Management of the adenocarcinoma of the upper rectum: a reappraisal

The role of superior hemorrhoidal vein ectasia in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer

Objective

The prognosis of colorectal cancer has continuously improved in recent years thanks to continuous progress in both the therapeutic and diagnostic fields. The specific objective of this study is to contribute to the diagnostic field through the evaluation of the correlation between superior hemorrhoidal vein (SHV) ectasia detected on computed tomography (CT) and Tumor (T), Node (N), and distant metastasis (M) examination and mesorectal fascia (MRF) invasion in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer.

Methods

Between January 2018 and April 2022, 46 patients with histopathological diagnosis of rectal cancer were retrospectively enrolled, and the diameter of the SHV was evaluated by CT examination. The cutoff value for SHV diameter used is 3.7 mm. The diameter was measured at the level of S2 during portal venous phase after 4× image zoom to reduce the interobserver variability. The parameters evaluated were tumor location, detection of MRF infiltration (defined as the distance < 1 mm between the tumor margins and the fascia), SHV diameter, detection of mesorectal perilesional lymph nodes, and detection of metastasis.

Results

A total of 67.39% (31/46) of patients had SHV ectasia. All patients with MRF infiltration (4/46, 7.14%) presented SHV ectasia (average diameter of 4.4 mm), and SHV was significantly related with the development of liver metastases at the moment of primary staging and during follow-up.

Conclusion

SHV ectasia may be related to metastasis and MRF involvement; therefore, it could become a tool for preoperative staging of rectal cancer.

Interrater Agreement of Height Assessment by Rigid Proctoscopy/Rectoscopy for Rectal Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Some guidelines for rectal carcinoma consider 12 cm, measured by rigid endoscopy, to be the cutoff tumor height for optional neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Measuring differences of only a few centimeters may predetermine the choice of further therapy. However, rigid endoscopy may exhibit similar operator dependence to most other clinical examination methods.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluation of concordance of rigid rectoscopic tumor height measurements performed by 4 experienced examiners, 2 measuring with patients in the lithotomy position and 2 in the left lateral position. Assessment of tumor palpability and distance of the anal verge to the anocutaneous line were also evaluated.

DESIGN

This study used a prospective observational design.

SETTING

This study was conducted at an academic teaching hospital that is a referral center for colorectal surgery.

PATIENTS

There were 50 patients, of whom 35 were men (70%). The median age was 72.5 years (53-88 years).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Interrater agreement of tumor height assessment and tumor height of less than or greater than the 12-cm height limit.

RESULTS

With an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.947 (95% CI, 0.918-0.967, p < 0.001), interrater reliability of tumor height assessment was statistically rated "excellent." Despite this, in 26% of patients, there was no agreement regarding the allocation of the tumor <12- or >12-cm height limit. Furthermore, there was also considerable disagreement concerning tumor palpability and the distance of the anal verge to the anocutaneous line. Patient positioning was not found to influence results.

LIMITATIONS

Single-center study.

CONCLUSIONS

Rigid rectal endoscopy may not be a sound pivotal basis for the consideration of optional chemoradiation therapy in rectal carcinoma. Application of a universally valid height limit ignores biological variability in body frame, gender, and acquired pelvic descent. Eligibility for neoadjuvant therapy should not rely on height measurements alone. Uniform MRI or CT imaging protocols, based on agreed upon terminology, including factors such as tumor height relative to the pelvic frame and peritoneal reflection, may be an important diagnostic addition to such a decision. See Video Abstract .Clinical trial registration: DRKS00012758 (German National Study Registry), ST-D 406 (German Cancer Society).

