Distal margin requirements after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for distal rectal carcinomas: are < or = 1 cm distal margins sufficient?

[Intraoperative frozen section diagnostics for low rectal cancer-Primary surgery vs. neoadjuvant pretreatment]

Depending on the extent of the tumor, the treatment strategies for rectal cancer include primary surgical resection or, in the case of locally advanced carcinoma, neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (C[R]Tx) or total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), usually followed by surgical treatment. During resection, it is important to find a balance between radicality and preservation of function. Current data show that shorter safety margins are possible for patients who received neoadjuvant treatment without compromising the oncological outcome. This enables continence-preserving surgery in many patients with low rectal cancer. In these cases in particular, intraoperative frozen section diagnostics play a central role in confirming tumor-free margins. However, frozen section diagnostics also play an important role in the transanal resection of early carcinomas or in the therapy of recurrent rectal cancer. It should not be performed routinely, but rather in a targeted maner for specific questions and the corresponding therapeutic consequences. The informative value of frozen section diagnostics in neoadjuvant treated rectal cancer may be limited, so that the final assessment of the resection status and thus the determination of further therapy must be based on paraffin-embedded sections.

Outcomes of Distal Rectal Cancer Patients Who Did Not Qualify for Watch-and-Wait: Comparison of Intersphincteric Resection Versus Abdominoperineal Resection

INTRODUCTION

Total mesorectal excision (TME) with intersphincteric resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis (ISR-CAA) has been shown to be oncologically safe in patients with distal rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. The introduction of the watch-and-wait (WW) strategy for rectal cancer patients with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy is changing the profile of patients undergoing TME surgery immediately following neoadjuvant treatment. The outcomes of ISR-CAA for patients with locally advanced rectal cancers not qualifying for WW have not been investigated.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing the outcomes of ISR-CAA and abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients with distal rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy and not qualifying for WW, at a comprehensive cancer center with an established WW program. The primary outcome was local recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients had ISR-CAA and 79 had APR. Median follow-up was 61.1 months. The two groups were similar in sex, tumor stage, grade, and distance from the anal verge, but patients in the APR group were older on average. An R0 resection was achieved in 94% of ISR-CAA patients and 91% of APR patients. Patients in the ISR-CAA group had a lower 5-year rate of local recurrence-free survival (79% vs. 93%; p = 0.038) compared with the APR group; however, 5-year disease-free survival did not differ significantly between groups (67% for ISR-CAA and 64% for APR; p = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

The local recurrence rate after ISR-CAA may be higher than after APR for patients without a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy requiring TME surgery.

Mesorectal reconstruction with pedicled greater omental transplantation to relieve low anterior resection syndrome following total intersphincteric resection in patients with ultra-low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Total intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate anus-preserving surgery for patients with ultra-low rectal cancer (ULRC), which can result in various degrees of anorectal dysfunction. Known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), it seriously affects the postoperative quality of life of patients. The aim of this study was to discuss the value of mesorectal reconstruction with pedicled greater omental transplantation (PGOT) to relieve LARS following total ISR in patients with ULRC, hoping to provide new ideas and strategies for the prevention and improvement of LARS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed hospitalization data and postoperative anorectal function of 26 ULRC patients, who were met inclusion and exclusion criteria in our center from January 2015 to February 2022. And combined with the results of anorectal manometry and rectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) defecography of some patients, we assessed comprehensively anorectal physiological and morphological changes of the patients after surgery, and their correlation with LARS.

RESULTS

In this study, 26 patients with ULRC were enrolled and divided into observation group (n = 15) and control group (n = 11) according to whether PGOT was performed. There were no significant differences in surgical results such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). Postoperative follow-up showed that patients in both groups showed severe LARS within 3 months after surgery, but from the 3rd month after surgery, LARS in both groups gradually began to decrease, especially in the observation group, which showed faster recovery and better recovery, with statistically significant difference (P < 0.001). Through anorectal manometry, the mean rectal resting pressure in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P = 0.010). In addition, the postoperative thickness of the posterior rectal mesenterium in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P = 0.001), and also higher than the preoperative level (P = 0.018). Moreover, rectal MRI defecography showed that the neo-rectum had good compliance under the matting of greater omentum, and its intestinal peristalsis was coordinated.

CONCLUSIONS

ULRC patients, with the help of greater omentum, coordinated their neo-rectum peristalsis after total ISR and recovery of LARS was faster and better. PGOT is expected to be an effective strategy for LARS prevention and treatment of ULRC patients after surgery and is worthy of clinical promotion.

New Frontiers in Management of Early and Advanced Rectal Cancer

It is important to understand advances in treatment options for rectal cancer. We attempt to highlight advances in rectal cancer treatment in the form of a systematic review. Early-stage rectal cancer focuses on minimally invasive endoluminal surgery, with importance placed on patient selection as the driving factor for improved outcomes. To achieve a complete pathologic response, various neoadjuvant chemoradiation regimens have been employed. Short-course radiation therapy, total neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and others provide unique advantages with select patient populations best suited for each. With a clinical complete response, a "watch and wait" non-operative surveillance has been introduced with preliminary equivalency to radical resection. Various modalities for total mesorectal excision, such as robotic or transanal, have advantages and can be utilized in select patient populations. Tumors demonstrating solid organ or peritoneal spread, traditionally defined as unresectable lesions conveying a terminal diagnosis, have recently undergone advances in hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy. Hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy has demonstrated clear advantages in 5-year survival over standard chemotherapy. With the peritoneal spread of colorectal cancer, HIPEC with cytoreductive therapy has emerged as the preferred treatment. Understanding the various therapeutic interventions will pave the way for improved patient outcomes.

Mid- and low-rectal cancer: laparoscopic vs open treatment-short- and long-term results. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach in the treatment of mid- or low-rectal cancer is still controversial. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic resection of extraperitoneal cancer is associated with improved short-time non-oncological outcomes, although high-level evidence showing similar short- and long-term oncological outcomes is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our paper is to study the oncological and non-oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of MedLine, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed by combining various key words.

STUDY SELECTION

Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer were included. The quality of RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane reviewer's handbook. This meta-analysis was based on the recommendation of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines.

INTERVENTION(S)

This study analyzes laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were oncological parameters.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs comprising 4,411 patients matched the selection criteria. Meta-analysis showed a significant difference between laparoscopic and open surgery in short-time non-oncological outcomes. Although laparoscopic approach increased operation time, it decreases significantly the blood loss and length of hospital stay. No significant difference was noted regarding short- and long-term oncological outcomes, but 4 and 5 years disease-free survival were statistically higher in the open group.

