent of resection between exenteration units, with our unit performing more complete soft tissue exenterations, sacrectomies and extended lateral compartment resections than most other units, resulting in a higher R0 rate and longer overall survival. Secondly, current literature shows there is a tendency to use more neoadjuvant treatment such as re-irradiation and total neoadjuvant treatment and perform less radical surgery. However, peri-operative chemotherapy or radiotherapy should not be a substitute for adequate radical surgery and an R0 resection remains the gold standard. Finally, we describe our experiences with standardizing our surgical approaches to the various compartments and the achieved oncological and functional outcomes.

Assessing the histopathology reports of colorectal carcinoma surgery: An audit of three years with emphasis on lymph node yield

Background

A comprehensive histopathology report of colorectal carcinoma surgery is important in cancer staging and planning adjuvant treatment. Our aim was to review histopathology reports of operated specimens of colorectal carcinoma in our institution between 2013 and 2015 to assess different histological parameters, including lymph node yield, and to evaluate compliance to minimum data sets.

Methods

After approval by the institutional review board (IRB), we analyzed 1230 histopathology reports of colorectal carcinoma between 2013 and 2015. Various gross and microscopic findings (along with age, sex) were noted, for example, specimen type, tumor site, resection margins including circumferential resection margin (CRM), lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, pTNM stage, lymph node yield, etc.

Results

Out of 1230 patients, 826 (67.15%) were men and 404 (32.85%) were women. The overall mean age was 52 (range: 18 - 90) years. There were 787 surgeries for rectal cancers. All reports commented on the type of specimen, tumor size (mean = 4.38 cm), proximal, and distal margins. Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and the pT stage were mentioned in 98.06% and 99.84%, respectively. The overall mean lymph node yield was 18.38 (median = 15, range = 0-130 lymph nodes). A statistically significant difference in lymph node yield was detected between rectal and colonic cancer patients (14.79 and 27.26); post neoadjuvant therapy (NACT) cases, and NACT naive cases (13.51 and 25.11); and high tumor stage and low tumor stage disease (20.60 and 15.22). Not commenting on extramural vascular emboli, tumor budding, and CRM in non-rectal cancer cases were the lacunae.

Conclusion

Our compliance with minimal data sets is satisfactory. The overall mean lymph node yield was 18.38 (median = 15). Extramural vascular emboli, tumor budding need to be captured.

Multicenter validation of the PREDICT score for prediction of local recurrence after total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard treatment for rectal cancer. Although TME has managed to decrease the rates of local recurrence after rectal cancer resection, local recurrence is still recorded at varying rates. The present study aimed to validate the PREDICT score in the prediction of local recurrence of rectal cancer after TME with curative intent.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicenter study on patients with nonmetastatic low or middle rectal cancer who underwent TME. The total PREDICT score was calculated for every patient and related to the onset of local recurrence. According to the final score, patients were allocated to one of three risk groups: low, moderate, and high, and the rates of local recurrence in each group were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

The present study included 262 patients (50.4% males) with a mean age of 47.1 years. The overall local recurrence rate was 12.6%. 29.4% of patients were in the low-risk group, 63.7% in the moderate-risk group, and 6.9% in the high-risk group. The local recurrence rate was 3.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8-10.9) in the low-risk group, 13.2% (95% CI: 8.4-19.3) in the moderate risk group, and 44.4% (95% CI: 21.5-69.2) in the high-risk group (p < 0.0001). The sensitivity of the PREDICT score was 72.7%, the specificity was 88.1%, and the accuracy was 86.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

The PREDICT score had good diagnostic accuracy in the prediction of local recurrence after TME and a good discriminatory ability in the differentiation between patients at different risks to develop local recurrence.

Completion Total Mesorectal Excision After Transanal Local Excision of Early Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Completion total mesorectal excision is recommended when local excision of early rectal cancers demonstrates high-risk histopathological features. Concerns regarding the quality of completion resections and the impact on oncological safety remain unanswered.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to summarize and analyze the outcomes associated with completion surgery and undertake a comparative analysis with primary rectal resections.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included PubMed, Cochrane library, MEDLINE, and Embase databases up to April 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies reporting any outcome of completion surgery after transanal local excision of an early rectal cancer were selected. Case reports, studies of benign lesions, and studies using flexible endoscopic techniques were not included.

INTERVENTION

The intervention was completion total mesorectal excision after transanal local excision of early rectal cancers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measures included histopathological and long-term oncological outcomes of completion total mesorectal excision. Secondary outcome measures included short-term perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies including 646 patients met the eligibility criteria, and 8 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Patients undergoing completion surgery have longer operative times (standardized mean difference, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.23-0.75; p = 0.0002) and higher intraoperative blood loss (standardized mean difference, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.01-0.5; p = 0.04) compared with primary resections, but perioperative morbidity is comparable (risk ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98-1.62; p = 0.08). Completion surgery is associated with higher rates of incomplete mesorectal specimens (risk ratio, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.41-6.62; p = 0.005) and lower lymph node yields (standardized mean difference, -0.26; 95% CI, -0.47 to 0.06; p = 0.01). Comparative analysis on long-term outcomes is limited, but no evidence of inferior recurrence or survival rates is found.

LIMITATIONS

Only small retrospective cohort and case-control studies are published on this topic, with considerable heterogeneity limiting the effectiveness of meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides the strongest evidence to date that completion surgery is associated with an inferior histopathological grade of the mesorectum and finds insufficient long-term results to satisfy concerns regarding oncological safety. International collaborative research is required to demonstrate noninferiority.

REGISTRATION NO

CRD42021245101.

Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer

Utilization of robotic surgical systems has increased over the years. Robotic surgery is presumed to have advantages of enhanced visualization, improved dexterity, and reduced tremor, which is purported to be more suitable for rectal cancer surgery in a confined space than laparoscopic or open surgery. However, evidence supporting improved clinical and oncologic outcomes after robotic surgery remains controversial and limited despite the widespread adoption of robotic surgical systems. To date, numerous observational studies and a few randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate that short-term, oncological, and functional outcomes after a robotic surgery are superior to those of laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer patients. The objective of this review is to summarize the current state of robotic surgery and its impact on low-lying rectal cancer.

