Sphincter-saving resection for all rectal carcinomas: the end of the 2-cm distal rule

Evaluation of pelvic floor rehabilitation in the prevention of low anterior resection syndrome: Study protocol of the CONTICARE trial

AIM

Bowel dysfunction following sphincter-preserving rectal resection for cancer, commonly referred to as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), significantly impacts patients' quality of life. Preventing this condition is essential for healthcare teams. Postoperative pelvic floor rehabilitation, including anal biofeedback therapy, has shown potential in alleviating established LARS symptoms. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of pelvic floor rehabilitation prior to bowel continuity restoration in preventing LARS in patients undergoing sphincter-preserving rectal resection for cancer.

METHODS

CONTICARE is a national multicentre randomized trial. Patients who have undergone total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation and a defunctioning stoma (n = 174; 87 per arm) will be randomly assigned to either the rehabilitation or control group before stoma closure. The rehabilitation group will receive systematic pelvic floor rehabilitation, comprising four sessions before and six sessions after stoma closure, following a standardized approach. The control group will receive standard follow-up care, which includes symptom-based therapy after ileostomy closure. The primary outcome measure will be the severity of LARS, assessed using the dedicated LARS score at 6 months. Comparisons of faecal incontinence symptoms, quality of life and complications related to biofeedback therapy will also be evaluated at 6 weeks, 6 months and 1 year between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic floor rehabilitation has the potential to enhance symptom management and quality of life for patients following rectal resection by preventing LARS. The combination of anal exercises and biofeedback therapy, which has been extensively studied without reported adverse effects, suggests that the anticipated benefits outweigh any potential risks.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration number NCT03876561, first published on 15 March 2019.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Beta-2-microglobulin positive tumor cells and CD8 positive lymphocytes are associated with outcome in post-neoadjuvant colorectal cancer resections

Locally advanced colorectal cancers are treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), which has been shown to alter the characteristics of the tumor including size, lymph node yield, and histologic grade. We seek to interrogate the effect of NAT on the immune microenvironment. We compared 190 patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma treated with NAT with those without NAT (n = 926). We evaluated clinicopathologic and molecular factors and performed immunohistochemistry and quantification on tissue microarrays for HLA class I/II proteins, beta-2-microglobulin (B2M), CD8, CD163, LAG3, PD-L1, and FoxP3. Patients in the NAT group were younger (60.9 vs 67.9, p < 0.001) and more often male (59.5 vs. 47.9, p = 0.004) than those in the non-NAT group. Tumors in the NAT group were smaller (3.5 vs 4.7 cm, p < 0.001), less often high grade (6.5% vs. 16.2%, p = 0.001), more frequently in the rectum (68.9% vs. 6.6%, p < 0.001) and associated with lower lymph node yields (p = 0.002); however, the incidence of extramural venous invasion, perineural invasion, and AJCC stage 3-4 disease were not different. Immune cells positive for CD8 (p = 0.011) were significantly lower in the NAT group. A high number of CD8+ cells and higher expression of B2M in tumor cells showed a significant survival benefit in both NAT and non-NAT group. NAT is associated with an immune-low tumor environment. CD8+ cells and tumor B2M expression may help identify a subset of immune high-tumors following NAT. This identification could aid in determining patients who may benefit from conservative management of colorectal carcinomas.

Intersphinktäre Resektion zum Schließmuskelerhalt beim ultratiefen Rektumkarzinom – Ein Update

Die Indikation zum Sphinktererhalt bei Patienten mit einem sehr tief sitzenden Rektumkarzinom ist in vielerlei Hinsicht eine Herausforderung und auch an die Beherrschung der intersphinktären Resektion gebunden. In dieser Arbeit sollen die zunehmend definierten Operationstechniken kurz vorgestellt und aktuell eingeordnet werden.

Safety and feasibility of a new rectoscope in rectal cancer surgery. First clinical trial

We present a first in human clinical trial of a new rectoscope that shows, by means of transillumination, the optimal point of transection of the rectum in oncologic surgery. The device was developed together with a team of engineers and was manufactured by 3D printing. Eighteen patients with a mean age of 71 years and a mean distance from the tumor to the anal margin measured by colonoscopy of 10.4 ± 3.9 cm and by MRI of 10 ± 2.4 cm were included in the trial. Transillumination was feasible in all cases, and the use of the rectoscope was safe, as no adverse events due to its use were recorded.

Long-Term Results of 2-Stage Turnbull-Cutait Pull-Through Coloanal Anastomosis for Low Rectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

In patients operated on for low rectal cancer, 2-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis provides benefits in terms of postoperative morbidity compared with standard hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis associated with diverting ileostomy and further ileostomy reversal.

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term results of these 2 techniques after ultralow rectal resection for rectal cancer.

DESIGN, Setting, and Participants

In this randomized multicenter clinical trial, neither patients nor surgeons were blinded for technique. Patients were recruited in 3 centers. Patients undergoing ultralow anterior rectal resection needing hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis were randomly assigned to 2-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis (n = 46) or standard hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis associated with diverting ileostomy (n = 46).

INTERVENTIONS

All patients underwent ultralow anterior resection. Patients assigned to the 2-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through group underwent exteriorization of a segment of left colon through the anal canal. After 6 to 10 days, the exteriorized colon was resected and a delayed hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis performed. For patients assigned to standard coloanal anastomosis, the hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis was performed with diverting ileostomy during the first operation. Ileostomy closure was scheduled after adjuvant treatment was completed in about 6 to 8 months.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE

The study aimed to compare the differences between the 2 groups in terms of long-term surgery-related morbidity, functional, and oncological outcomes at 3 years postoperatively. Data were analyzed from October 1, 2018, through October 31, 2021.

RESULTS

The 92 patients randomized in the first study were included for the 3-year follow-up. The overall morbidity rate in the 2 groups showed that 15 patients (16.3%) had complications with a difference of 6.52 (95% CI, -8.93 to 21.79). Nine patients (19.6%) and 6 patients (13.0%) in the 2-stage Turnbull-Cutait pull-through group and hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis group, respectively, had complications without statistically significant differences (P = .57). Oncological results were comparable between the groups. Long-term fecal continence in the CCA and TCA groups, respectively, assessed using the Wexner Incontinence Score was 10.9 (5.50-15.5) vs 13.0 (7.25-16.0; P = .92), Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score was 32.0 (21.0-37.0) vs 34.0 (23.2-38.5; P = .76), and Colorectal Functional Outcome score was 38.5 (23.0-47.1) vs 40.8 (23.3-58.2; P = .30).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, after a 3-year follow-up period, 2-stage Turnbull-Cutait anastomosis for ultralow rectal cancer could be considered as a surgical alternative that has the valuable benefit of avoiding a temporary stoma with similar results in terms of morbidity, fecal continence, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and oncological outcomes when compared with hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis with ileostomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01766661.

Textbook anastomotic success in patients with low rectal cancer treated by intersphincteric resection: reappraising surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes

Previous studies on successful anastomosis after intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer (LRC) primarily focused on anastomotic complications rather than functional outcomes. Here, we improved the anastomotic success criteria by considering surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes and proposed a new composite outcome, "textbook anastomotic success" (TASS). This retrospective single-center study included patients with LRC treated with ISR from January 2014 to April 2020. TASS was defined as (1) no anastomotic complications occurring after ISR; (2) ileostomy was closed and there was no severe intestinal dysfunction 2 years after ISR; and (3) no local recurrence within 2 years of surgery. TASS was achieved upon meeting all indicators. We analyzed 259 patients with LRC, with 125 (48.3%) achieving TASS. Multivariate analysis showed that male sex (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.27-0.81; p = 0.007), hypertension (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.24-0.97; p = 0.041), ASA score ≥ 3 (OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.10-0.81; p = 0.018), pre-treatment major low anterior resection syndrome (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.15-0.94; p = 0.037), and preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.22-0.77; p = 0.006) were independent risk factors for not achieving TASS. Conversely, transverse coloplasty pouch (OR 2.13; 95% CI 1.07-4.25; p = 0.032) and higher anastomosis level (OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.05-2.30; p = 0.026) were independent protective factors for achieving TASS. The nomogram constructed to evaluate the probability of achieving TASS demonstrated good accuracy in the dataset (area under curve, 0.737). TASS provides a comprehensive quality assessment for ISR in patients with LRC. The nomogram predicting TASS may assist surgeons in decision-making for managing LRC.