LIMITATIONS

There are still questions about the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer being comparable to the open technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering that all surgical resections have been performed in high volume centers by expert surgeons, the minimally invasive surgery in patients with extraperitoneal cancer could still be not considered equivalent to open surgery in terms of oncological radicality.

Comparison of oncologic outcome of abdominoperineal resection versus sphincter saving resection for low lying rectal cancer

Purpose

The present study compares the peri/postoperative and oncological outcomes of abdominoperineal resections (APR) and sphincter saving resection (SSR) for low lying rectal cancer.

Methods

Between January 2001 and December 2014, 176 patients who underwent SSR (n=67) and APR (n=109) for low rectal cancer, without stage IV, were retrieved from a retrospective database.

Results

With a median follow-up of 66.5 months. The mean total number of harvested lymph nodes was 16.7 (SSR) versus 17.1 (APR) (P=0.801). The advanced T stage was higher in the APR group (82.6%) versus the SSR group (55.2%) (P=0.006). The positive rate of lymph nodes after surgery was significantly higher in the APR group (45.9%) versus SSR group (25.4%) (P<0.05). The 5-year overall survival rates for SSR and APR were 87.3% and 67.6%, respectively (P<0.005). The 5-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) was 83.6% (SSR) versus 65.5% (APR) (P=0.002). The recurrence rate was higher in the APR group (34.9%) versus the SSR group (14.9%) (P=0.004). Local recurrence rate was not different between the two groups. However, distant recurrence rate was significantly higher in the APR group (26.6% vs. 11.9%, P=0.023). In multivariate analysis, node positive (N0 vs. N1-2) was an independent prognostic factor for DFS (P<0.005).

Conclusion

Based on the present data, SSR achieved better 5-year oncological outcome than APR. The positive lymph node ratio in the N stage after surgery was higher in the APR group and this seems to have an effect on the oncological outcomes of the APR group.

Impact of the distal resection margin on local recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and rectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancer

We aimed to evaluate whether a short distal resection margin (< 1 cm) was associated with local recurrence in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Patients with rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by curative surgery were divided into two groups based on the distal resection margin (≥ 1 cm and < 1 cm). In total, 507 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up duration was 48.9 months. The 3-year local recurrence rates were 2% and 8% in the ≥ 1 cm and < 1 cm groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that a distal resection margin of < 1 cm was a significant risk factor for local recurrence (P = 0.008). Subgroup analysis revealed that a distal resection margin of < 1 cm was not an independent risk factor for local recurrence in the ypT0-1 group. However, among patients with tumor stages ypT2-4, the cumulative 3-year incidences of local recurrence were 2.3% and 9.8% in the ≥ 1 cm and < 1 cm groups, respectively (P = 0.01). A distal resection margin of < 1 cm might influence local recurrence rates in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing preoperative chemoradiotherapy, especially in patients with tumor stages ypT2-4.

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.

Management of Low Rectal Cancer Complicating Ulcerative Colitis: Proposal of a Treatment Algorithm

Low rectal Carcinoma arising at the background of Ulcerative Colitis poses significant management challenges to the clinicians. The complex decision-making requires discussion at the multidisciplinary team meeting. The published literature is scarce, and there are significant variations in the management of such patients. We reviewed treatment protocols and operative strategies; with the aim of providing a practical framework for the management of low rectal cancer complicating UC. A practical treatment algorithm is proposed.

Sphincter-saving surgery for ultra-low rectal carcinoma initially indicated for abdominoperineal resection: Is it safe on a long-term follow-up?

BACKGROUND

Rate of abdominoperineal resection (APR) varies from countries and surgeons. Surgical impact of preoperative treatment for ultra-low rectal carcinoma (ULRC) initially indicated for APR is debated. We report the 10-year oncological results from a prospective controlled trial (GRECCAR 1) which evaluate the sphincter saving surgery (SSR).

METHODS

ULRC indicated for APR were included (n = 207). Randomization was between high-dose radiation (HDR, 45 + 18 Gy) and radiochemotherapy (RCT, 45 Gy + 5FU infusion). Surgical decision was based on tumour volume regression at surgery. SSR technique was standardized as mucosectomy (M) or partial (PISR)/complete (CISR) intersphincteric resection.

RESULTS

Overall SSR rate was 85% (72% ISR), postoperative morbidity 27%, with no mortality. There were no significant differences between the HDR and RCT groups: 10-year overall survival (OS10) 70.1% versus 69.4%, respectively, 10.2% local recurrence (9.2%/14.5%) and 27.6% metastases (32.4%/27.7%). OS and disease-free survival were significantly longer for SSR (72.2% and 60.1%, respectively) versus APR (54.7% and 38.3%). No difference in OS10 between surgical approaches (M 78.9%, PISR 75.5%, CISR 65.5%) or tumour location (low 64.8%, ultralow 76.7%).

CONCLUSION

GRECCAR 1 demonstrates the feasibility of safely changing an initial APR indication into an SSR procedure according to the preoperative treatment tumour response. Long-term oncologic follow-up validates this attitude.

Response Assessment with MRI after Chemoradiotherapy in Rectal Cancer: Current Evidences

Baseline magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become the primary staging modality for surgical plans and stratification of patient populations for more efficient neoadjuvant treatment. Patients who exhibit a complete response to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) may achieve excellent local tumor control and better quality of life with organ-preserving treatments such as local excision or even watch-and-wait management. Therefore, the evaluation of tumor response is a key factor for determining the appropriate treatment following CRT. Although post-CRT MRI is generally accepted as the first-choice method for evaluating treatment response after CRT, its application in the clinical decision process is not fully validated. In this review, we will discuss various oncologic treatment options from radical surgical technique to organ-preservation strategies for achieving better cancer control and improved quality of life following CRT. In addition, the current status of post-CRT MRI in restaging rectal cancer as well as the main imaging features that should be evaluated for treatment planning will also be described for the tailored treatment.

