International expert consensus guidance on indications, implementation and quality measures for transanal total mesorectal excision

Local Recurrence-Free Survival After TaTME: A Canadian Institutional Experience

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision is a novel surgical treatment for mid to low rectal cancers. Norwegian population data have raised concerns about local recurrence in patients treated with transanal total mesorectal excision.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze local recurrence and disease-free survival in patients treated by transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer at a high-volume tertiary center.

DESIGN

This retrospective study used a prospectively maintained institutional transanal total mesorectal excision database. Patient demographics, treatment, and outcomes data were analyzed. Local recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single academic institution in Vancouver, Canada.

PATIENTS

All patients treated by transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma between 2014 and 2022 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was local recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2022, 306 patients were treated by transanal total mesorectal excision at St. Paul's Hospital. Of these, 279 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 62 years (SD ± 12.3), and 66.7% of patients were men. Restorative resection was achieved in 97.5% of patients, with a conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery of 6.8%. The composite optimal pathological outcome was 93.9%. The median follow-up was 26 months (interquartile range, 12-47), and 82.8% of patients achieved reestablishment of GI continuity to date. The overall local recurrence rate was 4.7% (n = 13). The estimated 2-year local recurrence-free survival rate was 95.0% (95% CI, 92-98) and the estimated 5-year local recurrence-free survival rate was 94.5% (95% CI, 91-98).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study and the generalizability of a Canadian population.

CONCLUSIONS

Recent European data have challenged the presumed oncologic safety of transanal total mesorectal excision. Although the learning curve for this procedure is challenging and poor outcomes are associated with low volume, this high-volume single-center study confirms acceptable oncologic outcomes consistent with the current standard. See Video Abstract .

SOBREVIDA SIN RECIDIVA DESPUS DE TATME EXPERIENCIA INSTITUCIONAL CANADIENSE

ANTECEDENTES:La excisión total del mesorecto por vía transanal es un tratamiento quirúrgico novedoso para los cánceres de recto medio a bajo. Estudios sobre la población noruega han generado preocupación debido a la recidiva local en pacientes tratados con excisión total del mesorecto por vía transanal.OBJETIVO:Nuestra finalidad fué de analizar la recidiva local y la sobrevida libre de enfermedad en pacientes tratados mediante la excisión total del mesorecto por vía transanal, debido a un cáncer de recto en un centro terciario de alto volúmen.DISEÑO:El presente estudio retrospectivo, utiliza una base de datos institucional sobre la excisión total del mesorecto por vía transanal mantenida prospectivamente. Se analizaron los datos demográficos, de tratamiento y los resultados de los pacientes sometidos a la técnica mencionada. La recidiva local, la sobrevida libre de enfermedad y la sobrevida global se analizaron mediante el modelo de Kaplan-Meier.AJUSTES:El estudio se llevó a cabo en una sola institución académica en Vancouver, Canadá.PARTICIPANTES:Se incluyeron todos los pacientes tratados mediante excisión total del mesorecto por vía transanal causado por adenocarcinomas de recto entre 2014 y 2022.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la sobrevida libre de recidiva local.RESULTADOS:Entre 2014 y 2022, 306 pacientes fueron tratados mediante la excisión total del mesorecto por vía transanal en el Hospital St. Paul. De estos, 279 pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. La edad media fue de 62 años (DE ± 12,3) y el 66,7% de los pacientes eran varones. La resección restauradora se logró en el 97,5% de los pacientes con una tasa de conversión de cirugía laparoscópica en laparotomía del 6,8%. El resultado patológico óptimo combinado fué del 93,9%. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 26 meses (rango intercuartil 12-47) y el 82,8% logró el restablecimiento de la continuidad gastrointestinal hasta la fecha. La tasa global de recidiva local fué del 4,7% (n = 13). La sobrevida libre de recidiva local estimada a los 2 años fué del 95,0% (IC del 95%: 92-98) y del 94,5% a los 5 años (IC del 95%: 91-98).LIMITACIONES:Las limitaciones incluyen la naturaleza retrospectiva del estudio y la generalización de una población canadiense.CONCLUSIONES:Datos europeos recientes han cuestionado la supuesta seguridad oncológica de la excisión total del mesorecto por vía transanal. Si bien la curva de aprendizaje de este procedimiento es muy desafiante y los malos resultados se asocian con un volumen bajo, el presente estudio, unicéntrico de gran volumen confirma los resultados oncológicos aceptables consistentes con el estándar actual. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Clinical efficacy and pathological outcomes of transanal endoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Transanal endoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) surgery currently lacks sufficient clinical research and reporting.

