A 12-year experience of the Trendelenburg perineal approach for abdominoperineal resection

Prognostic importance of circumferential resection margin in the era of evolving surgical and multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Circumferential resection margin is considered an important prognostic parameter after rectal cancer surgery, but its impact might have changed because of improved surgical quality and tailored multimodality treatment. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the prognostic importance of circumferential resection margin involvement based on the most recent literature.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies published between January 2006 and May 2019. Studies were included if 3- or 5-year oncological outcomes were reported depending on circumferential resection margin status. Outcome parameters were local recurrence, overall survival, disease-free survival, and distant metastasis rate. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Jadad score were used for quality assessment of the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model and reported as a pooled odds ratio or hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Seventy-five studies were included, comprising a total of 85,048 rectal cancer patients. Significant associations between circumferential resection margin involvement and all long-term outcome parameters were uniformly found, with varying odds ratios and hazard ratios depending on circumferential resection margin definition (<1 mm, ≤1 mm, otherwise), neoadjuvant treatment, study period, and geographical origin of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Circumferential resection margin involvement has remained an independent, poor prognostic factor for local recurrence and survival in most recent literature, indicating that circumferential resection margin status can still be used as a short-term surrogate endpoint.

Robotic pelvic exenteration and extended pelvic resections for locally advanced or synchronous rectal and urological malignancy

Purpose

To describe the surgical technique and examine the feasibility and outcomes following robotic pelvic exenteration and extended pelvic resection for rectal and/or urological malignancy.

Materials and Methods

We present a case series of seven patients with locally advanced or synchronous urological and/or rectal malignancy who underwent robotic total or posterior pelvic exenteration between 2012–2016.

Results

In total, we included seven patients undergoing pelvic exenteration or extended pelvic resection. The mean operative time was 485±157 minutes and median length of stay was 9 days (6–34 days). There was only one Clavien–Dindo complication grade 3 which was a vesicourethral anastomotic leak requiring rigid cystoscopy and bilateral ureteric catheter insertion. Eighty-five percent of patients had clear colorectal margins with a median margin of 3.5 mm (0.7–8.0 mm) while all urological margins were clear. Six out of seven patients had complete (grade 3) total mesorectal excision. Three patients experienced recurrence at a median of 22 months (21–24 months) post-operatively. Of the three recurrences, one was systemic only whilst two were both local and systemic. One patient died from complications of dual rectal and prostate cancer 31 months after the surgery.

Conclusions

We report a large series examining robotic pelvic exenteration or extended pelvic resection and describe the surgical technique involved. The robotic approach to pelvic exenteration is highly feasible and demonstrates acceptable peri-operative and oncological outcomes. It has the potential to benefit patients undergoing this highly complex and morbid procedure.

Biological Mesh Closure of the Pelvic Floor After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (the BIOPEX-study)

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of biological mesh closure on perineal wound healing after extralevator abdominoperineal resection (eAPR).

BACKGROUND

Perineal wound complications frequently occur after eAPR with preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer. Cohort studies have suggested that biological mesh closure of the pelvic floor improves perineal wound healing.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to primary closure (standard arm) or biological mesh closure (intervention arm). A non-cross-linked porcine acellular dermal mesh was sutured to the pelvic floor remnants in the intervention arm, followed by a layered closure of the ischioanal and subcutaneous fat and skin similar to the control intervention. The outcome of the randomization was concealed from the patient and perineal wound assessor. The primary endpoint was the rate of uncomplicated perineal wound healing defined as a Southampton wound score of less than 2 at 30 days postoperatively. Patients were followed for 1 year.

RESULTS

In total, 104 patients were randomly assigned to primary closure (n = 54; 1 dropouts) and biological mesh closure (n = 50; 2 dropouts). Uncomplicated perineal wound healing rate at 30 days was 66% (33/50; 3 not evaluable) after primary closure, which did not significantly differ from 63% (30/48) after biological mesh closure [relative risk 1.056; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7854-1.4197; P = 0.7177). Freedom from perineal hernia at 1 year was 73% (95% CI 60.93-85.07) versus 87% (95% CI 77.49-96.51), respectively (P = 0.0316).

CONCLUSIONS

Perineal wound healing after eAPR with preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer was not improved when using a biological mesh. A significantly lower 1-year perineal hernia rate after biological mesh closure is a promising secondary finding that needs longer follow-up to determine its clinical relevance.

Circumferential resection margins and perineal complications after neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy followed by extralevator abdominoperineal excision of the rectum: Five years of activity at a single institution

BACKGROUND

Prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (ELAPE) has been introduced to improve the circumferential resection margins (CRM) compared with traditional APER.

OBJECTIVE

We present short-term results achieved with prone ELAPE preceded by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy during the last 5 years of activity.

DESIGN

A retrospective review was conducted.