Impact of Length of Distal Margin on Outcomes Following Sphincter Preserving Surgery for Middle and Lower Third Rectal Cancers

Outcomes of sphincter preserving surgery for distal rectal cancers improve with clear circumferential resection and distal resection margin. However, the extent of distal resection margin after a complete mesorectal excision is often a cause for debate. We evaluated the outcome of middle and lower third rectal cancer patients undergoing sphincter preservation with variable distal resection margin at our center. Patients with biopsy-proven rectal adenocarcinoma within 10 cm from anal verge undergoing sphincter preserving resections were included. Patients with positive circumferential resection margin were excluded. Patients were divided into three groups based on the extent of distal resection margin (< 6 mm, 6-10 mm, > 10 mm) and oncological outcomes were compared. The median age of 242 patients was 50 years and 44 (18.2%) were high-grade tumors. Preoperative chemoradiation was used in 185 (75.2%) patients. Median distal resection margin was 20 mm. Patients in < 10 mm group had a significantly higher proportion of lower third (68.3% vs 39.8%, p = 0.004) and chemoradiation-treated tumors (85.4 vs 74.6%, p = 0.001). A significantly higher percentage required an intersphincteric resection in the < 10 mm group (53.7% vs 14.4%, p = 0.0001). Significantly higher percentage tumors were pT3 in > 10 mm group (45.3% vs. 31.7%) (p = 0.05). The median follow-up was 23 months. There was no difference in the overall, loco-regional, and distant recurrence rates between the three groups. A subcentimeter distal resection margin does not influence loco-regional or distant recurrence rates following sphincter preserving surgery for middle and lower third rectal adenocarcinoma.

Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on distal spread of low rectal cancer located close to the anus

PURPOSE

This study aimed to clarify the frequency of distal spread and the optimal distal margin after preoperative chemotherapy for advanced low rectal cancer.

METHODS

The study included patients with advanced lower rectal cancer who received preoperative chemotherapy and underwent surgery during 2012-2015. We investigated the distal spread of tumor cells, defined as the distal distance from the intramucosal distal tumor edge to the farthest tumor cells located under the submucosal layer. Clinical characteristics were compared for distal spreads ≥ 10 and < 10 mm, and risk factors for distal spread ≥ 10 mm were investigated.

RESULTS

Of the 71 patients, 42 (59%) showed distal spread. Distal spreads of 1-9, 10-19, and ≥ 20 mm were observed in 27 (38%), 11 (15%), and 4 (6%) patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed two independent risk factors for distal spread ≥ 10 mm after preoperative chemotherapy. The first risk factor is the presence of different therapeutic effects between the mucosal and deeper layers (meaning that superficial tumor shrinkage was evident on colonoscopy, but little tumor shrinkage was evident on magnetic resonance imaging) (odds ratio, 11.6; 95% CI, 2.22-61.3). The second risk factor is poorly differentiated or mucinous adenocarcinoma (odds ratio, 8.86; 95% CI, 1.58-49.9).

CONCLUSION

A distal margin of 20 mm is required (10 mm is insufficient) for advanced lower rectal cancer patients who receive preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery. Independent risk factors for distal spread ≥ 10 mm include (1) the presence of different therapeutic effects between mucosal and deeper layers and (2) poorly differentiated or mucinous adenocarcinomas.

Tumor Biological Aspects of Epithelial versus Mesenchymal Tumors of the Gastrointestinal Tract

One of the holy grails of cancer surgery for surgical oncologists is to perform a macroscopically complete resection of the affected organ or site with negative microscopic margins. The surgical oncologist must also be mindful of what constitutes appropriately-sized negative margins. However, what is necessary, based on the best available evidence, can vary considerably for different malignancies arising within the same organ. This review compares two different gastric and rectal malignancies, one each of epithelial and of mesenchymal origin. Data supporting extent of margins will be reviewed, illustrating the importance of knowing the histologic diagnosis prior to surgery to provide proper oncologic care.

Sphincter-preserving surgery for low-middle rectal cancer: Can we predict feasibility with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging?

The study proposed to evaluate the feasibility of predicting sphincter-sparing surgery (SSS) preoperatively in low-middle rectal cancer by using magnetic resonance (MR).The study included both retrospective and prospective design. In the retrospective design, the distance from lower edge of tumor to upper margin of the internal sphincter (Dis1) and distance to anal verge (Dis2) were measured on MR, the distance to anal verge recorded by colonoscopy (Dis3) and digital rectal examination (Dis4) were also obtained. ROC analysis was conducted and cut-off value was determined with overall and stratified analysis. The prospective part was designed to validate the predictive capability of the optimal distance.The retrospective design included 278 patients with middle or lower rectal adenocarcinoma, the prospective design included 106 patients with neoadjuvant therapies. The primary outcome was the actual surgical method and pathological distal resection margin. Dis1 obtained from MRI presented better performance than other distances in determining the surgical approach, with AUC of 0.997 (95% CI, 0.934-1.000). Dis1 was selected as the optimal distance and a cut-off value of 2 cm was determined. Dis1 and the cut-off value were also validated in the prospective sample, with AUC of 0.996 (95% CI, 0.989-1.000) and an overall accuracy of 99.1%.MR-based distance from lower edge of tumor to upper margin of the internal sphincter could be used to help the surgeons to predict the feasibility of SSS preoperatively.

Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: A review of the updated literature

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has rapidly increased worldwide including laparoscopic surgery. However, there are some concerns for the definition of ISR, surgical technique, oncological outcome, anal function, and quality of life (QoL). The aim of the present study is to evaluate those issues. A review of this surgical technique was carried out by searching English language literature of the PubMed online database and appropriate articles were identified. With regard to open‐ISR, the morbidity rate ranged from 7.5% to 38.3%, with lower mortality rates. Local recurrence rates varied widely from 0% to 22.7%, with a mean follow‐up duration of 40–94 months. Disease‐free and overall 5‐year survival rates were 68–86% and 76–97%, respectively. Those outcomes were equivalent to laparoscopic‐ISR. Surgical and oncological outcomes of ISR were generally acceptable. However, accurate evaluation of anal function and QoL was difficult because of a lack of standard assessment of various patient‐related factors. The surgical and oncological outcomes after ISR seem to be acceptable. The ISR technique seems to be valid as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection in selected patients with a very low rectal cancer. However, both necessity for ISR and expectations of QoL impairment as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

Anorectal complications after robotic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Robotic intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been introduced for sphincter-preservation in the treatment of low rectal cancer. However, many patients experience anorectal symptoms and defecatory dysfunction after ISR. This study aims to evaluate the anorectal complications that develop after ISR.