AIM

To investigate the clinical effectiveness of transanal endoscopic ISR, in order to promote the clinical application and development of this technique.

METHODS

This study utilized a retrospective case series design. Clinical and pathological data of patients with lower rectal cancer who underwent transanal endoscopic ISR at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University between May 2018 and May 2023 were included. All patients underwent transanal endoscopic ISR as the surgical approach. We conducted this study to determine the perioperative recovery status, postoperative complications, and pathological specimen characteristics of this group of patients.

RESULTS

This study included 45 eligible patients, with no perioperative mortalities. The overall incidence of early complications was 22.22%, with a rate of 4.44% for Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III events. Two patients (4.4%) developed anastomotic leakage after surgery, including one case of grade A and one case of grade B. Postoperative pathological examination confirmed negative circumferential resection margins and distal resection margins in all patients. The mean distance between the tumor lower margin and distal resection margin was found to be 2.30 ± 0.62 cm. The transanal endoscopic ISR procedure consistently yielded high quality pathological specimens.

CONCLUSION

Transanal endoscopic ISR is safe, feasible, and provides a clear anatomical view. It is associated with a low incidence of postoperative complications and favorable pathological outcomes, making it worth further research and application.

Is survival after transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) worse than that after traditional total mesorectal excision? A retrospective propensity score-adjusted cohort study

PURPOSE

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) was developed to provide better vision during resection of the mesorectum. Conflicting results have shown an increase in local recurrence and shorter survival after taTME. This study compared the outcomes of taTME and abdominal (open, laparoscopic, robotic) total mesorectal excision (abTME).

METHODS

Patients who underwent taTME or abTME for stages I-III rectal cancer and who received an anastomosis were included. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively conducted database was performed. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Risk factors were adjusted by propensity score matching (PSM). The secondary endpoints were local recurrence rates and combined poor pathological outcomes.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2020, a total of 189 patients underwent taTME, and 119 underwent abTME; patients were followed up for a mean of 54.7 (SD 24.2) and 78.4 (SD 34.8) months, respectively (p < 0.001). The 5-year survival rates after taTME and abTME were not significantly different after PSM: OS: 78.2% vs. 88.6% (p = 0.073), CSS: 87.4% vs. 92.1% (p = 0.359), and DFS: 69.3% vs. 80.9% (p = 0.104), respectively. No difference in the local recurrence rate was observed (taTME, n = 10 (5.3%); abTME, n = 10 (8.4%); p = 0.280). Combined poor pathological outcomes were more frequent after abTME (n = 36, 34.3%) than after taTME (n = 35, 19.6%) (p = 0.006); this difference was nonsignificant according to multivariate analysis (p = 0.404).

CONCLUSION

taTME seems to be a good treatment option for patients with rectal cancer and is unlikely to significantly affect local recurrence or survival. However, further investigations concerning the latter are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT0496910).

Transanal total mesorectal excision: single center study on risk factors for major complications

Purpose

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) as a novel surgical approach for mid and low rectal cancer has gained significant research interest in recent years. The main objective of this study is to identify the risk factors associated with major complications after TaTME and evaluate the perioperative clinical outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients with mid-to-low rectal cancer who underwent TaTME surgery and were admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University from January 2018 to May 2023. Univariate and multivariate regression methods were employed to analyze the risk factors influencing the occurrence of major complications (Clavien-Dindo III-V).

Results

This study included a total of 179 eligible cases, with no perioperative deaths. The overall incidence of early complications was 25.1%, with a rate of 10.1% for mild complications and 15.0% for major complications. The postoperative anastomotic leakage rate within 30 days was 6.7%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that male (P=0.030), pathological T ≥ 3 (P=0.018) and manual anastomosis (P=0.009) were independent risk factors for the development of major complications after surgery.

Conclusion

In this study, the incidence of early complications and anastomotic leakage rate in TaTME were both relatively low. Male, pathological T stage ≥ 3 and manual anastomosis were independent risk factors for the occurrence of major complications in a cohort of patients with mid and low rectal cancer undergoing TaTME.

