Comparison of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery and Total Mesorectal Excision in the Treatment of T1 Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

What Is the Comparative Efficacy of Surgical, Endoscopic, Transanal Resection, and Radiotherapy Modalities in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer?

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer is a significant healthcare burden, and effective treatment is crucial. This research aims to compare the effectiveness of surgical and endoscopic resection, transanal resection, and radiotherapy.

METHODS

A literature analysis was conducted in order to identify relevant studies, by comparing the different surgical approaches and variables affecting treatment decisions. The findings were analyzed and synthesized to provide a comprehensive overview.

RESULTS

Surgical treatment, particularly TME (total mesorectal excision), proved consistent efficacy in achieving complete tumor resection and improving long-term survival. Endoscopic treatment and transanal resection techniques were promising for early-stage tumors but were associated with higher local recurrence rates. Radiotherapy, especially in combination with chemotherapy, played a crucial role in locally advanced cases, improving local control and reducing recurrence risk. Patient data, tumor characteristics, and healthcare system factors were identified as important factors in treatment modality selection.

CONCLUSION

Surgical treatment, specifically TME, remains the recommended standard approach for rectal cancer, providing excellent oncological outcomes. Endoscopic treatment and transanal resection techniques can be considered for selected early-stage cases, while radiotherapy is beneficial for locally advanced tumors. Treatment decisions should be personalized based on patient and tumor characteristics, considering the available resources and expertise within the healthcare system.

Local versus radical surgery for early rectal cancer with or without neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the standard of care for stage I rectal cancer. Despite major advances and increasing enthusiasm for modern endoscopic local excision (LE), uncertainty remains regarding its oncologic equivalence and safety relative to radical resection (RR).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the oncologic, operative, and functional outcomes of modern endoscopic LE compared to RR surgery in adults with stage I rectal cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to present), four trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials database), two thesis and proceedings databases, and relevant scientific societies' publications in February 2022. We performed handsearching and reference checking and contacted study authors of ongoing trials to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in people with stage I rectal cancer comparing any modern LE techniques to any RR techniques with or without the use of neo/adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) and standard errors for time-to-event data and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes, using generic inverse variance and random-effects methods. We regrouped surgical complications from the included studies into major and minor according to the standard Clavien-Dindo classification. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework.

MAIN RESULTS

Four RCTs were included in data synthesis with a combined total of 266 participants with stage I rectal cancer (T1-2N0M0), if not stated otherwise. Surgery was performed in university hospital settings. The mean age of participants was above 60, and median follow-up ranged from 17.5 months to 9.6 years. Regarding the use of co-interventions, one study used neoadjuvant CRT in all participants (T2 cancers); one study used short-course radiotherapy in the LE group (T1-T2 cancers); one study used adjuvant CRT selectively in high-risk patients undergoing RR (T1-T2 cancers); and the fourth study did not use any CRT (T1 cancers). We assessed the overall risk of bias as high for oncologic and morbidity outcomes across studies. All studies had at least one key domain with a high risk of bias. None of the studies reported separate outcomes for T1 versus T2 or for high-risk features. Low-certainty evidence suggests that RR may result in an improvement in disease-free survival compared to LE (3 trials, 212 participants; HR 1.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 4.24). This would translate into a three-year disease-recurrence risk of 27% (95% CI 14 to 50%) versus 15% after LE and RR, respectively. Regarding sphincter function, only one study provided objective results and reported short-term deterioration in stool frequency, flatulence, incontinence, abdominal pain, and embarrassment about bowel function in the RR group. At three years, the LE group had superiority in overall stool frequency, embarrassment about bowel function, and diarrhea. Local excision may have little to no effect on cancer-related survival compared to RR (3 trials, 207 participants; HR 1.42, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; very low-certainty evidence). We did not pool studies for local recurrence, but the included studies individually reported comparable local recurrence rates for LE and RR (low-certainty evidence). It is unclear if the risk of major postoperative complications may be lower with LE compared with RR (risk ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.28; low-certainty evidence; corresponding to 5.8% (95% CI 2.4% to 14.1%) risk for LE versus 11% for RR). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that the risk of minor postoperative complications is probably lower after LE (risk ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.85); corresponding to an absolute risk of 14% (95% CI 8% to 26%) for LE compared to 30.1% for RR. One study reported an 11% rate of temporary stoma after LE versus 82% in the RR group. Another study reported a 46% rate of temporary or permanent stomas after RR and none after LE. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of LE compared with RR on quality of life. Only one study reported standard quality of life function, in favor of LE, with a 90% or greater probability of superiority in overall quality of life, role, social, and emotional functions, body image, and health anxiety. Other studies reported a significantly shorter postoperative period to oral intake, bowel movement, and off-bed activities in the LE group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-certainty evidence, LE may decrease disease-free survival in early rectal cancer. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that LE may have little to no effect on cancer-related survival compared to RR for the treatment of stage I rectal cancer. Based on low-certainty evidence, it is unclear if LE may have a lower major complication rate, but probably causes a large reduction in minor complication rate. Limited data based on one study suggest better sphincter function, quality of life, or genitourinary function after LE. Limitations exist with respect to the applicability of these findings. We identified only four eligible studies with a low number of total participants, subjecting the results to imprecision. Risk of bias had a serious impact on the quality of evidence. More RCTs are needed to answer our review question with greater certainty and to compare local and distant metastasis rates. Data on important patient outcomes such as sphincter function and quality of life are very limited. Results of currently ongoing trials will likely impact the results of this review. Future trials should accurately report and compare outcomes according to the stage and high-risk features of rectal tumors, and evaluate quality of life, sphincter, and genitourinary outcomes. The role of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy as an emerging co-intervention for improving oncologic outcomes after LE needs to be further defined.