METHODS

The medical records of 108 patients who underwent robotic ISR at Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan between December 2011 and June 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Photographic records of perineal conditions were documented at the following time intervals after surgery: 1 day, 2 weeks, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months. Clinical outcomes and treatment results were analysed.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients (78.7%) developed edematous hemorrhoids after surgery. These subsided at a median of 56 days after operation (range 23-89 days). Forty-six patients (42.6%) were found to have anal stenosis requiring anal dilatation. Sixteen patients (14.8%) had neorectal mucosal prolapse, which was noted to occur at an average of 98 days after surgery (range 41-162 days). Multivariate analysis showed that the occurrence of edematous hemorrhoids was associated with operating time (P = 0.043), and male gender was a significant risk factor for anal stenosis (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study reporting on the clinical outcomes of anorectal status after robotic ISR. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term effects of these anorectal complications.

The Influence of the Distal Resection Margin Length on Local Recurrence and long- term Survival in Patients with Rectal Cancer after Chemoradiotherapy and Sphincter- Preserving Rectal Resection

Background

Low recurrence rates and long term survival are the main therapeutic goals of rectal cancer surgery. Complete, margin- negative resection confers the greatest chance for a cure. The aim of our study was to determine whether the length of the distal resection margin was associated with local recurrence rate and long- term survival.

Patients and methods

One hundred and nine patients, who underwent sphincter-preserving resection for locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy between 2006 and 2010 in two tertiary referral centres were included in the study. Distal resection margin lengths were measured on formalin-fixed, pinned specimens. Characteristics of patients with distal resection margin < 8 mm (Group I, n = 27), 8–20 mm (Group II, n = 31) and > 20 mm (Group III, n = 51) were retrospectively analysed and compared. Median (range) follow-up time in Group I was 89 (51–111), in Group II 83 (57–111) and in Group III 80 (45–116) months (p = 0.326), respectively.

Results

Univariate survival analysis showed that distal resection margin length was not statistically significantly associated with overall survival or local recurrence rate (p > 0.05). In a multiple Cox regression analysis, after adjusting for pathologic T and N stage (yT, yN), distal resection margin length was still not statistically significantly associated with overall survival.

Conclusions

Our study shows that close distal resection margins can be accepted as oncologically safe for sphincter-preserving rectal resections after preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

Is Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Beneficial for Sphincter Preservation in Low-Lying Rectal Cancer Patients?

The present study explored the benefit of preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) for sphincter preservation in locally advanced low-lying rectal cancer patients who underwent stapled anastomosis, especially in those with deep and narrow pelvises determined by magnetic resonance imaging.Patients with locally advanced low-lying rectal cancer (≤5 cm from the anal verge) who underwent stapled anastomosis were included. Patients were categorized into two groups (PCRT+ vs. PCRT-) according to PCRT application. Patients in the PCRT+ group were matched to those in the PCRT- group according to potential confounding factors (age, gender, clinical stage, and body mass index) for sphincter preservation. Sphincter preservation, permanent stoma, and anastomosis-related complications were compared between the groups. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging was used to measure 12 dimensions representing pelvic cavity depth and width with which deep and narrow pelvis was defined. The impact of PCRT on sphincter preservation and permanent stoma in pelvic dimensions defined as deep and narrow pelvis was evaluated, and factors associated with sphincter preservation and permanent stoma were analyzed.One hundred sixty-six patients were one-to-one matched between the PCRT+ and PCRT- groups. Overall, sphincter-saving surgery was performed in 66.3% and the rates were not different between the 2 groups. Anastomotic complications and permanent stoma occurred nonsignificantly more frequently in the PCRT+ group. PCRT was not associated with higher rate of sphincter preservation in all pelvic dimensions defined as deep and narrow pelvis, while PCRT was related to higher rate of permanent stoma in shorter transverse diameter and interspinous distance. On logistic regression analysis, PCRT was not shown to influence both sphincter preservation and permanent stoma, while longer transverse diameter and interspinous distance were associated with lower rate of permanent stoma.PCRT had no beneficial effect on sphincter preservation in patients with locally advanced low-lying rectal cancer who had undergone stapled anastomosis. In patients with deep and narrow pelvis, PCRT had no impact on sphincter preservation but was associated with higher rate of permanent stoma.

Pathologic Assessment of Rectal Carcinoma after Neoadjuvant Radio(chemo)therapy: Prognostic Implications

Neoadjuvant radio(chemo)therapy is increasingly used in rectal cancer and induces a number of morphologic changes that affect prognostication after curative surgery, thereby creating new challenges for surgical pathologists, particularly in evaluating morphologic changes and tumour response to preoperative treatment. Surgical pathologists play an important role in determining the many facets of rectal carcinoma patient care after neoadjuvant treatment. These range from proper handling of macroscopic specimens to accurate microscopic evaluation of pathological features associated with patients' prognosis. This review presents the well-established pathological prognostic indicators and discusses challenging features in order to provide both surgical pathologists and treating physicians with a checklist that is useful in a neoadjuvant setting.

Efficacy and Safety of Low-Dose-Rate Endorectal Brachytherapy as a Boost to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Distal Rectal Cancer: A Phase-II Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Despite advances in rectal cancer treatment over the last decade, local control and risk of late side effects due to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) remain as concerns. The present study aimed to investigate the efficacy and the safety of low-dose-rate endorectal brachytherapy (LDRBT) as a boost to neoadjuvant chemoradiation for use in treating locally advanced distal rectal adenocarcinomas.

METHODS

This phase-II clinical trial included 34 patients (as the study arm) with newly diagnosed, locally advanced (clinical T3-T4 and/or N1/N2, M0) lower rectal cancer. For comparative analysis, 102 matched patients (as the historical control arm) with rectal cancer were also selected. All the patients were treated with LDRBT (15 Gy in 3 fractions) and concurrent chemoradiation (45-50.4 Gy). Concurrent chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 plus oral capecitabine 825 mg/m(2) twice daily during LDRBT and EBRT.

RESULTS

The study results revealed a significant differences between the study arm and the control arm in terms in the pathologic tumor size (2.1 cm vs. 3.6 cm, P = 0.001), the pathologic tumor stage (35% T3-4 vs. 65% T3-4, P = 0.003), and the pathologic complete response (29.4% vs. 11.7%, P < 0.028). Moreover, a significantly higher dose of EBRT (P = 0.041) was found in the control arm, and a longer time to surgery was observed in the study arm (P < 0.001). The higher rate of treatment-related toxicities, such as mild proctitis and anemia, in the study arm was tolerable and easily manageable.