Integrating a tumour appropriate transanal or robotic assisted approach to total mesorectal excision in high-volume rectal cancer practice is safe and cost-effective

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is accepted as the gold standard for oncological resection in rectal cancer. The best approach to TME is debated and often surgeons will select a preferred approach. In this study, we aimed to describe how both robotic (R-TME) and transanal (TaTME) TME can be integrated into high-volume rectal cancer surgeon practice with a comparison of clinical and oncological outcomes and cost analysis. A prospective comparative cohort study was performed in a high-volume rectal cancer centre comparing the previous 50 R-TME and 50 TaTME performed by the same surgeon. A comparison of tumour characteristics was performed to highlight a specific role for each technique. Clinical outcomes (operative duration, length of stay (LOS) and perioperative morbidity), cancer quality indicators (resection margin and completeness of TME) and cost analysis were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS, version 20. R-TME was preferred in mid-rectal cancer, compared to TaTME preferred in low rectal cancer (9 cm vs. 5 cm, p < 0.001). Operative duration was longer in R-TME compared to TaTME (265 vs. 179 min, p < 0.001). Major complications (CD III-IV complications) were experienced in 10% of R-TME and 14% of TaTME (p = 0.476). A 98% (n = 49) clear R0 resection margin was achieved with both R-TME and TaTME and mesorectum quality defined as 'complete' in 86% (n = 43) in R-TME and 82% (n = 41) in TaTME. Length of hospital stay was shorter in R-TME (5 vs. 7 days, p = 0.624). An overall difference of €131 was observed favouring TaTME. In high-volume rectal cancer surgery practice, both R-TME and TaTME can be practised and tailored according to patients and tumour characteristics, with comparable clinical and cancer outcomes and is cost-effective.

Establishment of Surgical Difficulty Grading System and Application of MRI-Based Artificial Intelligence to Stratify Difficulty in Laparoscopic Rectal Surgery

(1) Background: The difficulty of pelvic operation is greatly affected by anatomical constraints. Defining this difficulty and assessing it based on conventional methods has some limitations. Artificial intelligence (AI) has enabled rapid advances in surgery, but its role in assessing the difficulty of laparoscopic rectal surgery is unclear. This study aimed to establish a difficulty grading system to assess the difficulty of laparoscopic rectal surgery, as well as utilize this system to evaluate the reliability of pelvis-induced difficulties described by MRI-based AI. (2) Methods: Patients who underwent laparoscopic rectal surgery from March 2019 to October 2022 were included, and were divided into a non-difficult group and difficult group. This study was divided into two stages. In the first stage, a difficulty grading system was developed and proposed to assess the surgical difficulty caused by the pelvis. In the second stage, AI was used to build a model, and the ability of the model to stratify the difficulty of surgery was evaluated at this stage, based on the results of the first stage; (3) Results: Among the 108 enrolled patients, 53 patients (49.1%) were in the difficult group. Compared to the non-difficult group, there were longer operation times, more blood loss, higher rates of anastomotic leaks, and poorer specimen quality in the difficult group. In the second stage, after training and testing, the average accuracy of the four-fold cross validation models on the test set was 0.830, and the accuracy of the merged AI model was 0.800, the precision was 0.786, the specificity was 0.750, the recall was 0.846, the F1-score was 0.815, the area under the receiver operating curve was 0.78 and the average precision was 0.69; (4) Conclusions: This study successfully proposed a feasible grading system for surgery difficulty and developed a predictive model with reasonable accuracy using AI, which can assist surgeons in determining surgical difficulty and in choosing the optimal surgical approach for rectal cancer patients with a structurally difficult pelvis.

Surgical Outcomes, Long-Term Recurrence Rate, and Resource Utilization in a Prospective Cohort of 165 Patients Treated by Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Distal Rectal Cancer

A transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a smart alternative to a conventional TME. However, worrisome reports of a high recurrence and complications triggered a moratorium in a few countries. This study assessed the outcomes and resource utilization of a taTME. Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer treated by a taTME were prospectively included. Outcomes were reported as the median and interquartile range (IQR). One hundred sixty-five patients (67% male and 33% female) with a tumor 7 cm (IQR 5-10) from the anal verge were followed for 50 months (IQR 32-79). The resection margins were threatened in 25% of the patients, while 75% of the patients received neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. A good mesorectal dissection and clear margins were achieved in 96% of the specimens, and 27 lymph nodes (IQR 20-38) were harvested. Ninety-day major morbidity affected 36 patients (21.8%), including 12 with anastomotic leakages (7.2%). A recurrence occurred locally in 9 patients (5.4%), and 44 patients had a distant metastasis (26.7%). The five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were 67% and 90%, respectively. A multivariate analysis found a long operation and frailty predicted an anastomotic leak, while a positive distal margin and lymph nodes predicted a local recurrence and distant metastasis. A two-team taTME saved 102 min of operative time and EUR 1385 when compared to a one-team approach. Transanal total mesorectal excision produced sound surgical quality and excellent oncologic outcomes.