Long-term outcomes of patients with poor prognostic factors following transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer

AIM

Management of early rectal cancer following transanal microscopic anal surgery poses a management dilemma when the histopathology reveals poor prognostic features, due to high risk of local recurrence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the oncological outcomes of such patients who undergo surgery with total mesorectal excision (TME), receive adjuvant chemo/radiotherapy (CRDT/RT) or receive close surveillance only (no further treatment).

METHODS

We identified patients with poor prognostic factors-pT2 adenocarcinoma, poor differentiation, deep submucosal invasion (Kikuchi SM3), lymphovascular invasion, tumour budding or R1 resection margin-between 1 September 2012 and 31 January 2020 and report their oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 53 patients, 18 had TME, 14 had CRDT and 14 had RT; seven patients did not have any further treatment. The median follow-up was 48 months, 12 developed recurrence and six died. Overall, 5-year survival (OS) was 88.9% and disease-free survival (DFS) was 79.2%. Compared to the surgical group, in which there were eight recurrences and two deaths, there were zero recurrences or deaths in the CRDT group, log-rank test P = 0.206 for OS and P = 0.005 for DFS. The 5-year survival rates in the RT and surveillance only groups were OS 78.6%, DFS 85.7% and OS 71.5%, DFS 71% respectively. TME assessment in the surgical group revealed Grade 3 quality in seven of the 16 available reports.

CONCLUSION

These findings support the strategy of adjuvant CRDT as first line treatment for patients undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer with poor prognostic factors on initial histological assessment.

Robotic Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (RTaTME): State of the Art

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard technique for the surgical management of rectal cancer. The transanal approach to the mesorectum was introduced to overcome the technical difficulties related to the distal rectal dissection. Since its inception, interest in transanal mesorectal excision has grown exponentially and it appears that the benefits are maximal in patients with mid-low rectal cancer where anatomical and pathological features represent the greatest challenges. Current evidence demonstrates that this approach is safe and feasible, with oncological and functional outcome comparable to conventional approaches, but with specific complications related to the technique. Robotics might potentially simplify the technical steps of distal rectal dissection, with a shorter learning curve compared to the laparoscopic transanal approach, but with higher costs. The objective of this review is to critically analyze the available literature concerning robotic transanal TME in order to define its role in the management of rectal cancer and to depict future perspectives in this field of research.

Clinical Reality and Treatment for Local Recurrence of Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Background and Objectives: Despite advances in treatment, local recurrence remains a great concern in patients with rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors of local recurrence of rectal cancer in our single center over a 7-year-period. Materials and Methods: Patients with stage I-III rectal cancer were treated with curative intent. The necessity for radiotherapy and chemotherapy was determined before surgery and/or postoperative histopathological results. Results: Of 365 rectal cancer patients, 76 (20.8%) developed recurrent disease. In total, 27 (7.4%) patients presented with a local tumor recurrence (isolated in 40.7% of cases). Radiotherapy was performed in 296 (81.1%) patients. The most often used schema was 5 × 5 Gy followed by immediate surgery (n = 214, 58.6%). Local recurrence occurred less frequently in patients treated with 5 × 5 Gy radiotherapy followed by surgery (n = 9, 4%). Surgical procedures of relapses were performed in 12 patients, six of whom were operated with radical intent. Only two (7.4%) patients lived more than 5 years after local recurrence treatment. The incidence of local recurrence was associated with primary tumor distal location and worse prognosis. The median overall survival of patients after local recurrence treatment was 19 months. Conclusions: Individualized rectal cancer patient selection and systematic treatment algorithms should be used clinical practice to minimize likelihood of relapse. 5 × 5 Gy radiotherapy followed by immediate surgery allows good local control in resectable cT2N+/cT3N0 patients. Radical resection of isolated local recurrence offers the best chances of cure.

Comparison of Survival between Single-Access and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer

Introduction

Innovative laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer can be classified into 2 types: firstly, new instruments such as robotic surgery and secondly, new technique such as single-access laparoscopic surgery (SALS) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME). Most reports of SALS for rectal cancer have shown pathologic outcomes comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS); however, SALS is considered to be superior to CLS in terms of lower levels of discomfort and faster recovery rates. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes of the two approaches.

Methods

From 2011 to 2014, 84 cases of adenocarcinoma of the rectum and anal canal were enrolled. The operations were anterior, low anterior, intersphincteric, and abdominoperineal resections. Data collected included postoperative outcomes. The oncological outcomes recorded included 3-year and 5-year survival, local recurrence, and metastasis.

Results

SALS was performed on 41 patients, and CLS was utilized in 43 cases. The demographic data of the two groups were similar. Intraoperative volumes of blood loss and conversion rates were similar, but operative time was longer in the SALS group. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications or pathological outcomes. The oncologic results were similar in terms of 3-year survival (100% and 97.7%; p = 1.00), 5-year survival (78.0% and 86.0%; p = 0.401), local recurrence rates (19.5% vs 11.6%, p = 0.376), and metastasis rates (19.5% vs 11.6%; p = 0.376) for SALS and CLS, respectively.

Conclusion

SALS and CLS for rectal and anal cancer had comparable pathological and survival results, but SALS showed some superior benefits in the early postoperative period.

Surgical and oncological short-term outcomes of prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer

Introduction In recent years, a standardized surgical approach for low rectal cancer was proposed and adopted in many centres. The extralevator abdominoperineal excision introduce an extensive resection of the pelvic floor and demonstrated superiority if the procedure is done in the prone jack-knife position, especially regarding intraoperative perforation and circumferential resections margins. The aim of this study is to evaluate the surgical and oncological short-term outcomes of prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision.

Methods All patients registered in our institution from January 2003 to January 2015 who underwent abdominoperineal resection or prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiation were retrospectively included from prospective maintained data base and were compared regarding surgical and oncological outcomes.

Results Eighty-nine patients underwent curative intent resections. Abdominoperineal resection was performed in 67 patients and prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision in 22 patients. There were no statistical significant differences between groups regarding pathological stage, median number of harvested lymph node, intraoperative perforation, circumferential resections margins involvement and recurrence rates. Surgical outcomes were statistically different between groups. Twenty-six patients (29%) developed perineal complications, 21% of the abdominoperineal resection patients and 55% of the prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision (p < 0.001). Most of these complications were due to delayed perineal wound healing (12.4%), and wound abscesses (4.5%). However, the readmission rate and median length of hospital stay was higher in the abdominoperineal resection group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion Prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision is comparable to standard abdominoperineal resection. It was associated to a decrease in length of hospital stay and readmission rate, although more perineal complications occurred. We cannot recommend it as a standard technique for all low rectal cancer. Notwithstanding, prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision can be considered a more radical approach when there is sphincter complex or levators muscles invasion.

