Therapeutic results in low-rectal cancer patients treated with abdominosacral resection are similar to those obtained by means of anterior resection in mid- and upper-rectal cancer cases

Robotic-Assisted vs. Standard Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 19,731 Patients

Simple Summary

Surgery remains a mainstay of combined modality treatment at patients with rectal cancer; however, there is a growing interest in using laparoscopic techniques (LG); including robotic-assisted techniques (RG). Therefore, we have prepared a meta-analysis of the literature regarding the safety and efficacy of robotic versus laparoscopic approaches in patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer. The results indicate a number of advantages of RG in terms of both safety and efficacy. Operative time in the RG group was shorter and associated with a statistically significantly lower conversion of the procedure to open surgery. RG technique provided a shorter duration of hospital stay and lowered urinary risk retention. No differences were found between these techniques regarding TNM stage; N stage or lymph nodes harvested. Survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate was 99.6% in RG vs. 98.8% for LG.

Abstract

Robotic-assisted surgery is expected to have advantages over standard laparoscopic approach in patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from database inception to 10 November 2021, for both RCTs and observational studies comparing robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Forty-Two were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. Survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate was 99.6% for RG and 98.8% for LG (OR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.43; p = 0.05). Time to first flatus in the RG group was 2.5 ± 1.4 days and was statistically significantly shorter than in LG group (2.9 ± 2.0 days; MD = −0.34; 95%CI: −0.65 to 0.03; p = 0.03). In the case of time to a liquid diet, solid diet and bowel movement, the analysis showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). Length of hospital stay in the RG vs. LG group varied and amounted to 8.0 ± 5.3 vs. 9.5 ± 10.0 days (MD = −2.01; 95%CI: −2.90 to −1.11; p < 0.001). Overall, 30-days complications in the RG and LG groups were 27.2% and 19.0% (OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.80 to 1.55; p = 0.53), respectively. In summary, robotic-assisted techniques provide several advantages over laparoscopic techniques in reducing operative time, significantly lowering conversion of the procedure to open surgery, shortening the duration of hospital stay, lowering the risk of urinary retention, improving survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate.

The effect of increased body mass index values on surgical outcomes after radical resection for low rectal cancer

PURPOSES

This study aimed to explore the effect of increased body mass index (BMI) values (overweight: BMI ≥ 25-30 kg/m²; obese: BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²) on surgical outcomes after radical resection for low rectal cancer (LRC).

METHODS

Patients with LRC who underwent radical surgery from January 2009 to December 2013 were included. The patients were divided into three groups according to their BMI values (control group: BMI < 25 kg/m²; overweight group: BMI 25 to < 30 kg/m²; obese group: BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²). The patients' clinicopathological characteristics and survival data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 792 patients were enrolled in this study finally (control, n = 624; overweight, n = 147; obese, n = 21). The baseline characteristics of the three groups were similar. We found that an increased BMI was associated with a longer operative time (P < 0.001) and length of postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.032). Patients with increased BMI values had a significantly higher incidence of postoperative complications, including pulmonary infection (P = 0.008), anastomotic leakage (P = 0.029), allergy (P = 0.017) and incisional hernia (P = 0.045). The limited data showed that the pathological outcomes of the three groups did not differ to a statistically significant extent. A multivariate analysis showed that increased BMI was not associated with poorer OS or DFS.

CONCLUSION

In LRC resection, an increased BMI was associated with a longer operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and an increased number of postoperative complications. However, it did not contribute to poorer pathological or survival outcomes.

Standard versus extralevator abdominoperineal excision and oncologic outcomes for patients with distal rectal cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) for distal rectal cancer remains controversial, and the procedure is not widely accepted or practiced.