CONCLUSION

A boost of LDRBT can optimize the pathologic complete response, with acceptable toxicities, in patients with distal rectal cancer.

Oncologic outcomes in rectal cancer with close distal resection margins: a retrospective analysis

Purpose

The assurance of a negative resection margin is significant in rectal cancer as it indicates a reduced risk of local recurrence; thus, sufficient length of the resection margin is strongly required. The purpose of this study was to analyze the relationship between the length of the distal resection margin (DRM) and local recurrence or survival rate and to evaluate the possibility of performing sphincter-conserving surgery.

Methods

The medical records of 218 rectal cancer patients were analyzed. Patients were classified into three groups according to the length of the DRM as follows: group 1, DRM < 1 cm; group 2, 1 cm ≤ DRM ≤ 2 cm; and group 3, DRM > 2 cm.

Results

Of 218 patients enrolled, 81 were in group 1, 66 in group 2, and 71 in group 3. The 5-year survival rates were 78.2%, 78.2%, and 76.8% for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and there were no statistically significant differences in survival (P = 0.913). Local recurrence was found in 2 patients in group 1, 1 patient in group 2, and 1 patient in group 3; there were no statistically significant differences in local recurrence (P = 0.908).

Conclusion

A DRM of < 1 cm did not impair the oncologic outcomes of rectal cancer patients. Our results indicated that surgeons should keep in mind to consider the option of sphincter-conserving surgery with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy even in very low rectal cancer.

Changing the Way We Manage Rectal Cancer-Standardizing TME from Open to Robotic (Including Laparoscopic)

Standardizing total mesorectal excision (TME) has been a topic of interest since 1979 when Professor Richard J. Heald first described TME and a new approach to rectal cancer. The procedure is optimized only if every one of the relevant factors is tackled with precise attention to detail, so that the preoperative, operative, and postoperative practice is standardized completely. The same concept of TME standardization applies today regardless of technique chosen, that is, open laparoscopic, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, or robotic. This article reviews the relevant operative factors in performing a quality TME, looking at both the oncologic and nononcologic advantages and disadvantages. It supports TME as the standard of care in obtaining a negative circumferential margin for mid and lower-third rectal cancers, and discusses the role of tumor-specific mesorectal excision for upper-third rectal cancers. It discusses the new options and challenges each operative technique holds, and identifies the same standardized principles each must obey to provide the highest quality of oncologic resection. The operative documentation of these critical features from diagnostic workup to pathological reporting is also emphasized.

Techniques in total mesorectal excision surgery

Advances in the surgical management of rectal cancer have placed the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) as the major predictor in overall survival. A standardized TME technique along with quality increases the percentage of patients undergoing a complete TME. Quality measurements of TME will place increasing demands on surgeons maintaining competence with present and future techniques. These efforts will improve the outcome of the rectal cancer patients.

Hospital variation in sphincter preservation for elderly rectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The primary goal of an operation for rectal cancer is to cure cancer and, where possible, preserve continence. A wide range of sphincter preservation rates have been reported. This study evaluated hospital variation in the use of low anterior resection (LAR), local excision (LE), and abdominoperineal resection (APR) in the treatment of elderly rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data, we identified 4959 patients older than 65 y with stage I-III rectal cancer diagnosed from 2000-2005 who underwent operative intervention at one of 370 hospitals. We evaluated the distribution of hospital-specific procedure rates and used generalized mixed models with random hospital effects to examine the influence of patient characteristics and hospital on operation type, using APR as a reference.

RESULTS

The median hospital performed APR on 33% of elderly patients with rectal cancer. Hospital was a stronger predictor of LAR receipt than any patient characteristic, explaining 32% of procedure choice, but not a strong predictor of LE, explaining only 3.8%. Receipt of LE was primarily related to tumor size and tumor stage, which combined explained 31% of procedure variation.

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of LE is primarily determined by patient characteristics. In contrast, the hospital where surgery is performed significantly influences whether a patient undergoes an LAR or APR. Understanding the factors that cause this institutional variation is crucial to ensuring equitable availability of sphincter preservation.

Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: a systematic review

Radical surgical treatment for very low rectal cancer near the anus has generally involved abdominoperineal resection. Various sphincter-saving operations have been developed for such tumors to optimize the patients' postoperative quality of life. Current protocols focus on intersphincteric resection (ISR), which differs from conventional hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA) after low anterior resection. However, the efficacy of ISR remains unclear. The surgical, oncologic, and functional outcomes after intersphincteric resection (ISR) were reviewed. This review of the current literature was conducted by searching the PubMed online database. Articles focusing specifically on conventional hand-sewn CAA were excluded from this study. The mean mortality rate is <2 %, and the mean morbidity rate ranges from 7.7 to 38.3 %. The mean local recurrence rate varies widely from 0 to 22.7 %, with a mean follow-up duration of 40-94 months. The mean disease-free and overall 5-year survival rates are 69-86 and 79-97 months, respectively. Functional outcomes are generally acceptable, but accurate evaluation is extremely difficult due to the absence of unified appraisal methods. ISR appears surgically, oncologically and functionally acceptable. However, more experience and better understanding of the oncology, anal physiology, and pelvic anatomy are necessary to achieve successful outcomes without complications, and to improve patient survival.

Multivisceral resection for locally advanced rectal cancer: adequate length of distal resection margin

PURPOSE

Locally advanced rectal cancer may require an intraoperative decision regarding curative multivisceral resection (MVR) of adjacent organs. In bulky tumor cases, ensuring sufficient distal resection margin (DRM) for achievement of oncologic safety is very difficult. This study is designed to evaluate the adequate length of DRM in multiviscerally resected rectal cancer.

METHODS

A total of 324 patients who underwent curative low anterior resection for primary pT3-4 rectal cancer between 1995 and 2004 were identified from a prospectively collected colorectal database.

RESULTS

Short lengths of DRM (≤1 cm) did not compromise essentially poor oncologic outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer (P = 0.736). However, especially in rectal cancers invading adjacent organs, DRM of less than 2 cm showed poor survival outcome. In 5-year and 10-year survival analysis of MVR, a shorter DRM (<2 cm) showed 41.9% and 30.5%, although a longer DRM (≥2 cm) showed 72.4% and 60.2% (P = 0.03, 0.044). In multivariate analysis of MVR, poorly differentiated histology, ulceroinfiltrative growth of tumor, and short DRM (<2 cm) were significant factors for prediction of poor survival outcome, although short DRM was not significantly related to local and systemic recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In locally advanced rectal cancer of pT3-4, a short length of DRM (≤1 cm) did not compromise essentially poor oncologic outcome. In rectal cancers invading adjacent organs and requiring MVR, a shorter DRM (<2 cm) was found to be related to poor survival outcome.