Current Surgical Methods in Local Rectal Excision

Background

The treatment of rectal cancer has evolved with the advancement of surgical techniques. Less invasive approaches are becoming more accepted as the primary treatment method.

Summary

Such methods as transanal excision, transanal endoscopic microsurgery, and transanal minimally invasive surgery can reduce morbidity and mortality rates. However, not all patients are suitable candidates for these procedures, and proper diagnostics are necessary to establish indications. Compared to total mesorectal excision, transanal excision techniques have been shown to have fewer complications and comorbidities while still being able to remove cancerous tissue entirely. Transanal excision is the simplest method, where the operator removes visible rectal lesions. The basic principle of transanal endoscopic microsurgery is to dilate the rectum mechanically and by air insufflation and then use special surgical instruments to remove suspicious lesions under the vision of a telescope. Transanal minimally invasive surgery combines transanal endoscopic microsurgery and single-incision laparoscopic surgery, making the hard-to-reach proximal rectum accessible to classic laparoscopic instruments.

Key Message

Local excision techniques, when used as a monotherapy for treating patients with rectal cancer, have established themselves as a curative and less radical treatment for strictly selected patients with early rectal carcinoma, leading to improved quality of life. When combined with other modalities such as neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, total neoadjuvant therapy, and immunotherapy, transanal surgery can be offered to patients with locally advanced rectal cancer as part of the organ preservation strategy. This review will discuss the patient selection and technical aspects of transanal surgery, showcasing its current role in treating rectal carcinoma.

Prognosis of Patients Over 60 Years Old With Early Rectal Cancer Undergoing Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery – A Single-Center Experience

Aim

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is widely performed in early rectal cancer. This technique offers greater organ preservation and decreases the risk of subsequent surgery. However, postoperative local recurrence and distant metastasis remain challenges for patients with high-risk pathological factors. This single-center study reports the prognosis of early rectal cancer patients over 60 years old after TEM.

Methods

The data of the patients over 60 years old who underwent local anal resection were collected retrospectively. Moreover, the 5-year follow-up data were analyzed to determine the 5-year DFS and OS.

Results

47 early rectal cancer patients over 60 years old underwent TEM. There were 27 patients with high-risk factors and 20 patients without high-risk factors. Two patients underwent radical surgery after TEM and ten patients received adjuvant treatment. Local recurrence occurred in 7 patients, of which 4 underwent salvage surgery. The 5-year progression-free survival rate was 75.6%, which was lower in the high-risk patients group (69.6%) than in the non-high-risk patients group (83.3%) (P>0.05). The 5-year OS was 90.2%, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (high-risk patients 87.0%, non-high-risk patients 94.4%). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in DFS and OS between people over and under 70 years old.

Conclusion

Some high-risk factor patients over 60 years old do not have inferior 5-year DFS and OS to the non-high-risk patients. TEM is an option for old patients with high surgical risks. Even if postoperative pathology revealed high-risk factors, timely surgical treatment after local recurrence would be beneficial to improve the 5-year DFS and OS.

SEOM-GEMCAD-TTD clinical guidelines for localized rectal cancer (2021)

The management of localized rectal cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach to optimize outcomes, reduce morbidity and prevent under or overtreatments. While early stages may obtain benefit of local resections without any additional therapies, locally advanced rectal cancer becomes a challenge defining the better sequential strategy of surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The latest results of international phase III studies have positioned the total neoadjuvant therapy as a potential new standard of care in high risk rectal cancers, however, the best schedule is still not well defined.

Complex Procedures in Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery: Intraperitoneal Entry, Ultra Large Rectal Tumors, High Lesions, and Resection in the Anal Canal

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) allows the local excision of rectal tumors and achieves lower morbidity and mortality rates than total mesorectal excision. TEM can treat lesions up to 18 to 20 cm from the anal verge, obtaining good oncological results in T1 stage cancers and preserving sphincter function. TEM is technically demanding. Large lesions (>5 cm), those with high risk of perforation into the peritoneal cavity, those in the upper rectum or the rectosigmoid junction, and those in the anal canal are specially challenging. Primary suture after peritoneal perforation during TEM is safe and it does not necessarily require the creation of a protective stoma. We recommend closing the wall defect in all cases to avoid the risk of inadvertent perforation. It is important to identify these complex lesions promptly to transfer them to reference centers. This article summarizes complex procedures in TEM.