SETTINGS AND PATIENTS

Prone ELAPE operations performed between September 2010 and August 2014 at Leicester Royal Infirmary preceded by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

INTERVENTIONS AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Data regarding demographics, staging, neoadjuvant therapies, intraoperative perforations, and perineal complications were collected.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were included. Pretreatment radiological T4 were 25.0%, histological T4 2.8%. Intraoperative perforations occurred in 2.8%, CRM was involved in 11.1%. Perineal complications consisted of superficial wound infections (20.8%), full thickness dehiscences (16.7%), hematomas (9.7%), pelvic collections (6.9%), and perineal hernias (5.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, prone ELAPE preceded by long-course chemoradiotherapy has been successfully used in the last 5 years to resect low rectal tumors. Perineal wound complications rates are similar to those presented in series using direct perineal closures. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:86-90. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

A prospective multicenter clinical study of extralevator abdominoperineal resection for locally advanced low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have shown that extralevator abdominoperineal resection has the potential for reduced circumferential resection margin involvement, intraoperative bowl perforation, and local recurrence rates; however, it has been suggested that extended resection may be associated with increased morbidity because of the formation of a larger perineal defect.

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to demonstrate the feasibility and complications of extralevator abdominoperineal resection for locally advanced low rectal cancer in China.

DESIGN

This was a prospective cohort study.

SETTING

The study was conducted at 7 university hospitals throughout China.

PATIENTS

A total of 102 patients underwent this procedure for primary locally advanced low rectal cancer between August 2008 and October 2011.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures comprised circumferential resection margin involvement, intraoperative perforation, postoperative complications, and local recurrence.

RESULTS

The most common complications included sexual dysfunction (40.5%), perineal complications (23.5%), urinary retention (18.6%), and chronic perineal pain (13.7%). Chronic perineal pain was associated with coccygectomy (p < 0.001), and the pain gradually eased over time. Reconstruction of the pelvic floor with biological mesh was associated with a lower rate of perineal dehiscence (p = 0.006) and overall perineal wound complications (p = 0.02) in comparison with primary closure. A positive circumferential margin was demonstrated in 6 (5.9%) patients, and intraoperative perforations occurred in 4 (3.9%) patients. All circumferential margin involvements and intraoperative perforations were located anteriorly. The local recurrence was 4.9% at a median follow-up of 44 months (range, 18-68 months).

LIMITATIONS

This was a nonrandomized, uncontrolled study.

CONCLUSIONS

Extralevator abdominoperineal resection performed in the prone position for low rectal cancer is a relatively safe approach with acceptable circumferential resection margin involvement, intraoperative perforations, and local recurrences. Reconstruction of the pelvic floor with biological mesh might lower the rate of perineal wound complications (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A161).

Perineal wound healing after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Impaired perineal wound healing has become a significant clinical problem after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. The increased use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and wider excisions might have contributed to this problem.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the impact of radiotherapy and an extralevator approach on perineal wound healing after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer.

DATA SOURCES

In March 2014, electronic databases were searched.

STUDY SELECTION AND INTERVENTIONS

Studies describing any outcome measure on perineal wound healing after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was overall perineal wound problems within 30 days after conventional or extralevator abdominoperineal resection with or without neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Secondary end points were primary wound healing, perineal hernia rate, and the effect of biological mesh closure on perineal wound problems.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies were included. The pooled percentage of perineal wound problems after primary perineal wound closure in patients who did not undergo neoadjuvant radiotherapy was 15.3% (95% CI, 12.1-19.2) after conventional abdominoperineal resection and 14.8% (95% CI, 9.5-22.4) after extralevator abdominoperineal resection. After neoadjuvant radiotherapy, perineal wound problems occurred in 30.2% (95% CI, 19.2-44.0) after conventional abdominoperineal resection and in 37.6% (95% CI, 18.6-61.4) after extralevator abdominoperineal resection. Radiotherapy significantly increased perineal wound problems after abdominoperineal resection (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.45-3.40; p < 0.001). After biological mesh closure of the pelvic floor following extralevator abdominoperineal resection with neoadjuvant radiotherapy, the percentage of perineal wound problems was 7.3% (95% CI, 1.5-29.3).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity was high for some analyses.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant radiotherapy significantly increases perineal wound problems after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, whereas the extralevator approach seems not to be of significant importance.

Perineal wound healing after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: a two-centre experience in the era of intensified oncological treatment

PURPOSE

Intensified treatment for distal rectal cancer has improved oncological outcome, but at the expense of more perineal wound complications in patients undergoing an abdominoperineal resection (APR). The aim of this study was to analyse perineal wound healing after APR with primary perineal wound closure over time.

METHOD

All patients undergoing APR for primary rectal cancer with primary wound closure between 2000 and 2013 were included and analysed in three consecutive time periods. Both early (<30 days postoperatively) and late perineal wound complications were determined. Independent risk factors of early perineal wound complications were identified using multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 136 patients were identified, of whom 129 patients underwent primary perineal wound closure. The use of neo-adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy increased from 72 to 91%, and the use of an extralevator approach increased from 9 to 19%. The rate of early perineal wound complications increased from 18 to 31% and was independently associated with an extralevator approach [odds ratio (OR) 3.17; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-8.66] and intra-operative perforation (OR 3.35; 95% CI 1.06-10.57). Perineal wound complications had no impact on local recurrence or 3-year overall survival rate. During a median follow-up of 28 months [interquartile range (IQR) 14-56], a persistent presacral sinus was diagnosed in 10%, and a perineal hernia occurred in 8% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The increased use of an extralevator APR for rectal cancer significantly increased the risk of perineal wound complications over time. Intra-operative perforation was also independently associated with impaired perineal wound healing.