Completion total mesorectal excision following transanal endoscopic microsurgery does not compromise outcomes in patients with rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) represents a choice of treatment in patients with neoplastic lesions in the rectum. When TEM fails, completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is often required. However, a concern is whether cTME increases the rate of abdominoperineal resections (APR) and is associated with higher risk of incomplete mesorectal fascia (MRF) resection. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of cTME with primary TME (pTME) in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a nationwide study on all patients with cTME from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database between 2005 and 2015. Patients with cTME were compared to patients with pTME after propensity score matching (matching ratio 1:2). Matching variables were age, gender, tumor distance from anal verge, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients with cTME were compared with 120 patients with pTME. Patients with cTME experienced more intraoperative complications as compared to pTME patients (18.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.021). However, there was no difference in the rate of perforations at or near the tumor/previous TEM site (6.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.224), conversion to open surgery (p = 0.733) or 30-day morbidity (p = 0.86). On multivariate analysis, cTME was not a risk factor for APR (OR 2.49; 95% CI 0.95-6.56; p = 0.064) or incomplete MRF (OR 1.32; 95% CI 0.48-3.63; p = 0.596). There was no difference in the rate of local recurrence between cTME and pTME (5.2% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.1), distant metastases (6.8% vs. 6.8%, p = 1), or survival (p = 0.081). The mean follow-up time was 6 years.

CONCLUSION

In our study, the largest so far on the subject, we find no difference in postoperative short- or long-term outcomes between cTME and pTME.

Robotic rectal resection: oncologic outcomes

Robotic surgery has progressively gained popularity in the treatment of rectal cancer. However, only a few studies on its oncologic effectiveness are currently present, with contrasting results. The purpose of this study is to report a single surgeon’s experience on robotic rectal resection (RRR) for cancer, focusing on the analysis of oncologic outcomes, both in terms of pathological features and long-term results. One-hundred and twenty-two consecutive patients who underwent RRR for rectal cancer from January 2013 to December 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients’ characteristics and perioperative outcomes were collected. The analyzed oncologic outcomes were pathological features [distal (DM), circumferential margin (CRM) status and quality of mesorectal excision (TME)] and long-term outcomes [overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS)]. The mean operative time was 275 (± 60.5) minutes. Conversion rate was 6.6%. Complications occurred in 27 cases (22.1%) and reoperation was needed in 2 patients (1.5%). The median follow-up was 30.5 (5.9–86.1) months. None presented DM positivity. CRM positivity was 2.5% (2 cases) while a complete TME was reached in 94.3% of cases (115 patients). Recurrence rate was 5.7% (2 local, 4 distant and 1 local plus distant tumor relapse). OS and DFS were 90.7% and 83%, respectively. At the multivariate analysis, both CRM positivity and near complete/incomplete TME were recognized as negative prognostic factors for OS and DFS. Under appropriate logistic and operative conditions, robotic surgery for rectal cancer proves to be oncologically effective, with adequate pathological results and long-term outcomes. It also offers acceptable peri-operative outcomes, further confirming the safety and feasibility of the technique.

Current Surgical Strategies for the Treatment of Rectal Adenocarcinoma and the Risk of Local Recurrence

BACKGROUND

Despite new medical and surgical strategies, 5-year local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma was reported in up to 25% of cases. Therefore, we aimed to review surgical strategies for the prevention of local recurrences in rectal cancer.

SUMMARY

After implementation of the total mesorectal excision (TME), surgical resection of rectal adenocarcinoma with anterior resection or abdominoperineal excision (APE) allowed decrease in local recurrence (3% at 5 years). More recently, extralevator APE was described as an alternative to APE, decreasing specimen perforation and recurrence rate. Moreover, technique modifications were developed to optimize rectal resection, such as the laparoscopic or robotic approach, and transanal TME. However, the technical advantages conferred by these techniques did not translate into a decreased recurrence rate. Lateral lymph node dissection is another technique, which aimed at improving the long-term outcomes; nevertheless, there is currently no evidence to recommend its routine use. Strategies to preserve the rectum are also emerging, such as local excision, and may be beneficial for subgroups of patients. Key Messages: Rectal cancer management requires a multidisciplinary approach, and surgical strategy should be tailored to patient factors: general health, previous perineal intervention, anatomy, preference, and tumor characteristics such as stage and localization.

The multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer

Rectal cancer treatment has evolved during the past 40 years with the use of a standardized surgical technique for tumour resection: total mesorectal excision. A dramatic reduction in local recurrence rates and improved survival outcomes have been achieved as consequences of a better understanding of the surgical oncology of rectal cancer, and the advent of adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments to compliment surgery have paved the way for a multidisciplinary approach to disease management. Further improvements in imaging techniques and the ability to identify prognostic factors such as tumour regression, extramural venous invasion and threatened margins have introduced the concept of decision-making based on preoperative staging information. Modern treatment strategies are underpinned by accurate high-resolution imaging guiding both neoadjuvant therapy and precision surgery, followed by meticulous pathological scrutiny identifying the important prognostic factors for adjuvant chemotherapy. Included in these strategies are organ-sparing approaches and watch-and-wait strategies in selected patients. These pathways rely on the close working of interlinked disciplines within a multidisciplinary team. Such multidisciplinary forums are becoming standard in the treatment of rectal cancer across the UK, Europe and, more recently, the USA. This Review examines the essential components of modern-day management of rectal cancer through a multidisciplinary team approach, providing information that is essential for any practising colorectal surgeon to guide the best patient care.

Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Ultralow Rectal Cancer with Transanal Intersphincteric Dissection as a First Step: A Single-surgeon Experience

Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation is helpful in the management of patients with low rectal cancer. With the advent of this technique, the need for performance of abdominoperineal resection seems to have decreased in patients with very low rectal tumors. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic ISR preceded by transanal rectal dissection low rectal cancer. Between December 2009 and June 2011, we performed laparoscopic ISR for 30 patients with very low rectal cancer. Patients received preoperative concurrent chemoradiation (5 days a week for 5 weeks). The surgical procedure was performed 6 weeks after radiotherapy and included total mesorectal excision, ISR, transanal coloanal anastomosis with coloplasty and loop ileostomy. Clinical data of 30 patients were analyzed retrospectively. Thirty patients (21 men, nine women) had a median age of 65 years (range, 37 to 75 years), a median body weight of 67 kg (range, 43 to 96 kg), and body mass index of 24 kg/m2 (range, 19 to 33 kg/m2). The distance of the tumor from the anal verge was 5 cm (range, 2 to 11 cm). The operative time was from 240 to 360 minutes, and estimated blood loss was 100 to 520 mL. There were no conversions and no postoperative mortality. This procedure is feasible and has favorable short-term results for radical treatment of very low rectal disease while preserving anal function.

The relationship between mesorectal grading and oncological outcome in rectal adenocarcinoma

AIM

The prognostic association between mesorectal grading and oncological outcome in patients undergoing resection for rectal adenocarcinoma is controversial. The aim of this retrospective chart review was to determine the individual impact of mesorectal grading on rectal cancer outcomes.

METHOD

We compared oncological outcomes in patients with complete, near-complete and incomplete mesorectum who underwent rectal excision with curative intent from 2009 to 2014 for Stage cI-III rectal adenocarcinoma. We also assessed the independent association of mesorectal grading and oncological outcome using multivariate models including other relevant variables.

RESULTS

Out of 505 patients (339 men, median age of 60 years), 347 (69%) underwent a restorative procedure. There were 452 (89.5%), 33 (6.5%) and 20 (4%) patients with a complete, near-complete and incomplete mesorectum, respectively. Local recurrence was seen in 2.4% (n = 12) patients after a mean follow-up of 3.1 ± 1.7 years. Unadjusted 3-year Kaplan-Meier analysis by mesorectal grade showed decreased rates of overall, disease-free and cancer-specific survival and increased rates of overall and distant recurrence with a near-complete mesorectum, while local recurrence was increased in cases of an incomplete mesorectum (all P < 0.05). On multivariate analyses, a near-complete mesorectum was independently associated with decreased cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.1-0.7; P = 0.007). There were no associations between mesorectal grading and overall survival, disease-free survival, overall recurrence or distant recurrence (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Mesorectal grading is independently associated with oncological outcome. It provides unique information for optimizing surgical quality in rectal cancer.

Systemic review and network meta-analysis comparing minimal surgical techniques for rectal cancer: quality of total mesorectum excision, pathological, surgical, and oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimal invasive surgery has revolutionized recovery in rectal cancer patients. However, there has been debate on its effect on quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) and oncological outcomes. This network meta-analysis compares laparoscopic, robotic-assisted, and transanal TMEs. This study shows that All three surgical techniques are comparable across TME quality and oncological outcomes. Ultimately, good outcomes are based on each individual surgeon choosing an approach based on their expertise.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME): single-centre early experience in a selected population

Total mesorectal excision (TME) represents the key principle in the surgical treatment of rectal cancer. Transanal mesorectal excision was introduced as a complement to conventional surgery to overcome its technical difficulties. The aim of this study was to evaluate the early surgical results following the introduction of this novel technique at our Unit. Between January and May 2016, 12 patients diagnosed with mid-low rectal adenocarcinoma were enrolled into this study and evaluated with regards demography, histopathology, peri-operative data and postoperative complications. The tumor was located in the middle rectum in 6 patients (50%), in the lower rectum in 6 patients (50%). Mean operative time was 356.5 ± 76.2 min (range 240-494). Eleven out 12 patients (91.6%) had less than 200 mL of intraoperative blood loss. Mean hospital stay was 10.9 ± 4.6 days (range 5-19). No mortality was recorded. Intraoperative complications were recorded in 1, while early post-operative complications (< 30 days) were observed in 5 patients (41.6%). Histopathology showed in all cases an intact mesorectum. Mean number of lymphnodes harvested was 13.6 ± 6.6 (range 4-29). Distal and circumferential margin was, respectively, of 20.8 ± 14.2 mm (range 2-45 mm) and 16.1 ± 7.6 mm (range 3-30 mm). The comparative analysis showed significant differences concerning mean operative time (p = 0.0473) and estimated blood loss (p = 0.0367). This study confirms this technique is safe and feasible, but more evidence to support its use over conventional laparoscopic surgery is needed.

Comparative Outcomes of Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy and Selective Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Clinical Stage T3N0 Low and Mid Rectal Cancer

Purpose/aim: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (pre-CRT) and total mesorectal excision (TME) have become the standard of care for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Nevertheless, it is a controversial issue whether pre-CRT in cT3N0M0 patients would result in potential overtreatment. Materials and methods: In total, 183 clinical stage IIA rectal cancer patients treated with and without pre-CRT between 2011 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Capecitabine/FOLFOX/CAPOX chemotherapy was co-administered with preoperative radiotherapy. Surgical resection with laparoscopic or open TME was conducted 8-12 weeks after completion of the pre-CRT. Postoperative radiotherapy was routinely given to patients with pT4 lesion or circumferential margin (CRM) and/or distal resection margin (DRM) involvement. Results: In total, 108 (59%) patients received pre-CRT and 75 (41%) underwent surgery first. The pre-CRT patients presented with less-advanced pathological T stage tumors compared with the surgery-first patients (p < 0.001). However, the pathological N stage was not significantly different between the two groups (p = 0.065). The 3-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and 2-year local recurrence (LR) rate were similar in the pre-CRT and surgery-first patients (88.4 versus 88.7%, p = 0.552; 79.6 versus 83.3%, p = 0.797; 2.8 versus 2.7%, p = 0.960, respectively). Cox regression analysis showed that pN stage and CRM/DRM involvement were independently correlated with an unfavorable DFS. Conclusions: In this study, the omission of pre-CRT in cT3N0M0 patients did not translate into a worse oncological outcome. Postoperative radiotherapy should remain a standard option for patients with CRM/DRM involvement and pathological T4 tumors. A generalized indication for pre-CRT in cT3N0 patients is likely to result in overtreatment.

Association of Plane of Total Mesorectal Excision With Prognosis of Rectal Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Previous retrospective studies have shown that surgical quality affects local control in rectal cancer..