[Transanal endoscopic rectal resection: immediate and long-term results]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the results of transanal endoscopic microsurgery in patients with rectal tumors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed 87 transanal endoscopic resections of rectal benign tumors (35 patients) and rectal cancer cT1N0M0 (52 patients) for the period since 2012.

RESULTS

There were 2 (3.8%) intraoperative intestinal wall perforations into abdominal cavity and 2 (3.8%) postoperative bleedings among patients with rectal cancer. Four (7.7%) patients developed recurrent rectal cancer (pT1N0M0 - 1 patient, pT2N0M0 - 3 patients; by tumor grades: G1 - 2 patients, G2 - 2 patients) within 1.6-5.2 years. All recurrent tumors were located on anterior rectal wall. In patients with rectal cancer, cumulative relapse-free survival was 0.923 (standard error 0.037), cumulative overall survival - 0.926 (standard error 0.043). There was 1 (4.3%) intraoperative intestinal wall perforation among patients with benign rectal tumors. Postoperative anastomotic leakage occurred in 1 (4.3%) patient. Recurrent benign tumors occurred in 2 (8.7%) patients with villous rectal tumors. No relapses were observed in patients with rectal adenomas (p=1.0).

CONCLUSION

Transanal endoscopic rectal resection is effective for benign rectal tumors and rectal cancer pT1N0M0 with high relapse-free and overall survival and low complication rate. Risk factors of recurrence are tumor stage pT2N0M0, tumor location on anterior wall and distance from the anus over 10 cm.

Early salvage total mesorectal excision (sTME) after organ preservation failure in rectal cancer does not worsen postoperative outcomes compared to primary TME: systematic review and meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

While oncological outcomes of early salvage total mesorectal excision (sTME) after local excision (LE) have been well studied, the impact of LE before TME on postoperative outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to compare early sTME with a primary TME for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines with the random-effects model were adopted using Review Manager Version 5.3 for pooled estimates.

RESULTS

We retrieved eleven relevant articles including 1728 patients (350 patients in the sTME group and 1438 patients in the TME group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of mortality (OR = 0.90, 95%CI [0.21 to 3.77], p = 0.88), morbidity (OR = 1.19, 95%CI [0.59 to 2.38], p = 0.63), conversion to open surgery (OR = 1.34, 95%CI [0.61 to 2.94], p = 0.47), anastomotic leak (OR = 1.38, 95%CI [0.50 to 3.83], p = 0.53), hospital stay (MD = 0.23 day, 95%CI [- 1.63 to 2.10], p < 0.81), diverting stoma rate (OR = 0.69, 95%CI [0.44 to 1.09], p = 0.11), abdominoperineal resection rate (OR = 1.47, 95%CI [0.91 to 2.37], p = 0.11), local recurrence (OR = 0.94, 95%CI [0.44 to 2.04], p = 0.88), and distant recurrence (OR = 0.88, 95%CI [0.52 to 1.48], p = 0.62). sTME was associated with significantly longer operative time (MD = 25.62 min, 95%CI[11.92 to 39.32], p < 0.001) lower number of harvested lymph nodes (MD =  - 2.25 lymph node, 95%CI [- 3.86 to - 0.65], p = 0.006), and higher proportion of incomplete TME (OR = 0.25, 95%CI [0.11 to 0.61], p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

sTME is not associated with increased postoperative morbidity, mortality, or local recurrence. However, the operative times are longer and yield a poor specimen quality.

Management of early rectal cancer; current surgical options and future direction

Rectal cancer is the second commonest cause of cancer death within the United Kingdom. Utilization of national screening programmes have resulted in a greater proportion of patients presenting with early-stage disease. The technique of transanal endoscopic microsurgery was first described in 1984 following which further options for local excision have emerged with transanal endoscopic operation and, more recently, transanal minimally invasive surgery. Owing to the risks of local recurrence, the current role of minimally invasive techniques for local excision in the management of rectal cancer is limited to the treatment of pre-invasive disease and low risk early-stage rectal cancer (T1N0M0 disease). The roles of chemotherapy and radiotherapy for the management of early rectal cancer are yet to be fully established. However, results of high-quality research such as the GRECCAR II, TESAR and STAR-TREC randomised control trials may highlight a wider role for local excision surgery in the future, when used in combination with oncological therapies. The aim of our review is to provide an overview in the current management of early rectal cancer, the surgical options available for local excision and the future multimodal direction of early rectal cancer treatment.

Multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: recommendations from the SICG (Italian Society of Geriatric Surgery), SIFIPAC (Italian Society of Surgical Pathophysiology), SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery and new technologies), and the WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) International Consensus Project

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although rectal cancer is predominantly a disease of older patients, current guidelines do not incorporate optimal treatment recommendations for the elderly and address only partially the associated specific challenges encountered in this population. This results in a wide variation and disparity in delivering a standard of care to this subset of patients. As the burden of rectal cancer in the elderly population continues to increase, it is crucial to assess whether current recommendations on treatment strategies for the general population can be adopted for the older adults, with the same beneficial oncological and functional outcomes. This multidisciplinary experts' consensus aims to refine current rectal cancer-specific guidelines for the elderly population in order to help to maximize rectal cancer therapeutic strategies while minimizing adverse impacts on functional outcomes and quality of life for these patients.

METHODS

The discussion among the steering group of clinical experts and methodologists from the societies' expert panel involved clinicians practicing in general surgery, colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, geriatric oncology, geriatrics, gastroenterologists, radiologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, and endoscopists. Research topics and questions were formulated, revised, and unanimously approved by all experts in two subsequent modified Delphi rounds in December 2020-January 2021. The steering committee was divided into nine teams following the main research field of members. Each conducted their literature search and drafted statements and recommendations on their research question. Literature search has been updated up to 2020 and statements and recommendations have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. A modified Delphi methodology was implemented to reach agreement among the experts on all statements and recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 SICG-SIFIPAC-SICE-WSES consensus for the multidisciplinary management of elderly patients with rectal cancer aims to provide updated evidence-based statements and recommendations on each of the following topics: epidemiology, pre-intervention strategies, diagnosis and staging, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgery, watch and wait strategy, adjuvant chemotherapy, synchronous liver metastases, and emergency presentation of rectal cancer.

Systematic review of transanal total mesorectal excision literature according to the ideal framework: The evolution never ends

BACKGROUND

Designing studies to assess critically novel procedures can be challenging; thus, the process to achieve robust evidence is frequently problematic. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate if literature on transanal total mesorectal excision is evolving according to the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term results framework.

METHODS

Literature on transanal total mesorectal excision was searched according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement, and these variables were recorded: bibliometric data, design, corresponding author's nationality, number of patients enrolled, and Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term results stages (stage 0, stage 1, stage 2, stage 3, and stage 4).

RESULTS

Out of 447 articles retrieved, 247 were selected (76.5% single center and 23.5% multicenter collaborations), including 35 reviews, 15 meta-analyses, 24 other publications, and 173 articles classified according to Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term results stages (19 stage 0, 27 stage 1, 111 stage 2, 7 stage 3, and 9 stage 4). Overall, impact factor produced was 634.10. Reviewing corresponding authors' nationalities, 32 countries were identified, and the most reported were the United States, China, and the United Kingdom; nearly all were from the Northern Hemisphere. Publication of stage 3 and 4 articles started in 2014, whereas stage 0 and 1 articles were stably published over time. The number of patients increased in correspondence with the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term results stages (case series with >51 patients, respectively, 100.0% stage 3, 77.8% stage 4, and 33.3% stage 2, P = .005).

CONCLUSION

The number of stage 3 and 4 articles is still low; however, the technical innovation of transanal total mesorectal excision is a non-stopping process with preclinical studies stably published over time.

Timing of recurrences of TEM resected rectal neoplasms is variable as per the surveillance practices of one tertiary care institution

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is widely used for the excision of rectal adenomas and early rectal adenocarcinoma. Few recommendations currently exist for surveillance of lesions excised by TEM. The purpose of this study was to review the surveillance practices and the patterns of recurrence among TEM resected lesions at a tertiary care hospital. A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients who underwent TEM for rectal adenoma or adenocarcinoma before June 2017. In our study population of 114 patients, the final pathology included 78 (68%) adenomas and 36 (32%) adenocarcinomas. Of the adenocarcinomas 23, 9, and 4 were T1, T2, T3 lesions, respectively. Of those, 25 patients opted for surveillance instead of further treatment. The most commonly recommended endoscopic surveillance strategy by our group for both adenomas and adenocarcinomas excised by TEM was flexible sigmoidoscopy every 6 months for 2 years. Recurrences occurred in 4/78 (5.1%) adenoma patients, all found within 16.9 months of surgery, and in 4/25 (16%) adenocarcinoma patients, found between 7.4 and 38.5 months post-surgery. Our data highlights the fact that the timing of recurrences post TEM surgery is variable. Further studies looking at recurrence patterns are needed in order to create comprehensive guidelines for surveillance of these patients.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy affects postoperative outcomes and functional results in patients treated with transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to quantify the incidence of short-term postoperative complications and functional disorders at 1 year from transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for rectal neoplasms, to compare patients treated with TEM alone and with TEM after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and to analyse factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on all patients treated with TEM for rectal neoplasms at our institution in January 2000-December 2017. Data from a prospectively maintained database were retrospectively analysed. Patients were divided into two groups: adenoma or early rectal cancer (no CRT group) and locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer with major or complete clinical response after preoperative CRT (CRT group). Short-term postoperative mortality and morbidity and the functional results at 1 year were recorded. The two groups were compared, and a statistical analysis of factors influencing postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes was performed. Functional outcome was also evaluated with the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score (0-20 no LARS, 21-29 minor LARS and 30-42 major LARS).

