Long-term outcomes of radical surgery after gasless video endoscopic transanal excision of T1/T2 rectal cancers

Oncologic safety and technical feasibility of completion transanal total mesorectal excision after local excision; a cohort study from the International TaTME Registry

BACKGROUND

As part of an organ sparing strategy, a surgical local excision may be performed in patients with early-stage rectal cancer or following neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. In selected cases, a completion total mesorectal excision may be recommended which can be more complex because of the preceding local excision. A transanal approach to perform completion total mesorectal excision may offer an advantage through the better visualization of the surgical field in the distal rectum and less forceful retraction for exposure. However, the oncologic safety and technical feasibility of this approach have yet to be demonstrated in these patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the oncological and technical safety of completion transanal total mesorectal excision following a local excision in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients from the prospective International Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Registry who underwent a surgical local excision prior to completion transanal total mesorectal excision were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 189 patients were included of which 22% received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. In 94% of the patients, a low anterior resection was performed. A primary anastomosis was constructed in 91% (n = 171/189) of the patients, with the majority also receiving a defunctioning stoma (84%, n = 144/171), of which 69% (n = 100/144) were reversed. Within 30 days, 7% developed an anastomotic leakage. The two-year local recurrence rate was 5% (n = 5/104) with an estimated rate of 3% (95% CI 0-7%). Two-year disease-free survival was 85% (n = 88/104) and overall survival was 95% (n = 99/104).

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal completion total mesorectal excision following local excision for rectal cancer is oncologically safe, with low complication rates and high restorative rates.

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.

The impact of transanal local excision of early rectal cancer on completion rectal resection without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The impact of transanal local excision (TAE) of early rectal cancer (ERC) on subsequent completion rectal resection (CRR) for unfavorable histology or margin involvement is unclear. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the impact of TAE on CRR in patients without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature up to March 2020. Medline and Cochrane libraries were searched for studies reporting outcomes of CRR after TAE for ERC. We excluded patients who had neoadjuvant CRT and endoscopic local excision. Surgical, functional, pathological and oncological outcomes were assessed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 353 patients were included. Pathology following TAE was as follows T0 = 2 (0.5%); T1 = 154 (44.7%); T2 = 142 (41.2%); T3 = 43 (12.5%); Tx = 3 (0.8%); T not reported = 9. Fifty-three percent were > T1. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) was performed in 80 (23.2%) patients. Postoperative major morbidity and mortality occurred in 22 (11.4%) and 3 (1.1%), patients, respectively. An incomplete mesorectal fascia resulting in defects of the mesorectum was reported in 30 (24.6%) cases. Thirteen (12%) patients developed recurrence: 8 (3.1%) local, 19 (7.3%) distant, 4 (1.5%) local and distant. The 5-year cancer-specific survival was 92%. Only 1 study assessed anal function reporting no continence disorders in 11 patients. In the meta-analysis, CRR after TAE showed an increased APR rate (OR 5.25; 95% CI 1.27-21.8; p 0.020) and incomplete mesorectum rate (OR 3.48; 95% CI 1.32-9.19; p 0.010) compared to primary total mesorectal excision (TME). Two case matched studies reported no difference in recurrence rate and disease free survival respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The data are incomplete and of low quality. There was a tendency towards an increased risk of APR and poor specimen quality. It is necessary to improve the accuracy of preoperative staging of malignant rectal tumors in patients scheduled for TAE.

Local recurrence after local excision of early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of completion TME, adjuvant (chemo)radiation, or no additional treatment

BACKGROUND

The risks of local recurrence and treatment-related morbidity need to be balanced after local excision of early rectal cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer followed by no additional treatment (NAT), completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (aCRT).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was local recurrence. Statistical analysis included calculation of the weighted average of proportions.

RESULTS

Some 73 studies comprising 4674 patients were included in the analysis. Sixty-two evaluated NAT, 13 cTME and 28 aCRT. The local recurrence rate for NAT among low-risk pT1 tumours was 6·7 (95 per cent c.i. 4·8 to 9·3) per cent. There were no local recurrences of low-risk pT1 tumours after cTME or aCRT. The local recurrence rate for high-risk pT1 tumours was 13·6 (8·0 to 22·0) per cent for local excision only, 4·1 (1·7 to 9·4) per cent for cTME and 3·9 (2·0 to 7·5) per cent for aCRT. Local recurrence rates for pT2 tumours were 28·9 (22·3 to 36·4) per cent with NAT, 4 (1 to 13) per cent after cTME and 14·7 (11·2 to 19·0) per cent after aCRT.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial risk of local recurrence in patients who receive no additional treatment after local excision, especially those with high-risk pT1 and pT2 rectal cancer. The lowest recurrence risk is provided by cTME; aCRT has outcomes comparable to those of cTME for high-risk pT1 tumours, but shows a higher risk for pT2 tumours.

Is Previous Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery for Early Rectal Cancer a Risk Factor of Worse Outcome following Salvage Surgery A Case-Matched Analysis

Introduction

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a minimally invasive procedure which allows local excision of early-stage rectal cancer and can be used as an alternative treatment to radical surgery. Patients can undergo salvage total mesorectal excision (sTME) following TEM after finding of unfavourable histological features. This study aimed to compare results and possible complications of sTME following TEM and primary TME (pTME) procedures.

Methods

Between 2010 and 2017, early sTME was performed in 9 patients at the National Cancer Institute in Vilnius, Lithuania. These patients were compared with 18 patients who underwent pTME, matched according to gender, age, cancer stage, and operative procedure. Data were obtained from the patients' charts and reviewed prospectively. We recorded the demographics, tumour specifications, treatment, operation time, postoperative results complications, and oncological outcome. Fisher's exact test and student's T test was used to compare both groups.

Results

A total of 130 patients underwent TEM at our institution during the study period, of which 9 (6.92%) had to undergo sTME. The average age of the patients was 62.7 ± 7.07 years; 44.4% of the patients were male and 55.6% female. The average tumour size in the sTME group was 2.8 ± 1.05 cm (range 1.5-5) and 2.61 ± 1.36 cm (range 1-5) in the pTME group (p = 0.696). When comparing postoperative complications, statistically significant results were not found in either of the groups (p = 0.55). Operation time of pTME was significantly shorter on average, i.e. 43 min, compared to sTME (p < 0.0267). The average number of harvested lymph nodes was 12.44 ± 7.126 in the sTME and 12.5 ± 8.06 in the pTME group (p = 0.986). The circumferential resection margin (CRM) was negative in 92.6% (25/27) of specimens, while the CRM was positive in 2 cases (7.4%), both of which were from the sTME group. The average follow-up time was 22.8 months (8-80 months) for patients undergoing sTME and 19.33 months (2-88 months) for patients after pTME (p = 0.71).

Conclusions

TEM is a relatively safe method for treating patients with early rectal cancer without high-risk features. It can be used in exceptional cases with high-risk features when the patient is not fit for radical surgery.

Meta-analysis of oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer requiring adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy or completion surgery

BACKGROUND

Completion total mesorectal excision (TME) is advised for high-risk early (pT1/pT2) rectal cancer following transanal removal. The main objective of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes of adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy as a rectum-preserving alternative to completion TME.

METHODS

A literature search using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was performed in February 2015. Studies had to include at least ten patients with pT1/pT2 adenocarcinomas that were removed transanally and followed by either adjuvant chemoradiotherapy or completion surgery. A weighted average of the logit proportions was determined for the pooled analyses of subgroups according to treatment modality and pT category.

RESULTS

In total, 14 studies comprising 405 patients treated with adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy and seven studies comprising 130 patients treated with completion TME were included. Owing to heterogeneity it was not possible to compare the two strategies directly. However, the weighted average local recurrence rate for locally excised pT1/pT2 rectal cancer treated with adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy was 14 (95 per cent c.i. 11 to 18) per cent, and 7 (4 to 14) per cent following completion TME. The weighted averages for distance recurrence were 9 (6 to 14) and 9 (5 to 16) per cent respectively. Weighted averages for local recurrence rate after adjuvant chemo(radiotherapy) and completion TME for pT1 were 10 (4 to 21) and 6 (3 to 15) per cent respectively. Corresponding averages for pT2 were 15 (11 to 21) and 10 (4 to 22) per cent respectively.

CONCLUSION

A higher recurrence rate after transanal excision and adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy must be balanced against the morbidity and mortality associated with mesorectal excision. A reasonable approach is close follow-up and salvage mesorectal surgery as needed.

The indication and surgical results of local excision following radiotherapy for low rectal cancer

AIM

Radical surgery of rectal cancer is associated with significant morbidity, and some patients with low-lying lesions must accept a permanent colostomy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of local excision followed by adjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer for curative purposes.

METHOD

One hundred and seven patients with rectal carcinoma performed with local excision were analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The procedures of local excision were trans-anal resection in 83 patients, trans-sacral resection in 16, trans-sphincteric local resection in five, and trans-vaginal resection in three. The overall disease-free survival rate was 80.4% (86/107), including 90.0% (54/60) for T1 and 72.3% (34/47) for T2 tumours, respectively. Eighty-two of 107 patients underwent adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy after local excision, and 25 did not, and the DFS rates between radiation and nonradiation group were significantly different for T2 [81.6% (31/38) vs 33.3% (3/9), P < 0.05], but not for T1 tumours (90.9%vs 87.5%, P > 0.05). The rates of local recurrence and distant metastasis were 13.1% (14/107) and 4.7% (5/106), respectively, and the median time to relapse was 15 months (range: 10-53) for local recurrence and 30 months (21-65) for distant recurrence. The risk factors for local recurrence were large tumour (≥3 cm), poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma and T2 tumour.

CONCLUSIONS

Local excision followed adjuvant radiotherapy is an alternative and feasible technique for small T1 rectal cancer in selected cases.

Oncological outcome after local excision of rectal carcinomas

BACKGROUND

Local excision (LE) of T1 rectal cancer yields low recurrence rates. However, more frequent recurrences with unknown states of high-risk T1/T2 tumors are risk factors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if, after LE, immediate reoperation is required, or awaiting salvage surgery is sufficient.

METHODS

150 T1 and 42 T2 tumors were treated by LE. Immediate reoperation was attempted for unfavorable pT1 (G3-4/L1/V1/R1/Rx/R < or =1 mm) and all pT2 tumors. Three groups were formed. Group A included low-risk pT1 tumors after complete (R0) LE; unfavorable pT1 and all T2 tumors were divided in groups B (immediate reoperation) and C (salvage surgery).

RESULTS

Groups A (n = 93) and B (n = 39) showed high tumor-free (TFS) and tumor-related survival (TRS) rates: group A 92% and 98%; group B 86% and 89%. In group C (n = 43), the TFS und TRS were significantly lower with 54% and 72%. Group A showed low recurrence rates and a wide range of International Union Against Cancer (UICC) stages. In group B, similarly low recurrence rates were found, but, in contrast, all recurrences were UICC IV. Group C had significantly higher recurrences rates and, in addition, two-thirds of these patients showed advanced UICC stages (III-IV).

CONCLUSIONS

LE of low-risk T1 tumors represents an adequate therapy. Immediate reoperation after LE of pT1 tumors with unfavorable histological finding or pT2 tumors can avoid local recurrences. Thereafter, high TFS rates can be expected in these patients, but metastases cannot be prevented and adjuvant measures are necessary. Awaiting recurrences as in group C leads to bad oncological outcomes with high recurrences and low survival rates.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and local excision for T2-3 rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Local excision (LE) of T1 low-risk (G1-2/L0/V0) rectal cancer is an established approach with local recurrence (LR) rates of approximately 5%, whereas LE of > or = T2 high-risk tumors or inadequate resections (R1/RX/R < or = 1 mm) showed high recurrence rates. Because of the favorable results after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and radical surgery of disease that completely responds (CR) with almost absent LR even of T3-4 tumors, an extension of the indication for LE is controversially discussed, and therefore, we assessed this therapeutic option.

METHODS

Including our own data, seven studies about LE after nCRT of cT2-3 tumors (n = 237) were analyzed after a PubMed search for cT categories, tumor height, nCRT regimens, schedule and technique of surgery, complications, freedom of stoma, response rates (ypT0-3), length of follow-up, LR, and metastases.

RESULTS

Subgroups that we formed (retrospective vs. prospective/retractor vs. transanal endoscopic microsurgery) showed differences in the distribution of cT categories. However, neither the studies we considered nor our own patients showed LR in CR (ypT0). In addition, patients with ypT1 tumor consistently showed low LR rates of 2% (range, 0%-6%), whereas in ypT2 findings, less favorable LR rates of 6% to 20% were observed, and disease that did not respond to therapy (ypT3) displayed LR rates in up to 42%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite of a highly selected patient collective, an extended indication for LE of cT2-3 rectal cancer after nCRT may be considered. The strongest prognostic factors were a CR (ypT0) or responses on submucosa level (ypT1). These first results will have to be confirmed in a prospective trial with an appropriate sample size to ensure high statistical power.

Is surgery-only the adequate treatment approach for T2N0 rectal cancer?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Resection combined with standard lymphadenectomy is generally recommended for T2N0 rectal cancer. In order to evaluate the outcome of this specific tumor category, our own data were reviewed.

METHODS

To evaluate the results of patients with curative resected T2N0 rectal carcinoma, we reviewed data of 164 consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum between 1981 and 2003 in our department. In addition, patient characteristics were stratified according to the position of the rectal tumor with respect to the anal verge.

RESULTS

One hundred ten patients (67.1%) underwent anterior resection and 54 patients (32.9%) received abdominoperineal amputation. The follow-up revealed 6 local recurrences (3.7%); in 10 patients (10.0%), metastases were discovered. Regarding the tumor localization nearly no local recurrence or distant metastases were observed in the middle or the upper rectum. However, in the lower rectum the actuarial 5-year recurrence rate was 16.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although T2N0 rectal carcinomas are considered as low risk tumors, we found a considerable local recurrence rate of 3.7%. The question arises whether this result can be improved by adjuvant treatment modalities without being compromised by the toxicity of an adjuvant treatment.