Objective

In this secondary end point analysis, we evaluated the prognostic effect of the total mesorectal excision (TME) plane in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 phase 3 randomized clinical trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The CAO/ARO/AIO-04 trial enrolled 1236 patients with cT3-4 and/or node-positive rectal adenocarcinoma from 88 centers in Germany between July 25, 2006, and February 26, 2010.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to receive treatment with standard fluorouracil-based preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) alone (control arm) or oxaliplatin (experimental arm) followed by TME and adjuvant chemotherapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The TME quality (mesorectal, intramesorectal, and muscularis propria plane) was prospectively assessed in 1152 operation specimens. An assessment was performed independently by pathologists and surgeons. The results were correlated with clinicopathologic data and the clinical outcome was tested, including multivariable analysis with the Cox regression model.

Results

Of 1152 German Caucasian participants, 332 (28.8) were women and the mean age was 63 years. The plane of TME was mesorectal in 930 patients (80.7%), intramesorectal in 169 (14.7%), and muscularis propria in 53 (4.6%). In a univariable analysis, the TME plane was significantly associated with 3-year disease-free survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 73.1-78.8 vs 61.6-76.0 vs 55.6-81.3, respectively; P = .01), cumulative incidence of local and distant recurrences (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 2.0-4.5 vs 1.2-8.1 vs 2.5-20.5, respectively; P < .001; and mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 17.0-22.4 vs 18.3-32.0 vs 14.2-39.0, respectively; P = .03, respectively), and overall survival (mesorectal vs intramesorectal vs muscularis propria, 95% CI, 88.3-92.3 vs 79.7-91.0 vs 81.6-98.7, respectively; P = .02). In contrast to the pathologist-based evaluation, the assessment of TME plane by the operating surgeon failed to demonstrate prognostic significance for any of these clinical end points. In a multivariable analysis, the plane of surgery (mesorectal vs muscularis propria TME) constituted an independent factor for local recurrence (P = .002).

Conclusions and Relevance

This phase 3 randomized clinical trial confirms the long-term clinical effect of TME plane quality on local recurrence, as initially reported in the MRC CR07 study. The data highlight the key role of pathologists and surgeons in the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00349076.

The Pattern of Defects in Mesorectal Specimens: Is There a Difference between Transanal and Laparoscopic Approaches?

BACKGROUND:

Total mesorectal excision has evolved from open to minimally invasive techniques. To overcome difficulties in the lowest part of the pelvis, transanal total mesorectal excision was introduced and has gained acceptance in the recent years. The results of transanal total mesorectal excision seem to be comparable to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. Whether or not transanal total mesorectal excision has changed the pattern of defects in the retrieved mesorectal specimens is yet to be clarified.

PURPOSE:

To determine the pattern of mesorectal defects following transanal total mesorectal excision, compared to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. The primary end-point was the location of defects in the part of the mesorectum below the peritoneal reflection, as it is this part, which is dissected from below in the transanal total mesorectal excision procedure.

METHODS:

From our transanal total mesorectal excision database that includes all transanal total mesorectal excision procedures performed at our institution since 2013, we have included 29 patients who originally had defects in their retrieved specimens. Another 29 patients who underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with mesorectal defects served as a control group. All specimen photos and pathology reports were reviewed systematically; sites and pattern of defects were defined.

RESULTS:

A higher ratio of the defects in the laparoscopic total mesorectal excision group was located below the peritoneal reflection (P = 0.043). The distribution of defects by anatomical quadrant was not statistically different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS:

The ratio of defects below the peritoneal reflection was lower in the transanal total mesorectal excision group. Whether this is due to a lower incidence of defect in transanal total mesorectal excision is not part of our study.

Oncological outcome after MRI-based selection for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in the OCUM Rectal Cancer Trial

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether all patients with rectal cancer need chemoradiotherapy. A restrictive use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) based on MRI findings for rectal cancer was investigated in this study.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre observational study included patients with stage cT2-4 rectal cancer, with any cN and cM0 status. Carcinomas in the middle and lower third that were 1 mm or less from the mesorectal fascia, all cT4 tumours, and all cT3 tumours of the lower third were classified as high risk, and these patients received nCRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). All other carcinomas with a minimum distance of more than 1 mm from the mesorectal fascia and those in the upper third were classified as low risk; these patients underwent TME alone (no nCRT). Patients were followed for at least 3 years. Outcomes were the rates of local recurrence, distant metastasis and survival.

RESULTS

Among 545 patients included, 428 were treated according to the study protocol: 254 (59·3 per cent) had TME alone and 174 (40·7 per cent) received nCRT and TME. Median follow-up was 60 months. The 3- and 5-year local recurrence rates were 1·3 and 2·7 per cent respectively, with no differences between the two treatment protocols. Patients with disease requiring nCRT had higher 3- and 5-year rates of distant metastasis (17·3 and 24·9 per cent respectively versus 8·9 and 14·4 per cent in patients who had TME alone; P = 0·005) and worse disease-free survival compared with that in patients who did not need nCRT (3- and 5-year rates 76·7 and 66·7 per cent, versus 84·9 and 76·0 per cent in the TME-alone group; P = 0·016).

CONCLUSION

Restriction of nCRT to high-risk patients achieved good results.

The quality of total mesorectal excision specimen: A review of its macroscopic assessment and prognostic significance

As a surgical procedure which could significantly lower the recurrence rate of cancers, total mesorectal excision (TME) has been the gold standard for middle and lower rectal cancer treatment. However, previous studies have shown that the procedure did not achieve the ideal theoretical local recurrence rates of rectal cancers. Some researchers pointed out it was very likely that not all so-called TME treatments completely removed the mesorectum, implying that some of these TME surgical treatments failed to meet oncological quality standards. Therefore, a suitable assessment tool for the surgical quality of TME is necessary. The notion of “macroscopic assessment of mesorectal excision (MAME)” was put forward by some researchers as a better assessment tool for the surgical quality of TME and has been confirmed by a series of studies. Besides providing rapid and accurate surgical quality feedbacks for surgeons, MAME also effectively assesses the prognosis of patients with rectal cancer. However, as a new assessment tool used for TME surgical quality, MAME has an only limited influence on the current guidelines and is yet to be widely applied in most countries. The aims of this review are to provide a detailed introduction to MAME for clinical practice and to summarize the current prognostic significance of MAME.