RESULTS

One hundred and thirteen patients (71 males, 42 females, median age 64 years [range 41-80 years]) were included in the study (46 in the CRT group). The overall postoperative complication rate was 23.0%, lower in the noCRT group (p < 0.001), but only 2.7% were grade ≥ 3. The most frequent complication was suture dehiscence (17.6%), which occurred less frequently in the noCRT group (p < 0.001). At 1 year from TEM, the most frequent symptoms was urgency (11.9%, without significant differences between the CRT group and the noCRT group); the noCRT group experienced a lower rate of soiling than the CRT group (0% vs. 7.7%; p: 0.027). The incidence of LARS was evaluated in 47 patients from May 2012 on and was 21.3% occurring less frequently in the noCRT group (10% vs. 41.2%; p: 0.012). Only 6.4% of the patients evaluated experienced major LARS. In multivariate analysis, preoperative CRT significantly worsened postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is a safe procedure associated with only low risk of severe postoperative complications and major LARS. Preoperative CRT seems to increase the rate of postoperative morbidity after TEM and led to worse functional outcomes at 1 year after surgery.

Current Surgical Strategies for the Treatment of Rectal Adenocarcinoma and the Risk of Local Recurrence

BACKGROUND

Despite new medical and surgical strategies, 5-year local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma was reported in up to 25% of cases. Therefore, we aimed to review surgical strategies for the prevention of local recurrences in rectal cancer.

SUMMARY

After implementation of the total mesorectal excision (TME), surgical resection of rectal adenocarcinoma with anterior resection or abdominoperineal excision (APE) allowed decrease in local recurrence (3% at 5 years). More recently, extralevator APE was described as an alternative to APE, decreasing specimen perforation and recurrence rate. Moreover, technique modifications were developed to optimize rectal resection, such as the laparoscopic or robotic approach, and transanal TME. However, the technical advantages conferred by these techniques did not translate into a decreased recurrence rate. Lateral lymph node dissection is another technique, which aimed at improving the long-term outcomes; nevertheless, there is currently no evidence to recommend its routine use. Strategies to preserve the rectum are also emerging, such as local excision, and may be beneficial for subgroups of patients. Key Messages: Rectal cancer management requires a multidisciplinary approach, and surgical strategy should be tailored to patient factors: general health, previous perineal intervention, anatomy, preference, and tumor characteristics such as stage and localization.

Early-rectal Cancer Treatment: A Decision-tree Making Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Local excision (LE) has arisen as an alternative to total mesorectal excision for the treatment of early rectal cancer. Despite a decreased morbidity, there are still concerns about LE outcomes. This systematic-review and meta-analysis design is based on the "PICO" process, aiming to answer to three questions related to LE as primary treatment for early-rectal cancer, the optimal method for LE, and the potential role for completion treatment in high-risk histology tumors and outcomes of salvage surgery. The results revealed that reported overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were 71%-91.7% and 80%-94% for LE, in contrast to 92.3%-94.3% and 94.4%-97% for radical surgery. Additional analysis of National Database studies revealed lower OS with LE (HR: 1.26; 95%CI, 1.09-1.45) and DSS (HR: 1.19; 95%CI, 1.01-1.41) after LE. Furthermore, patients receiving LE were significantly more prone develop local recurrence (RR: 3.44, 95%CI, 2.50-4.74). Analysis of available transanal surgical platforms was performed, finding no significant differences among them but reduced local recurrence compared to traditional transanal LE (OR:0.24;95%CI, 0.15-0.4). Finally, we found poor survival outcomes for patients undergoing salvage surgery, favoring completion treatment (chemoradiotherapy or surgery) when high-risk histology is present. In conclusion, LE could be considered adequate provided a full-thickness specimen can be achieved that the patient is informed about risk for potential requirement of completion treatment. Early-rectal cancer cases should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team, and patient's preferences must be considered in the decision-making process.

Optimising functional outcomes in rectal cancer surgery

Background

By improved surgical technique such as total mesorectal excision (TME), multimodal treatment and advances in imaging survival and an increased rate of sphincter preservation have been achieved in rectal cancer surgery. Minimal-invasive approaches such as laparoscopic, robotic and transanal-TME (ta-TME) enhance recovery after surgery. Nevertheless, disorders of bowel, anorectal and urogenital function are still common and need attention.

Purpose

This review aims at exploring the causes of dysfunction after anterior resection (AR) and the accordingly preventive strategies. Furthermore, the indication for low AR in the light of functional outcome is discussed. The last therapeutic strategies to deal with bowel, anorectal, and urogenital disorders are depicted.

