Is there a limit to transanal endoscopic surgery? A comparative study between standard and technically challenging indications among 168 consecutive patients

Trans-anal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) versus trans-anal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM): a comparative case-control matched-pairs analysis

AIM

Since its introduction, transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) has become the treatment of choice for rectal benign lesions not amenable to flexible endoscopic excision and for early rectal cancer. Disposable soft devices as the Trans-anal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) are a valid alternative to non-disposable rigid trans-anal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) platforms. The aim of the present study is to compare TEM and TAMIS in terms of incidence of R1 resection and lesion fragmentation which were combined in a composite outcome called quality resection. Perioperative complication and operative time were also investigated.

METHODS

A total of 132 patients were eligible for this study of whom 63 (47.7%) underwent TAMIS and 69 (52.3%) underwent TEM. Patients were extracted for from a prospective maintained database and groups resulted homogenous after matching using propensity score in terms of size of the lesion, height from the anal verge, position within the rectal lumen, preoperative histology, neoadjuvant treatment. A multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis was carried out using those variables that have significant independent relationship with the quality of surgical resection and operative time.

RESULTS

The incidence of R0 resection and lesion fragmentation was similar between groups. No differences were found in terms of perioperative complication. TAMIS was associated with less setup time and less operative time compared with TEM. Variables influencing quality resection at the multivariate analysis were larger lesion (> 5 cm) and ≥ T2 stage. Variables influencing operative time were surgical procedure (TEM vs TAMIS), height from the anal verge and size of the lesion.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that TEM and TAMIS are equally effective in terms of quality of local excision and perioperative complication. TAMIS resulted less operative time consuming compared to TEM.

Hybrid Robotic Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery Approach to Large and Low-Lying Rectal Polyps

BACKGROUND

Transanal excision is the surgical treatment of choice for low-risk rectal pathology such as endoscopically unresectable polyps, very select early rectal cancers, as well as other benign and low-risk tumors. Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery enhances the surgeon's ability to work in the confined space of the rectum and helps overcome the limitations of other modalities for transanal excision. Large lesions that extend to the dentate line and cannot be excised transanally impart a particular challenge. Herein, we describe a hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach for excising large rectal lesions that extend to the dentate line and cannot be excised by utilizing traditional transanal techniques.

TECHNIQUE

With the use of a standard transanal approach, the distal margin of the lesion is marked and lifted off of the internal sphincter muscle. The dissection is continued until above the anorectal ring, and a 5.5-cm transanal platform is introduced transanally. Insufflation with an 8-mm trocar is initiated and the robotic platform is docked transanally. A 1-cm circumferential proximal margin is marked, and the excision is continued robotically until en bloc resection of the lesion is completed. The defect is closed in a transverse fashion using barbed suture. For rare cases of circumferential or nearly circumferential full-thickness defects, interrupted barbed sutures are placed equidistant, the robot is undocked, the transanal platform is removed, and a handsewn coloanal anastomosis is performed allowing complete closure of the defect.

RESULTS

A hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach to large and low-lying rectal lesions is feasible and safe, and it has advantages over standard transanal excision including enhanced ergonomics, dexterity, and optics, as well as reduced rates of specimen fragmentation.

CONCLUSION

A hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach allows for complete resection of very large polyps, which would otherwise be extremely challenging with standard transanal approaches. See Video at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B231.

Trans-anal minimally invasive surgery: A new technique to avoid peritoneal entry

•

TAMIS can be considered for removal of rectal polyps and early rectal cancers.

•

A potential complication of TAMIS is abdominal entry.

•

Higher risk of entry if the lesion is located above the peritoneal reflection.

•

The use of laparoscopic staplers is a novel approach that should be considered.

•

The resection quality is comparable to the traditional approach to TAMIS.

Introduction

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is a valuable surgical option for removal of rectal polyps and early rectal cancers. A potential complication of this technique is abdominal entry if the lesion is located above the peritoneal reflection. We present the first case series describing the use of a laparoscopic stapling device to remove a sessile lesion, and seal the resulting defect simultaneously with full thickness excision of the rectal lesion, avoiding abdominal entry.

Presentation of cases

Five patients with rectal lesions between 8 and 14 cm from the anal verge are described in this case series. Each underwent a stapled-TAMIS procedure as the lesion was suspected to be above the peritoneal reflection. The goal specimen was achieved in each procedure.

Discussion

This article demonstrates the feasibility of a novel technique to remove sessile polyps in the upper rectum using laparoscopic staplers trans-anally through the TAMIS port. More studies and long-term follow-up are needed to evaluate the oncologic outcomes including the recurrence rate for those lesions removed with a stapler.

Conclusion

For rectal lesions suspected to be above the peritoneal reflection, a stapled resection through a TAMIS port could prove be a valuable addition to the standard excisional approach to TAMIS.

Does previous transanal excision for early rectal cancer impair surgical outcomes and pathologic findings of completion total mesorectal excision? Results of a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Transanal excision (TAE) is increasingly used in the treatment of early rectal cancer because of lower rate of both postoperative complications and postsurgical functional disorders as compared with total mesorectal excision (TME) OBJECTIVE: To compare in a meta-analysis surgical outcomes and pathologic findings between patients who underwent TAE followed by completion proctectomy with TME (TAE group) for early rectal cancer with unfavorable histology or incomplete resection, and those who underwent primary TME (TME group).

METHODS

The Medline and Cochrane Trials Register databases were searched for studies comparing short-term outcomes between patients who underwent TAE followed by completion TME versus primary TME. Studies published until December 2016 were included. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.0 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).