GOLPH3 overexpression correlates with poor response to neoadjuvant therapy and prognosis in locally advanced rectal cancer

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) combined with surgery is a standard therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). The aim of this study was to assess the expression of GOLPH3 (Golgi phosphoprotein 3), a newly found oncogene, in LARC as well as its relationship with nCRT sensitivity and prognosis. We retrospectively analyzed 148 LARC cases receiving nCRT and total mesorectal excision (TME). Immunohistochemistry was used to assess GOLPH3 and mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) in tumor tissues. Then, the associations of GOLPH3 with pathological characteristics and prognosis of rectal cancer were assessed. The 148 cases included 77 with high GOLPH3 expression (52.03%), which was associated with tumor invasive depth and lymphatic metastasis. Cases with high GOLPH3 expression had 2.58 and 2.71 fold higher local relapse and distant metastasis rates compared with the low expression group. Correlation analyses showed that GOLPH3 was an independent indicator for judging tumor down-staging and postoperative TRG (tumor regression grade), indicating it could predict nCRT sensitivity. In addition, GOLPH3 expression was associated with mTOR levels. Multiple-factor analysis indicated that GOLPH3 was an independent prognosis indicator for 5 year-DFS (disease free survival) and OS (overall survival) in LARC. These results reveal that GOLPH3 is an independent predictive factor for nCRT sensitivity and prognosis in LARC, with a mechanism related to mTOR.

Perineal skin recurrence on the site of Lone Star Retractor: case report

Background

Local recurrence of colorectal cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality that usually implies a worse prognosis. Its etiopathogenesis is still a subject of debate. Recurrence on the perineal wound caused by anal retractor device is rarely reported.

Case presentation

We present the case of a 75-year-old woman with perineal skin recurrence on the site of Lone Star Retractor™ from rectal adenocarcinoma. The patient underwent a curative proctectomy followed by a hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis using Lone Star Retractor™ 2 years ago for a tumor of the lower rectum. The recurrence was most likely caused by the seeding of exfoliated tumor cells into the perianal skin which was abraded by the retractor.

Conclusion

This case is the fourth case reported in the literature and highlights the importance of the use of less traumatic endoanal retractors to prevent such perianal recurrence. Recurrence on the perineal wound caused by anal retractor device is rare but possible. Further studies are needed to define preventive measures able to reduce cutaneous implants.

Review of the quality of total mesorectal excision does not improve the prediction of outcome

AIM

A fair to moderate concordance in grading of the total mesorectal excision (TME) surgical specimen by local pathologists and a central review panel has been observed in the PROCARE (Project on Cancer of the Rectum) project. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the difference, if any, in the accuracy of predicting the oncological outcome through TME grading by local pathologists or by the review panel.

METHOD

The quality of the TME specimen was reviewed for 482 surgical specimens registered on a prospective database between 2006 and 2011. Patients with a Stage IV tumour, with unknown incidence date or without follow-up information were excluded, resulting in a study population of 383 patients. Quality assessment of the specimen was based on three grades including mesorectal resection (MRR), intramesorectal resection (IMR) and muscularis propria resection (MPR). Using univariable Cox regression models, local and review panel histopathological gradings of the quality of TME were assessed as predictors of local recurrence, distant metastasis and disease-free and overall survival. Differences in the predictions between local and review grading were determined.

RESULTS

Resection planes were concordant in 215 (56.1%) specimens. Downgrading from MRR to MPR was noted in 23 (6.0%). There were no significant differences in the prediction error between the two models; local and central review TME grading predicted the outcome equally well.

CONCLUSION

Any difference in grading of the TME specimen between local histopathologists and the review panel had no significant impact on the prediction of oncological outcome for this patient cohort. Grading of the quality of TME as reported by local histopathologists can therefore be used for outcome analysis. Quality control of TME grading is not warranted provided the histopathologist is adequately trained.

Lymph node ratio and surgical quality are strong prognostic factors of rectal cancer: results from a single referral centre

AIM

Nodal stage is a strong prognostic factor of oncological outcome of rectal cancer. To compensate for the variation in total number of harvested nodes, calculation of the lymph node ratio (LNR) has been advocated. The aim of the study was to compare the impact, on the long-term oncological outcome, of the LNR with other predictive factors, including the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) and the state of the circumferential resection margin.

METHOD

Consecutive patients having elective surgery for nonmetastatic rectal cancer were extracted from a prospectively maintained database. Retrospective uni- and multivariate analyses were performed based on patient-, surgical- and tumour-related factors. The prognostic value of the LNR on overall survival (OS) and on overall recurrence-free survival (ORFS) was assessed and a cut-off value was determined.

RESULTS

From 1998 to 2013, out of 456 patients, 357 with nonmetastatic disease were operated on for rectal cancer. Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy was administered to 66.7% of the patients. The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved was 12.8 ± 8.78 per surgical specimen. A lower lymph node yield was obtained in patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (11.8 vs 14.2; P = 0.014). The 5-year ORFS was 71.8% and the 5-year OS was 80.1%. Multivariate analysis confirmed LNR, the quality of TME and age to be independent prognostic factors of OS. LNR, age and perineural infiltration were independently associated with ORFS. Low- and high-risk patients could be discriminated using an LNR cut-off value of 0.2.

CONCLUSION

LNR is an independent prognostic factor of OS and ORFS. In line with the principles of optimal surgical management, the quality of TME and lymph node yield are essential technical requirements.

Structured pathology reporting improves the macroscopic assessment of rectal tumour resection specimens

We examined whether introduction of a structured macroscopic reporting template for rectal tumour resection specimens improved the completeness and efficiency in collecting key macroscopic data elements. Fifty free text (narrative) macroscopic reports retrieved from 2012 to 2014 were compared with 50 structured macroscopic reports from 2013 to 2015, all of which were generated at John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, NSW. The six standard macroscopic data elements examined in this study were reported in all 50 anatomical pathology reports using a structured macroscopic reporting dictation template. Free text reports demonstrated significantly impaired data collection when recording intactness of mesorectum (p<0.001), relationship to anterior peritoneal reflection (p=0.028) and distance of tumour to the non-peritonealised circumferential margin (p<0.001). The number of words used was also significantly (p<0.001) reduced using pre-formatted structured reports compared to free text reports. The introduction of a structured reporting dictation template improves data collection and may reduce the subsequent administrative burden when macroscopically evaluating rectal resections.