Conclusion

Functional disorders after rectal cancer surgery are frequent and underestimated. More evidence is needed to define an indication for non-operative management or local excision as alternatives to AR. The decision for restorative resection should be made in consideration of the relevant risk factors for dysfunction. In the case of restoration, a side-to-end anastomosis should be the preferred anastomotic technique. Further high-evidence clinical studies are required to clarify the benefit of intraoperative neuromonitoring. While the function of ta-TME seems not to be superior to laparoscopy, case-control studies suggest the benefits of robotic TME mainly in terms of preservation of the urogenital function. Low AR syndrome is treated by stool regulation, pelvic floor therapy, and transanal irrigation. There is good evidence for sacral nerve modulation for incontinence after low AR.

Prognosis following surgical resection versus local excision of stage pT1 colorectal cancer: A population-based cohort study

AIMS

To evaluate patient management following stage pT1 colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis, and to determine if surgical resection improved outcome compared with local excision, within a population-based study.

METHODS

Data were collected from the Northern Ireland Cancer Registry. Cases of stage pT1 CRC diagnosed from 2007 to 2012 were identified. Analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazard models to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for cancer-specific and all-cause mortality for individuals undergoing formal surgery versus local excision.

RESULTS

394 patients with pT1 CRC were included. Of these, 37.1% were treated by local resection, 36.8% had biopsy followed by surgery and 26.1% had local excision followed by surgery. There were 60 deaths over a mean 4.8 years of follow-up, including 10 CRC-specific deaths. An additional 12 patients had a CRC recurrence or metastases during follow-up. Of the CRC-specific deaths or recurrences, 27.3% had local excision only. Individuals treated by formal surgery did not have a reduced risk of CRC-specific death (adjusted HR = 1.51, 95% CI 0.29, 7.89), but did have a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR = 0.51 95% CI 0.30, 0.87) compared with those undergoing local excision only.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with stage pT1 CRC undergoing formal surgery had a reduced risk of all-cause mortality compared with those treated by local excision only. However, this was not explained by a reduced risk of recurrence/disease-free survival or CRC death, and suggests that the observed benefits may simply reflect selection of a healthier patient population in the formal surgery group.

Feasibility and Advantages of Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) for Various Lesions in the Rectum

Purpose

We report our experience in the use of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) and the feasibility and safety of this surgical technique in operating for various rectal diseases that require a transanal approach.

Methods

Between 2013 and 2019, 30 patients underwent TAMIS for a rectal lesion at Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center. The clinical data including age, gender, body mass index, tumour size, distance from the anal verge, diagnosis, operation time, postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and post-operative margin status were obtained retrospectively from the electronic medical records.

Results

The mean operation time was 52.1±33.5 and the mean duration of hospital stay after surgery was 4.3±4.2 days. Most of the patients had undergone TAMIS for neuroendocrine tumor (NET) (60%) followed by an adenoma (16.7%) and rectal cancer (13.3%). 4 patients (13.3%) had minor complications after TAMIS. 2 patients (50%) had complained of diarrhea, 1 patient (25%) complained of fecal incontinence and 1 patient (25%) been diagnosed fluid in the operation bed.

Conclusion

TAMIS is a useful method for local excision of rectal lesion located in mid to upper rectum as well as other rectal pathologies that require a transanal approach.

Report from the 20th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference; Saskatoon, Saskatchewan; 28-29 September 2018

The 20th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference was held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, 28-29 September 2018. This interactive multidisciplinary conference is attended by health care professionals from across Western Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) who are involved in the care of patients with gastrointestinal cancers. In addition, invited speakers from other provinces participate. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists, and allied health care professionals participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management of colorectal cancers.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Local Excision in Rectal Cancer

The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.

Long-term Oncological and Functional Outcomes of Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Organ-Sparing Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery for Distal Rectal Cancer: The CARTS Study

Importance

Treatment of rectal cancer is shifting toward organ preservation aiming to reduce surgery-related morbidity. Short-term outcomes of organ-preserving strategies are promising, but long-term outcomes are scarce in the literature.

Objective

To explore long-term oncological outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with cT1-3N0M0 rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM).

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this multicenter phase II feasibility study, patients with cT1-3N0M0 rectal cancer admitted to referral centers for rectal cancer throughout the Netherlands between February 2011 and September 2012 were prospectively included. These patients were to be treated with neoadjuvant CRT followed by TEM in case of good response. An intensive follow-up scheme was used to detect local recurrences and/or distant metastases. Data from validated HRQL questionnaires and low anterior resection syndrome questionnaires were collected. Data were analyzed from February 2011 to April 2017.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary study outcome of the study was the number of ypT0-1 specimens by performing TEM. Secondary outcome parameters were locoregional recurrences and HRQL.

