Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS): a technique that can be used for retrograde proctectomy

Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Cancer

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is considered a standard of care in rectal cancers. Its advantage is that it is organ preserving. Its main role is in early-stage cancers limited to the rectum (T1N0M0). Regular follow-up with computed tomography scan imaging is required. When done correctly in the right patients, the recurrence rate of rectal cancer is less than 3%. TAMIS can also be used as a salvage operation in symptomatic high-risk patients who are unable to undergo or are unfit for transabdominal resection.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) using flexible endoscope with laparoscopic assistance: a pilot study in porcine models

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is routinely performed to excise low rectal tumors. TaTME often relies on transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) or transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) platform, all using rigid endoscopes. Our study reported a novel approach to TaTME which was completed using flexible endoscope, and we named it F-TaTME.

METHODS

The feasibility of rectum resection using F-TaTME was evaluated in five pigs. Firstly, the superior rectal artery and vein were managed under the assistance of laparoscopy. Secondly, the flexible endoscope was used to complete the full-thickness rectotomy and rectal mobilization. Finally, the specimen was removed and the manual colon-rectal anastomosis was performed under direct vision.

RESULTS

F-TaTME was accomplished in all 5 pigs. The mean procedure time was 136.6 min (97-162 min). The mean length from the lower edge of the lesion to circumferential dissection line was 1.4 cm (1.0-1.8 cm) and mean length of exteriorized rectum was 12.6 cm (11-14 cm). No injury to colorectal wall, adjacent pelvic or abdominal organs was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary data suggested that F-TaTME may be a feasible method for TaTME.

Short- and long-term outcomes of transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid-to-low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is positioned at the cutting edge of minimally invasive approach to mid- and low rectal cancer. This meta-analysis was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of TaTME versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) and to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and possible superiority of TaTME.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs (NRCTs) comparing TaTME with LTME. Inter-group differences were evaluated via standardized mean differences and relative risks (RRs). All outcomes were analyzed using fixed effects or random effects models according to the heterogeneity. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata/SE 12.0 software.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (1 RCT and 10 NRCTs) with involving 757 patients were included. Among which, 361 patients underwent TaTME and 396 patients underwent LTME. Comparing the surgical and oncological quality of resection of TaTME with that of LTME, reports of TaTME indicated favorable outcomes considering mesorectal resection quality, circumferential resection margin involvement, intraoperative blood loss, conversions, and postoperative complications, while the differences between the two groups had no statistical significance in terms of distal resection margin, harvested lymph node, operation time, hospital stay, recurrence, 2-year overall survival (OS), and 2-year disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

TaTME is a promising surgical technique and is fully a safe, efficacious, and diffusible alternative to LTME in managing mid- and distal rectal cancer. Larger scale, national, multicentric RCTs are warranted to further verify these results and the possible superiority of TaTME.

Initial experience with taTME in patients undergoing laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a minimally invasive technique which was developed to overcome the difficulties associated with the "top-down" pelvic dissection by enabling a "bottom-up" dissection in patients with mid- and low rectal cancer. While this technique was primarily designed to manage tumors in the mid- and lower rectum, its spectrum of indications has been broadened to include benign colorectal pathologies. The aim of the present study was to assess our initial experience with taTME in patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP).

METHODS

All consecutive patients (undergoing prophylactic restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA for FAP using taTME between April and October 2016 at our institution) were included in the study.

RESULTS

There were 8 patients (6 females and 2 males). The median age was 19.5 years (range 16-31 years). In all cases, surgery was successfully completed using with taTME. No perioperative complications were recorded. A median of 5 bowel movements (range 4-6 bowel movements) with intermittent anti-diarrheal medication was recorded in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience with 8 consecutive cases suggests taTME is safe and effective in patients undergoing prophylactic restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA for FAP.

Initial experience of restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis by transanal total mesorectal rectal excision and single-incision abdominal laparoscopic surgery

AIM

Laparoscopic surgery is well established for colon cancer, with defined benefits. Use of laparoscopy for the performance of restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileoanal anastomosis is more controversial. Technical aspects include difficult dissection of the distal rectum and a potentially increased risk of anastomotic leakage through multiple firings of the stapler. In an attempt to overcome these difficulties we have used the technique of transanal rectal excision to perform the proctectomy. This paper describes the technique, which is combined with an abdominal approach using a single-incision platform (SIP).

METHOD

Data were collected prospectively for consecutive operations between May 2013 and October 2015, including all cases of restorative proctocolectomy with ileoanal pouch anastomosis performed laparoscopically. Only patients having a transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) assisted by SIP were included. The indication for RPC was ulcerative colitis (UC) refractory to medical treatment.