A Systematic Review of Outcomes After Transanal Mesorectal Resection for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Transanal mesorectal resection has been developed to facilitate minimally invasive proctectomy for rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the evidence regarding technical parameters, oncological outcomes, morbidity, and mortality after transanal mesorectal resection.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and MEDLINE databases were reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION

Systematic review of the literature from January 2005 to September 2015 was used for study selection.

INTERVENTION

Intervention included transanal mesorectal resection for rectal cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Technical parameters, histological outcomes, morbidity, and mortality were the outcomes measured.

RESULTS

Fifteen predominately retrospective studies involving 449 patients were included (mean age, 64.3 years; 64.1% men). Different platforms were used. The operative mortality rate was 0.4% and the cumulative morbidity rate 35.5%. Circumferential resection margins were clear in 98%, and the resected mesorectum was grade III in 87% of patients. Median follow-up was 14.7 months. There were 4 local recurrences (1.5%) and 12 patients (5.6%) with metastatic disease. No study followed patients long enough to report on 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates. Functional outcome was only reported in 3 studies.

LIMITATIONS

A low number of procedures were performed by expert early adopters. There are no comparative or randomized data included in this study and inconsistent reporting of outcome variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal mesorectal resection for rectal cancer may enhance negative circumferential margin rates with a reasonable safety profile. Contemporary randomized, controlled studies are required before there can be universal recommendation.

The circumferential resection margins status: A comparison of robotic, laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer (RC) is now widely performed via the laparoscopic approach, but robotic-assisted surgery may overcome some limitations of laparoscopy in RC treatment. We compared the rate of positive circumferential margins between robotic, laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision (TME) for RC in our institution.

METHODS

Mid and low rectal adenocarcinoma patients consecutively submitted to robotic surgery were compared to laparoscopic and open approach. From our prospective database, 59 patients underwent robotic-assisted rectal surgery from 2012 to 2015 (RTME group) were compared to our historical control group comprising 200 open TME (OTME group) and 41 laparoscopic TME (LTME group) approaches from July 2008 to February 2012. Primary endpoint was to compare the rate of involved circumferential resection margins (CRM) and the mean CRM between the three groups. Secondary endpoint was to compare the mean number of resected lymph nodes between the three groups.

RESULTS

CRM involvement was demonstrated in 20 patients (15.5%) in OTME, 4 (16%) in LTME and 9 (16.4%) in the RTME (p = 0.988). The mean CRM in OTME, LTME and RTME were respectively 0.6 cm (0-2.7), 0.7 cm (0-2.0) and 0.6 cm (0-2.0) (p = 0.960). Overall mean LN harvest was 14 (0-56); 16 (0-52) in OTME, 13 (1-56) in LTME and 10 (0-45) in RTME (p = 0.156).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that robotic TME has the same oncological short-term results when compared to the open and laparoscopic technique, and it could be safely offered for the treatment of mid and low rectal cancer.

High Rate of Positive Circumferential Resection Margins Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Call to Action

OBJECTIVES

To identify predictors of positive circumferential resection margin following rectal cancer resection in the United States.

BACKGROUND

Positive circumferential resection margin is associated with a high rate of local recurrence and poor morbidity and mortality for rectal cancer patients. Prior study has shown poor compliance with national rectal cancer guidelines, but whether this finding is reflected in patient outcomes has yet to be shown.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for stage I-III rectal cancer were identified from the 2010-2011 National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was a positive circumferential resection margin. The relationship between patient, hospital, tumor, and treatment-related characteristics was analyzed using bivariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A positive circumferential resection margin was noted in 2859 (17.2%) of the 16,619 patients included. Facility location, clinical T and N stage, histologic type, tumor size, tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, type of operation, and operative approach were significant predictors of positive circumferential resection margin on multivariable analysis. Total proctectomy had nearly a 30% increased risk of positive margin compared with partial proctectomy (OR 1.293, 95%CI 1.185-1.411) and a laparoscopic approach had nearly 22% less risk of a positive circumferential resection margin compared with an open approach (OR 0.882, 95%CI 0.790-0.985).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite advances in surgical technique and multimodality therapy, rates of positive circumferential resection margin remain high in the United States. Several tumor and treatment characteristics were identified as independent risk factors, and advances in rectal cancer care are necessary to approach the outcomes seen in other countries.

Predictors of circumferential resection margin involvement in surgically resected rectal cancer: A retrospective review of 23,464 patients in the US National Cancer Database

INTRODUCTION

The circumferential resection margin (CRM) is a key prognostic factor after rectal cancer resection. We sought to identify factors associated with CRM involvement (CRM+).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of the National Cancer Database, 2004-2011. Patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical resection and had a recorded CRM were included. Multivariable analysis of the association between clinicopathologic characteristics and CRM was performed. Tumor <1 mm from the cut margin defined CRM+.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Of 23,464 eligible patients, 13.3% were CRM+. Factors associated with CRM+ were diagnosis later in the study period, lack of insurance, advanced stage, higher grade, undergoing APR, and receiving radiation. Nearly half of CRM+ patients did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. CRM+ patients who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy were more likely to be female, older, with more comorbidities, smaller tumors, earlier clinical stage, advanced pathologic stage, and CEA-negative disease compared to those who received it.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors associated with CRM+ include features of advanced disease, undergoing APR, and lack of health insurance. Half of CRM+ patients did not receive neoadjuvant treatment. These represent cases where CRM status may be modifiable with appropriate pre-operative selection and multidisciplinary management.

Surgery for rectal cancer after high-dose radiotherapy for prostate cancer: is sphincter preservation relevant?

AIM

The feasibility and outcome of sphincter-saving resection for rectal cancer were assessed in patients previously treated by high-dose radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

METHOD

Between 2000 and 2012, 1066 patients underwent rectal excision for rectal cancer. Of these, 236 were treated by conventional radiotherapy (45 Gy) and sphincter-saving resection (Group A) and 12 were treated by external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for prostate cancer (70 Gy) and sphincter-saving resection (Group B) of whom five had a metachronous and seven a synchronous cancer. The end-points were surgical morbidity, pelvic sepsis, reoperation and definitive stoma.

