Transanal endoscopic microsurgery after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer

Therapeutic strategies for ypT1 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The optimal treatment of ypT1 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) remains controversial. This study aimed to determine whether local excision is non-inferior to radical surgery and whether adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) would improve survival in patients with ypT1 rectal cancer after nCRT.

METHODS

We enrolled 1212 and 91 patients with ypT1 rectal cancer underwent nCRT followed by radical surgery from the SEER database (2004-2018) and the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital (ZJCH) (2010-2022), respectively. Another 62 patients underwent LE were also identified from SEER registries. Propensity score matching was performed to balance baseline characteristics between patients in different treatment groups.

RESULTS

Regional nodal metastasis was histopathologically detected in 257 patients (20.7%) within the SEER cohort, showing a significant association with poor cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). Consistent findings were also observed in the ZJCH cohort. After 1:1 propensity score matching (60 pairs), no significant differences were observed between the extended resection and local excision groups in CSS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, P = 0.785) and OS (HR 0.81, P = 0.450). Patients with regional nodal metastases were more likely to receive ACT, while no apparent survival benefit was observed with additional ACT after PSM adjusting (187 pairs). Notwithstanding, for individuals younger than 50 years, ACT might provide a survival benefit in CSS (HR 0.25, P = 0.033) and OS (HR 0.30, P = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Although patients with ypT1 rectal cancer have a non-negligible risk for nodal metastasis, oncologic outcomes of local excision following nCRT seem to be comparable to radical surgery. ACT could not effectively improve prognosis in patients with ypT1 tumors, except for those younger than 50 years of age.

Nonoperative management and local excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer

Locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer represents a significant clinical challenge, and currently, the standard treatment is based on neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) followed by radical surgical resection with total mesorectal excision (TME). In the last 30 years, its management has undergone significant changes due to the improvement of complementary radio- and chemotherapy treatments, the improvement of minimally invasive surgical approaches and the diffusion of organ-sparing approaches, such as nonoperative management, commonly called "watch and wait" (NOM) and local excision (LE), in highly selected patients who achieve a major or complete response to neoadjuvant CRT. This review aimed to critically examine the efficacy and oncological safety of NOM and LE compared to those of standard TME in rectal cancer patients after neoadjuvant CRT. Both the pros and cons of these approaches were strictly analyzed, providing a comprehensive and critical overview of these novel management strategies for rectal cancer.

Completion total mesorectal excision after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and local excision for rectal cancer

AIM

Local excision (LE) in selected cases after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) for locally advanced rectal cancer in clinically complete or major responders has been recently reported as an alternative to standard radical resection. Completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) is generally performed when high-risk pathological features are found in LE surgical specimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of residual tumour and lymph node metastases after cTME in patients previously treated by RCT + LE. The secondary aims were to quantify the rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality and to evaluate the long-term oncological outcome of this group of patients.

METHODS

All patients treated from 2007 to 2020 by LE for locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinically complete or major response to RCT who had a subsequent cTME for high-risk pathological factors (ypT >1 and/or TRG >2 and/or positive margins) were included in this multicentre retrospective study. Pathological data, postoperative short-term morbidity (classified according to Clavien-Dindo) and mortality and oncological long-term outcome after cTME were recorded in a database. Statistical analysis was performed using Wizard for iOS version 1.9.31.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients were included in the study. The rate of R0 resection was 95.7%, and a sphincter-saving procedure was performed in 37 patients (78.7%), with a protective stoma rate of 78.4%. In 28 cases (59.6%), it was possible to perform a minimally invasive approach. A residual tumour (pT and/or pN) on cTME specimens was found in 21 cases (44.7%). The rate of lymph node metastases was 12.8%. The overall short-term (within 30 days) postoperative morbidity was 34%, but grade >2 postoperative complications occurred in only nine patients (19.1%), with a reoperation rate of 6.4%. No short-term postoperative deaths occurred. At a median follow-up of 57 months (range: 21-174), the long-term stoma-free rate was 70.2%, and the actuarial 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and local control (LC) were 86.7%, 88.9% and 95.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

When patients exhibit high-risk pathological factors after RCT + LE, cTME should be suggested due to the high risk of residual tumour or lymph node involvement (44.7%). The results after cTME in terms of the rate of R0 resection, sphincter-saving procedure, postoperative morbidity and mortality and long-term oncological outcome seem to be acceptable and do not represent a contraindication to use LE as a first-step treatment in patients with major or complete clinical response after RCT.

