Transanal Approach to Rectal Polyps and Cancer

Early Rectal Cancer: Advances in Diagnosis and Management Strategies

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most prevalent cause of cancer-related death and the third most common cancer globally. Early-stage rectal cancer is defined by lesions confined to the bowel wall, without extension beyond the submucosa in T1 or the muscularis propria in T2, with no indication of lymph node involvement or distant metastasis. The gold standard for managing rectal cancer is total mesorectal excision (TME); however, it is linked to considerable morbidities and impaired quality of life. There is a growing interest in local resection and non-operative treatment of early RC for organ preservation. Local resection options include three types of transanal endoscopic surgery (TES): transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), transanal endoscopic operations (TEO), and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), while endoscopic resection includes endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Although the oncological outcome of local resection of early rectal cancer is debated in the current literature, some studies have shown comparable outcomes with radical surgery in selected patients. The use of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in early rectal cancer management is also controversial in the literature, but a number of studies have reported promising outcomes. This review focuses on the available literature regarding diagnosis, staging, and management strategies of early rectal cancer and provides possible recommendations.

A staged approach to resecting a large rectal polyp using endoscopic mucosal resection and trans-anal endoscopic microsurgery: a case report

Large rectal adenomatous polyps are not uncommon. Proctectomy sparing interventions are favored when feasible. We present a case of a 62-year-old woman, who presented with diarrhea for several years. Colonoscopy revealed a very large 60 mm rectal polyp, biopsied as tubulovillous adenoma. This was successfully resected using a staged approach with endoscopic mucosal resection and trans-anal endoscopic microsurgery. Endoscopic mucosal resection removed 70% of the lesion with central scarred not amenable to resection but amenable to transanal excision. Pathology demonstrated tubulovillous adenoma with negative margins. Flexible sigmoidoscopy at 6-month follow-up revealed well healed scar without recurrence or residual disease. This demonstrates a staged resection for a large rectal polyp which is minimally invasive and organ preserving.

Small Cell Carcinoma of the Rectum Associated With a Tubulovillous Adenoma: An Atypical Case Presentation

Small cell carcinoma of the rectum (SCCR) is a rare and aggressive neuroendocrine tumor. Its association with a tubulovillous adenoma is an exceptional occurrence, presenting significant implications for diagnosis and treatment. This case report details a 62-year-old male, undergoing treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, presented with symptoms of diarrhea. A colonoscopy initially suggested a benign tubulovillous adenoma, but the presence of discordant clinical findings led to further evaluation. The final diagnosis, established post-surgery, was SCCR originating from a tubulovillous adenoma. This case highlights the diagnostic challenges when unusual presentations arise from atypical pathological findings, especially in patients with concurrent malignancies. The management followed standard care protocols, including robotic transanal surgery, despite the patient's ongoing HCC treatment. This case adds to the limited existing literature on SCCR, particularly its rare association with a tubulovillous adenoma. It emphasizes the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach in diagnosing and managing rare entities in colorectal cancer while demonstrating the feasibility of standard care in patients with complex comorbidities.

Surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of local and radical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for early- and mid-stage rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical resection is typically the standard treatment for early- and mid-stage rectal cancer as local resection may result in a high rate of recurrence and risk of distant metastasis. A growing number of studies have shown that local excision after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy can significantly reduce recurrence rates and is a feasible strategy to preserve the rectum as an alternative to conventional radical resection.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare the efficacy of local resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy with radical surgery for early- and mid-stage rectal cancer and to report the evidence-based clinical advantages of both techniques.

METHODS

Clinical trials comparing oncologic and perioperative outcomes of local and radical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with early- to mid-stage rectal cancer were searched in PubMed, Embase, Web Of Science, and Cochrane databases, and a total of 5 randomized controlled trials and 11 cohort study trials were included.

RESULTS

In terms of oncology and perioperative outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between the radical resection group and the local resection group in terms of OS [HR = 0.99, 95%CI (0.85, 1.15), p = 0.858], DFS [HR = 1.01, 95%CI (0.64, 1.58), p = 0.967], distant metastasis rate [RR = 0.76, 95%CI (0.36,1.59), p = 0.464], and local recurrence rate [RR = 1.30, 95%CI (0.69, 2.47), p = 0.420]. However, there were significant differences in the outcomes of complications [RR = 0.49, 95% CI (0.33, 0.72), p < 0.001], length of hospital stays [WMD =  - 5.13, 95%CI (- 6.22, - 4.05), p < 0.001], enterostomy [RR = 0.13, 95%CI (0.05, 0.37), p < 0.001], operative time [- 94.31, 95%CI (- 117.26, - 71.35), p < 0.001], and emotional functioning score [WMD = 2.34, 95% CI (0.94, 3.74), p < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Local resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy may be an effective alternative to radical surgery in patients with early and middle rectal cancer.

A population-based study of the management of rectal malignant polyps and the use of trans-anal surgery

INTRODUCTION

Rectal malignant polyps can be managed by use of trans-anal resections (TAR). Traditional techniques of resection have been replaced by use of platforms such as trans-anal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) or trans-anal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). This study reviewed the management of rectal malignant polyps, in particular focussing on when clinicians used TAR.

METHODS

A population wide cohort study of all malignant rectal polyps diagnosed in Queensland, Australia from 2011 to 2018 was undertaken. Patient and pathological factors were compared across the management strategies of polypectomy, TAR and rectal resection.

RESULTS

Overall 430 patients were diagnosed with a malignant rectal polyp during the study period, with 103 undergoing a TAR. There was increasing use of TAR across the study period as a management strategy (P < 0.001). Polypectomy alone was more likely to be the management strategy over TAR or rectal resection if there were clear margins (P < 0.001). The distance to the closest polypectomy margin was also significantly higher in the polypectomy group with mean clearance 2.09 mm in polypectomy group versus 0.86 mm in TAR group and 0.99 mm in resection group (P < 0.001). Rectal resection was more likely to be the management strategy over TAR if there was LVI (P < 0.001), depth of invasion was deeper (P < 0.001) and there was tumour budding (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TAR is an effective management strategy for rectal polyps and is utilized particularly in rectal malignant polyps when there are close or involved margins. Future guideline development should consider incorporation of TAR given the advances in techniques afforded by TAMIS or TEM platforms.

Local resection versus radical resection for early-stage rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The optimal surgical approach for early-stage rectal cancer remains controversial. Radical resection is considered to be the gold standard for rectal cancer treatment. More and more studies show that local resection can replace traditional radical resection in the treatment of early rectal cancer. This research aimed to compare the efficacy of local excision and radical surgery for early-stage rectal cancer and report the evidence-based clinical advantages of both techniques.

METHODS

The clinical trials comparing oncological and perioperative local and radical resection outcomes for early-stage rectal cancer were searched from 7 national and international databases.

RESULTS

Finally, 3 randomized controlled trials and 14 cohort studies were included. In terms of oncology and perioperative outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between the radical resection group and the local resection group in terms of OS (HR = 1.05, 95% CI (0.98, 1.13), DFS [HR = 1.18, 95% CI (0.93, 1.48), p = 0.168), distant metastasis rate (RR = 1.04, 95% CI (0.49, 2.20), p = 0.928), and mortality rate (RR = 1.52, 95% CI (0.80, 2.91), p = 0.200). However, there were significant differences in the outcomes of complications (RR = 2.85, 95% CI (2.07, 3.92), p < 0.001), length of hospital stays (WMD = 5.41, 95% CI (3.94, 6.87), p < 0.001), stoma rate (RR = 7.69, 95% CI (2.39, 24.77), p = 0.001), local recurrence rate (RR = 0.48, 95% CI (0.27, 0.86), p = 0.013), operative time (WMD = 74.68, 95% CI (68.00, 81.36), p < 0.001), blood loss (WMD = 156.36, 95% CI (95.48, 217.21, p < 0.001), and adverse events (RR = 1.59, 95% CI (1.05, 2.41), p = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

Local excision may be a viable alternative to radical resection for early-stage rectal cancer, but higher quality clinical studies are needed to confirm this.

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery: a single institutional experience

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (R-TAMIS) is a novel and evolving technique with limited reported outcomes in the literature. Compared to the laparoscopic approach, R-TAMIS provides enhanced optics, increased degrees of motion, superior ergonomics, and easier maneuverability in the confines of the rectum. We report a single institution experience at a large quaternary referral academic medical center with R-TAMIS using the da Vinci Xi® platform. This is a retrospective review of electronic medical records at the Mayo Clinic from September 2017 to April 2020. It includes all available clinical documentations for patients undergoing R-TAMIS at our institution. Patient demographics, intraoperative data (procedure time, tumor size and distance), complications, and pathology reports were reviewed. A total of 28 patients underwent R-TAMIS. Median follow-up was 23.65 months. Sixteen patients underwent R-TAMIS for endoscopically unresectable rectal polyps, eight for rectal adenocarcinoma, two for rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumor, and two for rectal carcinoid tumor. The mean size of the lesions was 4.1 cm (range 0.2-13.8 cm). The mean location of lesions was 7.8 cm (range 0-16 cm) from the anal verge. The mean operative time was 132.5 ± 46.8 min. There was one 30-day complication, and no deaths. Twenty-three (82%) patients were discharged the day of surgery. R-TAMIS is a safe, feasible, and effective technique for the surgical treatment of a variety of rectal pathology. A hybrid technique can be used for the resecting tumors extending into the anal canal.

Robotic Transanal Surgery for Rectal Cancer

Robotic transanal surgery is the culmination of major developments in rectal cancer management and minimally invasive surgery. It is the result of continuous efforts to tackle the challenges inherent to rectal cancer surgery. This latest technology holds great promise and excitement for the care of the rectal cancer patient. In this article, we will describe the evolution of transanal rectal cancer surgery and describe how the convergence of transanal transabdominal, transanal endoscopic microsurgery, transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME), and the different robotic platforms have culminated in the development of single port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) and single port robotic transanal total mesorectal excision (SP rtaTME). We will describe the indications, technical aspects, outcomes, benefits, and limitations of the SP rTAMIS and SP rtaTME.

First Clinical Experience With Single-Port Robotic Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery: Phase II Trial of the Initial 26 Cases

BACKGROUND

Many transanal platforms have been developed to address the challenge of reach and vision when operating transanally. The single-port robot was specifically designed for narrow-aperture surgery and is a promising platform for minimally invasive transanal surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this phase II trial is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the initial clinical experience with single-port robot transanal minimally invasive surgery.

DESIGN

In a prospective phase II trial, patients with rectal neoplasms eligible for local excision were enrolled for single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery.

SETTING

The study was conducted between October 2018 and March 2020 at a tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS/INTERVENTION

Twenty-six consecutive patients underwent single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery resection of rectal lesions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point of the study was the efficacy and safety of single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery.

RESULTS

There were 13 men and 13 women, with an average lesion size of 2.9 cm (range, 1.0-6.0 cm) and average level of 4.8 cm from the anorectal ring (range, 0-30 cm). Ten patients had a preoperative diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, 7 of whom received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (range, 4500-5580 cGy with concurrent oral capecitabine). Eighty-eight percent of cases were completed by single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery; 2 were converted to transanal endoscopic microsurgery, and 1 patient underwent a low anterior resection. There were no piecemeal extractions, and all margins were negative on final pathology. There were no mortalities, and the morbidity rate was 15.4%. There have been no local recurrences, with a mean follow-up of 5.8 months (range, 0-15.9 months).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by small sample size, short-term follow up, and a single-surgeon experience.

CONCLUSION

Single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery procedures are safe and feasible in patients with select benign and malignant rectal lesions. Future trials will need to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B605.

PRIMERA EXPERIENCIA CLNICA CON CIRUGA MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA TRANSANAL ROBTICA DE PUERTO NICO ENSAYO DE FASE II DE LOS CASOS INICIALES

ANTECEDENTES:Se han desarrollado muchas plataformas transanales para abordar el desafío del alcance y la visión cuando se opera de manera transanal. El robot de un solo puerto fue diseñado específicamente para la cirugía de apertura estrecha y es una plataforma prometedora para la cirugía transanal mínimamente invasiva.OBJETIVO:El propósito de este ensayo de fase II es evaluar la seguridad y viabilidad de la experiencia clínica inicial con la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal con robot de puerto único.DISEÑO:En un ensayo prospectivo de fase II, los pacientes con neoplasias rectales elegibles para la escisión local se inscribieron para la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único.AJUSTE:El estudio se realizó entre octubre de 2018 y marzo de 2020 en un hospital de referencia terciario.PACIENTES / INTERVENCIÓN:Veintiséis pacientes consecutivos fueron sometidos a cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único para resección de lesiones rectales.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El criterio de valoración principal del estudio fue la eficacia y seguridad de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único.RESULTADOS:Hubo 13 hombres y 13 mujeres, con un tamaño de lesión promedio de 2.9 cm (rango 1.0-6.0 cm) y un nivel promedio de 4.8 cm del anillo anorrectal (rango 0-30 cm). Diez pacientes tenían un diagnóstico preoperatorio de adenocarcinoma, 7 de los cuales recibieron quimiorradiación neoadyuvante (rango 4500-5580 cGy con capecitabina oral concurrente). El 88% de los casos se completaron mediante cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único; 2 se convirtieron a microcirugía endoscópica transanal y 1 se sometió a una resección anterior baja. No hubo extracciones parciales y todos los márgenes fueron negativos en la patología final. No hubo mortalidad y una tasa de morbilidad del 15,4%. No ha habido recidivas locales, con un seguimiento medio de 5,8 meses (rango 0-15,9 meses).LIMITACIONES:El estudio estuvo limitado por un tamaño de muestra pequeño, un seguimiento a corto plazo y la experiencia de un solo cirujano.CONCLUSIÓN:Los procedimientos de cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único son seguros y factibles en pacientes con lesiones rectales benignas y malignas seleccionadas. Los ensayos futuros deberán evaluar la seguridad y eficacia a largo plazo de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva transanal robótica de puerto único. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B605. (Traducción-Dr. Eduardo Londoño-Schimmer).

Non-conventional applications for Transanal endoscopic microsurgery. A single centre experience and a systematic review of literature

BACKGROUND

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and Transanal endoscopic operation (TEO) have been initially described for local excision of rectal adenomas and selected cases of rectal carcinomas. In the past decade, however, several new indications raised, and others could raise in the future. The aim of this review was to evaluate, both in the literature and in our personal experience, the use of TEM and TEO for nonconventional applications, different from rectal tumors.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of published papers and we selected articles reporting patients who underwent endoscopic surgery for other medical reason than polyp cancer resection, with TEM or TEO. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and bibliographies of the selected studies were searched for articles in English published up to May 2020 to identify all relevant articles. We excluded articles reporting TEM and TEO used for classical indications. We finally report our experience of non-conventional use of TEO in 5 patients with different diseases.

RESULTS

The research revealed 800 papers and among them we selected 52 articles for a total of 697 patients. Of all patients, only 52 had intraoperative or postoperative complications, with only 10 patients requiring major surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggest that TEM and TEO may be valid alternatives to traditional surgery in situations other than its classical indication. These findings can positively impact on the care of patients, who could benefit from less invasive surgical procedures associated with lower morbidity.

Endoscopic management versus transanal surgery for early primary or early locally recurrent rectal neoplasms-a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both endoscopic techniques and transanal surgery are viable options that allow organ preservation for early rectal neoplasms. Whilst endoscopic approaches are less invasive and carry less morbidity, it is unclear whether they are as oncologically effective.

AIM

To compare endoscopic techniques with transanal surgery in the management of early rectal neoplasms.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for randomised and observational studies comparing these techniques. The pre-specified main outcomes measured were en bloc and R0 resection rates and recurrence. Pair-wise meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

This review included 1044 patients. Transanal surgery had increased R0 resection rates (odds ratio (OR) 2.66; 95% CI 1.64; 4.31; p < 0.001) versus endoscopic management. The latter was associated with higher rates of incomplete resection (OR 2.25; 95% CI 1.14, 4.46; p = 0.02) and further intervention (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.09, 2.88; p = 0.02). There was no difference in the rates of late recurrence (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.53, 1.91; p = 0.99) or further major surgery (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.39, 1.94; p = 0.73) between the groups. Endoscopic treatment was associated with a shorter operating time (weighted mean difference (WMD) - 12.08; 95% CI - 18.97, - 5.19; p < 0.001) and LOS (WMD - 1.94; 95% CI - 2.43, - 1.44; p < 0.001), as well as lower rates of urinary retention post-operatively (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.02, 0.63; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic techniques should be favoured in the setting of benign early rectal neoplasms given their decreased morbidity and increased cost-effectiveness. However, where malignancy is suspected transanal surgery should be the preferred option given the superior R0 resection rate.

First clinical experience with single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) for benign rectal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The new da Vinci Single-Port (SP) robot is a single-arm four-channel robotic system well suited for endoluminal surgery. We report our initial experience performing SP robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) for rectal neoplasms.

METHODS

Under Institutional Review Board approval, two patients with rectal neoplasms were prospectively enrolled for elective SP rTAMIS. The primary endpoint was to report the safety and feasibility of successful procedure completion with the SP robot. Secondary endpoints included patient characteristics and perioperative metrics.

RESULTS

Both patients underwent successful SP rTAMIS resection of rectal neoplasms without intraoperative complications or conversions. The lesions were 4.0 cm and 3.0 cm in size, located 6 cm and 7 cm cephalad to the anorectal ring. Excisions were full thickness with no piecemeal extractions or specimen fragmentation. Estimated blood loss was 0 mL and 30 mL. The mean excised area was 13.4 cm² (22.7 cm² and 9.0 cm²). The mean docking time was 5.25 min (range 2-8 min) and mean console time was 122.5 min (98 min and 147 min). Patients tolerated a liquid diet on postoperative day (POD) 0 and were discharged on POD 1 after tolerating a low residue diet and having bowel function. Pathology showed two adenomas with negative margins. There was no immediate or delayed morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience indicates that SP rTAMIS is a safe and feasible approach for local excision of rectal lesions. While SP rTAMIS is very promising, more experience with this approach is necessary to determine its widespread applicability.

Comparison of the transanal surgical techniques for local excision of rectal tumors: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In order to assess the various surgical modalities for local resection of rectal tumors, a systematic review of the current literature and a network meta-analysis (NMA) was designed and conducted.

METHODS

The present study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions principles. Scholar databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science) were systematically screened up to 23/12/2019. A Bayesian NMA, implementing a Markov chain Monte Carlo analysis, was introduced for the probability ranking of the available surgical methods. Odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) of the categorical and continuous variables, respectively, were reported with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI).

RESULTS

Overall, 16 studies and 2146 patients were introduced in our study. Transanal minimal invasive surgery (TAMIS) displayed the highest performance regarding the overall postoperative morbidity, the perioperative blood loss, the length of hospitalization, and the peritoneal violation rate. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) was the most efficient modality for resecting an intact specimen. Although transanal local excision (TAE) had the highest ranking considering operative duration, it was associated with a significant risk for positive resection margins and tumor recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, TEM and TAMIS display superior oncological results over TAE. Due to several limitations, validation of these results requires further RCTs of a higher methodological level.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer: what the radiologist should know

Despite advances in surgical techniques and chemoradiation therapy, recurrent rectal cancer remains a cause of morbidity and mortality. After successful treatment of rectal cancer, patients are typically enrolled in a surveillance strategy that includes imaging as studies have shown improved prognosis when recurrent rectal cancer is detected during imaging surveillance versus based on development of symptoms. Additionally, patients who experience a complete clinical response with chemoradiation therapy may elect to enroll in a "watch-and-wait" strategy that includes imaging surveillance rather than surgical resection. Factors that increase the likelihood of recurrence, patterns of recurrence, and the imaging appearances of recurrent rectal cancer are reviewed with a focus on CT, PET CT, and MR imaging.

Colorectal cancer in adolescents and young adults: Defining a growing threat

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence is rising among adolescents and young adults (AYAs), with the greatest increase occurring in distal colon and rectal cancers. Reasons for this striking trend are not well understood. Genetically linked cases of CRC occur in the context of familial conditions such as Lynch Syndrome, but most AYA cases of CRC are sporadic. Unique biology is suggested, yet limited information is available regarding the molecular underpinnings of CRC in this age group. Young patients are more likely to experience delays in diagnosis and to present with advanced-stage disease; yet, prognosis by stage is comparable between younger and older adults. Treatment paradigms are based on evidence reflecting the older adult population. Given the concerning rise in CRC rates among AYAs, there is urgent need for further research into the role of screening from a younger age, biology of disease, and optimal therapies in this age group.

The outcomes of two robotic platforms performing transanal minimally invasive surgery for rectal neoplasia: a case series of 21 patients

Colorectal cancer remains the third most common cancer effecting adults. Surgical guidelines recommend transanal excision of early rectal neoplasia up to 8 cm from the anal verge. A retrospective review of two novel approaches for transanal robotic local excision with R0 resections of rectal cancers which was, on average, higher than 8 cm. Twenty-one cases of robotic assisted transanal surgery for early stage disease (T0-T1, N0) were reviewed. The first 10 cases performed with the da Vinci^® Si robotic platform between 2013 and 2016, and the first 11 cases performed using the Flex^® Medrobotics platform between August 2017 and August 2018. The average distance from the anal verge was 11.1 cm and 9.5 cm for the da Vinci^® Si and Flex^® Colorectal Drive, respectively. The average operative time was 167.6 min for the da Vinci^® Si and 110.1 min for the Flex^® Colorectal Drive; the average EBL was 37.5 cc and 9.1 cc for the da Vinci^® Si and Flex^® Colorectal Drive. In the da Vinci^® series, four cases required intraoperative conversion. In the Flex^® series, one case was aborted due to unfavorable robotic positioning. All margins were histologically negative when surgically complete with no recurrences to date. Transanal robotic surgery may provide a method to address rectal lesions farther from the anal verge than previously described. The Flex^® Colorectal Drive platform may provide superior ability to navigate the nonlinear anatomy of the rectum and distal sigmoid colon.

Neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer management

Thirty per cent of all colorectal tumours develop in the rectum. The location of the rectum within the bony pelvis and its proximity to vital structures presents significant therapeutic challenges when considering neoadjuvant options and surgical interventions. Most patients with early rectal cancer can be adequately managed by surgery alone. However, a significant proportion of patients with rectal cancer present with locally advanced disease and will potentially benefit from down staging prior to surgery. Neoadjuvant therapy involves a variety of options including radiotherapy, chemotherapy used alone or in combination. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy in rectal cancer has been shown to be effective in reducing tumour burden in advance of curative surgery. The gold standard surgical rectal cancer management aims to achieve surgical removal of the tumour and all draining lymph nodes, within an intact mesorectal package, in order to minimise local recurrence. It is critically important that all rectal cancer cases are discussed at a multidisciplinary meeting represented by all relevant specialties. Pre-operative staging including CT thorax, abdomen, pelvis to assess for distal disease and magnetic resonance imaging to assess local involvement is essential. Staging radiology and MDT discussion are integral in identifying patients who require neoadjuvant radiotherapy. While Neoadjuvant radiotherapy is potentially beneficial it may also result in morbidity and thus should be reserved for those patients who are at a high risk of local failure, which includes patients with nodal involvement, extramural venous invasion and threatened circumferential margin. The aim of this review is to discuss the role of neoadjuvant radiotherapy in the management of rectal cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by transanal local excision for T2 rectal cancer confers equivalent survival benefit as traditional transabdominal resection

BACKGROUND

Despite clinical guidelines classifying T2 rectal cancer as a contraindication for transanal local excision attributable to unacceptably high rates of local recurrence, it is a practice that persists clinically. Recent clinical trials have suggested that transanal local excision in addition to neoadjuvant chemoradiation is an acceptable alternative in select patients.

METHODS

The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage T2N0M0 rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent surgical intervention. Patients were stratified by treatment with transabdominal resection or transanal local excision, both with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Propensity matching was performed, and, using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models, survival was compared between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 12,021 patients met inclusion criteria, including 1,761 and 6,629 patients who underwent transabdominal resection with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation, respectively, and 695 and 2,936 patients who underwent local transanal excision with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiation, respectively. In unadjusted analysis, patients undergoing induction therapy followed by transabdominal resection or local excision had equivalent survival. Similarly, on multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression after propensity matching, local excision was not an independent predictor of patient mortality compared with transabdominal resection (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.16).

CONCLUSION

Local transanal excision in addition to neoadjuvant chemoradiation may provide comparable survival benefit to transabdominal resection for patients with clinical stage T2N0M0 rectal cancer. Therefore, patients who refuse or are poor candidates for transabdominal resection should be considered for neoadjuvant therapy followed by transanal local excision.

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) for local excision of rectal lesions with the da Vinci Xi (dVXi): technical considerations and video vignette

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) (RT) represents a compelling new alternative capable of overcoming the limitations of conventional TAMIS for the local excision of rectal lesions. We describe our RT technique using the dVXi™ (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) which we have used to efficiently and completely excise eight cases of rectal lesions which were not endoscopically resectable. We also include a video vignette of the procedure. With the patient in the prone jackknife position, we insert a GelPOINT™ Path Transanal Access Platform (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, USA) in combination with the dVXi and AirSeal™ insufflation system (Conmed, Niagara. Falls, ON, Canada). Our technique aims to be ergonomically efficient to minimise docking difficulties and to reduce instrument clash in the limited space, whilst maximising the capabilities of the dVXi for RT. At 3-month endoscopic follow-up, no evidence of recurrence was detected in any of the eight patients. RT is safe, feasible and has advantages over conventional laparoscopic TAMIS (LT). Our described technique addresses some of the long-standing challenges of LT and the novel RT. The immediate challenge to its widespread use remains the cost, expertise and availability.

Local Excision of Rectal Cancer

Local excision (LE) of early-stage rectal cancer avoids the morbidity associated with radical surgery but has historically been associated with inferior oncologic outcomes. Newer techniques, including transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), have been developed to improve the quality of LE and extend the benefits of LE to tumors in the more proximal rectum. This article provides an overview of conventional LE, TEM, and TAMIS techniques, including indications for their use and pertinent literature on their associated outcomes for rectal cancer.

Long-term Recurrence-free Survival After Standard Endoscopic Resection Versus Surgical Resection of Submucosal Invasive Colorectal Cancer: A Population-based Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is controversy over the optimal management for T1 colorectal cancer (T1 CRC). This study compared initial endoscopic resection with or without additional surgery, or initial surgery for T1 CRC, and assessed risk factors for lymph node metastases (LNMs) and long-term recurrence.

METHODS

We performed a registration study that included all patients diagnosed with T1 CRC from 1995 through 2011 in the southeast area of The Netherlands (n = 1315). High-risk histology (with regard to LNM) was defined as the presence of poor differentiation, lymphangio-invasion, and/or deep submucosal invasion. The primary outcome measure was the combined rate of local and distant CRC recurrence during a mean follow-up period of 6.6 years. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to evaluate independent risk factors for LNM and CRC recurrence, respectively.

RESULTS

Endoscopic resection was performed in 590 patients (44.9%); of these, 220 (16.7%) underwent additional surgery. Initial surgery was performed in 725 patients (55.1%). The risk of LNM was higher in T1 CRC with histologic risk factors (15.5% vs 7.1% without histologic risk factors; odds ratio, 2.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-3.70). Thirty-day mortality did not differ between patients who received additional surgery (0.9%) and those who underwent only endoscopic resection (1.4%; P = .631). Rates of CRC recurrence were 6.2% (9.8/1000 patient-years) after only endoscopic resection vs 6.4% (9.4/1000 patient-years) after additional surgery (P = .912), and 3.4% (5.2/1000 patient-years) after initial surgery (P = .031). In multivariate analysis, this difference was not significant. The only independent risk factor for long-term recurrence was a positive resection margin (hazard ratio, 6.88; 95% confidence interval, 2.27-20.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a population analysis of patients diagnosed with T1 CRC, additional surgery after endoscopic resection should be considered only for patients with high-risk histology or a positive resection margin.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery: is one technique superior?

BACKGROUND

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) have been shown to improve the quality of transanal resections, allowing for improved visibility and access to the proximal rectum. This study compares the short-term outcomes between TEM and TAMIS among experienced colorectal surgeons.

METHOD

A retrospective review was conducted for TEM and TAMIS performed from 2012 to 2015 by local colorectal surgeons. Baseline patient demographics, operative variables, pathology results, and short-term outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients were identified (40 TEM and 29 TAMIS). Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, operative variables, margin status, and postoperative complications were similar for both. Volume of resection was higher for TAMIS (P < .001). Lymph node retrieval was achieved in 17.2% of TAMIS cases compared with 0% of TEM (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

TAMIS appears to have equivalent indications and outcomes compared with TEM. TAMIS is associated with larger specimens and more frequent presence of mesorectal lymph nodes.