Comparison of a robotic surgery program for rectal cancer: short- and long-term results from a comparative, retrospective study between two laparoscopic and robotic reference centers

BACKGROUND

It is assumed that robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) may facilitate complex pelvic dissection for rectal cancer compared to the laparoscopic-assisted resection (LAR). The aim of this study was to compare perioperative morbidity, short- and long-term oncologic, and functional outcomes between the RAS and LAR approaches.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2021, all rectal cancers operated on by (LAR) or (RAS) were retrospectively reviewed in two colorectal surgery centers.

RESULTS

A total of 197 patients were included in the study, with 70% in the LAR group and 30% in the RAS group. The tumor location and stage were identical in both groups (not significant = NS). The overall postoperative mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups. (0% LAR; 0.5% RAS; NS). The postoperative morbidity was similar between the two groups (60% LAR vs 57% RAS; NS). The number of early surgical re-interventions within the first 30 days was similar (10% for the LAR group and 3% for the RAS group; NS). The rate of complete TME was similar (88% for the LAR group and 94% for the RAS group; NS). However, the rate of circumferential R1 was significantly higher in the LAR group (13%) compared to the RAS group (2%) (p = 0.009). The 3-year recurrence rate did not differ between the two groups (77% for both groups; NS). After a mean follow-up of three years, the incidence of anterior resection syndrome was significantly lower in the LAR group compared to the RAS group (54 vs 76%; p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a RAS was found to be reliable for oncologic outcomes and morbidity. However, the expected benefits for functional outcomes were not observed. Therefore, the added value of RAS for rectal cancer needs to be reassessed in light of new laparoscopic technologies and patient management options.

Sphincter-preserving effect of robotic-assisted intersphincteric resection for ultra-low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is a viable option for sphincter preservation in early ultra-low rectal cancer, but postoperative anal dysfunction remains a concern. This study evaluates the outcomes of robotic ISR with coloanal anastomosis in early ultra-low rectal cancer, comparing its efficacy and safety with laparoscopic ISR. Retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 74 consecutive patients undergoing robotic intersphincteric resection (R-ISR) for early ultra-low rectal cancer between January 2017 and December 2018 (R-ISR group), matched with 110 patients undergoing laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (L-ISR). After 1:1 propensity score matching, each group comprised 68 patients. Comparative analyses covered surgical outcomes, complications, long-term results, and anal function. The R-ISR group showed longer total operative time than the L-ISR group (211.7 ± 25.3 min vs. 191.2 ± 23.0 min, p = 0.001), but less intraoperative bleeding (55.2 ± 20.7 ml vs. 69.2 ± 22.9 ml, p = 0.01). R-ISR group had fewer conversions to APR surgery (6/8.8% vs. 14/20.6%). Other perioperative indicators were similar. R-ISR exhibited a smaller tumor margin, superior mesorectal integrity, and comparable histopathological outcomes. Postoperative complications, 3-year and 5-year DFS, and OS were similar. At the 1-year follow-up, the Wexner Incontinence Score favored R-ISR (9.24 ± 4.03 vs. 11.06 ± 3.77, p = 0.048). Although R-ISR prolongs the operative time, its surgical safety and oncological outcomes are similar to conventional ISR procedures. Furthermore, it further shortens the margin of anal preservation, reduces the rate of conversion to APR surgery, and improves postoperative anal function.

Revolutionizing sphincter preservation in ultra-low rectal cancer: exploring the potential of transanal endoscopic intersphincteric resection (taE-ISR): a propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

With the optimization of neoadjuvant treatment regimens, the indications for intersphincteric resection (ISR) have expanded. However, limitations such as unclear surgical field, impaired anal function, and failure of anal preservation still exist. Transanal total mesorectal excision can complement the drawbacks of ISR. Therefore, this study combined these two techniques and proposed transanal endoscopic intersphincteric resection (taE-ISR), aiming to explore the value of this novel technique in anal preservation for ultra-low rectal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Four high-volume centres were involved. After 1:1 propensity score-matching, patients with ultra-low rectal cancer underwent taE-ISR ( n =90) or ISR ( n =90) were included. Baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, pathological results, and follow-up were compared between the two groups. A nomogram model was established to assess the potential risks of anal preservation.

RESULTS

The incidence of adjacent organ injury (0.0% vs. 5.6%, P =0.059), positive distal resection margin (1.1% vs. 8.9%, P =0.034), and incomplete specimen (2.2% vs. 13.3%, P =0.012) were lower in taE-ISR group. Moreover, the anal preservation rate was significantly higher in taE-ISR group (97.8% vs. 82.2%, P =0.001). Patients in the taE-ISR group showed a better disease-free survival ( P =0.044) and lower cumulative recurrence ( P =0.022) compared to the ISR group. Surgery procedure, tumour distance, and adjacent organ injury were factors influencing anal preservation in patients with ultra-low rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

taE-ISR technique was safe, feasible, and improved surgical quality, anal preservation rate and survival outcomes in ultra-low rectal cancer patients. It held significant clinical value and showed promising application prospects for anal preservation.

Can the Single-stapling Technique Following Intersphincteric Resection with Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision Become the New Standard Anastomosis?

For transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME), the indication for single-stapling technique (SST) has been expanded to include lower anastomosis, even in intersphincteric resection (ISR). We focused on the anastomotic techniques following ISR with TaTME and examined the feasibility and safety of the SST below the anorectal junction (ARJ). Data on postoperative anastomosis-related complications and anorectal function was evaluated in comparison to conventional manual hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis in ISR with TaTME. We examined patients with 3-6 cm tumors from the anal verge who underwent ISR with TaTME between January 2018 and March 2020, and whose anastomotic line was located below the ARJ. Postoperative short-term outcomes and anorectal functions were compared. We also analyzed the effects of various factors on major low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) using multivariate logistic regression analysis. In total, 87 patients-48 in the hand-sewn anastomosis group and 39 in the SST group-were included in this study. SST below the ARJ in ISR with TaTME did not exacerbate surgical outcomes, including anastomosis-related complications. The SST group had a significantly lower LARS score as compared to the hand-sewn anastomosis group, and the proportion of major LARS was significantly lower. Only hand-sewn anastomosis was identified as a statistically significant independent risk factor for major LARS. In TaTME, SST below the ARJ was safe and feasible and had a lower negative impact on postoperative anastomosis-related complications and anorectal function as compared to hand-sewn anastomosis. Thus, SST is a promising anastomotic option for patients with low-lying rectal tumors.

Risk Factors for Radical Rectal Cancer Surgery with a Temporary Stoma Becoming a Permanent Stoma: A Pooling Up Analysis

Purpose: The aim of this study was to find out the potential risk factors for the formation of a permanent stoma (PS) for rectal cancer patients with a temporary stoma (TS) after surgery. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies until November 14, 2022. The patients were divided into the PS group and the TS group. Odds ratio (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled up for describing dichotomous variables. Stata SE 16 was performed for data analysis. Results: After pooling up the data, a total of 14 studies involving 14,265 patients were included in this study. The outcomes showed that age (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.10, I2 = 1.42%, P = .00 < .1), surgery type (P = .00 < .1), tumor stage (P = .00 < .1), preoperative chemoradiotherapy (P = .00 < .1), preoperative radiotherapy (P = .01 < .1), neoadjuvant therapy (P = .00 < .1), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of ≥3 (P = .00 < .1), anastomotic leakage (P = .01 < .1), local recurrence (P = .00 < .1), and distant recurrence (P = .00 < .1) were associated with the patient with PS. However, sex (P = .15 > .1), previous abdominal surgery (P = .84 > .1), adjuvant chemotherapy (P = .87 > .1), and defunctioning stoma (P = .1) had little association with PS. Conclusion: Patients who were elderly, had advanced tumor stages, had a high ASA score, and underwent neoadjuvant therapy should be informed of the high risk of PS before surgery. Meanwhile, those who underwent rectal cancer surgery with a TS should beware of anastomotic leakage, local recurrences, and distant recurrences, which could increase the risk of PS.

