A systematic review and meta-analysis on complications of transanal total mesorectal excision

Effectiveness of NOTES versus traditional techniques on surgical outcomes in adults with diverticulitis: a systematic review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This review will evaluate the effectiveness of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)/hybrid NOTES versus traditional surgical techniques in the management of diverticular disease.

INTRODUCTION

Diverticular disease can have a significant impact on a patient's quality of life, especially the changes affecting bowel function. Recurrent/severe symptoms may require surgery. Resections are invasive and can have significant operative complications. There has been a shift from an open resection to a more minimally invasive technique such as laparoscopy. Furthermore, the use of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic resection, using a transanal/transvaginal approach, has begun to be used in colorectal resections.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Eligible studies will include patients who underwent surgical resection for diverticular disease or diverticulitis. The review will consider studies that evaluate NOTES in the management of diverticular disease or diverticulitis. This will include hybrid procedures involving both NOTES and natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE), with the aid of laparoscopy/endoscopy/robotic equipment. Studies on participants under 18 years of age and presenting with non-diverticular pathologies will be excluded.

METHODS

This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. Databases to be searched will include PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ANZCTR, with no language limitations. The reference lists of included studies will be screened for additional studies. This review will preferentially consider experimental and quasi-experimental study designs. Two reviewers will conduct critical appraisal and data extraction. Studies will, where possible, be pooled in statistical meta-analyses.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023420771.

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).

Outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision compared to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Transanal dissection is increasingly used in laparoscopic surgery for total mesorectal excision of lower rectal cancers. Several studies compared outcomes of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with and without transanal dissection, yet there is a paucity of high-quality evidence. This meta-analysis aimed to provide a pooled comparative analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with and without transanal dissection based on evidence from randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2022-compliant systematic review of randomized controlled trials compared laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with and without transanal dissection. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through March 2023. The Medical Subject Headings terms used in the search were Rectal neoplasms, Proctectomy, Laparoscopy, and Transanal. The main outcomes included operative and pathologic outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias version 2 tool, and certainty of the evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The primary study outcome was conversion to open surgery.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials (1,339 patients; median age 61.2 years) were included; 671 patients underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with transanal dissection, and 668 underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision without transanal dissection. Both groups were similar in age, body mass index, and disease stage, but the laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with transanal dissection group had a higher male-to-female ratio, received neoadjuvant therapy and had a hand-sewn anastomosis more often. Patients who underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with transanal dissection had lower conversion rates (odds ratio = 0.179; P = .001), a higher likelihood of achieving complete total mesorectal excision (odds ratio = 1.435; P = .025), and fewer harvested lymph nodes (weighted mean difference = -1.926; P = .035). The groups had similar operative times (weighted mean difference = -3.476; P = .398), total complications (odds ratio = 0.94; P = .665), major complications (odds ratio = 1.112; P = .66), anastomotic leak (odds ratio = 0.67; P = .432), positive circumferential resection margin (odds ratio = 0.549; P = .155), and positive distal margins (odds ratio = 0.559; P = .171).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with transanal dissection was associated with lower odds of conversion to open surgery, greater likelihood of achieving complete total mesorectal excision, and fewer harvested lymph nodes than laparoscopic total mesorectal excision without transanal dissection.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a technique where rectal dissection is begun transanally in a "bottom-up" fashion. This technique facilitates dissection of the most distal part of the rectum and allows the establishment of the distal margin for rectal cancer. TaTME has proven its utility in facilitating low rectal dissection with significantly lower conversion rates and acceptable perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes. However, taTME remains a challenging technique to learn and adopt. This article describes the technique, indications, and outcomes of taTME in rectal cancer during the last decade.

Case report on a rare complication after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal malignancy vesicorectal fistula

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME) represents the latest surgical approach in rectal cancer management. We present a rare case of vesicorectal fistula (VRF) following a complication of TaTME surgery.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 67-year-old male underwent a Hartmann's procedure for perforated rectosigmoid cancer in 2019. He was lost to follow-up and re-presented in 2021 with synchronous cancer of the transverse colon and rectum. A two-team surgical approach was utilized: open subtotal colectomy (transabdominal approach) with concurrent excision of rectal stump (TaTME approach). Intraoperatively, an inadvertent bladder injury was identified and repaired. 8 months later, he re-presented with the passage of urine per rectum. Imaging and endoscopy revealed a VRF with cancer recurrence at the rectal stump.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

VRF is an uncommon complication of TaTME that carries a significant physical and psychological impact on the patient. While shown to be a safe and useful technique, the long-term oncological outcomes of TaTME are still awaited. Unique complications have been reported with TaTME, including gas embolism and injuries to the genitourinary structures, in which the latter caused the eventual VRF formation in our patient.