Pattern of Residual Submucosal Involvement after Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: A Rationale for the Utility of Endoscopic Submucosal Resection

Background and Objectives: Full-thickness trans anal local excision for tumors with favorable response following neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is a common strategy for organ preservation, but it could be associated with a high rate of postoperative complications. We describe the incidence and pattern of submucosal involvement in surgical specimens following neoadjuvant therapy for LARC and whether limiting local excision of the residual tumor bed to only mucosal/submucosal layers of the rectal wall is sufficient for accurately predicting the ypT status of residual cancer, providing a pathological rationale to replace full-thickness local excision by endoscopic submucosal resection. Materials and Methods: This was a single-institution retrospective study conducted at a teaching community hospital. We reviewed clinical and pathological findings with slides of 82 patients diagnosed with LARC treated at our center between 2006 and 2020. Eligibility criteria mirrored our current organ preservation trials. Results: No tumor was found in surgical specimens in 28 cases (34%). Additionally, 4, 22, 27, and 1 cases were staged as ypT1, ypT2, ypT3, and ypT4, respectively. Residual malignant cells were found in the submucosal layer in 98% of cases with ypT+ stage, with 'skip lesions' in only 2% of cases. Conclusions: A very high incidence of submucosal involvement is noticed in residual tumors after neoadjuvant therapy, providing pathological rationale to study the role of endoscopic submucosal resection as a restaging tool for tumors with favorable response after neoadjuvant therapy when organ preservation strategy is pursued. This study was limited by its retrospective design and relatively small number of patients.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery Versus Total Mesorectal Excision in ypT0-1 Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Radiochemotherapy: Postoperative Morbidity, Functional Results, and Long-term Oncologic Outcome

BACKGROUND

In patients with locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer, a multidisciplinary approach represents the standard treatment. However, considering the favorable prognosis in patients with major or complete response, radical surgery might represent overtreatment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate postoperative short-term morbidity, functional outcome, and oncologic long-term outcome in patients with rectal cancer treated with local excision by transanal endoscopic microsurgery or radical surgery and to determine who achieved a complete or major pathological response (ypT0-1) after neoadjuvant treatment.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTING

The study was conducted at a single center.

PATIENTS

Patients who had received neoadjuvant treatment by local excision with a major or complete pathological response at histological examination (transanal endoscopic microsurgery group) were compared to patients treated by radical surgery with the same pathological response (total mesorectal excision group).

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions included local excision by transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery with total mesorectal excision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative short-term morbidity, functional outcome 1 year after surgery, and oncologic long-term outcome were measured.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients were included in the study (35 in the transanal endoscopic microsurgery group and 58 in the mesorectal excision group). In the total mesorectal excision group, a sphincter-saving approach was possible in 89.7% (vs 100%; p = 0.049); a protective temporary stoma was necessary in 74.1% of radical procedures (vs 0%; p < 0.001), and 13.8% of these became permanent. Short-term postoperative morbidity was lower after local excision (14.3% vs 46.6%; p = 0.002). One year after surgery, the transanal endoscopic microsurgery group recorded better evacuation and continence function than the total mesorectal excision group. Oncologic outcome was similar between the groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study had a retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

If a major or complete pathological response occurs after neoadjuvant treatment, an organ-sparing approach by local excision seems to offer the same oncologic results as radical surgery, but it has a better postoperative morbidity rate and better functional results. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B901 .Microcirugía endoscópica transanal versus escisión total del mesorrecto en cáncer de recto ypT0-1 después de radioquimioterapia preoperatoria: morbilidad posoperatoria, resultados funcionales y resultado oncológico a largo plazo.