Comparison of functional and oncological outcome of conformal sphincter preservation operation, low anterior resection, and abdominoperineal resection in very low rectal cancer: a retrospective comparative cohort study with propensity score matching

PURPOSE

Conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) procedure is a sphincter preservation procedure for preserving the anal canal function for very low rectal cancers. This study investigated the functional and oncological outcome of conformal sphincter preservation operation by comparing with low anterior resection (LAR) and abdominoperineal resection (APR).

METHODS

This is a retrospective comparative study. Patients who received conformal sphincter preservation operation (n = 52), low anterior resection (n = 54), or abdominoperineal resection (n = 69) were included between 2011 and 2016 in a tertiary referral hospital. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust the baseline characteristics which may influence the choice of the surgical procedure.

RESULTS

Twenty-one pairs of conformal sphincter preservation operation vs. low anterior resection and 29 pairs of conformal sphincter preservation operation vs. abdominoperineal resection were selected. The first group had a higher tumor location than the second group. Compared with the low anterior resection group, the conformal sphincter preservation operation group had shorter distal resection margins; however, no significant differences were identified in daily stool frequency, Wexner incontinence score, local recurrence, distant metastasis, overall survival, and disease-free survival between both groups. Compared with the abdominoperineal resection group, the conformal sphincter preservation operation group had shorter operative time and shorter postoperative hospital stay. No significant differences were identified in local recurrence, distant metastasis, overall survival, and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Conformal sphincter preservation operation is oncologically safe compared to APR and LAR, and has similar functional findings to LAR. Studies comparing CSPO with intersphincteric resection should be performed.

Sexual, urinary, and intestinal dysfunction after rectal surgery: pre-, intra-, and post-operative predictors and trends over time in a single high-volume center

The incidence of long-term complications after rectal surgery varies widely among studies, and data regarding functional sequelae after transanal surgery are lacking. The aim of this study is to describe the incidence and change over time of sexual, urinary, and intestinal dysfunction in a single-center cohort, identifying independent predictors of dysfunction. A retrospective analysis of all rectal resections performed between March 2016 and March 2020 at our institution was conducted. Validated questionnaires were administered to assess post-operative function. Predictors of dysfunction were assessed by univariate and multivariate analysis. Latent class analysis was used to distinguish different risk profile classes. One hundred and forty-five patients were included. Sexual dysfunction at 1 month rose to 37% for both sexes, whereas urinary dysfunction reached 34% in males only. A significant (p < 0.05) improvement in urogenital function was observed between 1 and 6 months only. Intestinal dysfunction increased at 1 month, with no significant improvement between 1 and 12 months. Independent predictors of genitourinary dysfunction were post-operative urinary retention, pelvic collection, and Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III (p < 0.05). Transanal surgery resulted an independent predictor of better function (p < 0.05). Transanal approach, Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III, and anastomotic stenosis were independent predictors of higher LARS scores (p < 0.05). Maximum dysfunction was found at 1 month after surgery. Improvement was earlier for sexual and urinary dysfunction, whereas intestinal dysfunction improved slower and depended on pelvic floor rehabilitation. Transanal approach was protective for urinary and sexual function, although associated with a higher LARS score. Prevention of anastomosis-related complications resulted protective of post-operative function.

Permanent stoma after sphincter preservation for rectal cancer. A situation that occurs more often than you might think

Objectives

This study aimed: (i) to assess the cumulative incidence of permanent stoma (PS) after sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS) for rectal cancer (RC): (ii) to analyze associated risk factors for primary and secondary PS; and (iii) to compare the long-term survival of patients according to the stoma state.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study based on a prospectively maintained database of SRC patients undergoing SPS from January 2007 to December 2017. Incidence of both primary (no reversal of defunctioning stoma) and secondary (created after closure of defunctioning stoma) PS were investigated. Associations between potential risk factors and PS were analyzed using a logistic regression model. Cumulative survival curve was drawn by Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

Of the 257 eligible patients, 43 patients (16.7%) had a PS (16 primary PS and 27 secondary PS) after a median follow-up of 4.8 years. In multivariate analysis, the independent risk factors for primary PS were severe post-operative complications (OR 3.66; 95% CI, 1.19-11.20, p=0.022), and old age (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04-1.18, p=0.001) and those for secondary PS were local recurrence (OR 38.07; 95% CI 11.07-130.9, p<0.0001), anastomotic leakage (OR 7.01; 95% CI, 2.23-22.04, p=0.009), and severe post-operative complications (OR 3.67; 95% CI, 1.22-11.04, p=0.02), respectively. Both overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were significantly lower in patients with a PS compared with patients with SPS (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

This present study suggests that one out of 6 patients has a PS, 5 years after rectal resection with SPS for SRC.

Trends of sphincter-preserving surgeries for low lying rectal cancer: A 20-year experience in China

BACKGROUND

Over the last 2 decades, patients with low rectal cancer have had better outcomes from improvements in surgical techniques in sphincter preservation. We aimed to quantify the trends in sphincter-preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer over 20 years in a top tertiary hospital in China.

METHODS

Between 1999 and 2021, a cohort of patients with primary malignant rectal tumor ≤5cm from the anal verge and who received elective surgeries at Changhai Hospital, Shanghai, China, was identified. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. A Joinpoint Regression Model was used to analyze trends in surgical procedures by average annual percentage change (AAPC). Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess overall survival.

RESULTS

Among a total of 4,172 patients during the study period, 3,111 (74.6%) underwent a sphincter-preserving surgery and 1,061 (25.4%) received APR. Sphincter-preserving surgery increased 3.6% per year (95%CI, 2.3-4.9). Low anterior resection was the most performed procedure (86.3%) and maintained a steady trend, while intersphincteric resection increased 49.4% annually (95%CI, 19.5-86.7) after initiation. Laparoscopic techniques increased 15.1% per year (95%CI, 8.4-43.4) after initiation. Sphincter-preserving surgery increased annually for tumors ≤2cm, 2-≤3cm and 3-≤4cm from the anal verge (AAPC 7.1, 4.5-9.8; 4.7, 3.1-6.3; 2.7, 1.7-3.6, respectively). Furthermore, patients with sphincter-preserving surgery had a better overall survival than abdominoperineal resection (APR) patients (adjusted HR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.65-0.93, p=.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of sphincter-preserving surgeries increased significantly over the last 20 years. Patients with low rectal cancer who underwent sphincter preservation had better survival than similar patients who underwent APR.

Role of empathy in the outcomes of colorectal cancer: protocol for a population-based study in two areas in France (EMPACOL Project)

INTRODUCTION

The EMPACOL Project aims to investigate the link between healthcare professionals' (HCPs) empathy and the results of the curative treatment of non-metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

EMPACOL will be an observational multicentric prospective longitudinal study. It will cover eight centres comprising patients with non-metastatic CRC, uncomplicated at diagnosis in two French areas covered by a cancer register over a 2-year period. As estimated by the two cancer registries, during the 2-year inclusion period, the number of cases of non-metastatic CRCs was approximately 480. With an estimated participation rate of about 50%, we expect around 250 patients will be included in this study. Based on the curative strategy, patients will be divided into three groups: group 1 (surgery alone), group 2 (surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy) and group 3 (neo-adjuvant therapy, surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy). The relationship between HCPs' empathy at the time of announcement and at the end of the strategy, quality of life (QoL) 1 year after the end of treatment and oncological outcomes after 5 years will be investigated. HCPs' empathy and QoL will be assessed using the patient-reported questionnaires, Consultation and Relational Empathy and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire, respectively. A relationship between HCPs' empathy and early outcomes, particularly digestive and genitourinary sequelae, will also be studied for each treatment group. Post-treatment complications will be assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Patients' anxiety and depression will also be assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Institutional Review Board of the University Hospital of Caen and the Ethics Committee (ID RCB: 2022-A00628-35) have approved the study. Patients will be required to provide oral consent for participation. Results of this study will be disseminated by publication in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05447611.