Current status of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer and the expanding indications of the transanal approach for extended pelvic surgeries

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has been rapidly accepted as a promising surgical approach to the distal rectum. The benefits include ease of access to the bottom of the deep pelvis linearly over a short distance in order to easily visualize the important anatomy. Furthermore, the distal resection margins can be secured under direct vision. Additionally, a two-team approach combining taTME with a transabdominal approach could decrease the operative time and conversion rate. Although taTME was expected to become more rapidly popularized worldwide, enthusiasm for it has stalled due to unfamiliar intraoperative complications, a lack of oncologic evidence from randomized trials, and the widespread use of robotic surgery. While international registries have reported favorable short- and medium-term outcomes from taTME, a Norwegian national study reported a high local recurrence rate of 9.5%. The characteristics of the recurrences included rapid, multifocal growth in the pelvis, which was quite different from recurrences following traditional transabdominal TME; thus, the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Group reached a consensus for a temporary moratorium on the performance of taTME. To ensure acceptable baseline quality and patient safety, taTME should be performed by well-trained colorectal surgeons. Although the appropriate indications for taTME remain controversial, the transanal approach is extremely important as a means of goal setting in difficult TME cases and as an aid to the transabdominal approach in various types of extended pelvic surgeries. The benefits in transanal lateral lymph node dissection and pelvic exenteration are presented herein.

Detection of carbon dioxide embolism by transesophageal echocardiography during transanal/perineal endoscopic surgery: a pilot study

The transanal/perineal (ta/tp) endoscopic approach has been widely used for anorectal surgery in recent years, but carbon dioxide embolism is a possible lethal complication. The frequency of this complication in this approach is not known. In this study, we investigated the frequency of intraoperative (including occult) carbon dioxide embolism using transesophageal echocardiography. Patients who underwent surgery via the ta/tp approach and consented to participate were included. Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography was used to observe the right ventricular system in a four-chamber view. Changes in end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO₂), oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and blood pressure were taken from anesthesia records. Median maximum insufflation pressure during the ta/tp approach was 13.5 (12-18) mmHg. One patient (4.8%) was observed to have a bubble in the right atrium on intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography, with a decrease in EtCO₂ from 39 to 35 mmHg but no obvious change in SpO₂ or blood pressure. By lowering the insufflation pressure from 15 to 10 mmHg and controlling bleeding from the veins around the prostate, the gas rapidly disappeared and the operation could be continued. Among all patients, the range of variation in intraoperative EtCO₂ was 5-22 mmHg, and an intraoperative decrease in EtCO₂ of > 3 mmHg within 5 min was observed in 19 patients (median 5 mmHg in 1-10 times).Clinicians should be aware of carbon dioxide embolism as a rare but potentially lethal complication of anorectal surgery, especially when using the ta/tp approach.

Challenges and Learning Curves in Adopting TaTME and Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Cusum Analysis

Simple Summary

Rectal cancer surgery remains a challenge and information about the learning curve in adopting new techniques is lacking. This paper analyzes our experience in taTME (since 2015) and robotic surgery (since 2018) at a fully accredited referral center for the treatment of rectal cancer in Spain. In this retrospective study, we aim to analyze the learning curves for taTME and robot-assisted rectal procedures in the incorporation of these platforms into our practice. We sought to describe our team’s experience in incorporating these techniques and to analyze the difficulties that we have had. Hoping that sharing our experience can help other groups improve their results during the difficult initial phase of incorporating new techniques.

Abstract

New techniques are being developed to improve the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. This paper analyzes the learning curves for transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and robot-assisted surgery in our colorectal surgery department. We analyzed retrospectively data from patients undergoing curative and elective surgery for rectal cancer ≤12 cm from the anal verge. We excluded extended surgeries. We used cumulative sum (CUSUM) curve analysis to identify inflection points. Between 2015 and 2021, 588 patients underwent surgery for rectal cancer at our center: 67 taTME and 79 robot-assisted surgeries. To overcome the operative time learning curve, 14 cases were needed for taTME and 53 for robot-assisted surgery. The morbidity rate started to decrease after the 17th case in taTME and after the 49th case in robot-assisted surgery, but it is much less abrupt in robot-assisted group. During the initial learning phase, the rate of anastomotic leakage was higher in taTME (35.7% vs. 5.7%). Two Urological lesions occurred in taTME but not in robot-assisted surgery. The conversion rate was higher in robot-assisted surgery (1.5% vs. 10.1%). Incorporating new techniques is complex and entails a transition period. In our experience, taTME involved a higher rate of serious complications than robot-assisted surgery during initial learning period but required a shorter learning curve.