METHODS

An electronic search of Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and similar databases for articles in English was performed from the inception of the study until October 31, 2017. Two reviewers extracted information and independently assessed the quality of included studies by the methodological index for nonrandomized studies, then data were analyzed with Review Manager 5.3 software and Stata version 12.0 software.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 17 studies with 3479 patients, of whom 1915 (55.0%) underwent ELAPE and 1564 (44.0%) underwent abdominoperineal excision (APE). Compared with patients undergoing APE, patients undergoing ELAPE had a significant reduced risk of no more than 3 years local recurrence (LR) (risk ratio [RR] = 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.08-0.94), 3-year mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.20-0.97), intraoperative bowel perforation (IBP) involvement (RR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.31-0.74), and circumferential resection margin (CRM) positivity (RR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.43-1.00) at the threshold level.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of ELAPE is more effective in reducing the chance of 3 years LR, mortality, IBP involvement and CRM positivity than conventional APE, and worthy of being widely applied in surgical treatment of the distal rectal cancer.

Intraoperative blood loss during surgical treatment of low-rectal cancer by abdominosacral resection is higher than during extra-levator abdominosacral amputation of the rectum

INTRODUCTION

Abdominosacral resection (ASR) usually required blood transfusions, which are virtually no longer in use in the modified abdominosacral amputation of the rectum (ASAR). The aim of this study was to compare the intra-operative bleeding in low-rectal patients subjected to ASR or ASAR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included low-rectal cancer patients subjected to ASR (n = 114) or ASAR (n = 46) who were retrospectively compared in terms of: 1) the frequency of blood transfusions during surgery and up to 24 h thereafter; 2) the volume of intraoperative blood loss (ml of blood transfused) during surgery and up to 24 h thereafter; 3) hemoglobin concentrations (Hb) 1, 3 and 5 days after surgery; 4) the duration of hospitalization.

RESULTS

Blood transfusions were necessary in 107 ASR patients but in none of those subjected to ASAR (p < 0.001). Median blood loss in the ASR group was 800 ml (range: 100-4500 ml). The differences between the groups in median Hb determined 1, 3 and 5 days following surgery were insignificant. The proportions of patients with abnormal values of Hb, however, were significantly higher in the ASR group on postoperative days 1 and 3 (day 1: 71.9% vs. 19.6% in the ASAR group, p = 0.025; day 3: 57.% vs. 13.0%, p = 0.009). Average postoperative hospitalization in ASR patients was 13 days compared to 9 days in the ASAR group (p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominosacral amputation of the rectum predominates over ASR in terms of the prevention of intra- and postoperative bleeding due to the properly defined surgical plane in low-rectal cancer patients.

Randomized clinical trial of conventional versus cylindrical abdominoperineal resection for locally advanced lower rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

An alternative treatment for low rectal cancer is the cylindrical technique. We aim to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing conventional abdominoperineal resection (APR) versus cylindrical APR.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel controlled trial was conducted between January 2008 and December 2010. Sixty-seven patients with T3-T4 low rectal cancer were identified during the study period (conventional n = 32, cylindrical n = 35).

RESULTS

Patients who received cylindrical APR had less operative time for the perineal portion (P < .001), larger perineal defect (P < .001), less intraoperative blood loss (P = .001), larger total cross-sectional tissue area (P < .001), similar total operative time (P = .096), and more incidence of perineal pain (P < .001). The local recurrence of the cylindrical APR group was improved statistically (P = .048).

CONCLUSIONS

Cylindrical APR in the prone jackknife position has the potential to reduce the risk of local recurrence without increased complications when compared with conventional APR in the lithotomy position for the treatment of low rectal cancer.

Robotic-Assisted Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection in the Lithotomy Position: Technique and Early Outcomes

Extralevator abdominoperineal resection (E-APR) has been advocated as a superior procedure to achieve negative circumferential resection margins (CRMs) for sphincter-invading rectal cancers. An open total mesorectal excision is performed followed by perineal dissection with resection of the levators in the prone position. We describe a novel minimally invasive robotic approach carried out in the lithotomy position. Using the robotic arms to dissect the rectum and divide the levator fibers at their origin, the dissection is carried out in the ischiorectal space as distally as possible. From May to July 2011, six cases of robotic E-APR for rectal cancer were performed. The mean age was 54.5 years old. Mean operating time was 335 minutes. Mean estimated blood loss was 250 mL. There were no conversions to the open approach. A cylindrical specimen was obtained in all patients without perforation. All CRMs were negative. Mean hospital stay was 5 days. Two patients developed perineal wound infections and one developed a small bowel obstruction postoperatively. Robotic-assisted E-APR performed in the lithotomy position is safe and feasible. Future studies are needed to define the benefits of this technique.

