Surgical management strategies for colorectal malignancies of the splenic flexure - A systematic review and network meta-analysis

[Evidence for the extent and oncological benefits of lymphadenectomy in colon and rectal cancer : A narrative review based on meta-analyses]

BACKGROUND

Lymphadenectomy for rectal cancer is clearly defined by total mesorectal excision (TME). The analogous surgical strategy for the colon, the complete mesocolic excision (CME), follows the same principles of dissection in embryologically predefined planes.

METHOD

This narrative review initially identified key issues related to lymphadenectomy of rectal and colon cancer. The subsequent search was based on PubMed and focused on meta-analyses. The endpoints for rectal cancer were the benefit of high tie versus low tie and the indications for lateral pelvic lymphadenectomy. For colon cancer the evidence for CME, for the longitudinal extent of resection, for the dissection of infrapyloric and gastroepiploic lymph nodes, for the number of lymph nodes and for the sentinel lymph node technique were used as endpoints.

RESULTS

An oncological benefit of the high tie cannot be derived from the current data. Lateral pelvic lymphadenectomy should only be selectively performed after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in cases of remaining lymph nodes with suspected metastases. In most studies CME proved to be oncologically superior, especially in stage III. The longitudinal extent of resection should be at least 10 cm in both directions if the principles of CME are observed. Infrapyloric and gastroepiploic lymph node involvement is to be expected in 0.7-22% of cases, depending on patient selection, which justifies dissection, particularly in carcinomas of both flexure and the transverse colon. The minimum number of lymph nodes to be removed cannot be clearly derived from the available studies. Precisely performed CME and an optimal pathological work-up are important. The sentinel lymph node technique cannot currently be used as a criterion for limiting the extent of resection.

CONCLUSION

Both TME and CME are reliable standards for the lymphadenectomy in colorectal carcinomas. A lymphadenectomy that goes beyond this is reserved for selected cases and is partly the subject of currently ongoing studies.

Tata Memorial Centre Evidence Based Management of Colorectal cancer

This review article examines the evidence-based management of colorectal cancers, focusing on topics characterized by ongoing debates and evolving evidence. To contribute to the scientific discourse, we intentionally exclude subjects with established guidelines, concentrating instead on areas where the current understanding is dynamic. Our analysis encompasses a thorough exploration of critical themes, including the evidence surrounding complete mesocolic excision and D3 lymphadenectomy in colon cancers. Additionally, we delve into the evolving landscape of perioperative chemotherapy in both colon and rectal cancers, considering its nuanced role in the context of contemporary treatment strategies. Advancements in surgical techniques are a pivotal aspect of our discussion, with an emphasis on the utilization of minimally invasive approaches such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery in both colon and rectal cancers, including advanced rectal cases. Moving beyond conventional radical procedures, we scrutinize the feasibility and implications of endoscopic resections for small tumors, explore the paradigm of organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancers, and assess the utility of total neoadjuvant therapy in the current treatment landscape. Our final segment reviews pivotal trials that have significantly influenced the management of colorectal liver and peritoneal metastasis.