Clinical Robotic Surgery Association (India Chapter) and Indian rectal cancer expert group's practical consensus statements for surgical management of localized and locally advanced rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

There are standard treatment guidelines for the surgical management of rectal cancer, that are advocated by recognized physician societies. But, owing to disparities in access and affordability of various treatment options, there remains an unmet need for personalizing these international guidelines to Indian settings.

METHODS

Clinical Robotic Surgery Association (CRSA) set up the Indian rectal cancer expert group, with a pre-defined selection criterion and comprised of the leading surgical oncologists and gastrointestinal surgeons managing rectal cancer in India. Following the constitution of the expert Group, members identified three areas of focus and 12 clinical questions. A thorough review of the literature was performed, and the evidence was graded as per the levels of evidence by Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The consensus was built using the modified Delphi methodology of consensus development. A consensus statement was accepted only if ≥75% of the experts were in agreement.

RESULTS

Using the results of the review of the literature and experts' opinions; the expert group members drafted and agreed on the final consensus statements, and these were classified as "strong or weak", based on the GRADE framework.

CONCLUSION

The expert group adapted international guidelines for the surgical management of localized and locally advanced rectal cancer to Indian settings. It will be vital to disseminate these to the wider surgical oncologists and gastrointestinal surgeons' community in India.

Comparison between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer

Aim

Sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer include low anterior and intersphincteric resection. In low anterior resection, the distal rectum is divided by a transabdominal approach, which is technically demanding. In intersphincteric resection, a perineal approach is used. We aimed to evaluate whether robotic-assisted surgery is technically superior to laparoscopic surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer. We compared the frequency of low anterior resection in cases of sphincter-preserving operations.

Method

We investigated 183 patients who underwent sphincter-preserving robotic-assisted or laparoscopic surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer (lower border within 5 cm of the anal verge) between April 2010 and March 2020. The frequency of low anterior resection was compared between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgeries. The clinicopathological factors associated with an increase in performing low anterior resection were analyzed by multivariate analyses.

Results

Overall, 41 (22.4%) and 142 (77.6%) patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery, respectively. Patient characteristics were similar between the groups. Low anterior resection was done significantly more frequently in robotic-assisted surgery (67.6%) than in laparoscopic surgery (48.8%) (P = 0.04). Multivariate analyses showed that tumor distance from the anal verge (P < 0.01) and robotic-assisted surgery (P = 0.02) were significantly associated with an increase in the performance of low anterior resection. The rate of postoperative complications or pathological results was similar between the groups.

Conclusion

Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted surgery significantly increased the frequency of low anterior resection in sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer. Robotic-assisted surgery has technical superiority over laparoscopic surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer treatment.

Are risk factors for anastomotic leakage influencing long-term oncological outcomes after low anterior resection of locally advanced rectal cancer with neoadjuvant therapy? A single-centre cohort study

PURPOSE

Anastomotic leakage (AL) poses the most serious problem following low anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer independent of surgical approach or technique. The aim of this study was to evaluate risk factors for the occurrence of AL and how they affect the oncological long-term outcome of patients who received neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

A single centre cohort study of 163 consecutive locally advanced rectal cancer patients (cT3, cT4, N +) that received neoadjuvant therapy followed by resection with primary anastomosis between January 1998 and December 2020 were included in this study. Short- and long-term findings were compared between patients with AL (Leakage +) and without AL (Leakage -).

RESULTS

A complete follow-up was obtained from 163 patients; thereby, 33 patients (20%) developed an AL. We observed more patients with comorbidities (38% vs. 61%, p = 0.049) which developed a leakage in the course. Permanent stoma rate (36% vs. 18%, p = 0.03) was higher, and time between primary operation and stoma reversal was longer (219 days [172-309] vs. 93 days [50-182], p < 0.001) in this leakage group as well. Tumour distance lower than 6 cm from the anal verge (OR: 2.81 [95%CI: 1.08-7.29], p = 0.04) and comorbidities (OR: 2.22 [95%CI: 1.01-4.90], p = 0.049) was evaluated to be independent risk factors for developing an AL after rectal cancer surgery. Oncological outcome was not influenced by AL nor by other associated risk factors.

CONCLUSION

We could clearly detect the distance of tumour from the anal verge and comorbidities independent risk factors for the occurrence of AL. Oncological findings and long-term outcome were not influenced by these particular risk factors.

Quality of life meta-analysis following coloanal anastomosis versus abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer

AIM

In low rectal cancers without sphincter involvement a permanent stoma can be avoided without compromising oncological safety. Functional outcomes following coloanal anastomosis (CAA) compared to abdominoperineal excision (APR) may be significantly different. This study examines all available comparative quality of life (QoL) data for patients undergoing CAA versus APR for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Published studies with comparative data on QoL outcomes following CAA versus APR for low rectal cancer were extracted from electronic databases. The study was registered with PROSPERO and adhered to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Data was combined using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Seven comparative series examined QoL in 527 patients. There was no difference in the numbers receiving neoadjuvant radiotherapy in the APR and CAA groups (OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.78-1.81, p = 0.43). CAA was associated with higher mean scores for physical functioning(std mean diff -7.08, 95% CI: -11.92 to -2.25, p = 0.004) and body image (std. mean diff 11.11, 95% CI: 6.04-16.18, p < 0.0001). Male sexual problems were significantly increased in patients who had undergone APR compared to CAA (std. mean diff -16.20, 95% CI: -25.76 to -6.64, p = 0.0009). Patients who had an APR reported more fatigue, dyspnoea and appetite loss. Those who had a CAA reported higher scores for both constipation and diarrhoea.

DISCUSSION

It is reasonable to offer a CAA to motivated patients where oncological outcomes will not be threatened. QoL outcomes appear to be superior when intestinal continuity is maintained, and permanent stoma avoided.

Neorectum prolapse after rectal cancer surgery corrected with perineal stapled prolapse resection

A 61-year-old woman developed neorectal prolapse after laparoscopic low anterior resection, total mesorectal excision with partial intersphincteric resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer. She presented with a 3 cm full thickness reducible prolapse, with associated anal pain and bleeding. A perineal stapled prolapse resection was performed to address the rectal prolapse, with satisfactory results.

Comparative study of functional outcomes between ultra-low anterior resection and inter-sphincteric resection: a propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparative bowel functional outcomes between ultralow anterior resections (ULAR) and inter-sphincteric resection (ISR) for similar tumour and patient characteristics is not known.

METHODS

Single centre study of low rectal caners (<5cm from anal verge) with 1:1 propensity matching of age, sex, body mass index, prior radiation, and surgical approach (open vs. minimally invasive) was performed for the ULAR and ISR groups. Primary outcome measure was Wexner Incontinence scores and Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score at a single time point after stoma reversal.

RESULTS

Seventy-two matched patients were included. Median Wexner scores were five and eight for the ULAR and ISR cohorts (p = 0.006). Major incontinence (Wexner >11) was found in 5.6% versus 33% after ULAR and ISR, respectively. Major LARS (score > 29) was demonstrated in 11% versus 25% in ULAR versus ISR (p = 0.293). Majority in both groups has no LARS (score < 20), that is, 72.2% versus 63.9% in ULAR against ISR. Besides these, stool fragmentation (p < 0.001), nocturnal defecation (p < 0.001) and use of anti-diarrhoeal medications (p = 0.023) were significantly more after ISR.

CONCLUSIONS

Bowel continence was relatively inferior after ISR as compared to an ULAR for low rectal cancers in matched cohorts. Major LARS in ISR was twice as prevalent without statistical differences.

Lateral pelvic node dissection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer with right internal iliac node metastasis but without regional node metastasis: A case report

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Total mesorectal excision (TME) with lateral pelvic node dissection was routinely done in low clinical T3 rectal tumors below the peritoneal reflection as stated in the Japanese guidelines for colorectal cancer. Our institution follows the same practice in selected patients. This is our first reported case wherein a patient with rectal cancer underwent total mesorectal excision with lateral lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant treatment with a positive lateral node on histopathology.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 49 year old female rectal had rectal adenocarcinoma 4 cm FAV. Pelvic MRI revealed a low rectal tumor abutting the mesorectal fascia anteriorly, anal sphincters not involved, and confluent enlarged right iliac nodes. After neoadjuvant treatment, interval decrease in size of the rectal lesion and the right iliac nodes were noted. Patient underwent partial intersphincteric resection, lateral pelvic node dissection and protective loop ileostomy.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

Histopathology revealed a rectal adenocarcinoma with one right internal iliac lymph node was positive for tumor involvement. Circumferential resection margin was 4.0 mm. Patient is currently on 4th cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy. Preoperative chemoradiation could not completely eradicate lateral pelvic node metastasis. Therefore, lateral pelvic node dissection should be considered if lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis is suspected even after neoadjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSION

Unlike TME, performance of a routine lateral lymphadenectomy in rectal cancer surgery varies by geographic location. Reports from Asian countries and our practice in our institution shows that it can be performed safely. This could improve the oncologic outcomes of patients especially if combined with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

The Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopic Surgery for Very Low Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis Based on a Single Center's Experience

In this work we intend to validate the long-term oncologic outcomes for very low rectal cancer over the past 20 years and to determine whether laparoscopic procedures are useful options for very low rectal cancer. A total of 327 patients, who electively underwent laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery for a lesion within 5 cm from the anal verge, were enrolled in this study and their long-term outcomes were reviewed retrospectively. Of 327 patients, 70 patients underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR), 164 underwent laparoscopic abdominal transanal proctosigmoidocolectomy with coloanal anastomosis (LATA), and 93 underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR). The conversion rate was 1.22% (4/327). The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 26.30% (86/327). The 5-year disease free survival (DFS), 5-year overall survival (OS), and 3-year local recurrence (LR) were 64.3%, 79.7%, and 9.2%, respectively. The CRM involvement was a significant independent factor for DFS (p = 0.018) and OS (p = 0.042) in multivariate analysis. Laparoscopic APR showed poorer 5-year DFS (47.8%), 5-year OS (64.0%), and 3-year LR (17.6%) than laparoscopic LAR (74.1%, 86.4%, 1.9%) and laparoscopic LATA (69.2%, 83.6%, 9.2%). Laparoscopic procedures for very low rectal cancer including LAR, LATA, and APR could be good surgical options in selective patients with very low rectal cancer.

Clinical Efficacy of Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer Compared With Abdominoperineal Resection: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been increasingly used to replace abdominoperineal resection (APR) in the surgical treatment of ultra-low rectal cancer.

AIM

This study was to compare the clinical efficacy of ISR and APR.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2018, 74 consecutive patients with ultra-low rectal cancer underwent ISR or APR in our medical center. A retrospective comparison of these 2 procedures was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients underwent ISR and 31 underwent APR were included in the study. No significant differences were found between 2 groups in gender, age, BMI, and ASA score. Intersphincteric resection group showed shorter operative time (P = .02) and less blood loss (P = .001). Hospital stays, time to soft diet, and postoperative 30-day complications were not significantly different between the 2 groups. R0 resection achieved 100% in both the groups. As for the long-term outcomes, the survival and recurrence rate were similar between 2 groups. Moreover, the LARS and Wexner score showed that the postoperative anal function after ISR were satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that ISR was feasible and safe for selected patients with ultra-low rectal cancer, with clinically superior outcomes in select patients (small tumors/further from the anal verge) and similar oncological outcomes to APR, and the anal functional outcomes after ISR were acceptable.

Anus-Preserving Surgery in Advanced Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: A Perspective on Oncological Safety of Intersphincteric Resection

The surgical management of low-lying rectal cancer, within 5 cm from the anal verge (AV), is challenging due to the possibility, or not, to preserve the anus with its sphincter muscles maintaining oncological safety. The standardization of total mesorectal excision, the adoption of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the implementation of rectal magnetic resonance imaging, and the evolution of mechanical staplers have increased the rate of anus-preserving surgeries. Moreover, extensive anatomy and physiology studies have increased the understanding of the complexity of the deep pelvis. Intersphincteric resection (ISR) was introduced nearly three decades ago as the ultimate anus-preserving surgery. The definition and indication of ISR have changed over time. The adoption of the robotic platform provides excellent perioperative results with no differences in oncological outcomes. Pushing the boundaries of anus-preserving surgeries has risen doubts on oncological safety in order to preserve function. This review critically discusses the oncological safety of ISR by evaluating the anatomical characteristics of the deep pelvis, the clinical indications, the role of distal and circumferential resection margins, the role of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the outcomes between surgical approaches (open, laparoscopic, and robotic), the comparison with abdominoperineal resection, the risk factors for oncological outcomes and local recurrence, the patterns of local recurrences after ISR, considerations on functional outcomes after ISR, and learning curve and surgical education on ISR.

Minimally invasive versus open intersphincteric resection of low rectal cancer regardless of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: long-term oncologic outcomes

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is a surgical technique intended to avoid abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients diagnosed with low-lying rectal cancer. However, the oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive ISR are still controversial. We analyzed the long-term oncologic outcomes of open and minimally invasive ISR. A total of 313 rectal cancer patients who underwent ISR between 2000 and 2014 were analyzed, including 147 in the open surgery group and 166 in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group. This study also analyzed 113 patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for advanced lower rectal cancer. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences between the two groups. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was the primary end point. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MIS group (9.6 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001). Differences in overall postoperative morbidity rates between the groups were not significant; however, the rate of surgical site infection was significantly lower in the MIS group (1.2 vs. 10.9%, p < 0.001). The 5-year DFS associated with all stages combined in the matched patients were not significantly different: 75.2% in the open group vs. 64.2% in the MIS group (p = 0.214). Similar results were found in matched patients treated with nCRT, with 72.0% in the open group and 61.3% in the MIS group (p = 0.078) showing DFS. Both minimally-invasive and open ISR for rectal cancer yielded similar 5-year oncologic outcomes. MIS showed statistically significant advantages in some postoperative outcomes such as reduced surgical site infection and shorter hospital stay, and similar long-term outcomes compared with open ISR. This study also suggests that MIS after nCRT for advanced rectal cancer represents a surgical option with similar oncological results.

Sphincter-saving surgery versus abdominoperineal resection in low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant treatment with propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Sphincter-saving operation is the treatment of choice in patients with lower rectal cancer, although abdominoperineal resection (APR) is necessary in some cases for adequate oncological outcomes. This study compared the oncologic outcomes of patients with low rectal cancer undergoing APR and intersphincteric resection (ISR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).

METHODS

We compared 104 patients who underwent ISR for lower rectal cancer between 2008 and 2014 with 79 patients who underwent APR during the same period. Cases in which tumors involved the levator ani muscle or the external anal sphincter, as well as those in which surgeons were unable to obtain a negative distal margin via sphincter-saving operation were excluded. Fifty-two patients who underwent ISR were matched via propensity scoring with 52 patients who underwent APR. The analyzed variables included patient and tumor characteristics and long-term outcomes before and after 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

After matching, there were no significant differences between the two groups in clinical stage and tumor distance from anal verge. Short- and long-term outcomes were similar between the two groups. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 76.3% in the ISR group and 57.8% in the APR group (p = 0.080). The 5-year cancer-specific survival rate was 89.5% in the ISR group and 85.4% in the APR group (p = 0.383).

CONCLUSIONS

This reveals that ISR and APR have similar oncologic outcomes following nCRT in patients with advanced low rectal cancer adjusted for background variables.

Sphincter-saving surgery after neoadjuvant therapy for ultra-low rectal cancer where abdominoperineal resection was indicated: 10-year results of the GRECCAR 1 trial

This phase III trial included patients with ultra-low rectal adenocarcinoma that initially required abdominoperineal resection. The surgical decision was based on clinical tumour status after preoperative treatment. The overall sphincter-saving resection rate was 85 per cent, with 72 per cent rate of intersphincteric resection. Long-term results showed that changing the initial abdominoperineal resection indication into a sphincter-saving resection according to tumoral response is oncologically safe.

Saving the sphincter

Risk factors for local recurrence and long term survival after minimally invasive intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: Multivariate analysis in 161 patients

INTRODUCTION

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate anal-sparing technique as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection in selected patients. Oncological safety is still debated. This study analyses long-term oncological results and evaluates risk factors for local recurrence (LR) and overall survival (OS) after minimally-invasive ISR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective single-center data were collected from a prospectively maintained colorectal database. A total of 161 patients underwent ISR between 2008 and 2018. OS and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis (log-rank test). Risk factors for OS and LRFS were assessed with Cox-regression analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 55 months. LR occurred in 18 patients. OS and LRFS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 96%, 91%, and 80% and 96%, 89%, and 87%, respectively. Tumor size (p = 0.035) and clinical T-stage (p = 0.029) were risk factors for LRFS on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, tumor size (HR 2.546 (95% CI: 0.976-6.637); p = 0.056) and clinical T-stage (HR 3.296 (95% CI: 0.941-11.549); p = 0.062) were not significant. Preoperative CEA (p < 0.001), pathological T-stage (p = 0.033), pathological N-stage (p = 0.016) and adjuvant treatment (p = 0.008) were prognostic factors for OS on univariate analysis. Preoperative CEA (HR 4.453 (95% CI: 2.015-9.838); p < 0.001) was a prognostic factor on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the oncological safety of minimally-invasive ISR for locally advanced low-lying rectal tumors when performed in experienced centers. Despite not a risk factor for LR, tumor size and, locally advanced T-stage with anterior involvement should be carefully evaluated for optimal surgical strategy. Preoperative CEA is a prognostic factor for OS.

Cylindrical abdominoperineal resection rationale, technique and controversies

Surgery remains the cornerstone in rectal cancer treatment. Abdominoperineal excision (APE), described more than 100 years ago, remains as an important procedure for the treatment of selected advanced distal tumors with direct invasion of the anal sphincter or preoperative fecal incontinence. Historically, oncological outcomes of patients undergoing APE have been worse when compared to sphincter preserving operations. More recently, it has been suggested that patients undergoing APE for distal rectal cancer are more likely to have positive circumferential resection margins and intraoperative perforation, known surrogate markers for local recurrence. Recently, an alternative approach known as “Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision” has been described in an effort to improve rates of circumferential margin positivity possibly resulting in better oncological outcomes compared to the standard procedure. The objective of this paper is to provide a technical description and compare available data of both Extralevator and Standard abdominal perineal excision techniques.

Oncological strategy following R1 sphincter-saving resection in low rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy

AIM

Sphincter-saving resection (SSR) for low rectal cancer remains challenging due to the high risk of positive resection margin (R1). Long-term outcomes and the dedicated oncological strategy are not well established in this situation. The aim of this study was to define the more appropriate strategy according to the patterns of recurrence.

METHODS

Between 1994 and 2014, patients treated by SSR for low rectal cancer with preoperative chemoradiotherapy were included. Three types of recurrences were defined: local (LR), distant (DR) and mixed (MR). Recurrences and survival after R0 and R1 resection were analysed by Kaplan-Meier and compared with the log-rang test.

RESULTS

Among 394 patients receiving SSR, 42 (10.6%) had R1 resection. Independent factors of R1 resection were EMVI (OR2.24,95%IC1.10-4.53,p = 0.025) and no tumor downstaging (OR8.41,95%IC2.50-8.32,p = 0.001). Both 5-year disease free and overall survival, and 5-year distant and local recurrence, were significantly worse after R1 resection. The overall recurrence after R1 resection was 57% (24/42), 7% had LR, 36% DR and 14% MR. Time to DR was shorter than time to LR (11.1 vs. 34.3) months. In all cases of MR, DR occurred before LR (12.1 vs. 34.3) months, meaning that after R1 resection, the first concern was DR.

CONCLUSION

R1 resection after SSR for low rectal cancer reflects a more aggressive and systemic disease. Prognosis depends on DR in about 90% of cases, suggesting that pelvic control should not be the priority in the oncological strategy after R1. Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy ought to be preferred to salvage abdominoperineal resection.

Preservation of the Arterial Arc Formed by Left Colic Artery, Proximal Inferior Mesenteric Artery, and the First Branch of Sigmoid Arteries in Anus Saving Treatment of Low Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Low anterior, ultralow anterior, and intersphincteric resection are conventional, elective anus-sparing techniques for low rectal cancer, and good prognosis depends on a good blood supply and tension-free anastomosis.

AIM

The goal is to assess the effect of preserving the arc formed by the left colic and proximal inferior mesenteric arteries (IMAs), and first branch of the sigmoid arteries on the anastomotic blood supply, tension, and leakage rate in anus-sparing surgery for low rectal cancer.

METHOD

From 2011 to 2020, a patient with low rectal cancer resection was distributed into the ligation group (42 cases with inferior mesenteric artery ligation) and the preservation group (61 cases with preservation of the left colic and proximal IMAs and first branch of the sigmoid artery).

RESULTS

We evaluated patient characteristics, operative results, morbidity, and postoperative follow-up results. There were comparable outcomes between ligation and preservation groups in relations to the number of patients in each operative procedure, duration of surgery, operative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and the number of patients with protective stoma (P >.05). In postoperative morbidity, there were similar outcomes between ligation and preservation groups in terms of anastomotic subclinical dehiscence, bleeding and stricture, and urinary retention (P >.05). There were significant differences in anastomotic leakage and intra-abdominal abscess (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Preservation of the arterial arc formed by left colic artery, proximal IMA, and the first branch of sigmoid arteries with apical lymph node dissection could increase anastomotic blood supply, reduce anastomotic tension, and leakage rate in anus-saving treatment of low rectal cancer.

Trans-anal total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancers: Preliminary oncological results of a comparative study

OBJECTIVE

The management of lower rectal cancers is a therapeutic challenge both from the oncological and functional viewpoints. The aim of this study is to assess the oncological results and postoperative morbidity after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for low rectal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this monocentric retrospective study, we compared the quality of carcinologic resection and the morbidity-mortality between a group of 20 patients undergoing TaTME and 21 patients treated by abdomino-perineal resection (APR) between 2016 to 2019.

RESULTS

More patients had a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) (≤1mm) in the APR group (47.6% vs. 5%; P<0.0036). The difference in the rates of grades I-II and III-IV complications (Clavien-Dindo classification) between the two groups was not statistically significant (50% vs. 57.1% and 5% vs. 9.5% in TaTME and APR, respectively; P=0.7579, P=1.00). The median follow-up was longer in the TaTME group (20 months vs. 11 months; P=0.58). The local recurrence rate did not differ between the two groups (5% vs. 4.8%; P=1.00) CONCLUSION: TaTME provides a reliable total mesorectal resection with an acceptable CRM. However, like any new technique, it requires experience and the learning curve is long.

Gender aspects of survival after abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

The difference in prognosis between genders after abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancer (LRC) is unclear. This study aimed to compare survival outcomes between genders in patients with LRC who underwent curative APR.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used a database of consecutive colorectal resections. Patients who received curative APR with LRC were grouped according to their gender. Female patients were frequency-matched 1:1 on American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage to male patients. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and their independent risk factors were examined.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients with APR for LRC were included after matching: 70 (50.0%) males and 70 (50.0%) females. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of age, operation methods, AJCC stage, and adjuvant therapy (all P > 0.05). Median follow-up was 39 (range: 3-128) months. Male gender was independently associated with worse OS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 2.755, 95% CI: 1.507-5.038, P = 0.001) and worse DFS (adjusted HR = 2.440, 95% CI: 1.254-4.746, P = 0.009). Subgroup analysis revealed that female patients with stage III disease had better OS (P = 0.001) and DFS (P < 0.001) than male patients.

CONCLUSION

Gender affects survival after a curative APR for LRC. Compared with females, male patients with LRC after curative APR had worse prognosis, especially for stage III disease.

Transvaginal sonography accurately measures lesion-to-anal-verge distance in women with deep endometriosis of the rectosigmoid

OBJECTIVES

First, to investigate the accuracy of transvaginal sonography (TVS) for presurgical evaluation of the distance between the most caudal part of the endometriotic lesion and the anal verge (lesion-to-anal-verge distance (LAVD)) in women with rectosigmoid deep endometriosis (DE), compared with intraoperative measurement (IOM). Second, to assess the agreement between anastomosis height and LAVD measured using TVS.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational multicenter study of symptomatic women who were scheduled for surgical treatment of rectosigmoid DE, by either discoid or segmental resection, between April 2017 and September 2019. Presurgical TVS was performed to evaluate the LAVD in two ways, depending on the level of the lesion. Method 1: for lesions at the level of the rectovaginal septum (RVS), the caudal part of the lesion was identified on TVS and an index finger was placed on the TVS probe at the level of the anal verge. The probe was withdrawn and the distance from the tip of the TVS probe down to the index finger was measured using a ruler, representing the LAVD. Method 2: for lesions above the RVS, the distance between the caudal part of the lesion and the lower lip of the posterior cervix was measured in a frozen image (LAVD-1), and the distance between the lower lip of the posterior cervix and the anal verge (LAVD-2) was measured using Method 1. These two measurements (LAVD-1 and LAVD-2) were added together and the result represented the total LAVD. During surgery, a rectal probe was used to perform IOM of LAVD, which was considered as the gold standard test. Agreement between LAVD measured using TVS and the IOM was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for absolute agreement and Spearman's correlation coefficient were also calculated. Systematic and proportional bias were tested for significance using the paired t-test. Similar analysis was performed to assess agreement between LAVD measured using TVS and anastomosis height.

RESULTS

A total of 147 consecutive women were considered eligible for inclusion. Fourteen women were excluded initially. Thirty-four discoid resections and 102 segmental resections were performed; both procedures were performed in three women. Two more women were excluded from the final analysis because the measurements represented extreme outliers. The mean LAVD measured using TVS was 114.8 ± 36.5 mm and the mean IOM was 116.9 ± 42.3 mm. There was no statistically significant difference between LAVD measured using TVS and IOM (mean difference, -2.12 mm (95% CI, -6.33 to 2.05 mm); P = 0.32). Bland-Altman analysis showed that there was good agreement between the two methods. The ICC was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74-0.86) and Spearman's correlation coefficient was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.56-0.77). The mean difference between LAVD measured using TVS and anastomosis height was statistically, but not clinically, significant (mean difference, 10.25 mm (95% CI, 5.94-14.32 mm); P = 0.0005), and the ICC was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.66-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

There is good agreement between the LAVD measured using TVS and the IOM in women with rectosigmoid DE. As a consequence, TVS could be useful for estimation of the height of the final surgical anastomosis in women undergoing full-thickness resection for rectosigmoid DE. This is of pivotal importance in reducing the risk of complications and need for a temporary stoma, and could improve patient counseling. © 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: the risk is functional rather than oncological. A 25-year experience from Bordeaux

AIM

There are few data evaluating the long-term outcomes of intersphincteric resection (ISR), especially the impact of inclusion of more juxtapositioned and intra-anal tumours on oncological and functional outcomes. We compared the oncological and functional results of patients treated by total mesorectal excision and ISR for low rectal cancer over a 25-year period.

METHOD

This is a retrospective study from a single institution evaluating results of ISR over three periods: 1990-1998, 1999-2006 and 2007-2014. Patients treated by partial or total ISR, with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, for low rectal cancer (≤ 6 cm from the anal verge) were included. We compared postoperative morbidity, quality of surgery and oncological and functional outcomes in the time periods studied.

RESULTS

Of 813 patients operated on for low rectal cancer, 303 had ISR. Tumour stage did not differ; however, the distance of the tumour from the anorectal junction decreased from 1 to 0 cm (P < 0.001) and the distal resection margin shortened from 25 to 10 mm (P < 0.001) from 1990 to 2014. The postoperative morbidity and quality of surgery did not change significantly over time. The 5-year local recurrence (4.3% vs 5.9% vs 3.5%; P = 0.741) and disease-free survival (72% vs 71% vs 75%; P = 0.918) did not differ between the three time periods. Functional results improved during the last period; however, overall 42% of patients experienced major bowel dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

Pushing the envelope of sphincter-saving resection in ultra-low rectal cancer reaching or invading the anal sphincter did not compromise oncological and functional outcomes. The main limitation of the ISR procedure appears to be functional rather than oncological, suggesting that bowel rehabilitation programmes should be developed.

Turnbull-Cutait technique without ileostomy after total mesorectal excision is associated with acceptably low early post-operative morbidity

Background

This study aimed to compare the standard one‐stage coloanal anastomosis (CAA) technique plus diverting ileostomy and the Turnbull–Cutait (T–C) technique with delayed CAA in terms of early post‐operative morbidity in patients with low rectal cancer.

Methods

A total of 33 patients with non‐metastatic distal rectal cancer who were operated with one of the two different reconstruction methods (one‐stage CAA plus diverting ileostomy or two‐stage T–C technique with delayed CAA) after total mesorectal excision were included in this retrospective study. The two groups were compared for early post‐operative morbidity within 30 post‐operative days using complication frequency, Clavien–Dindo classification and Comprehensive Complication Index scores.

Results

The two groups did not differ in terms of morbidity parameters, including frequency of any morbidity, presence of grade 3b morbidity requiring management under general anaesthesia, as well as Comprehensive Complication Index score (P > 0.05 for all).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that the two techniques did not differ in terms of early post‐operative morbidity. Owing to its comparable morbidity and safety to CAA plus concomitant ileostomy performed at the same session, the T–C technique may be considered in distal rectal cancer patients refusing to have a temporary stoma and in patients in whom CAA poses technical difficulties during the initial operation.

Sphincter-saving surgery for ultra-low rectal carcinoma initially indicated for abdominoperineal resection: Is it safe on a long-term follow-up?

BACKGROUND

Rate of abdominoperineal resection (APR) varies from countries and surgeons. Surgical impact of preoperative treatment for ultra-low rectal carcinoma (ULRC) initially indicated for APR is debated. We report the 10-year oncological results from a prospective controlled trial (GRECCAR 1) which evaluate the sphincter saving surgery (SSR).

METHODS

ULRC indicated for APR were included (n = 207). Randomization was between high-dose radiation (HDR, 45 + 18 Gy) and radiochemotherapy (RCT, 45 Gy + 5FU infusion). Surgical decision was based on tumour volume regression at surgery. SSR technique was standardized as mucosectomy (M) or partial (PISR)/complete (CISR) intersphincteric resection.

RESULTS

Overall SSR rate was 85% (72% ISR), postoperative morbidity 27%, with no mortality. There were no significant differences between the HDR and RCT groups: 10-year overall survival (OS10) 70.1% versus 69.4%, respectively, 10.2% local recurrence (9.2%/14.5%) and 27.6% metastases (32.4%/27.7%). OS and disease-free survival were significantly longer for SSR (72.2% and 60.1%, respectively) versus APR (54.7% and 38.3%). No difference in OS10 between surgical approaches (M 78.9%, PISR 75.5%, CISR 65.5%) or tumour location (low 64.8%, ultralow 76.7%).

CONCLUSION

GRECCAR 1 demonstrates the feasibility of safely changing an initial APR indication into an SSR procedure according to the preoperative treatment tumour response. Long-term oncologic follow-up validates this attitude.