Extended abdominoperineal excision vs. standard abdominoperineal excision in rectal cancer--a systematic overview

BACKGROUND

After introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) as the gold standard for rectal cancer surgery, oncologic results appeared to be inferior for abdominoperineal excision (APE) as compared to anterior resection. This has been attributed to the technique of standard APE creating a waist at the level of the tumor-bearing segment. This systematic review investigates outcome of both standard and extended techniques of APE regarding inadvertent bowel perforation, circumferential margin (CRM) involvement, and local recurrence.

METHODS

A literature search was performed to identify all articles reporting on APE after the introduction of TME using Medline, Ovid, and Embase. Extended APE was defined as operations that resected the levator ani muscle close to its origin. All other techniques were taken to be standard. Studies so identified were evaluated using a validated instrument for assessing nonrandomized studies. Rates for perforation, CRM involvement, and local recurrence were compared using chi-square statistics.

RESULTS

In the extended group, 1,097 patients, and in the standard group, 4,147 patients could be pooled for statistical analysis. The rate of inadvertent bowel perforation and the rate of CRM involvement for extended vs. standard APE was 4.1% vs. 10.4% (relative risk reduction 60.6%, p = 0.004) and 9.6% vs. 15.4% (relative risk reduction 37.7%, p = 0.022), respectively. The local recurrence rate was 6.6% vs. 11.9% (relative risk reduction 44.5%, p < 0.001) for the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review suggests that extended techniques of APE result in superior oncologic outcome as compared to standard techniques.

Is the 1-cm rule of distal bowel resection margin in rectal cancer based on clinical evidence? A systematic review

Background

Distal intramural spread is present within 1 cm from visible tumor in a substantial proportion of patients. Therefore, ≥1 cm of distal bowel clearance is recommended as minimally acceptable. However, clinical results are contradictory in answering the question of whether this rule is valid. The aim of this review was to evaluate whether in patients undergoing anterior resection, a distal bowel gross margin of <1 cm jeopardizes oncologic safety.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature identified 17 studies showing results in relation to margins of approximately <1 cm (948 patients) versus >1 cm (4626 patients); five studies in relation to a margin of ≤5 mm (173 patients) versus >5 mm (1277 patients), and five studies showing results in a margin of ≤2 mm (73 patients). In most studies, pre- or postoperative radiation was provided.

Results

A multifactorial process was identified resulting in selection of favorable tumors for anterior resection with the short bowel margin and unfavorable tumors for abdominoperineal resection or for anterior resection with the long margin. In total, the local recurrence rate was 1.0% higher in the <1-cm margin group compared to the >1-cm margin group (95% confidence interval [CI] −0.6 to 2.7; P = 0.175). The corresponding figures for ≤5 mm cutoff point were 1.7% (95% CI −1.9 to 5.3; P = 0.375). The pooled local recurrence rate in patients having ≤2 mm margin was 2.7% (95% CI 0 to 6.4).

Conclusions

In the selected group of patients, <1 cm margin did not jeopardize oncologic safety.

Stapler access and visibility in the deep pelvis: A comparative human cadaver study between a computerized right angle linear cutter versus a curved cutting stapler

Purpose

Distal rectal stapling is often challenging because of limited space and visibility. We compared two stapling devices in the distal rectum in a cadaver study: the iDrive™ right angle linear cutter (RALC) (Covidien, New Haven, CT) and the CONTOUR^® curved cutter (CC) (Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, OH).

Methods

Twelve male cadavers underwent pelvic dissection by 4 surgeons. After rectal mobilization as in a total mesorectal excision, the staplers were applied to the rectum as deep as possible in both the coronal and sagittal positions. The distance from the pelvic floor was measured for each application. A questionnaire rated the visibility and access of the stapling devices. Measurements were taken between pelvic landmarks to see what anatomic factors hinder the placement of a distal rectal stapler.

Results

The median (range) distance of the stapler from the pelvic floor in the coronal position for the RALC was 1.0 cm (0-4.0) vs. 2.0 cm (0-5.0) for the CC, p = 0.003. In the sagittal position, the median distance was 1.6 cm (0-3.5) for the RALC and 3.3 cm (0-5.0) for the CC, p < 0.0001. The RALC scored better than the CC in respect to: 1. interference by the symphysis pubis, 2. number of stapler readjustments, 3. ease of placement in the pelvis, 4. impediment of visibility, 5. ability to hold and retain tissue, 6. visibility rating, and 7. access in the pelvis. A shorter distance between the tip of the coccyx and the pubic symphysis correlated with a longer distance of the stapler from the pelvic floor (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

The RALC is superior to the CC in terms of access, visibility, and ease of placement in the deep pelvis. This could provide important clinical benefit to both patient and surgeon during difficult rectal surgery.

Long-term survival and recurrence outcomes following surgery for distal rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Treatment of distal rectal cancer remains clinically challenging and includes proctectomy and coloanal anastomosis (CAA) or abdominoperineal resection (APR). The purpose of this study is to evaluate operative and pathologic factors associated with long-term survival and local recurrence outcomes in patients treated for distal rectal cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective consecutive cohort study of 304 patients treated for distal rectal cancer with radical resection from 1993 to 2003 was performed. Patients were grouped by procedure (CAA or APR). Demographic, pathologic, recurrence, and survival data were analyzed utilizing chi-square analysis for comparison of proportions. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test for univariate and Cox regression for multivariate comparison.

RESULTS

The median tumor distance from the anal verge was 2 cm [interquartile range (IQR) 0.5-4 cm]. Margins were negative in all but four patients (one distal, 0.3%; three radial, 1%). The 5-year overall survival rate was 82% (88.6% stage pI, 80.5% stage pII, 67.9% stage pIII). Older age, advanced pathologic stage, presence of lymphovascular or perineural invasion, earlier treatment period, and APR surgery type were associated with worse survival on multivariate analysis. The 5-year local recurrence rate was 5.3% after CAA and 7.9% after APR (p = 0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Low rates of local recurrence and good overall survival can be achieved after treatment of distal rectal cancer with stage-appropriate chemoradiation and proctectomy with CAA or APR. Sphincter preservation can be achieved even with distal margins less than 2 cm.