International expert opinion on optimal treatment of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer resection: a case-vignette study

PURPOSE

Little is known about the optimal treatment of anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer and whether treatment strategy depends on leakage features and patient characteristics. The objective of this study was to determine which treatment principles are used by expert colorectal surgeons worldwide.

METHODS

In this international case-vignette study, participants completed a survey on their preferred treatment for 11 clinical cases with varying leakage features and two patient scenarios depending on surgical risk (a total of 22 cases).

RESULTS

In total, 42 of 64 invited surgeons completed the survey from 18 countries worldwide. The majority worked at a university training hospital (62%) and had more than 15 years of experience performing LAR for rectal cancer (52%). Early leaks in septic patients were preferably treated by major salvage surgery, to some extent depending on the patient scenario. In early leaks in non-septic patients, drainage and faecal diversion were the cornerstones of the proposed treatment. Endoscopic vacuum therapy was more often proposed than percutaneous drainage. A minority proposed anastomotic reconstruction, more often for larger defects. Treatment of late leaks ranged from watchful waiting, drainage, or transanal repair to major (non-)restorative salvage surgery, with minimal influence of the degree of symptoms on the proposed strategy. Leaks of the blind loop and rectovaginal fistulae showed high variability in the proposed treatment strategy.

CONCLUSION

This TENTACLE-Rectum case-vignette study demonstrates tailored treatment strategies depending on the clinical type of leak and patient characteristics, with variable degrees of consensus and knowledge gaps which should be addressed in future studies.

Indications and Technical Considerations for Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision

A 53-year-old man presented after noting bright red blood from his rectum. On examination, he was found to have a mass 1 cm above the anal sphincter complex. He had a BMI of 40 kg/m2 and was otherwise healthy. MRI revealed a T2/early T3 lesion with extramural venous invasion and suspicious perirectal lymph nodes. Low rectal cancer was diagnosed. He underwent long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiation with good but not complete clinical response. Given his obesity and the low nature of his rectal cancer, a transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) was planned.

Usefulness of structured-cadaveric training for trans-anal pelvic exenteration

PURPOSE

Structured training using cadaveric simulation is useful for trans-anal surgery; however, no studies have examined the effectiveness of cadaveric training for advanced trans-anal surgery including pelvic exenteration (PE).

METHODS

Twelve colorectal surgeons attended a total of 10 cadaveric simulation training courses between 2016 and 2021 and completed a questionnaire at the end of the program. We divided 14 consecutive patients who underwent trans-anal PE between 2015 and 2021 into two groups: pre-training group and post-training group, and compared the clinico-pathological features between the groups.

RESULTS

The median length of clinical experience of the surgeons was 12 years. There was high score agreement among the surgeons that the course was useful for recognition of anatomical and layer structure, training for trans-anal total mesorectal excision and trans-anal PE, and reducing complications specific to the trans-anal approach. Compared with the pre-training group, patients in the post-training group had a higher rate of two-team surgery (77.8% vs 0%, P = .021), and shorter time to specimen removal (273 vs 423 min, P = .045).

CONCLUSIONS

Structured-cadaveric training has potential use as a technical step-up in advanced trans-anal surgery that might contribute to better short-term outcomes in the clinical setting.

UEG and EAES rapid guideline: Systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment and evidence-informed European recommendations on TaTME for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Evidence and practice recommendations on the use of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer are conflicting.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to summarize best evidence and develop a rapid guideline using transparent, trustworthy, and standardized methodology.

METHODS

We developed a rapid guideline in accordance with GRADE, G-I-N, and AGREE II standards. The steering group consisted of general surgeons, members of the EAES Research Committee/Guidelines Subcommittee with expertise and experience in guideline development, advanced medical statistics and evidence synthesis, biostatisticians, and a guideline methodologist. The guideline panel consisted of four general surgeons practicing colorectal surgery, a radiologist with expertise in rectal cancer, a radiation oncologist, a pathologist, and a patient representative. We conducted a systematic review and the results of evidence synthesis by means of meta-analyses were summarized in evidence tables. Recommendations were authored and published through an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), with the guideline panel making use of an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to arrive at consensus.

RESULTS

This rapid guideline provides a weak recommendation for the use of TaTME over laparoscopic or robotic TME for low rectal cancer when expertise is available. Furthermore, it details evidence gaps to be addressed by future research and discusses policy considerations. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries, and decision aids in user-friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/4494 .