The evaluation of diagnostic value of the tumor markers: CCSA-2 and CEA in colorectal cancer

Finding the biomarker or biomarkers with high sensitivity and specificity in colorectal cancer, and thus a high diagnostic value will determine their clinical usefulness in clinical practice. An effective noninvasive blood test would be an ideal method to detect colorectal cancer. Discovered in 2007 a novel tumor marker CCSA-2 showes a promising results in patients with colorectal cancer. THE AIM OF THE STUDY was the evaluation of diagnostic and clinical value of a novel marker - colon cancer specific antigen-2 (CCSA-2) in colorectal adenocarcinoma in comparison to carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in patients operated during the years 2008 to 2010 at Wrocław Medical University 1st Department and Clinic of General, Gastroenterological and Endocrinologic Surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was performed on 40 patients with colorectal cancer and 40 patients in control group consisted of healthy subjects who had colonoscopy examinations with negative results (no pathology in the colon was found). The obtained results were statistically analyzed using nonparametric tests - Mann Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis and Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. To determine the clinical value of CCSA-2 and CEA in those groups, their sensitivity and specifity was evaluated using ROC analysis. This analysis determines the accuracy and diagnostic value of both tests.

RESULTS

There was a positive correlation between markers in patients with colorectal cancer and a statistically significant relationship according to which respondents with higher concentrations of CCSA-2 also have higher concentrations of CEA (R=0.754, p<0,001). Concentrations of tumor markers increase and correlate with the clinical progression of the disease. Accuracy of CCSA-2 test using ROC analysis showed a slightly lower measurement of antigen CCSA-2 as diagnostic value in colorectal cancer in comparison to measurement of antigen CEA (accuracy of tests: CCSA-2 - 52%, CEA - 60%).

CONCLUSIONS

CCSA-2 as a single tumor marker has a low diagnostic value in colorectal cancer because of low sensitivity and specifity. The diagnostic value of novel marker is slightly lower than previously understood and accepted in clinical practice - CEA.

Quality of care in rectal cancer surgery. Exploring influencing factors in the West of Scotland

AIM

To assess variability in the proportions of types of major resection for rectal cancer throughout the west of Scotland (WoS) and ascertain factors explaining the variability.

METHOD

Retrospective cohort study of a regional population clinical audit database. This was linked to cancer registrations and death certificates in order that outcome analyses could be derived. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were used to explore determinants of survival.

RESULTS

A total of 1574 patients met the inclusion criteria. The age range was from 22 to 97 years. The mean age was 67, median age 68 and the standard deviation was 11.5. The majority of patients (61%) were male. Unlike previous series, male patients and those with poorer socioeconomic circumstances (SEC) were no more likely to receive an abdominoperineal excision (APE) procedure for rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Variation exists in the west of Scotland regarding surgical treatment for rectal cancer. We found no difference in the type of procedure offered according to sex, intent of operation or socioeconomic circumstances with reference to APE and anterior resection (AR) for rectal cancer. We conclude therefore that our region provides an equitable service on grounds of sex and SEC. This demonstrates that an equitable surgical service has been provided for those suffering from rectal cancer. Circumferential margin positivity was four times more likely in an APE than an AR for rectal cancer. This is not explained by age, stage, sex, socioeconomic circumstances (SEC), volume of surgery, intent of operation, type of admission or year of incidence.

Preoperative treatment does not improve the therapeutic results of abdominosacral amputation of the rectum

BACKGROUND

This study reviewed the impact of preoperative chemoradiotherapy/short-term radiotherapy on abdominosacral amputations of the rectum (ASAR) for the treatment of low-rectum cancers in terms of postoperative morbidity, local recurrence rates, and survival.

METHODS

A total of 198 patients with stage II and III tumors located within 6 cm of the anorectal junction underwent ASAR between 1998 and 2008 and were selected for further analysis. Patients were compared according to the following groups: those who had surgery only (Group A) and those who had preoperative chemoradiotherapy/short-term radiotherapy (Group B).