ACUERDO ENTRE EVALUADORES EN LA EVALUACIN DE LA ALTURA MEDIANTE PROCTO/ RECTOSCOPIA RGIDA PARA EL CARCINOMA DE RECTO

ANTECEDENTES:Algunas guías para el carcinoma de recto consideran que 12 cm, medidos mediante endoscopia rígida, es la altura de corte del tumor para la quimiorradiación neoadyuvante opcional. Por lo tanto, una diferencia de medición de sólo unos pocos centímetros puede predeterminar la elección de una terapia adicional. Sin embargo, la endoscopia rígida puede presentar una dependencia del operador similar a la de la mayoría de los demás métodos de examen clínico.OBJETIVOS:Evaluación de la concordancia de las mediciones de la altura del tumor rectoscópico rígido realizadas por cuatro examinadores experimentados, dos en litotomía y dos en posición lateral izquierda. También se evaluó la evaluación de la palpabilidad del tumor y la distancia del borde anal a la línea anocutánea.DISEÑO:Estudio observacional prospectivo.LUGAR:Hospital universitario, centro de referencia para cirugía colorrectal.PACIENTES:50 pacientes, 35 varones (70%), mediana de edad 72,5 años (53-88 años).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS:Acuerdo entre evaluadores en la evaluación de la altura del tumor y la asignación del tumor por debajo o más allá del límite de altura de 12 cm.RESULTADOS:Con un coeficiente de correlación intraclase de 0,947 (IC del 95%: 0,918-0,967, p < 0,001), la confiabilidad entre evaluadores de la evaluación de la altura del tumor se calificó estadísticamente como "excelente". A pesar de esto, en el 26% de los pacientes no hubo acuerdo sobre la asignación del tumor por debajo o por encima del límite de 12 cm de altura. Además, también hubo un considerable desacuerdo con respecto a la palpabilidad del tumor y la distancia del borde anal a la línea anocutánea. No se encontró que la posición del paciente influyera en los resultados.LIMITACIONES:Estudio unicéntrico.CONCLUSIONES:La endoscopia rectal rígida puede no ser una base sólida y fundamental para considerar la quimiorradiación opcional en el carcinoma de recto. La aplicación de un límite de altura universalmente válido obviamente ignora la variabilidad biológica en la constitución corporal, el género y el descenso pélvico adquirido. La elegibilidad para la terapia neoadyuvante no debe depender únicamente de las mediciones de altura. Los protocolos uniformes de imágenes por resonancia magnética o tomografía computarizada, basados en una terminología acordada, incluidos factores como la altura del tumor en relación con la estructura pélvica y la reflexión peritoneal, pueden ser una adición diagnóstica importante para tal decisión. (Traducción-Yesenia Rojas-Khalil )Clinical trial registration: DRKS00012758 (German National Study Registry), ST-D 406 (German Cancer Society).

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer with peritumoral abscesses and fistulas

PURPOSE

Rectal cancer patients who present with peritumoral abscesses and fistulas at the time of diagnosis may be denied chemoradiotherapy (CRT) as the safety is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of preoperative CRT in this patient group.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective nested case-control study to compare outcomes between patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with peritumoral abscesses and fistulas (study group) and patients with T4 locally advanced rectal cancer with no evidence of abscesses and fistulas (control group). These groups were matched by treatment center and radiotherapy delivery method. All patients received 50-54 Gy of conventionally fractionated RT with concurrent chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was grade 3-5 toxicity (by National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI CTCAE). Secondary endpoints included postoperative morbidity, pathologic complete response (pCR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) at 2 years.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients were included in each group. Grade 3 toxicity was observed in 2 (6.1%) patients in the study group and 4 (12.1%) patients in the control group (p = 0.672). No patients developed grade 4-5 toxicity. Grade 3-4 Clavien-Dindo complications were observed in 5 (15.2%) patients in the study group and in 6 (18.2%) patients in the control group (p = 1.0). Pathologic CR was achieved in 3 (9.1%) and 5 (15.2%) patients, respectively (p = 0.708). Two-year OS was 78.3% vs. 81.8% (p = 0.944), 2‑year DFS was 62.8% vs. 69.7% (p = 0.693), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The presence of peritumoral abscesses and fistulas in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer is not associated with increased toxicity or inferior clinical outcomes after preoperative CRT.