CONCLUSIONS

This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed trustworthy recommendations on the use of TaTME for rectal cancer.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for abdominoperineal resection is associated with poor oncological outcomes in rectal cancer patients: A word of caution from a multicentric Canadian cohort study

AIM

The main objective of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes of patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR) versus low anterior resection (LAR) through a transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) approach.

METHOD

A total of 360 adult patients with a diagnosis of rectal cancer were enrolled at participating centres from the Canadian taTME Expert Collaboration. Forty-three patients received taTME-APR and received 317 taTME-LAR. Demographic, operative, pathological and follow-up data were collected and merged into a single database. Results are presented as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval. All analyses were performed in the R environment (v.3.6).

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with a positive circumferential radial margin status was higher in the taTME-APR group than the taTME-LAR group (21% vs. 9%, p = 0.001). Complete TME was achieved in 91% of those undergoing APR compared with 96% of those undergoing LAR (p = 0.25). APR was associated with a greater rate of local recurrence relative to LAR, although it was not significant [crude HR = 3.53 (95% CI 0.92-13.53)]. Circumferential margin positivity was significantly associated with a higher rate of systemic recurrence [crude HR = 3.59 (95% CI 1.38-9.3)].

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate inferior outcomes in those undergoing taTME-APR compared with taTME-LAR. The use of this technique for this particular indication needs to be carefully considered.

Limitations and Concerns with Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) was developed to overcome the technical challenges of a minimally invasive (ultra-) low anterior resection. This new technique has recently come under careful scrutiny as technical pitfalls were reported, in specific relation to the transanal approach. Patients are at risk for urologic lesions. Moreover, carbon dioxide embolism is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication. The benefit of TaTME from an oncological point of view has neither been clarified. Hypothetically, better visualization of the lower rectum could lead to better dissection and total mesorectal excision (TME) specimens, resulting in better oncologic results. Up until now, retrospective multicenter reports seem to show that short-term oncologic results are not inferior after TaTME as compared with after laparoscopic TME. Alarming reports have however been published from Norway suggesting a high incidence and particular multifocal pattern of early local recurrence. In this article, a balanced overview is given of the most important technical pitfalls and oncological concerns arising with this new procedure.

Transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a comparative study of long-term oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is the most recent approach developed to improve pelvic dissection in surgery for mid and low rectal tumors. There are still inconsistencies regarding the technique's oncological results. The aim of this study was to analyze clinical and oncological outcomes of the learning curve of TaTME in comparison to laparoscopic TME (lapTME).

METHODS

Rectal cancer patients who had TaTME and lapTME in two Portuguese colorectal units between March 2016 and December 2018 were eligible. Primary endpoints were 5-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence. Secondary endpoints were clinical and pathological outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients underwent TaTME (29 men) and 39 lapTME (27 men) with a median age of 69 and 66 (p = 0.093), respectively. No differences were observed concerning baseline characteristics, emphasizing their comparability. In the TaTME group, there were more hand-sewn anastomosis (0 lapTME versus 7 TaTME, p = 0.018) with significantly less distance to the dentate line (40 mm lapTME versus 20 mm TaTME, p = 0.005) and significantly more loop ileostomies performed (28 lapTME versus 41 TaTME, p = 0.001). There were no differences in post-operative mortality, morbidity, readmissions, and stoma closure. Groups were similar in relation to specimen quality, margins, and resectability; however, TaTME had a significantly higher node yield (14 lapTME versus 20 TaTME, p = 0.002). Finally, no disparities were noted in oncological outcomes, namely local and distant recurrence, 5-year overall survival, and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Even with the disadvantage of the learning curve of a new technique, TaTME appears to be comparable to lapTME, with similar long-term oncological outcomes. It has, however, a demanding learning curve, significant risk for morbidity and should be used only for selected patients.

The role of transanal total mesorectal excision

At inception, transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) was hypothesized to be a solution for several problems encountered in pelvic surgery, particularly for distal rectal cancer. The transanal part of the procedure is less hampered by patient related factors such as visceral obesity and a narrow bony pelvis and can thus overcome access and visualization problems encountered with a pure abdominal approach. Clearly, as for any new technique, a learning curve needs to be negotiated, ideally without unacceptable harm to patients. Once in experienced hands, TaTME might overcome challenges found in anatomically challenging rectal cancer patients as well as for other indications. The role of TaTME is not to replace, but rather complement its abdominal counterpart.