ANTECEDENTES

En pacientes con cáncer rectal extraperitoneal localmente avanzado, un abordaje multidisciplinario con radioquimioterapia preoperatoria y cirugía con escisión total del mesorrecto representa el tratamiento estándar. En pacientes que obtienen una respuesta mayor o completa, la cirugía radical puede representar un sobretratamiento, considerando el pronóstico favorable de estos casos.

OBJETIVO

Evaluar la morbilidad posoperatoria a corto plazo, el resultado funcional y el resultado oncológico a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer de recto tratados con escisión local mediante microcirugía endoscópica transanal o mediante cirugía radical y que obtuvieron una respuesta patológica completa o mayor (ypT0-1) después del tratamiento neoadyuvante.

DISEO

Este fue un estudio retrospectivo.

AJUSTE

El estudio se realizó en un solo centro.

ESCENARIO

El estudio se realizó en un solo centro.

PACIENTES

Se comparó a los pacientes tratados, tras tratamiento neoadyuvante (1996-2016), mediante escisión local con respuesta patológica mayor o completa al examen histológico (grupo de microcirugía endoscópica transanal), con los pacientes tratados mediante cirugía radical con la misma respuesta patológica (grupo de escisión mesorrectal total).

INTERVENCIONES

Extirpación local mediante microcirugía endoscópica transanal y cirugía radical con escisión mesorrectal total.

PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO

Morbilidad posoperatoria a corto plazo, resultado funcional a un año después de la cirugía (evaluado con una puntuación de evacuación y continencia) y resultado oncológico a largo plazo.

LIMITACIONES

Las limitaciones de este estudio incluyen su diseño retrospectivo.

CONCLUSIN

Si se produce una respuesta patológica mayor o completa después del tratamiento neoadyuvante, un abordaje con preservación de órganos mediante escisión local parece ofrecer los mismos resultados oncológicos que la cirugía radical, pero tiene una menor tasa de morbilidad postoperatoria y mejores resultados funcionales un año después de la cirugía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B901 . (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio ).

A Meta-analysis of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery versus Total Mesorectal Excision in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer

Background  Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) has been suggested as an alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in the treatment of early rectal cancers. The extended role of TEMS for higher stage rectal cancers after neoadjuvant therapy is also experimented. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the oncological outcomes and report on the evidence-based clinical supremacy of either technique.

Methods  Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for the randomized controlled trials comparing the oncological and perioperative outcomes of TEMS and a radical TME. A local recurrence and postoperative complications were analyzed as primary end points. Intraoperative blood loss, operation time, and duration of hospital stay were compared as secondary end points.

Results  There was no statistical difference in the local recurrence or postoperative complications with a risk ratio of 1.898 and 0.753 and p -values of 0.296 and 0.306, respectively, for TEMS and TME. A marked statistical significance in favor of TEMS was observed for secondary end points. There was standard difference in means of −4.697, −6.940, and −5.685 with p -values of 0.001, 0.005, and 0.001 for blood loss, operation time, and hospital stay, respectively.