RESULTS

The procedure was performed on 16 patients with a median age of 46 (26-70) years. The male:female ratio was 5:3 and the median hospital stay was 6 (3-20) days. The median operation time was 247 (185-470) min and the overall conversion rate to open surgery was 18.7%. The 30-day surgical complication rate was 37.5% (Clavien-Dindo 1 in four patients, 2 in one patient and 3 in one patient). One patient developed anastomotic leakage 2 weeks postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

This initial study has demonstrated the feasibility and safety of TaTME combined with SIP when performing RPC with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for UC.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and perioperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision

Background

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is an emerging surgical technique for rectal cancer. However, the oncological and perioperative outcomes are controversial when compared with conventional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME).

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane database. All original studies published in English that compared taTME with laTME were included for critical appraisal and meta-analysis. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

A total of seven studies including 573 patients (taTME group = 270; laTME group = 303) were included in our meta-analysis. Concerning the oncological outcomes, no differences were observed in harvested lymph nodes, distal resection margin (DRM) and positive DRM between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed a higher rate of achievement of complete grading of mesorectal quality (OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.02–3.01, P = 0.04), a longer circumferential resection margin (CRM) and less involvement of positive CRM (CRM: WMD = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.60–1.31, P <0.01; positive CRM: OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.17–0.86, P = 0.02). Concerning the perioperative outcomes, the results for hospital stay, intraoperative complications and readmission were comparable between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed shorter operation times (WMD = –23.45, 95% CI = –37.43 to –9.46, P <0.01), a lower rate of conversion (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.11–0.81, P = 0.02) and a higher rate of mobilization of the splenic flexure (OR = 2.34, 95% CI = 0.99–5.54, P = 0.05). Although the incidence of anastomotic leakage, ileus and urinary morbidity showed no difference between the groups, a significantly lower rate of overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.45–0.95, P = 0.03) was observed in the taTME group.

Conclusions

In comparison with laTME, taTME seems to achieve comparable technical success with acceptable oncologic and perioperative outcomes. However, multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of taTME.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: early outcomes in 50 consecutive patients

AIM

Minimally invasive approaches to proctectomy for rectal cancer have not been widely adopted due to inherent technical challenges. A modification of traditional transabdominal mobilization, termed transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME), has the potential to improve access to the distal rectum. The aim of the current study is to assess outcomes following TaTME for rectal cancer.

METHOD

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive patients who underwent TaTME for rectal cancer at a single institution. The study period was from 1 March 2012 to 31 July 2015.

RESULTS

During the study period 50 patients underwent TaTME. The median tumour distance from the anal verge was 4.4 (3.0-5.5) cm. The rate of conversion from a planned minimally invasive approach was 2.2%. The median operative time was 267.0 (227.0-331.0) min. The median lymph node yield was 18.0 (12.0-23.8), the macroscopic quality assessment of the resected specimen was incomplete in 2% and the circumferential resection margin positivity rate was 4%. Intra-operative morbidity occurred in 6% and the 30 day morbidity rate was 36%. The median length of stay was 4.5 (4.0-8.0) days. The median follow-up was 15.1 (7.0-23.2) months; two patients have developed a local recurrence and eight patients have developed distant recurrence.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that TaTME for rectal cancer is feasible with an acceptable pathological outcome and morbidity profile. Further data on functional and long-term survival outcomes are required.

Transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: initial experience from Denmark

AIM

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) has improved short-term outcomes of rectal cancer surgery with comparable oncological results to open approach. LaTME can be difficult in the lowermost part of the rectum, leading potentially to higher rates of complications, conversion to open surgery and probably suboptimal oncological quality. Transanal TME (TaTME) can potentially solve these problems. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term results after TaTME with those after LaTME.

METHOD

A prospectively collected database of consecutive patients who underwent TaTME was maintained. Results were compared with those who underwent LaTME in the preceding period. Patients who underwent low anterior resection or intersphincteric abdominoperineal excision were included. Primary end-points were radical resection and specimen quality. Secondary end-points were complications, rates of conversion, operating time and hospital stay.

RESULTS

In total, 50 patients were included (TaTME = 25, LaTME = 25). The groups were comparative in demographic data and tumour characteristics. Circumferential resection margin was positive in one patient in the TaTME group vs four patients in the LaTME group (P = 0.349). All patients in the TaTME group had either complete or nearly complete specimen quality, while four patients in the LaTME group had incomplete specimen quality (P = 0.113). Less blood loss, shorter operating time and shorter hospital stay were found in the TaTME group (P values 0.016, 0.002 and 0.020 respectively). Intra-operative complications were comparable (P = 0.286).