Hand-held spectroscopic device for in vivo and intraoperative tumor detection: contrast enhancement, detection sensitivity, and tissue penetration

Surgery is one of the most effective and widely used procedures in treating human cancers, but a major problem is that the surgeon often fails to remove the entire tumor, leaving behind tumor-positive margins, metastatic lymph nodes, and/or satellite tumor nodules. Here we report the use of a hand-held spectroscopic pen device (termed SpectroPen) and near-infrared contrast agents for intraoperative detection of malignant tumors, based on wavelength-resolved measurements of fluorescence and surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) signals. The SpectroPen utilizes a near-infrared diode laser (emitting at 785 nm) coupled to a compact head unit for light excitation and collection. This pen-shaped device effectively removes silica Raman peaks from the fiber optics and attenuates the reflected excitation light, allowing sensitive analysis of both fluorescence and Raman signals. Its overall performance has been evaluated by using a fluorescent contrast agent (indocyanine green, or ICG) as well as a surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) contrast agent (pegylated colloidal gold). Under in vitro conditions, the detection limits are approximately 2-5 × 10(-11) M for the indocyanine dye and 0.5-1 × 10(-13) M for the SERS contrast agent. Ex vivo tissue penetration data show attenuated but resolvable fluorescence and Raman signals when the contrast agents are buried 5-10 mm deep in fresh animal tissues. In vivo studies using mice bearing bioluminescent 4T1 breast tumors further demonstrate that the tumor borders can be precisely detected preoperatively and intraoperatively, and that the contrast signals are strongly correlated with tumor bioluminescence. After surgery, the SpectroPen device permits further evaluation of both positive and negative tumor margins around the surgical cavity, raising new possibilities for real-time tumor detection and image-guided surgery.

Adequate length of the distal resection margin in rectal cancer: from the oncological point of view

INTRODUCTION

The distal resection margin (DRM) has been considered an important factor for the oncological outcome of rectal cancer surgery. However, the optimal distal margins required to achieve safe oncological outcome remains to be controversial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

More recently, as circumferential resection margin or mesorectal margin has been additionally reported to be more important factors predicting patient outcome than the distal mucosal margin, a re-evaluation of the impact of DRM on patient outcome is needed.

RESULTS

The extent of distal tumor spread is known to be influenced by a variety of factors such as tumor location, lymph node metastasis, and tumor size. DRM might affect survival more than a local recurrence. Because distal intramural tumor spread rarely exceeds 1 to 2 cm in most rectal cancers, and local control and survival do not seem to be compromised by shorter distal resection margins, the generally accepted practice is to aim for a 2-cm DRM. However, in the recent trend of curative resection after preoperative chemoradiotherapy, with an otherwise favorable tumor such as well-differentiated tumor and no lymph node metastasis, a DRM at < or =1 cm does not necessarily portend a poor prognosis. In cases with preoperative chemoradiotherapy, distal resection margins need to be evaluated individually.

DISCUSSION

It has been suggested that down-staging of low-lying rectal cancers after preoperative radiation might well include the pathological clearance of distal intramural microscopic spread. Moreover, the measurement of DRM varies with respective study, making it difficult to compare.

CONCLUSION

We need an applicable intraoperative method to accurately measure distal resection margin, enabling comparative outcome.

Sphincter-preserving R0 total mesorectal excision with resection of internal genitalia combined with pre- or postoperative chemoradiation for T4 rectal cancer in females

AIM: To evaluate the impact of chemoradiation admi-nistered pre- or postoperatively on prognosis in females following R0 extended resection with sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision (TME) for locally advanced rectal cancer and to assess the association between chemoradiation and intra- and postoperative variables.

METHODS: Twenty-one females were treated for locally advanced but preoperatively assessed as primarily resectable rectal cancer involving reproductive organs. Anterior resection with TME and excision of internal genitalia was combined with neo- or adjuvant chemoradiation. Two-year disease-free survival analysis was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. The association between chemoradiation and other variables was evaluated with the Fisher’s exact test and Mann-Whitney test.

RESULTS: Survival rate decreased in anaemic females (51.5% vs 57.4%), in patients older than 60 years (41.8% vs 66.7%) with poorly differentiated cancers (50.0% vs 55.6%) and tumors located ≤ 7 cm from the anal verge (42.9% vs 68.1%) but with the lack of importance. Patients with negative lymph nodes and women chemoradiated preoperatively had significantly favourable prognosis (85.7% vs 35.7%; P = 0.03 and 80.0% vs 27.3%; P = 0.01, respectively). Preoperative chemoradiation compared to adjuvant radiochemotherapy was not significantly associated with the duration of surgery, incidence of intraoperative bowel perforation and blood loss ≥ 1 L, rate of postoperative bladder and anorectal dysfunction, and minimal distal resection margin. It significantly influenced minimal radial margin (mean 4.2 mm vs 1.1 mm; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: Despite involving internal genitalia, long-term disease-free survival and sphincter preservation may be achieved with combined-modality therapy for females with T4 locally advanced rectal carcinoma. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation does not compromise functional results and may significantly improve oncological outcomes probably due to enhanced radial clearance.

A prospective pathologic analysis using whole-mount sections of rectal cancer following preoperative combined modality therapy: implications for sphincter preservation

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to use a comprehensive whole-mount pathologic analysis to characterize microscopic patterns of residual disease, as well as circumferential and distal resection margins, in rectal cancer treated with preoperative CMT; and to identify clinicopathologic factors associated with residual disease.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Recent studies have shown that preoperative combined modality therapy (CMT) for rectal cancer enhances rates of sphincter preservation. However, the efficacy of preoperative CMT in conjunction with a total mesorectal excision (TME)-based resection, in terms of resection margins using whole-mount sections, has not been reported. Furthermore, since patterns of residual disease and extent of distal spread following preoperative CMT are largely unknown, intraoperative determination of distal rectal transection remains a surgical challenge.

METHODS

We prospectively accrued 109 patients with endorectal ultrasound (ERUS)-staged, locally advanced rectal cancer (T2-T4 and/or N1), located a median distance of 7 cm from the anal verge, requiring preoperative CMT, and undergoing a TME-based resection. Comprehensive whole-mount pathologic analysis was performed, with particular emphasis on extent of residual disease, margin status, and intramural tumor extension. Clinicopathologic factors associated with residual disease were identified.