RESULTS

Tumour characteristics were similar in both groups. Surgical morbidity (67% vs 25%, P = 0.004), anastomotic leakage (50% vs 10%, P = 0.001, and reoperation (50% vs 17%, P = 0.011) were significantly higher in Group B. Multivariate analyses showed that EBRT for prostate cancer was the only independent factor for anastomotic leakage (OR = 5.12; 95% CI 1.45-18.08; P = 0.011) and definitive stoma (OR = 10.56; 95% CI 3.02-39.92; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

High-dose radiotherapy for prostate cancer increases morbidity from rectal surgery and the risk of a permanent stoma. This suggests that a delayed coloanal anastomosis or a Hartmann procedure should be proposed as an alternative to low anterior resection in this population.

Mesorectal pathologic assessment in two grades predicts accurately recurrence, positive circumferential margin, and correlates with survival

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the prognostic value of the mesorectum quality assessed in a two-grade system compared with a classic system.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer were included (n = 103). Mesorectum was assessed into three grades (classic system: complete, nearly complete, incomplete) and compared with a two-grade system (adequate, inadequate).

RESULTS

Mesorectum was complete in 62 (60.25%) patients, nearly complete in 21, and incomplete in 20. Reassessment showed adequate mesorectum in 83 (80.5%) patients and inadequate in 20. A R0 resection was achieved in 90.4% of adequate mesorectum and in 65% of inadequate mesorectum (P = 0.006). Recurrence was present in 18% of adequate mesorectum patients as compared with 50% of inadequate mesorectum (P = 0.003). The classic system failed to accurately predict the 5-year survival rate between complete (78.9%) and nearly complete (86.2%) categories (P = 0.235); whereas a two grading system showed a 5-year survival rate of 80.8% for adequate versus 39.3% for inadequate (P = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

High recurrence occurred in inadecuate mesorectum patients and was correlated with R1/R2 resections, positive margins, and decreased survival. We propose a simplified classification of mesorectum that correlates with survival and overall recurrence.

Scoring the quality of total mesorectal excision for the prediction of cancer-specific outcome

AIM

A three-grade system for macroscopic evaluation of the resection plane is used to describe the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME). In several studies, two of the three grades have been combined when analysing the outcome. The aim of our study was to compare the predictive value of the three-graded with that of a two-graded TME score.

METHOD

The quality of TME in 1382 patients who underwent elective resection for mid or low rectal adenocarcinoma was registered by 65 hospitals in PROCARE, a Belgian multidisciplinary improvement project. Prediction of outcome based on the classic three-grade score was compared with a two-grade scoring system in which intramesorectal resection (IMR) was combined with mesorectal (MRR) or with muscularis propria resection (MPR). End-points included the local recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate (DMR), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among the 1382 resections, 63% were MRR, 27% IMR and 9% MPR. No significant differences were found in local recurrence between the different grades of TME. A two-grade score distinguishing MRR from the others was found to predict DMR, DFS and OS as well as the three-grade score.

CONCLUSION

The discriminatory and predictive value of a two-grade score, differentiating MRR from the combined IMR and MPR, was as good as the classic three-grade score.

A step toward NOTES total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: endoscopic transanal proctectomy

BACKGROUND

Previous publications have suggested that endoscopic transanal proctectomy (ETAP) is a promising technique and may be an alternative to conventional low anterior resection for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility of ETAP, with a particular focus on postoperative and oncological results and on functional outcomes.

METHODS

This study was a multicenter prospective study of unselected consecutive patients with low rectal cancer requiring proctectomy and coloanal anastomosis. All patients underwent a standardized procedure. The study endpoints were the safety and adequacy of the oncological resection criteria. All patients were evaluated with the Wexner Fecal Incontinence Questionnaire after stoma closure.

RESULTS

Fifty-six consecutive patients (41 men) underwent ETAP between February 2010 and June 2012. The median age was 65 years (39-83), and the median body mass index was 27 (20-42). No intraoperative complications were encountered. There was no postoperative mortality, and the morbidity rate was 26%. The mesorectum was complete in 47 cases (84%) and nearly complete in 9 cases (16%). The median number of lymph nodes retrieved was 12 (range, 7-29) per patient. The median radial and distal margins were 8 mm (0-20) and 10 mm (3-40), respectively. R0 resection was achieved in 53 patients (94.6%). The median Wexner score was 4 (3-12). Thirteen (28%) patients reported stool fragmentation and difficult evacuation.

CONCLUSIONS

ETAP is a feasible alternative surgical option to conventional laparoscopy for rectal resection and may represent a promising step toward rectal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES).

Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic marker in the modern multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

A positive circumferential resection margin has been associated with a high risk of local recurrence and a decrease in survival in patients who have rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the involvement of circumferential resection margin in local recurrence and survival in a multidisciplinary population-based setting by using tailored oncological therapy and surgery with total mesorectal excision.

DESIGN

Data were collected in a prospective database and retrospectively analyzed. Between 1996 and 2009, 448 patients with rectal cancer underwent a curative bowel resection.

SETTINGS

Population-based data were collected at a single institution in the county of Västmanland, Sweden.

RESULTS

Preoperative radiotherapy was delivered to 334 patients (74%); it was delivered to 35 patients (8%) concomitantly with preoperative chemotherapy. In 70 patients (16%), en bloc resections of the prostate and vagina were performed. Intraoperative perforations were seen in 7 patients (1.6%). The mesorectal fascia was assessed as complete in 117/118 cases. In 32 cases (7%), the circumferential resection margin was 1 mm or less. After a median follow-up of 68 months, 5 (1.1%) patients developed a local recurrence; one of them had circumferential resection margin involvement. The 5-year overall survival was 77%. In the multivariate analysis, the circumferential resection margin was not an independent factor for disease-free survival.

LIMITATIONS

Mesorectal fascia was not assessed before 2007. The findings might be explained by a type II error but, from a clinical perspective, enough patients were included to motivate the conclusion of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Circumferential resection margin is an important measurement in rectal cancer pathology, but the correlation to local recurrence is much less than previously stated, probably because of oncological treatment and surgery that respects the mesorectal fascia and, when required, en bloc resections. Circumferential resection margin should not be used as a prognostic marker in the modern multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer.