The assessment of urinary function following extended lymph node dissection for colorectal cancer

Management of lateral pelvic lymph nodes in rectal cancer

Lateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN) involvement occurs in 10%-25% of rectal cancer cases. Total mesorectal excision (TME) with routine LPLN dissection (LPLND) is predominantly applied in Japan whereas TME with neoadjuvant treatment are used in the West. LPLND is a morbid procedure and minimally invasive techniques may help reduce its morbidity. Selective lateral pelvic node dissection with TME following neoadjuvant treatment achieves acceptable disease-free and overall survival.

Functional outcomes after lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) may improve oncological outcomes for select patients with rectal cancer, though functional outcomes may be adversely impacted. The aim of this study is to assess the functional outcomes associated with LPLND for rectal cancer and compare these outcomes with standard surgical resection.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken to identify relevant studies reporting on urinary dysfunction (UD), sexual dysfunction (SD), and defecatory dysfunction (DD) for patients who underwent LPLND for rectal cancer. Studies comparing functional outcomes in patients who underwent surgery with and without LPLND were assessed. In addition, a comparison of functional outcomes in patients who underwent LPLND before and after the year 2000 was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies of predominantly non-randomised observational data were included. Ten were comparative studies. Male SD was worse in patients who underwent LPLND compared with those who did not (RR 1.68 (95% CI 1.41-1.99, P < 0.001)). No difference was observed for the rate of UD between treatment groups. The rates of UD and male SD in patients who underwent LPLND after the year 2000 were significantly lower than those who underwent LPLND before the year 2000 ((UD) RR = 4.5, p value = 0.0034; male SD RR = 28.7, p value < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection is associated with worse male sexual dysfunction compared to standard surgical resection. However, the rates of urine dysfunction and male sexual dysfunction are better in contemporary cohorts which may reflect improved surgical technique and autonomic nerve preservation.

Rise and fall of total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic lymphadenectomy for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 11,366 patients

The role of lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) during total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer is still controversial. Many reviews were published on prophylactic LLND in rectal cancer surgery, some biased by heterogeneity of overall associated treatments. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to perform a timeline analysis of different treatments associated to prophylactic LLND vs no-LLND during TME for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, SCOPUS and WOS for publications up to 1 September 2020. We considered RCTs and CCTs comparing oncologic and functional outcomes of TME with or without LLND in patients with rectal cancer.

RESULTS

Thirty-four included articles and 29 studies enrolled 11,606 patients. No difference in 5-year local recurrence (in every subgroup analysis including preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy), 5-year distant and overall recurrence, 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival was found between LLND group and non LLND group. The analysis of post-operative functional outcomes reported hindered quality of life (urinary, evacuatory and sexual dysfunction) in LLND patients when compared to non LLND.

CONCLUSION

Our publication does not demonstrate that TME with LLND has any oncological advantage when compared to TME alone, showing that with the advent of neoadjuvant therapy, the advantage of LLND is lost. In this review, the most important bias is the heterogeneous characteristics of patients, cancer staging, different neoadjuvant therapy, different radiotherapy techniques and fractionation used in different studies. Higher rate of functional post-operative complications does not support routinely use of LLND.

Radiological assessment of persistent retroperitoneal and lateral pelvic lymph nodes after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: An analysis of the United States Rectal Cancer Consortium

INTRODUCTION

Management of retroperitoneal and lateral pelvic lymph nodes (RLPN) in rectal cancer remains unclear. With total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), more patients have radiologic complete clinical response (rCR). We sought to evaluate the impact of radiographic persistent RLPN after neoadjuvant therapy on survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with rectal adenocarcinoma with isolated RLPN metastasis, who received neoadjuvant therapy before surgery were included from the United States Rectal Cancer Consortium database. Primary outcomes were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Of 77 patients, all received neoadjuvant therapy, with 35 (46%) receiving TNT. Posttreatment, 33 (43%) had rCR while 44 (57%) had radiographic persistent RLPN. Median number of radiographic positive RLPN was 1 (IQR 1-2). Receipt of TNT was associated with radiographic RLPN rCR (OR 4.77, 95% CI 1.81-12.60, p < .01). However, there was no difference in RFS and OS between patients who achieved rCR or with persistent RLPN (all p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Radiographic persistence of RLPN was not associated with worse survival in well-selected patients and may not be a reliable indicator of pathological response. TNT may be the preferred management strategy to select patients given its association with rCR. Radiographic persistence of RLPN after preoperative therapy should not necessarily preclude surgery.

Meta-analysis of direct-to-surgery lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer

AIM

Direct-to-surgery rectal resection with lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) is a treatment strategy commonly employed in Japan to improve oncological outcomes for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to assess oncological outcomes in the literature for patients with low rectal cancer who underwent direct-to-surgery resection and LPLND compared with those who underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) alone.

METHOD

A literature search of Medline, Embase and PubMed databases was performed to identify relevant studies published between 1989 and 2020. The primary outcomes were 5-year overall survival (OS) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcomes were cancer recurrence (local, distant and total) and operative burden (operative time and blood loss). Pooled relative risk (RR) of oncological outcomes was performed using the DerSimonian-Laird method random-effect model.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies fulfilled inclusion criteria, including 19 nonrandomized studies of interventions and two studies from one randomized controlled trial. No differences were observed in 5-year OS or 5-year DFS. Local recurrence in nonrandomized studies was worse in patients who underwent LPLND [RR 1.41 (95% CI 1.21-1.64, p < 0.001)], as was total recurrence [RR 1.44 (95% CI 1.25-1.67, p < 0.001)]. No differences were observed for distant recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In the published literature, direct-to-surgery resection with LPLND was associated with worse local and total recurrence. These predominantly nonrandomized data suggest that a nonselective approach to LPLND does not provide optimal management in radiotherapy-naïve patients with low rectal cancer. Further prospective randomized studies with a focus on patient selection are required.

Outcome of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection with total mesorectal excision in treatment of rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the gold standard treatment of mid- and low-lying rectal cancer. Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection has been suggested as an approach to decrease recurrence and improve survival. Our meta-analysis presented here aimed to review the current outcomes of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection and total mesorectal excision in comparison with total mesorectal excision alone.

METHODS

A systematic literature search querying electronic databases was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We reviewed articles that reported the outcomes of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection combined with total mesorectal excision in comparison with total mesorectal excision alone. The main outcome measures were local recurrence, distant metastasis, overall and disease free-survival, and complications.

RESULTS

This systematic review included 29 studies of 10,646 patients. Of those patients, 39.4% underwent total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic lymph node dissection. The median operation time for the lateral pelvic lymph node dissection + total mesorectal excision was significantly longer than total mesorectal excision alone (360 minutes versus 294.7 minutes, P = .02). Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection + total mesorectal excision was associated with higher odds of overall complications (odds ratio = 1.48, 95% confidence interval: 1.18-1.87, P < .001) and urinary dysfunction (odds ratio = 2.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.21-3.67, P = .008) than total mesorectal excision alone. Both groups had similar rates of male sexual dysfunction (odds ratio = 1.62, 95% confidence interval: 0.94-2.79, P = .08), anastomotic leakage (odds ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 0.69-1.93, P = .59), local recurrence (hazard ratio = 0.96, 95% confidence interval: 0.75-1.25, P = .79), distant metastasis (hazard ratio = 0.96, 95% confidence interval: 0.76-1.2, P = .72), overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.056, 95% confidence interval: 0.98-1.13, P = .13), and disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 0.97-1.07, P = .37).

CONCLUSION

Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection was not associated with a significant reduction of recurrence rates or improvement in survival as compared with total mesorectal excision alone; however, LPLND was associated with longer operation time and increased complication rate.

Long-term effects of laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection on urinary retention in rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The addition of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) in rectal cancer surgery has been reported to increase the incidence of post-operative urinary retention. Here, we assessed the predictive factors and long-term outcomes of urinary retention following laparoscopic LPLND (L-LPLND) with total mesorectal excision (TME) for advanced lower rectal cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective single-institutional study reviewed post-operative urinary retention in 71 patients with lower rectal cancer who underwent L-LPLND with TME. Patients with preoperative urinary dysfunction or who underwent unilateral LPLND were excluded. Detailed information regarding patient clinicopathologic characteristics, post-void residual urine volume, and the presence or absence of urinary retention over time was collected from clinical and histopathologic reports and telephone surveys. Urinary retention was defined as residual urine > 100 mL and the need for further treatment.

RESULTS

Post-operative urinary retention was observed in 25/71 patients (35.2%). Multivariate analysis revealed that blood loss ≥ 400 mL [odds ratio (OR) 4.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24-16.43; p = 0.018] and inferior vesical artery (IVA) resection (OR 8.28; 95% CI 2.46-27.81; p < 0.001) were independently correlated with the incidence of urinary retention. Furthermore, bilateral IVA resection caused urinary retention in more patients than unilateral IVA resection (88.9% vs 47.1%, respectively; p = 0.049). Although urinary retention associated with unilateral IVA resection improved relatively quickly, urinary retention associated with bilateral IVA resection tended to persist over 1 year.

CONCLUSION

We identified the predictive factors of urinary retention following L-LPLND with TME, including increased blood loss (≥ 400 mL) and IVA resection. Urinary retention associated with unilateral IVA resection improved relatively quickly. L-LPLND with unilateral IVA resection is a feasible and safe procedure to improve oncological curability. However, if oncological curability is guaranteed, bilateral IVA resection should be avoided to prevent irreversible urinary retention.

Long-term clinical outcomes of total mesorectal excision and selective lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for advanced low rectal cancer: a comparative study of a robotic versus laparoscopic approach

BACKGROUND

The long-term outcomes of minimally invasive lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPND) are not completely known. The aim of this study was to compare long-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic LPND in low rectal cancer patients with suspected lymph node metastasis in the pelvic sidewall.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of all rectal cancer patients who had laparoscopic or robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) with LPND between March 2006 and June 2016. Stage IV patients were excluded. The outcomes of patients who had laparoscopic and robotic TME with LPND were compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients had laparoscopic LPND and 70 had robotic LPND. No significant differences in patient characteristics were observed between the two groups. The urinary retention rate was lower in the robotic group than in the laparoscopic group (7.1% vs. 24.1%; p = 0.043). During a median follow-up of 44.3 months, the overall recurrence rates were 48.3% and 31.4% in the laparoscopic and robotic groups, respectively (p = 0.175). The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 50.4% and 67.0% in the laparoscopic and robotic groups, respectively (p = 0.227). The 5-year overall survival rates were 65.0% and 92.2% in the laparoscopic and robotic groups, respectively (p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic TME with LPND is safe and feasible. In particular, it is associated with lower urinary retention. Robotic TME with LPND might yield a similar local recurrence rate and 5-year disease-free survival, but favorable long-term overall survival as compared to the laparoscopic approach. However, considering the retrospective nature and both major variables of TME and LPND involved together, this should be cautiously interpreted.

Meta-analysis of survival and functional outcomes after total mesorectal excision with or without lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in rectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

To compare outcomes of total mesorectal excision with or without lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

The electronic data sources were explored to capture all studies comparing total mesorectal excision with and without lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in patients undergoing operation for rectal cancer. Random effects modelling was utilized for the analyses. The uncertainties associated with varying follow-up periods among the included studies were resolved by analysis of time-to-event outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighteen comparative studies enrolling 6,133 patients were eligible. No difference was found between the 2 groups in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.77-1.10, P = .36, I² = 67%), overall survival at maximum follow-up (odds ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.25, P = .86, I² = 22%), 5-year overall survival (odds ratio: 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.30, P = .94, I² = 50%), disease-free survival (hazard ratio: 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.87-1.82, P = .23, I² = 74%), disease-free survival at maximum follow-up (odds ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.88-1.31, P = .50, I² = 0%), 5-year disease-free survival (odds ratio: 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.86-1.32, P = .54, I² = 0%), local recurrence (odds ratio: 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.42, P = .97, I² = 34%), distant recurrence (odds ratio: 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.46, P = .84, I² = 18%), and total recurrence (odds ratio: 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.29, P = .82, I² = 0%). Total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic lymph node dissection resulted in longer operative time (mean difference: 116.02, 95% confidence interval 89.20-142.83, P < .00001, I² = 68%) and higher risks of postoperative complications (odds ratio: 1.59, 95% confidence interval 1.14-2.24, P = .007, I² = 0%), urinary dysfunction (odds ratio: 6.66, 95% confidence interval 3.31-13.39, P < .00001, I² = 23%), and sexual dysfunction (odds ratio: 9.67, 95% confidence interval 2.38-39.26, P = .002; I² = 51%). The results remained consistent through separate analyses for randomized trials, observational studies, and patients with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence suggests that lateral pelvic lymph node dissection results in greater postoperative morbidity, urinary dysfunction, and sexual dysfunction without improving recurrence and survival. Further evidence is needed from randomized controlled trials to enable experts in the nerve-sparing surgical experiences and neoadjuvant therapy experience to advise on the best treatment strategies for the management of rectal cancer patients including those with possible positive nodes on pretreatment imaging.

Laparoscopic and robotic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer

In the era of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision, overall oncological outcomes after curative resection of rectal cancer are excellent, with local recurrence rates as low as 5–10%. However, lateral nodal disease is a major cause of local recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision. Patients with lateral nodal disease have a local recurrence rate of up to 30%. The oncological benefits of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) in reducing local recurrence, particularly in the lateral compartment, have been demonstrated. Although LPLND is not standard in Western countries, technical improvements in minimally invasive surgery have resulted in rapid technical standardization of this complicated procedure. The feasibility and short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic LPLND have been reported widely. A minimally invasive approach has the advantages of less bleeding and providing a better surgical view of the deep pelvic anatomy than an open approach. With precise autonomic nerve preservation, postoperative genitourinary dysfunction has been reported to be minimal. We review recent evidence on the management of lateral nodal disease in rectal cancer and technical improvements of LPLND, focusing on laparoscopic and robotic LPLND.

Controversies in the Management of Lateral Pelvic Lymph Nodes in Patients With Advanced Rectal Cancer: East or West?

The presence of lateral pelvic lymph nodes (LPLN) in advanced rectal cancer entails challenges with ongoing debate regarding the role of prophylactic dissection vs. neoadjuvant radiation treatment. This article highlights the most recent data of both approaches: bilateral LPLN dissection in every patient with low rectal cancer (Rb) as per the Japanese guidelines, vs. the developing approach of neoadjuvant radiotherapy as per Eastern countries. In addition, we also accentuate the importance of a combined approach published by Sammour et al. where a simple "one-size-fits-all" strategy should be abandoned. Rectal cancer treatment is well-established in Western countries. Patients with advanced rectal cancer will undergo radiation ± chemo neoadjuvant therapy followed by TME. In the Dutch TME trial, TME plus radiotherapy showed that the presacral area was the most frequent site of recurrence and not the lateral pelvic wall. Supporting this data, the Swedish study also concluded that LPLN metastasis is not an important cause of local recurrence in patients with low rectal cancer. Therefore, Western approach is CRM-orientated and prophylactic LPLN dissection is not performed routinely as the NCCN guideline does not recommend its surgical removal unless metastases are clinically suspicious. The paradigm in Eastern countries differs somewhat. The Korean study demonstrated that adjuvant radiotherapy without lateral lymph node dissection was not enough to control local recurrence and LPLN metastases. The Japanese Trial JCOG 0212 demonstrated the effects of LPLN dissection in reducing local recurrence in the lateral pelvic compartment. We agree with Sammour and Chang on the fact that rather than a mutual exclusivity approach, we should claim for an approach where all available modalities are considered and used to optimize treatment outcomes, classifying patients into 3 categories of LPLN: low risk cT1/T2/earlyT3 (and Ra) with clinically negative LPLN on MRI; Moderate risk (cT3+/T4 with negative LPLN on MRI) and high risk (clinically abnormal LPLN on MRI). Treatment modality should be based on detailed pretreatment workup and an individualized approach that considers all options to optimize the treatment of patients with rectal cancer in the West or the East.

The efficacy and safety of lateral lymph node dissection for patients with rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Lateral lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer was first reported in the 1950s, since then, there has been an on-going debate about the value of lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) in the management of rectal cancer. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the value of LLND for the patients with rectal cancer. To collect clinical studies for the comparison of LLND and non-LLND in patients with rectal cancer, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were searched from inception to 2019.A total of 26 studies, including 6865 patients were enrolled. Data processing and statistical analyses were performed using Stata V.15.0 software and Review Manager 5.3 software. Outcome measures included the 5-year survival rate, recurrence rate, perioperative outcomes, urinary function, and male sexual function. Regarding efficacy, our meta-analysis results showed no difference in 5-year disease-free survival rate and local recurrences between the two groups, the Hazard Ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was1.07 and 0.89 to 1.28 (P = 0.496),and the Odds Ratio(OR) and 95% CI were 0.90 and 0.76 to 1.06 (P = 0.208), respectively. Concerning safety, the incidence of urinary dysfunction and male sexual dysfunction was significantly increased in the LLND group (OR = 2.14, 95%CI = 1.21-3.79, P = 0.009), and (OR = 4.19, 95%CI = 1.55-11.33, P = 0.005), respectively. In conclusion, LLND did not improve the long-term prognosis of patients with rectal cancer, and was associated with increased urinary dysfunction and male sexual dysfunction.

The risk factors for urinary dysfunction after autonomic nerve-preserving rectal cancer surgery: a multicenter retrospective study at Yokohama Clinical Oncology Group (YCOG1307)

AIM

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the frequency and risk factors of urinary dysfunction after autonomic nerve-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective multiinstitution study of 1002 rectal cancer patients conducted between January 2008 and December 2012 in Yokohama Clinical Oncology Group. Patients who had preoperative urinary dysfunction or had not undergone autonomic nerve preservation surgery were excluded. Urinary dysfunction was defined as that with a Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ 2. Patient-, tumor-, and surgery-related variables were examined by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 887 patients were analyzed. Postoperative urinary dysfunction was observed in 77 patients (8.8%). A multivariate logistic analysis showed that a tumor location in lower rectum (odds ratio [OR] 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-3.71; p = 0.02), tumor diameter ≥ 40 mm (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.19-4.44; p < 0.01), operation time ≥ 240 min (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.19-4.44; p < 0.01), blood loss ≥ 300 ml (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.12-3.84; p = 0.02), and diabetes (OR 3.26; 95% CI 1.80-5.89; p < 0.01) were independent risk factors of urinary dysfunction. The incidence of urinary dysfunction exceeded 20% in patients with 3 preoperative predictors (tumor location, tumor diameter, diabetes).

CONCLUSIONS

This result demonstrated that high-risk patients with more than two risk factors should be informed of the risk of urinary dysfunction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000033688.

Lateral Lymph Node Dissection With the Focus on Indications, Functional Outcomes, and Minimally Invasive Surgery

The lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) is still a subject of great debate as to the appropriate treatment for patients with mid to low advanced rectal cancer. The guidelines of the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum recommend a LLND for patients with T3/4 rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection. However, in most Western countries, a routine LLND is not recommended unless a node or nodes are clinically suspicious for metastasis. Even after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT), an 8% to 12% lateral pelvic recurrence was noted. The size of the lateral lymph node and responsiveness to preoperative CRT should be the main factors for selecting appropriate patients to undergo a LLND. In addition, from the recent literature, a laparoscopic LLND is safe and oncologically feasible and might have some advantages in short-term outcomes.

Urinary dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery: Results from a randomized trial comparing mesorectal excision with and without lateral lymph node dissection for clinical stage II or III lower rectal cancer (Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study, JCOG0212)

BACKGROUND

Postoperative urinary dysfunction is a major complication of rectal cancer surgery. A randomized controlled trial (JCOG0212) concluded that the noninferiority of mesorectal excision alone to mesorectal excision with lateral lymph node dissection was not confirmed in terms of relapse-free survival.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria included histologically proven clinical stage II/III rectal cancer, a main lesion located in the rectum with the lower margin below the peritoneal reflection, and the absence of lateral lymph node enlargement. After confirming R0 resection by mesorectal excision, patients were randomized intraoperatively. The residual urine volume was measured three times. Urinary dysfunction was defined as ≥50 mL residual urine occurring at least once or no measurement of residual urinary volume. This trial was registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, number C000000034.

RESULTS

In the mesorectal excision alone and the mesorectal excision with lateral lymph node dissection groups, the incidence of early urinary dysfunction were 58% and 59%, respectively. A tumor location in the lower rectum (vs. upper rectum) and a blood loss of ≥500 mL (vs. <500 mL) were associated with an increased risk of early urinary dysfunction. However, only blood loss was independently predictive of early urinary dysfunction (relative risk, 1.25 [95% CI: 1.10-1.55], p = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Mesorectal excision with lateral lymph node dissection is not associated with a significant increase in the incidence of urinary dysfunction. Urinary dysfunction is associated with tumor location and blood loss.

Inspection of Perirectal Lymph Nodes by One-Step Nucleic Acid Amplification Predicts Lateral Lymph Node Metastasis in Advanced Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) is performed for advanced rectal cancers in Japan; however, it can cause sexual and urinary dysfunction. The incidence of lateral LN metastasis is estimated at 7-13.9%; therefore, excessive rectal surgery with LLND should be avoided, especially for prophylactic purposes. To identify the patients who require LLND, we examined metastases in perirectal LNs by using a one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) assay to predict lateral LN metastases.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients who underwent surgery with bilateral LN dissection due to T3-T4 rectal cancers were prospectively included in this study. Twenty-two patients (88.0%) received preoperative chemotherapy. Among 1052 LNs from 25 patients (median 40 per case), 135 perirectal LNs (median 6 per patient) were divided into three pieces and analyzed by OSNA, reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for carcinoembryonic antigen mRNA, and pathological examination after surgery. These results were compared with the pathological diagnosis of lateral LNs.

RESULTS

Lateral LN metastases were present in 4 of 25 patients (16.0%). All of these patients were positive by OSNA for perirectal LN metastases. The OSNA assay had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 86%, positive predictive value of 57%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% for predicting lateral LN metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this prospective study suggest that the OSNA assay of perirectal LNs may be useful for determining when LLND is necessary because of its high NPV, even in patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy.

Extended lymphadenectomy for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to assess the value of extended (lateral) lymphadenectomy (EL) in the operative management of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients that underwent exenterative surgery for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer between 2006 and 2009 were included in the study. A decision for EL was taken at the local multidisciplinary meeting based on the radiological findings. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were assessed and compared between the EL and non-EL group prospectively.

RESULTS

Forty-one consecutive patients were included in the study (EL = 17). The median age was 57 (40-71) for EL and 66 (39-81) years for non-EL. Of patients, 27 (EL = 13) and 14 (EL = 4) underwent pelvic exenteration and abdominosacral resection, respectively. Twelve (EL = 7) patients were diagnosed with locally advanced primary rectal cancer. Thirty-one (EL = 12) patients received neoadjuvant radiotherapy. The median intraoperative time, blood loss and hospital stay were 9 h (3-13), 1.5 l (0.3-7) and 14 days (12-72), respectively, for the EL group, and 8 h (4-15), 1.6 l (0.25-17) and 14 days (10-86), respectively, for the non-EL (p ≥ 0.394). Morbidity was similar between the two groups (EL = 4, non-EL = 9; p = 0.344). Complete tumour resection (R0) was achieved in 30 (73.17%) patients, 12 (70.58%) in the EL group and 18 (75%) in the non-EL group (p = 0.649). There was no significant difference in 5-year survival (EL = 60.7%, non-EL = 75.2%; p = 0.447), local recurrence (EL = 53.6%, non-EL = 65.4%; p = 0.489) and disease-free survival (EL = 53.6%, non-EL = 51.4%; p = 0.814).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated that EL does not provide a statistically significant advantage in survival or recurrence rates, for patients with locally advanced primary or recurrent rectal cancer.

Extended lymphadenectomy versus conventional surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lateral pelvic lymph-node metastases occur in 10-25% of patients with rectal cancer, and are associated with higher local recurrence and reduced survival rates. A meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the value of extended lateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in the operative management of rectal cancer.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for studies published between 1965 and 2009 that compared extended lymphadenectomy (EL) with standard rectal resection. 20 studies, which included 5502 patients from one randomised, three prospective non-randomised, and 14 retrospective case-control studies published between 1984 and 2009, met our search criteria and were assessed. 2577 patients underwent EL and 2925 underwent non-EL for rectal cancer. Random and fixed-effects meta-analytical models were used where indicated, and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. End-points evaluated included peri-operative outcomes, 5-year survival and recurrence rates.

FINDINGS

Operating time was significantly longer in the EL group by 76.7 min (95% CI 18.77-134.68; p=0.0096). Intra-operative blood loss was greater in the EL group by 536.5 mL (95% CI 353.7-719.2; p<0.0001). Peri-operative mortality (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.34-1.93; p=0.63) and morbidity (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.89-2.35; p=0.13) were similar between the two groups. Data from individual studies showed that male sexual dysfunction and urinary dysfunction (three studies: OR 3.70, 95% CI 1.66-8.23; p=0.0012) were more prevalent in the EL group. There were no significant differences in 5-year survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.09, 95% CI 0.78-1.50; p=0.62), 5-year disease-free survival (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.75-2.03, p=0.41), and local (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61-1.13; p=0.23) or distant recurrence (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72-1.21; p=0.60).

INTERPRETATION

Extended lymphadenectomy does not seem to confer a significant overall cancer-specific advantage, but does seem to be associated with increased urinary and sexual dysfunction.