Defining the learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) represents a novel approach to rectal dissection. Although many structured training programs have been developed worldwide to assist surgeons in implementing this new technique, the learning curve (LC) of taTME has yet to be conclusively defined. This is particularly important given the concerns regarding the complication profile and oncological safety of taTME. The aim of this review was to provide an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis of the LC for taTME, comparing the difference of outcomes between the LC and after learning curve (ALC) groups.

METHODS

An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2010-2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases. All studies comparing taTME procedures before and after LC were analysed.

RESULTS

Seven retrospective studies of prospectively collected databases were included, comparing 333 (51.0%) patients in the LC group and 320 (49.0%) patients in the ALC group. There was a significantly reduced number of adverse intra-operative events, anastomotic leaks and improved quality of mesorectal excision in the ALC group.

CONCLUSION

This review shows that there is a significant improvement in clinical outcomes between the LC and ALC groups which supports the need for careful mastery and ongoing technical refinement during the LC in taTME. This procedure should be performed on a subset of carefully selected patients in the hands of experienced and well-trained teams dedicated to ongoing audit.

Transanal total mesorectal excision and transabdominal robotic surgery for rectal cancer: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Transabdominal robotic surgery and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) are newly introduced strategies for rectal cancer. These procedures might have many advantages in rectal cancer treatment in terms of improving oncological and functional outcomes, especially in cases involving advanced cancer or technical difficulty. In the present study, we aimed to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of transabdominal robotic surgery and laparoscopic TaTME as a hybrid surgery for rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated six patients who underwent hybrid surgery for rectal cancer from August 2018 to April 2020. Both clinical and pathological outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Two patients showed circumferential margin involvement both before and after neoadjuvant therapy. Three patients were planned to undergo hybrid surgery with intersphincteric resection because of a narrow pelvis. One patient was planned to undergo hybrid surgery for a giant tumor of >10 cm. The median length of hospitalization was 17 days. No patients required conversion to an open procedure. All patients underwent formation of defunctioning ileostomies. Two patients had a stapled anastomosis and four had a hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis. Complications included one case of anastomotic leakage, which was managed conservatively with ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided drainage and antibiotics. Histological analysis revealed that all specimens had a negative radial margin and distal margin. The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 17.5. Two patients showed extensive lymph node metastases, including lateral node metastasis.

CONCLUSION

Hybrid surgery was performed safely and may improve oncological outcomes for rectal cancer. This technique has many potential benefits and would be alternative option in multimodal strategies for rectal cancer.

Special surgical approaches during peri-COVID-19 pandemic: Robotic and transanal minimally invasive surgery

During the peri-coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the need of special care has raised, not only for our patients but also for health care workers. These needs are different regarding the procedure and the approach performed. This is a dynamic review in the use of robotics and transanal approaches for colorectal diseases. We searched PubMed and KSREvidence.com for studies related to coronavirus disease and robotic surgery/transanal mesorectal excision/transanal surgery (primary and systematic reviews). From 147 results in PubMed, 11 were selected for full text screening, and 11 were included in this paper. From 3 results in KSREvidence, no relevant systematic reviews were identified. We also checked the references in identified papers for further relevant studies. European Society of Coloproctology guidelines were including as part of the recommendations available. Robotic and transanal MIS can be performed safely during the pandemic, but particular characteristics of these procedure need to be taken into consideration.

Transanal mesorectal excision: early outcomes in Australia and New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) aims to overcome some of the technical challenges faced when operating on mid and low rectal cancers. Specimen quality has been confirmed previously, but recent concerns have been raised about oncological safety. This multicentre prospective study aimed to evaluate the safety of taTME among early adopters in Australia and New Zealand.

METHODS

Data from all consecutive patients who had taTME for rectal cancer from July 2014 to February 2020 at six tertiary referral centres in Australasia were recorded and analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 308 patients of median age of 64 years underwent taTME. Some 75.6 per cent of patients were men, and the median BMI was 26.8 kg/m2. The median distance of tumour from anal verge was 7 cm. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was administered to 57.8 per cent of patients. The anastomotic leak rate was 8.1 per cent and there was no mortality within 30 days of surgery. Pathological examination found a complete mesorectum in 295 patients (95.8 per cent), a near-complete mesorectum in seven patients (2.3 per cent), and an incomplete mesorectum in six patients (1.9 per cent). The circumferential resection margin and distal resection margin was involved in nine patients (2.9 per cent), and two patients (0.6 per cent) respectively. Over a median follow-up of 22 months, the local recurrence rate was 1.9 per cent and median time to local recurrence was 30.5 months.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that, with appropriate training and supervision, skilled minimally invasive rectal cancer surgeons can perform taTME with similar pathological and oncological results to open and laparoscopic surgery.