Retrospective study of the functional and oncological outcomes of conformal sphincter preservation operation in the treatment of very low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) is a new surgical procedure for very low rectal cancers (within 4-5 cm from the anal verge). CSPO preserves more of the dentate line and distal rectal wall and also avoids injuring nerves in the intersphincteric space, resulting in satisfactory anal function after resection. The aim of this study was to analyze the short-term surgical results and long-term oncological and functional outcomes of CSPO.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with very low rectal cancer, who had CSPO between January 2011 and October 2018 at Changhai Hospital, Shanghai were included. Patient demographics, clinicopathological features, oncological outcomes and anal function were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients (67 men) with a mean age of 56.9 ± 10.8 years were included. The median distance of the tumor from the anal verge was 3 (IQR, 3-4) cm. Thirty-five patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). The median distal resection margin (DRM) was 0.5 (IQR, 0.3-0.8) cm. One patient had a positive DRM. All circumferential margins were negative. There was no perioperative mortality. The postoperative complication rate was 19.6%. The median duration of follow-up was 28 (IQR, 12-45.5) months. The local recurrence rate was 2% and distant metastasis rate was 10.8%. The 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 100% and 83.9%, respectively. The mean Wexner incontinence and low anterior resection syndrome scores 12 months after ileostomy reversal were 5.9 ± 4.3, and 29.2 ± 6.9, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with very low rectal cancers, fecal continence can be preserved with CSPO without compromising oncological results.

Long term outcome of anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing low anterior resection for rectal cancer

Background

The influence of anastomotic leakage (AL) on local recurrence rates and survival in rectal cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of asymptomatic anastomotic leakage (AAL) and symptomatic anastomotic leakage (SAL) on short- and long-term outcome after curative rectal cancer resection.

Methods

All patients who underwent surgical resection of non-metastatic rectal cancer with curative intent from January 2005 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Short-term morbidity, long-term functional and oncological outcomes were compared between patients with SAL, AAL and without AL (WAL).

Results

Overall, 200 patients were included and AL was observed in 39 (19.5%) patients (10 AAL and 29 SAL) with a median follow-up of 38.5 months. Rectal cancer location and preoperative neoadjuvant treatment was similar between the three groups. Postoperative 30-day mortality rate was nil. The permanent stoma rate was higher in patients with SAL or AAL compared to WAL patients (44.8 and 30% vs 9.3%, p < 0.001). The mean wexner continence grading scale was significantly different between AAL (11,4 ± 3,8), SAL (10,3 ± 0,6) and WAL (6,4 ± 4,7) groups (p = 0.049). The 3 and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were similar between the 3 groups (86.6% /84% vs 100%/100% vs 76%/70 and 82.9%/77% vs 100%/100% vs 94.7%/88.3% for patients with SAL, AAL, and WAL, p = 0.480 and p = 0.527).

Conclusion

The permanent stoma rate was significant higher in patients with SAL or AAL compared to WAL patients. AL did not impair long-term oncological outcome.

Latest Advances in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer

Background

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been a preferable alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for anal preservation in patients with low rectal cancer. Laparoscopic ISR and robotic ISR have been widely used with the proposal of 2 cm or even 1 cm rule of distal free margin and the development of minimally invasive technology. The aim of this review was to describe the newest advancements of ISR.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify studies on ISR techniques, preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT), complications, oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes and thereby to summarize relevant information and controversies involved in ISR.

Results

Although PCRT is employed to avoid positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and decrease local recurrence, it tends to engender damage of anorectal function and patients' quality of life (QoL). Common complications after ISR include anastomotic leakage (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), urinary retention, fistula, pelvic sepsis, and prolapse. CRM involvement is the most important predictor for local recurrence. Preoperative assessment and particularly rectal endosonography are essential for selecting suitable patients. Anal dysfunction is associated with age, PCRT, location and growth of anastomotic stoma, tumour stage, and resection of internal sphincter.

Conclusions

The ISR technique seems feasible for selected patients with low rectal cancer. However, the postoperative QoL as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Ultralow Rectal Cancer with Transanal Intersphincteric Dissection as a First Step: A Single-surgeon Experience

Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation is helpful in the management of patients with low rectal cancer. With the advent of this technique, the need for performance of abdominoperineal resection seems to have decreased in patients with very low rectal tumors. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic ISR preceded by transanal rectal dissection low rectal cancer. Between December 2009 and June 2011, we performed laparoscopic ISR for 30 patients with very low rectal cancer. Patients received preoperative concurrent chemoradiation (5 days a week for 5 weeks). The surgical procedure was performed 6 weeks after radiotherapy and included total mesorectal excision, ISR, transanal coloanal anastomosis with coloplasty and loop ileostomy. Clinical data of 30 patients were analyzed retrospectively. Thirty patients (21 men, nine women) had a median age of 65 years (range, 37 to 75 years), a median body weight of 67 kg (range, 43 to 96 kg), and body mass index of 24 kg/m2 (range, 19 to 33 kg/m2). The distance of the tumor from the anal verge was 5 cm (range, 2 to 11 cm). The operative time was from 240 to 360 minutes, and estimated blood loss was 100 to 520 mL. There were no conversions and no postoperative mortality. This procedure is feasible and has favorable short-term results for radical treatment of very low rectal disease while preserving anal function.

Early and Late Functional Outcomes of Anal SphincterSparing Procedures With Total Mesorectal Excision for Anorectal Adenocarcinoma

Purpose

The study aims to assess the functional outcome of anal sphincter-sparing procedures (SSP) with total mesorectal excision (TME) for anorectal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

In a multicentric, prospective, single-group study in the period between December 2012 and November 2017, 93 patients presented with anorectal adenocarcinoma were included in the study. Sixty-nine patients underwent SSP with TME. SSP included the combined approach of transabdominal TME with intersphincteric resection (ISR) or transanal transabdominal TME. Using the per anal examination scoring system (PASS), postoperative anal function was assessed after 1 year.

Results

Bowel motility time was 50±19 hours. The time needed for narcotic analgesia was 54±18.8 hours. Mean hospital stay was 15.4±10.25 days. Incidence of evident fecal incontinence after ISR is 10.6% (7 of 67 cases). The PASS findings of 69 cases are as follows: extremely hypotonic 8.6% (6 cases), slightly hypotonic 26.1% (18 cases), normal tone 58% (40 cases), slightly stenotic 3 cases (4.3%), or occluded 2.9% (2 cases). Urinary dysfunction occurred in 1 case (1.4%). Temporary diversion was performed in 61 patients (87.1%).

Conclusion

Sphincter preservation with TME for anorectal adenocarcinoma helps avoid permanent stoma and provides reasonable functional outcomes. PASS is a new application for postoperative assessment of anal function.

'French LARS score': validation of the French version of the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score for measuring bowel dysfunction after sphincter-preserving surgery among rectal cancer patients: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Many bowel problems following low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer considerably impair the quality of life (QoL) of patients. The LAR syndrome (LARS) scale is a self-report questionnaire to identify and assess bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery. It has been translated and validated in several languages but not in French (metropolitan French). The primary objective is to adapt the LARS scale to the French language (called French-LARS score) and to assess its psychometric properties. Secondary objectives are to assess both the prevalence and severity of LARS and to measure their impact on QoL.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A French multicentre observational cohort study has been designed. The validation study will include translation of the LARS scale following the current international recommendations, assessment of its reliability, convergent and discriminant validities, sensitivity, internal consistency, internal validity and confirmatory analyses. One thousand patients will be enrolled for the analyses. The questionnaire will be initially administered to the first 100 patients to verify the adequacy and degree of comprehension of the questions. Then reproducibility will be investigated by a test-retest procedure in the following 400 patients.An analysis will be conducted to determine the correlation between the LARS score and the Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ; European Organization for Treatment and Research of Cancer's QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29). Risk factors linked to QoL deterioration will be identified and their impact will be measured. This study will meet the need for a validated tool to improve patient care and QoL.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The institutional review board of the University Hospital of Caen and the ethics committee (CPP Nord Ouest I, 25 January 2019) approved the study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03569488.