CONCLUSION

The TaTME procedure had comparable pathological results and acceptable short-term postoperative outcomes compared to LaTME.

A systematic review of transanal total mesorectal excision: is this the future of rectal cancer surgery?

AIM

The surgical technique used for transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) was reviewed including the oncological quality of resection and the peri-operative outcome.

METHOD

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify studies reporting on TaTME.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies (eight case reports, 24 case series and four comparative studies) were identified, reporting 510 patients who underwent TaTME. The mean age ranged from 43 to 80 years and the mean body mass index from 21.7 to 31.8 kg/m(2) . The mean distance of the tumour from the anal verge ranged from 4 to 9.7 cm. The mean operation time ranged from 143 to 450 min and mean operative blood loss from 22 to 225 ml. The ratio of hand-sewn coloanal to stapled anastomoses performed was 2:1. One death was reported and the peri-operative morbidity rate was 35%. The anastomotic leakage rate was 6.1% and the reoperation rate was 3.7%. The mean hospital stay ranged from 4.3 to 16.6 days. The mesorectal excision was described as complete in 88% cases, nearly complete in 6% and incomplete in 6%. The circumferential resection margin was negative in 95% of cases and the distal resection margin was negative in 99.7%.

CONCLUSION

TaTME is a feasible and reproducible technique, with good quality of oncological resection. Standardization of the technique is required with formal training. Clear indications for this procedure need to be defined and its safety further assessed in future trials.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: a systematic review of the experimental and clinical evidence

Achieving a clear distal or circumferential resection margins with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) may be laborious, especially in obese males and when operating on advanced distal rectal tumors with a poor response to neoadjuvant treatment. Transanal (TaTME) is a new natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery modality in which the rectum is mobilized transanally using endoscopic techniques with or without laparoscopic assistance. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review of publications on this new technique in PubMed and Embase databases from January, 2008, to July, 2014. Experimental and clinical studies written in English were included. Experimental research with TaTME was done on pigs with and without survival models and on human cadavers. In these studies, laparoscopic or transgastric assistance was frequently used resulting in an easier upper rectal dissection and in a longer rectal specimen. To date, 150 patients in 16 clinical studies have undergone TaTME. In all but 15 cases, transabdominal assistance was used. A rigid transanal endoscopic operations/transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEO/TEM) platform was used in 37 patients. Rectal adenocarcinoma was the indication in all except for nine cases of benign diseases. Operative times ranged from 90 to 460 min. TME quality was deemed intact, satisfactory, or complete. Involvement in circumferential resection margins was detected in 16 (11.8 %) patients. The mean lymph node harvest was equal or greater than 12 in all studies. Regarding morbidity, pneumoretroperitoneum, damage to the urethra, and air embolism were reported intraoperatively. Mean hospital stay varied from 4 to 14 days. Postoperative complications occurred in 34 (22.7 %) patients. TaTME with TEM is feasible in selected cases. Oncologic safety parameters seem to be adequate although the evidence relies on small retrospective series conducted by highly trained surgeons. Further studies are expected.

Clinical Robotic Surgery Association Fifth Worldwide Congress, Washington DC, 3-5 October 2013: Robotic Colorectal Surgery

The colorectal session was one of the most successful and well attended sessions at the Fifth Worldwide Clinical Robotic Surgery Association Congress because of the increasing interest and diffusion of robotic techniques in this specific field. This session was structured as follows: two technical focuses, one on rectal resection and the other on right colectomies; a journal club with two hot topic papers presented by the authors; a face-to-face on single-port laparoscopic versus robotic surgery; an update on the transanal approach; and three lectures, on the oncologic safety of robotic total mesorectal excision, on the use of fluorescence in colorectal surgery, and finally an update on the ongoing ROLARR trial (laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection).

Transanal minimally invasive surgery for total mesorectal excision

Transanal TME is a new and important application for TAMIS. It allows for resection and mobilization of the rectum while preserving the quality of the mesorectal envelop. This new approach has gained considerable interest not only because of its minimally invasive nature, but because TAMIS-TME offers a solution to one of the most difficult problems in rectal cancer surgery: Specifically, access to the distal rectum in obese male patients with a narrow pelvis. Recently, transanal TME has become one of the most rapidly expanding areas in rectal cancer surgery. Interestingly, the origin and inception of this approach began decades ago. The evolution of transanal TME with a historical perspective is described.