CONCLUSION

Revisional surgery for recurrent disease is challenging and can result in rare complications, especially in patients with distorted anatomy and when new surgical techniques are utilized. Radiotherapy further causes unpredictable tissue healing quality. The challenge remains for proper patient selection with individualization of surgical approaches, while keeping a close eye on the oncological outcomes of the patient.

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.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Surgical Complications and Anastomotic Leakage After Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Middle and Low Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a promising surgical procedure for middle and low rectal cancer; however, it is linked to significant morbidity. This study aimed to determine the incidence of postoperative surgical complications and anastomotic leakage following taTME and to identify their associated risk factors.

METHODS

The prospective clinical data of 114 patients, who underwent taTME and primary anastomosis for mid-low rectal cancer between November 2016 and June 2022, were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify clinical characteristics and risk factors for predicting surgical complications and anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

Surgical complications occurred in 40 (35.1%) patients within the first 30 days following surgery. Based on the Clavien-Dindo classification, minor complications (Clavien-Dindo grades I + II) accounted for 30.7%, while major complications (Clavien-Dindo grades III + IV) accounted for only 4.4%. None of the patients died within 30 days. The incidence of anastomotic leakage was 15.8%: 4.4% as grade A (5 cases), 9.6% as grade B (11 cases), and 1.8% as grade C (2 cases). Preoperative T3-4 was identified as an independent risk factor for surgical complications (p = 0.031) by multivariate analysis. American Society of Anesthesiology score ≥ 3 (P = 0.021) and incomplete total mesorectal excision specimens (P = 0.030) were significantly associated with the risk of anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the incidence of surgical complications and anastomotic leakage in taTME aligned with previously reported rates. Preoperative T3-4 was significantly associated with surgical complications. American Society of Anesthesiology score ≥ 3 and incomplete TME specimens independently increased the risk of anastomotic leakage.

Transanal down-to-up dissection of the distal rectum as a viable approach to achieve total mesorectal excision in laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer near the anus: a study of short- and long-term outcomes of 123 consecutive patients from a single Japanese institution

Background

In rectal cancer (RC) surgery, the complexity of total mesorectal excision (TME) in laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgery (lap-SPS) for RC near the anus has been a critical issue. Recently, technical assistance via the anus for complete TME has been receiving attention. This study aimed at clarifying the transanal down-to-up dissection viability for achieving TME in lap-SPS for RC near the anus.

Methods

We evaluated surgical and oncological outcomes of a total of 123 consecutive patients undergoing either a transanal rectal dissection (TARD) under direct vision mobilizing the most difficult portion of TME via the anus or the transanal TME by using an endoscopic system (TaTME) for achieving TME in lap-SPS for RC near the anus between January 2006 and February 2021.

Results

A total of 123 consecutive patients (83 men) with a median age of 66 years (range 33–86 years) were included. TARD and TaTME were performed for 50 (40.7%) and for 73 (59.3%) patients, respectively. Preoperative treatment was performed for 40 (32.5%) patients, resulting in a complete pathological response in 5 (12.5%) patients. Intersphincteric resection was performed significantly more in the TARD group (p<0.001). Although the TaTME group needed a longer operative time at the transanal portion (p<0.001), the median blood loss was lower (p<0.001). Postoperative complications with the Clavien–Dindo classification grade ≧2 developed in 52 (42.3%) patients. Urinary dysfunction and stoma-related complications were found most frequently. More patients needing medication for urinary dysfunction were found in the TARD group, but a significant difference was not observed (10.0% vs. 6.8%, p=0.526). The quality of TME was good for almost all patients. Recurrence developed in 18 (14.6%) patients. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates in 123 patients were 95.8% and 88.8%, respectively. The 5-year OS and RFS between the two groups were comparable.

Conclusions

Our data suggested that a transanal down-to-up dissection of the distal rectum might be a viable approach in lap-SPS for RC near the anus. Further studies are needed to examine the differences between TARD and TaTME.