RESULTS

Meta-analysis showed that completion TME after TAE was significantly associated with increased reintervention rate (OR=4.28; 95% CI, 1.10-16.76; P≤0.04) and incomplete mesorectal excision rate (OR=5.74; 95% CI, 2.24-14.75; P≤0.0003), as compared with primary TME. However there both abdominoperineal amputation and circumferential margin invasion rates were comparable between TAE and TME groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that previous TAE impaired significantly surgical outcomes and pathologic findings of completion TME as compared with primary TME. First transanal approach during completion TME might be evaluated in order to decrease technical difficulties.

Peritoneal perforation is less a complication than an expected event during transanal endoscopic microsurgery: experience from 194 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Indications for transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) have been extended to technically challenging tumors, which may be associated with an increased risk of peritoneal perforation (PP). The aim of the present study was to investigate the occurrence, management and outcome of PP in patients having TEM.

METHODS

All the patients who had TEM for rectal adenoma or adenocarcinoma in our unit were included. Patients in whom PP occurred (Group A) were compared to those without PP (Group B).

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2015, 194 TEM (116 men, median age 66 [range 21-100] years) were divided into Groups A (n = 28, 14%) and B (n = 166). The latter group included four patients, in whom a laparoscopy did not confirm suspicion of PP made during TEM. In 2 of 28 patients (7%), the diagnosis of PP was made postoperatively during reoperation for peritonitis. For the 26 other patients (93%), routine exploratory laparoscopy was performed with suture of the peritoneal defect on the pouch of Douglas in 24 cases and a rectal suture alone in 2 cases. Independent predictive factors for PP were: distance from the anal verge >10 cm (OR = 3.6), circumferential tumor (OR = 3.0) and anterior location (OR = 2.7). Hospital stay was significantly longer in Group A (7.5 [3-31] days) than in Group B (4 [1-38] days; p < 0.0001), whereas there was no significant difference regarding postoperative morbidity and recurrence rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggested that PP is not a very rare event during TEM, especially in anterior, circumferential and/or high rectal tumors. Laparoscopic treatment of PP is feasible and safe. The occurrence of PP is not associated with poor oncologic results.

What is the best tool for transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM)? A case-matched study in 74 patients comparing a standard platform and a disposable material

PURPOSE

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is the gold standard for local excision of rectal lesions, but no study exists concerning the best material. The objective was to compare TEM using a disposable material vs a standard platform through a case-matched study.

METHODS

Patients who underwent TEM for rectal neoplasms were identified from prospective databases in two tertiary referral centers and matched according to four criteria (sex, tumor location, size, distance from the anal verge): TEM using a disposable material (GelPoint Applied®; group A) and TEM using a standard TEO® platform (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany; group B).

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients were included and divided into group A (n = 33) and group B (n = 41). Full-thickness resection was less frequent in group A (85%) than B (100%; p = 0.01). Adenocarcinoma was less frequent in group A than B: 27 vs 42% (p = 0.03). No difference was noted regarding median operative time (53 vs 53 min; p = 0.6) and a peritoneal perforation rate (6 vs 20%; p = 0.17). Median length of stay was shorter in group A than B (4 vs 5 days; p < 0.008). No significant difference was noted for major morbidity (12 vs 10%; p = 0.66), R1 resection (21 vs 10%; p = 0.2), and recurrence rates (8 vs 7%; p = 0.62). No difference was noted for rectal stenosis (3 vs 12%; p = 0.22) and transit disorder rates (12 vs 17%; p = 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that TEM can be performed using either a TEO® platform or a disposable material, with similar surgical results. The TEO® platform seems to be superior to obtain full-thickness and R0 resection.

Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery

Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) techniques encompass a variety of approaches, including transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery. These allow a surgeon to perform local excision of rectal lesions with minimal morbidity and the potential to spare the need for proctectomy. As understanding of the long-term outcomes from these procedures has evolved, so have the indications for TES. In this study, we review the development of TES, its early results, and the evolution of new surgical techniques. In addition, we evaluate the most recent research on indications and outcomes in rectal cancer.

Indications and Outcomes From 32 Consecutive Patients for the Treatment of Rectal Lesions by Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, perioperative morbidity, and short-term outcomes of the transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) technique.

METHODS

This is a descriptive review of prospectively collected data from 32 consecutive patients who underwent TAMIS procedures in our colorectal unit over a 40-month period. GelPOINT Path port was used in all cases. Demographic data, indications, tumor characteristics, morbidity, and follow-up data were collected. Primary endpoints included feasibility, safety, perioperative morbidity, and resection quality.

RESULTS

Fifteen adenomas, 12 carcinomas, 1 gastrointestinal stromal tumor, and 1 neuroendocrine tumor were locally excised. Additionally, 3 pelvic abscesses were drained transanally using the TAMIS port. Mean distance from the anal verge was 5.6 ± 1.5 cm. Early postoperative complications occurred in 22%, with only one case of major complication (3.1%) requiring reoperation, and no postoperative mortality. Four carcinomas were understaged (33.3%) and 1 adenoma overstaged (6.7%) preoperatively. Three carcinomas were not suspected preoperatively (25%). Microscopic positive lateral margin was found in one case, and no affected deep margin was found. Fragmentation rate was 6.9%, 2 cases, both lesions over 20 cm². In cases of fit patients with high-risk carcinomas, 2 underwent immediate salvage surgery and another 2 refused and were treated with adjuvant radiotherapy. With a median follow-up of 26 months, the overall recurrence rate was 10.3%, 1 adenoma and 2 carcinomas.

CONCLUSION

TAMIS seems to be a safe and reproducible procedure for local excision of well-selected rectal lesions with low morbidity and good functional outcomes.