Short-term outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in Denmark - a prospective multicentre study

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term surgical and oncological outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer during the implementation phase of this procedure in Denmark.

METHOD

This is a retrospective review of prospectively recorded data. Registration was initiated by the Scientific Council of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG.dk) in order to assess the quality of care during the implementation of TaTME. Pre-, intra- and postoperative data including early recurrences were recorded at the operating centres.

RESULTS

From August 2016 to April 2019, 115 TaTME procedures were registered. Patients were predominantly male (74%) with mid-rectal (88%) tumours. The level of surgical complications was comparable to previous nationwide results. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 6/109 (5.5%). One urethral injury occurred. The plane of dissection was mesorectal in 60% of cases, intramesorectal in 28% and muscularis in 12%. Nonmicroradicality was seen in 8% (R1, 6%; R2, 2%). Four local recurrences occurred after a median of 23 months of follow-up. One of these was multifocal.

CONCLUSION

In an implementation phase where patient selection is expected, surgical and oncological results after TaTME were comparable to those of other approaches reported in the literature.

Initial Experience with the Safe Implementation of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME) as a Standardized Procedure for Low Rectal Cancer

Introduction: The laparoscopic approach for TME is proven to be non-inferior in oncological outcome compared to open surgery. Anatomical limitations in the male and obese pelvis with resulting pathological shortcomings and high conversion rates were stimuli for alternative approaches. The transanal approach for TME (TaTME) was introduced to overcome these limitations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of TaTME for mid and low rectal cancer at our center. Methods: TaTME is a hybrid procedure of simultaneously laparoscopic and transanal mesorectal excision. A retrospective analysis of all consecutive TaTME procedures performed at our center for mid and low rectal cancer between December 2014 and January 2020 was conducted. Results: A total of 157 patients underwent TaTME, with 72.6% receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Mean tumor height was 6.1 ± 2.3 cm from the anal verge, 72.6% of patients had undergone neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and 34.2% of patients presented with a threatened CRM upon pretherapeutic MRI. Abdominal conversion rate was 5.7% with no conversion for the transanal dissection. Early anastomotic leakage occurred in 7.0% of the patients. Mesorectum specimen was complete in 87.3%, R1 resection rate was 4.5% (involved distal resection margin) and in 7.6%, the CRM was positive. The three-year local recurrence rate of 58 patients with a follow-up ≥ 36 months was 3.4%. Overall survival was 92.0% after 12 months, and 82.2% after 36 months. Conclusion: TaTME can be performed safely with acceptable long-term oncological outcome. Low rectal cancer can be well addressed by TaTME, which is an appropriate alternative with low conversion, local recurrence, adequate mesorectal quality and CRM positivity rates.

Exploring the perioperative outcomes of a sample of successful adopters of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) during the learning phase

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision can be a technically challenging operation to master. While many early adopters have reported adequate outcomes, others have failed to reproduce these results. There are contradicting data on oncologic outcomes during the learning phase of this technique. Thus, our objective was to perform a multicentered assessment of oncological outcomes in patients undergoing transanal total mesorectal excision during the learning phase in a sample of successful adopting centers.

METHODS

Surgeons from 8 centers with experience in the management of rectal cancer were invited to participate. The initial 51 consecutive benign and malignant cases of the participating units were retrospectively reviewed, but only 366 cancer cases were included in the analysis. Procedures were divided into implementation (ie, the first 10 cases) and postimplementation (ie, case 11 on onwards) groups, and the main outcome was the incidence of local recurrence.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of local recurrence was 4.1% at a median follow-up of 35 months (interquartile range 20.3-44.2); among implementation and postimplementation groups local recurrence was 7.5% and 3.1%, respectively, and the rate of local recurrence was observed to be nearly 60% lower in the postimplementation group (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.43 [0.26-0.72]) Total mesorectal excision specimens were complete or nearly complete in 87.7% of cases, and the circumferential and distal margins were clear in 93.2% and 92.6%, respectively CONCLUSION: Local recurrence rate was low during the learning phase of the transanal total mesorectal excision in a sample of rectal cancer surgeons with acceptable surgical and oncologic outcomes. Both the prevalence and rate of local recurrence were markedly lower in the postimplementation phase, indicating improvement as experience accumulated.