Results

Of the 55 included patients, 30 (55%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 64 (39-82) years. Patients were followed up for a median (interquartile range) period of 53 (39-57) months. Two patients (4%) died during CRT, 1 (2%) stopped CRT, and 1 (2%) was lost to follow-up. Following CRT, 47 patients (85%) underwent TEM, of whom 35 (74%) were successfully treated with local excision alone. Total mesorectal excision was performed in 16 patients (4 with inadequate responses, 8 with completion after TEM, and 4 with salvage for local recurrence). The actuarial 5-year local recurrence rate was 7.7%, with 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates of 81.6% and 82.8%, respectively. Health-related quality of life during follow-up was equal to baseline, with improved emotional well-being in patients treated with local excision (mean score at baseline, 72.0; 95% CI, 67.1-80.1; mean score at follow-up, 86.9; 95% CI, 79.2-94.7; P = .001). Major, minor, and no low anterior resection syndrome was experienced in 50%, 28%, and 22%, respectively, of patients with successful organ preservation.

Conclusions and Relevance

In early-stage rectal cancer (cT1-3N0M0), CRT enables organ preservation with additional TEM surgery in approximately two-thirds of patients with good long-term oncological outcome and HRQL. This multimodality treatment triggers a certain degree of bowel dysfunction, and one-third of patients still undergo radical surgery and are overtreated by CRT.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer: what the radiologist should know

Despite advances in surgical techniques and chemoradiation therapy, recurrent rectal cancer remains a cause of morbidity and mortality. After successful treatment of rectal cancer, patients are typically enrolled in a surveillance strategy that includes imaging as studies have shown improved prognosis when recurrent rectal cancer is detected during imaging surveillance versus based on development of symptoms. Additionally, patients who experience a complete clinical response with chemoradiation therapy may elect to enroll in a "watch-and-wait" strategy that includes imaging surveillance rather than surgical resection. Factors that increase the likelihood of recurrence, patterns of recurrence, and the imaging appearances of recurrent rectal cancer are reviewed with a focus on CT, PET CT, and MR imaging.

Management of locally advanced rectal cancer in the elderly: a critical review and algorithm

Colorectal cancer incidence and death rates have been declining over the past 10 years. However, it remains the second leading cause of death in men ages 60-79 and the third leading cause of death in men over 80 and in women over 60 years old. However, there is little data specific to the treatment of the elder patient, since few of these patients are included in trials. With the advent of improved therapies, there are many alternative options available. Still, no definitive consensus or guidelines have been defined for this particular patient population. The goal of this study is to review the literature on the management of rectal cancer in the elderly and to propose treatment algorithms to help the oncology team in treatment decision-making.

A case of local recurrence of T1 rectal cancer 10 years after transanal excision

We report a case of a patient with T1 rectal cancer, which recurred locally after 10 years from the primary operation. A 78-year-old woman was diagnosed with rectal cancer. Transanal excision (TAE) was performed in December 2006. The pathological findings revealed stage I rectal cancer [tub2>muc, pSM (2,510 µm), ly0, v0, pHM0, pVM0]. Because she did not opt for additional treatment, she received follow-up examination. After approximately 10 years from the primary operation, she presented to her physician, complaining of melena, and she was referred to our hospital again in November 2016. She was diagnosed with recurrent rectal cancer. Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection was performed in December 2016. Pathological findings revealed stage IIIB rectal cancer (tub2>muc, pA, pN1). The reported postoperative local recurrence rate for T1 rectal cancer after TAE is high, but local recurrence after years from the primary operation is rare. In high-risk cases, local recurrence may be observed even after 10 years from the primary operation. Long-term and close postoperative follow-up is important to detect local recurrence early.

Decision-Making Strategy for Rectal Cancer Management Using Radiation Therapy for Elderly or Comorbid Patients

Rectal cancer predominantly affects patients older than 70 years, with peak incidence at age 80 to 85 years. However, the standard treatment paradigm for rectal cancer oftentimes cannot be feasibly applied to these patients owing to frailty or comorbid conditions. There are currently little information and no treatment guidelines to help direct therapy for patients who are elderly and/or have significant comorbidities, because most are not included or specifically studied in clinical trials. More recently various alternative treatment options have been brought to light that may potentially be utilized in this group of patients. This critical review examines the available literature on alternative therapies for rectal cancer and proposes a treatment algorithm to help guide clinicians in treatment decision making for elderly and comorbid patients.

The feasibility of laparoscopic rectal resection in patients undergoing reoperation after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM)

BACKGROUND

The success of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for early rectal cancer depends on proper indications and strict patient selection. When unfavorable pathologic features are identified after TEM operation, total mesorectal excision is recommended to minimize the risk of recurrence. In this study, data were collected in a retrospective series of patients to determine the results of laparoscopic reoperation after TEM.