RESULTS

There were 44 and 154 patients in Groups A and B, respectively, including 135 males. The median age of the subjects was 63 years (range = 35-88). The median follow-up period was 81 months (range = 23-138). Neither the local recurrence rates (6.8% in Group A vs. 4.6% in Group B, p = 0.544) nor the 5-year relative survival rates (72.4% in Group A vs. 69.3% in Group B, p = 0.127) differed significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative therapy in low-rectum cancer does not improve the therapeutic results of ASAR.

Short-term outcomes of the prone perineal approach for extra-levator abdomino-perineal excision (elAPE)

BACKGROUND

Many studies report that low rectal cancer treated with abdomino-perineal excision (APE) have higher rates of CRM involvement with associated local recurrence and worse survival when compared to low anterior resection. We present a single surgeon's short-term outcomes using the prone perineal extra-levator (elAPE) approach.

METHODS

Thirty-one patients between 2006 and 2010 underwent elAPE with curative intent. Data was collected prospectively recording patient tumour characteristics and histological outcome. Outcome measures included circumferential resection margins, recurrence rates, 30-day morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Mean distance of tumour from anal verge was 3.63 ± SD 1.52 cm. 14 patients had pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy. The involved circumferential resection margin rate was 3.2%. Median follow-up was 20 (0-45) months, with overall mortality of 13.3% and 30 day mortality of 6.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

The prone position elAPE has a low circumferential resection margin involved rate and, through improved vision, reduces the risk of inadvertent tumour or specimen perforation.

Robotic cylindrical abdominoperineal resection with transabdominal levator transection

PURPOSE

The extralevator approach to abdominoperineal resection is an emerging surgical option for patients with low rectal cancer. This technique involves a wide excision of the levator muscles that could reduce the high incidence of circumferential margin positivity associated with conventional abdominoperineal resections. We present our technique of robotic cylindrical abdominoperineal resection where the daVinci robot is used to perform a controlled transection of the levator muscles transabdominally under direct visualization.

METHODS

Five patients with rectal adenocarcinoma within 5 cm of the anal verge underwent robot-assisted cylindrical abdominoperineal resection. Safety, feasibility, immediate postoperative outcomes, and pathological adequacy of the specimen were assessed.

RESULTS

The procedure was successfully completed in all 5 patients without any intraoperative complications, robot-associated morbidity, or conversion to the open approach. The mean operative time and length of hospital stay were 343 minutes and 5.8 days. An intact mesorectal envelope and negative circumferential margin was achieved in all cases. All specimens had a cylindrical shape.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic assistance enables the transabdominal transection of the levator muscles in cylindrical abdominoperineal resection, with acceptable perioperative and pathological outcomes. Further studies are essential to objectively define the safety, efficacy, and long-term results of this new technique.

Multicentre experience with extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer

Background

Abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal cancer is associated with higher rates of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement and intraoperative perforation (IOPs) than anterior resection for higher tumours. This multicentre observational study was designed to confirm that extralevator APE can improve outcomes and investigated the morbidity associated with such extensive surgery.

Methods

Some 176 extralevator APE procedures from 11 European colorectal surgeons were compared with 124 standard excisions from one UK centre. Clinical and pathological data were collected along with specimen photographs. Tissue morphometry was performed on the distal ten slices of the excision.

Results

Extralevator APE removed more tissue from outside the smooth muscle layer per slice (median area 2120 versus 1259 mm2; P &lt; 0·001) leading to a reduction in CRM involvement (from 49·6 to 20·3 per cent; P &lt; 0·001) and IOP (from 28·2 to 8·2 per cent; P &lt; 0·001) compared with standard surgery. However, extralevator surgery was associated with an increase in perineal wound complications (from 20 to 38·0 per cent; P = 0·019).

Conclusion

Extralevator APE is associated with less CRM involvement and IOP than standard surgery.

Abdominosacral resection for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The results of resection of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancers, including sacral resection, were analysed critically.

METHODS

Between 1987 and 2007, 353 patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer, all treated in a tertiary referral centre, were identified from a prospective database. Twenty-five patients (eight primary and 17 recurrent tumours) underwent en bloc sacral resection.

RESULTS

A mid-sacral resection was carried out in 12 patients (level S3) and a low sacral resection in 13 (level S4/S5). Nineteen patients had an R0, four an R1 and two an R2 resection. There was no postoperative mortality. Median follow-up was 32 months. Incomplete resection had an independent negative influence on local control (5-year local recurrence rate 42 versus 0 per cent in those with and without incomplete resection; P < 0.001). The 5-year overall survival rate was 30 per cent. Five patients with recurrent tumour had pathological invasion into the sacral bone and none survived beyond 1 year.

CONCLUSION

Abdominosacral resection can be performed in patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. Patients who cannot undergo a complete resection or have clear evidence of cortical invasion have a poor prognosis.

Abdominosacral amputation of the rectum for low rectal cancers: ten years of experience

BACKGROUND

Abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer is related to the high frequency of local recurrences, risk of inadvertent bowel perforation, and disease-positive tumor margin. An alternative technique to this procedure, however, is the abdominosacral amputation of the rectum (ASAR). The aim of this study was to report on the technique and share our experience of ASAR on the cohort of consecutively operated patients.

METHODS

In its anterior stage, ASAR follows the rules of total mesorectal excision. In its posterior part, the patient is positioned in a prone jackknife position and the coccyx and the last sacral vertebra (if necessary) are removed, enabling a sharp and directly visualized resection of the tumor and other structures critical to local recurrence. Between 1998 and 2007, a total of 210 low-rectal cancer patients were so treated at our clinic.

RESULTS

Bowel perforation occurred in 9 patients, the circumferential resection margin was positive in 16 patients, and 38 patients had local wound complications. Seven (4.4%) of 158 patients with 2-year follow-up developed local recurrence, whereas 5-year observed and relative survivals were 68.3% and 73.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ASAR has a low risk of bowel perforation, circumferential resection margin involvement, and local wound complications. The local recurrence rate is lower and survival better than with conventional abdominoperineal resection.

Abdominosacral resection is not related to the risk of neurological complications in patients with low-rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Some authors claim that the risk of sacrectomy-related neurological complications is a serious limitation of abdominosacral resection (ASR). We determined the incidence of neurological complications in patients with a low-rectal cancer who were treated by ASR.

METHOD

The clinical records of 54 consecutive patients with low-rectal cancer who were operated on by ASR were analysed. The occurrence of neurological complications in these patients was compared with that of 140 consecutive patients with cancer of the mid- and upper rectum who underwent anterior resection (AR) during the same period. Neurological complications were defined as bowel, bladder or sexual dysfunction, gait abnormalities and local parasthesiae persisting for more than 6 months following surgery.

RESULTS

There were no persisting neurological complications after either AR or ASR. At the end of hospitalization, the 16 of 140 and 12 of 54 of those treated with AR and ASR had neurological complications, which fell to five of 140 and three of 53 at 3 months, respectively; at 6 months, no one treated had any complications.

CONCLUSION

Neurological complications after AR and ASR were similar but recovery was complete at 6 months following surgery.

Infralevator lymphatic drainage of low-rectal cancers: preliminary results

BACKGROUND

Some low-rectal cancers may spread into or recur in the inguinal lymph nodes despite optimal resection of the primary tumor. Hence, we hypothesized that lymphatic drainage of low-rectal malignancies may be inhomogeneous and that an extramesorectal route may be involved in at least some cases. The idea of our preliminary study was to analyze the potential lymphatic drainages in low-rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

The first stage of the experiment included two consecutive low-rectal adenocarcinoma patients (free from inguinal lymph node metastases), in whom the lymphatics of the primary tumor were traced with Patentbalu dye. During the second stage the records of 206 consecutive low-rectal cancer patients were analyzed for presence of inguinal lymph node metastases.

RESULTS

An evaluation of specimens from two rectal cancer patients revealed extramesorectal lymphatic drainage of the primary tumor besides the mesorectal route. An analysis of 206 patients revealed six cases of inguinal node metastases. Median age of patients was 55 years. They were all diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma, T3 or T4 tumors with G2 or G3 grade.

CONCLUSION

The demonstration of an alternative route of lymphatic drainage suggests that more radical surgical procedures are necessary for successful treatment of low-rectal cancers.