RESULTS

A sphincter-preserving resection was feasible in 87 patients (80%), and in all 109 patients, distal margins were negative (median, 2.1 cm; range, 0.4-10 cm). Intramural extension beyond the gross mucosal edge of residual tumor was observed in only 2 patients (1.8%), both < or =0.95 cm. There were no positive circumferential margins (median, 10 mm; range, 1-28 mm), although 6 were less than or equal to 1 mm. On multivariate analysis, residual disease was observed more frequently in distally located tumors (distance from anal verge <5 cm) (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Our comprehensive pathologic analysis suggests that, following preoperative CMT and a TME-based resection, distal margins of 1 cm may provide for complete removal of locally advanced rectal cancer. Although residual cancer following preoperative CMT was more likely in the setting of distally located tumors, occult tumor beneath the mucosal edge was rare and, when present, limited to less than 1 cm. Our results extend the indications for sphincter preservation, as distal resection margins of only 1 cm may be acceptable for rectal cancer treated with preoperative CMT.

Modern management of rectal cancer: A 2006 update

The goal of this review is to outline some of the important surgical issues surrounding the management of patients with early (T1/T2 and N0), as well as locally advanced (T3/T4 and/or N1) rectal cancer. Surgery for rectal cancer continues to develop towards the ultimate goals of improved local control and overall survival, maintaining quality of life, and preserving sphincter, genitourinary, and sexual function. Information concerning the depth of tumor penetration through the rectal wall, lymph node involvement, and presence of distant metastatic disease is of crucial importance when planning a curative rectal cancer resection. Preoperative staging is used to determine the indication for neoadjuvant therapy as well as the indication for local excision versus radical cancer resection. Local excision is likely to be curative in most patients with a primary tumor which is limited to the submucosa (T1N0M0), without high-risk features and in the absence of metastatic disease. In appropriate patients, minimally invasive procedures, such as local excision, TEM, and laparoscopic resection allow for improved patient comfort, shorter hospital stays, and earlier return to preoperative activity level. Once the tumor invades the muscularis propria (T2), radical rectal resection in acceptable operative candidates is recommended. In patients with transmural and/or node positive disease (T3/T4 and/or N1) with no distant metastases, preoperative chemoradiation followed by radical resection according to the principles of TME has become widely accepted. During the planning and conduct of a radical operation for a locally advanced rectal cancer, a number of surgical management issues are considered, including: (1) total mesorectal excision (TME); (2) autonomic nerve preservation (ANP); (3) circumferential resection margin (CRM); (4) distal resection margin; (5) sphincter preservation and options for restoration of bowel continuity; (6) laparoscopic approaches; and (7) postoperative quality of life.

© 2006 The WJG Press. All rights reserved.

Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in the treatment of fixed and semi-fixed rectal tumors. Analysis of results and prognostic factors

PURPOSE

To report the retrospective analysis of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neodjuvant radiochemotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From January 1994 to December 2003, 101 patients with fixed (25%) or semi-fixed (75%) rectal adenocarcinoma were treated by preoperative radiotherapy with a dose of 45 Gy at the whole pelvis and 50.4 Gy at primary tumor, concomitant to four weekly chemotherapies with 5-Fluorouracil (425 mg/m2) and Leucovorin (20 mg/m2). In 71 patients (70.3%) the primary tumor was located up to 6 cm from the anal verge and in 30 (29.7%) from 6.5 cm to 10 cm. Age, gender, tumor fixation, tumor distance from the anal verge, clinical response, surgical technique, and postoperative TNM stage were the prognostic factors analyzed for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local control (LC) at five years.

RESULTS

Median follow-up time was 38 months (range, 2-141). Complete response was observed in eight patients (7.9%), partial in 54 (53.4%) and absence in 39 (38.7%). OS, DFS and LC were 52.6%, 53.8%, and 75.9%, respectively. Distant metastasis occurred in 40 (39.6%) patients, local recurrence in 20 (19.8%) and both in 16 (15.8%). Patients with fixed tumors had lower OS (17% Vs 65.6%; p < 0.001), DFS (31.2% Vs 60.9%; p = 0.005), and LC (58% Vs 82%; p = 0.004). Patients with tumors more than 6 cm above the anal verge had better LC (93% Vs 69%; p = 0.04). The postoperative TNM stage was a significant factor for DFS (I:64.1%, II:69.6%, III:35.2%, IV:11.1%; p < 0.001) and for LC (I:75.7%, II: 92.9%, III:54.1%, IV:100%; p = 0.005). Patients with positive lymph nodes had worse OS (37.9% Vs 70.4%, p = 0.006), DFS (32% Vs 72.7%, p < 0.001) and LC (56.2% Vs 93.4%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that the neoadjuvant treatment employed was effective for local control. Fixation of the lesion and lymph nodes metastasis were the main adverse prognostic factors. Distant failures were frequent, supporting the need of new drugs for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Distal cT2N0 rectal cancer: is there an alternative to abdominoperineal resection?

PURPOSE

Patients with cT2N0 distal rectal cancer do not require adjuvant therapy. However, when a patient refuses an abdominoperineal resection (APR), is there an alternative? The purpose of this trial is to determine whether preoperative external-beam radiation therapy can increase the rate of sphincter preservation for patients with distal cT2N0 adenocarcinoma of the rectum.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between April 1988 and October 2003, 27 patients with distal rectal adenocarcinoma staged T2 by clinical and/or endorectal ultrasound who were judged by the operating surgeon to require an APR were treated with preoperative pelvic radiation alone (50.4 Gy). Surgery was performed 4 to 7 weeks later. If pathologic positive pelvic nodes were identified, postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy was recommended. The median follow-up was 55 months (range, 9 to 140 months).

RESULTS

The pathologic complete response rate was 15% and 78% of patients underwent a sphincter-sparing procedure. The crude incidence of local failure for patients undergoing a sphincter sparing procedure was 10% and the 5-year actuarial incidence was 13%. The actuarial 5-year survival for patients undergoing sphincter preservation was as follows: disease-free, 77%; colostomy-free, 100%; and overall, 85%. Using the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center sphincter function score, 54% of those undergoing a sphincter-sparing procedure had good/excellent bowel function at 12 to 24 months after surgery, and 77% had good/excellent function at 24 to 36 months after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that for patients with cT2N0 distal rectal cancer who require an APR, preoperative pelvic radiation improves sphincter preservation without an apparent compromise in local control or survival.