METHODS

All patients underwent an accurate rectal-digital examination and clinical tumor staging by transanal endosonography, CT, and/or MRI. The histologic examination included an evaluation of the free margins, depth of tumor infiltration according to International Union Against Cancer guidelines, degree of tumor differentiation, and the presence of lymphovascular and perineural invasion. When a high-risk tumor was identified, reoperation was performed within 6 weeks from TEM. The patients were divided into two groups according to the procedure performed: laparoscopic anterior resection (LAR) or laparoscopic abdominal perineal amputation (LAPR).

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients (5.3%) underwent reoperation: 38 underwent LAR and 30 underwent LAPR. The mean operative time was 148.24 min (± 35.8, p = 0.62). Meanwhile, the mean distance of the TEM scar from the anal verge differed statistically between the two groups (p = 0.003) and was statistically correlated with abdominal perineal amputation (p = 0.0001) in multivariate analysis. Conversion to open surgery was required in 6 patients (15.7%) in the LAR group and 3 patients (10%) in the LAPR group (p = 0.38). The histologic examination revealed residual cancer cells in 3 cases (3 pT2N0) and 1 case (1 pT3N0), respectively, and lymph node metastases in 4 cases. No residual neoplasms were detected in the remaining 60 cases (88.3%). After a mean follow-up of 108 months, the overall disease-free survival was 98% (95% CI 88-99%).

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, reoperation after TEM using a laparoscopic approach is feasible and safe, with low conversion rates and optimal postoperative results.

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.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery for Patients With Rectal Tumors: A Single Institution's Experience

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to look at our complication rates and recurrence rates, as well as the need for further radical surgery, in treating patients with benign and early malignant rectal tumors by using transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM).

METHODS

Our study included 130 patients who had undergone TEM for rectal adenomas and early rectal cancer from December 2009 to December 2015 at the Department of Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Lithuania. Patients underwent digital and endoscopic evaluation with multiple biopsies. For preoperative staging, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging or endorectal ultrasound was performed. We recorded the demographics, operative details, final pathologies, postoperative lengths of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and recurrences.

RESULTS

The average tumor size was 2.8 ± 1.5 cm (range, 0.5-8.3 cm). 102 benign (78.5%) and 28 malignant tumors (21.5%) were removed. Of the latter, 23 (82.1%) were pT1 cancers and 5 (17.9%) pT2 cancers. Of the 5 patients with pT2 cancer, 2 underwent adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 1 underwent an abdominoperineal resection, 1 refused further treatment and 1 was lost to follow up. No intraoperative complications occurred. In 7 patients (5.4%), postoperative complications were observed: urinary retention (4 patients, 3.1%), postoperative hemorrhage (2 patients, 1.5%), and wound dehiscence (1 patient, 0.8%). All complications were treated conservatively. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 2.3 days.

CONCLUSION

TEM in our experience demonstrated low complication and recurrence rates. This technique is recommended for treating patients with a rectal adenoma and early rectal cancer and has good prognosis.

Californium-252 neutron intracavity brachytherapy alone for T1N0 low-lying rectal adenocarcinoma: A definitive anal sphincter-preserving radiotherapy

This study evaluated the 4-year results of 32 patients with T1N0 low-lying rectal adenocarcinoma treated solely with californium-252 (Cf-252) neutron intracavity brachytherapy (ICBT). Patients were solicited into the study from January 2008 to June 2011. All the patients had refused surgery or surgery was contraindicated. The patients were treated with Cf-252 neutron ICBT using a novel 3.5-cm diameter off-axis 4-channel intrarectal applicator designed by the authors. The dose reference point was defined on the mucosa surface, with a total dose of 55-62 Gy-eq/4 f (13-16 Gy-eq/f/wk). All the patients completed the radiotherapy in accordance with our protocol. The rectal lesions regressed completely, and the acute rectal toxicity was mild (≤G2). The 4-year local control, overall survival, disease-free survival, and late complication (≥G2) rates were 96.9%, 90.6%, 87.5% and 15.6%, respectively. No severe late complication (≥G3) occurred. The mean follow-up was 56.1 ± 16.0 months. At the end of last follow-up, 29 patients remained alive. The mean survival time was 82.1 ± 2.7 months. Cf-252 neutron ICBT administered as the sole treatment (without surgery) for patients with T1N0 low-lying rectal adenocarcinoma is effective with acceptable late complications. Our study and method offers a definitive anal sphincter-preserving radiotherapy for T1N0 low-lying rectal adenocarcinoma patients.

SEOM Clinical Guideline of localized rectal cancer (2016)

Localized rectal adenocarcinoma is a heterogeneous disease and current treatment recommendations are based on a preoperative multidisciplinary evaluation. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasound are complementary to do a locoregional accurate staging. Surgery remains the mainstay of treatment and preoperative therapies with chemoradiation (CRT) or short-course radiation (SCRT) must be considered in more locally advanced cases. Novel strategies with induction chemotherapy alone or preceding or after CRT (SCRT) and surgery are in development.