Conclusion  TEMS procedure is a viable alternative to TME in the treatment of early rectal cancers. An extended role of TEMS after neoadjuvant therapy may also be offered to a selected group of patients. TME surgery remains the standard of care in more advanced rectal cancers.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy affects postoperative outcomes and functional results in patients treated with transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to quantify the incidence of short-term postoperative complications and functional disorders at 1 year from transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for rectal neoplasms, to compare patients treated with TEM alone and with TEM after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and to analyse factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on all patients treated with TEM for rectal neoplasms at our institution in January 2000-December 2017. Data from a prospectively maintained database were retrospectively analysed. Patients were divided into two groups: adenoma or early rectal cancer (no CRT group) and locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer with major or complete clinical response after preoperative CRT (CRT group). Short-term postoperative mortality and morbidity and the functional results at 1 year were recorded. The two groups were compared, and a statistical analysis of factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes was performed. Functional outcome was also evaluated with the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score (0-20 no LARS, 21-29 minor LARS and 30-42 major LARS).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirteen patients (71 males, 42 females, median age 64 years [range 41-80 years]) were included in the study (46 in the CRT group). The overall postoperative complication rate was 23.0%, lower in the noCRT group (p < 0.001), but only 2.7% were grade ≥ 3. The most frequent complication was suture dehiscence (17.6%), which occurred less frequently in the noCRT group (p < 0.001). At 1 year from TEM, the most frequent symptoms was urgency (11.9%, without significant differences between the CRT group and the noCRT group); the noCRT group experienced a lower rate of soiling than the CRT group (0% vs. 7.7%; p: 0.027). The incidence of LARS was evaluated in 47 patients from May 2012 on and was 21.3% occurring less frequently in the noCRT group (10% vs. 41.2%; p: 0.012). Only 6.4% of the patients evaluated experienced major LARS. In multivariate analysis, preoperative CRT significantly worsened postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is a safe procedure associated with only low risk of severe postoperative complications and major LARS. Preoperative CRT seems to increase the rate of postoperative morbidity after TEM and led to worse functional outcomes at 1 year after surgery.

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in T2-T3 rectal cancer: current status and critical appraisal

Local excision following chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer is an organ-preserving procedure which aims at reducing morbidity and functional disorders associated with total mesorectal excision (TME) in selected patients. Although TME after chemoradiotherapy remains the gold standard for locally advanced mid and low rectal cancer, in the last years multicenter research trials have offered encouraging oncologic results which have allowed to preserve the rectum in patients with a pathologic complete response after chemoradiotherapy. A review of the available literature on this topic was conducted to define the state of the art of this conservative approach and to focus on the most controversial aspects concerning local excision performed after chemoradiotherapy, in particular tumor scatter and lymph node status, completion and salvage surgery, morbidity and quality of life. The analysis of these topics should be considered, in trial setting or in current practice, for their clinical implications. Oncologic outcomes of recent trials are encouraging for part of the patients presenting T2 rectal cancer; however, TME still remains the standard treatment in clinical practice. In such cases, local excision should include a surgical safety margin of at least 1 cm from the resection margin to achieve a true negative margin from residual tumor cells. The selection of the patients should be carefully performed and their consensus extremely detailed because TME is necessary in about 30% of cases. Failing that, morbidity and quality of life are negatively affected. However, about half of these patients refuse radical surgery (45%), thus undergoing only palliative care.

Organ-saving surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation: Analysis of failures and long-term results

BACKGROUND

To analyze long-term results and risk of relapse in the clinical TNM stages II and III, mid-low rectal cancer patients (RC pts), treated with transanal local excision (LE) after major response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (n-CRT).

METHODS

Thirty-two out of 345 extraperitoneal cT3-4 or N+ RC pts (9.3%) underwent LE.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

extraperitoneal RC, adenocarcinoma, ECOG Performance Status ≤2. Pts with distant metastases were excluded.

RESULTS

All pts showed histologically clear margins of resection and 81.2% were restaged ypT0/mic/1. Nine out of 32 (28.1%) pts relapsed: 7 (21.8%) showed a local recurrence, of which 5 (15.6%) at the endorectal suture, 1 (3.1%) pelvic and 1 (3.1%) mesorectal. Two pts (6.2%) relapsed distantly. Among the pT0/1, 11.5% relapsed vs 100% of the pT2 and pT4 ones. The six pts relapsing locally or in the mesorectal fat underwent a salvage total mesorectal excision surgery. The old patient with pelvic recurrence relapsed after 108 months and underwent a re-irradiation; the two pts with distant metastases were treated with chemotherapy followed by radical surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Presently combined approach seems a valid option in major responders, confirming its potential curative impact in the ypT0/mic/1 pts. A strict selection of pts is basic to obtain favourable results.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.