Effective dissecting range and prognostic significance of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for middle-low rectal cancer patients with lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis: Results of a large multicenter lateral node collaborative group in China

The oncologic benefits of lateral lymph node dissection after neoadjuvant therapy - local control or survival?

Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) for rectal adenocarcinoma is an established treatment modality for selected patients with abnormal lateral pelvic lymph nodes on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging. The goal of this treatment is to achieve a true R0 resection, including lymphadenectomy, with the aim of improving patient oncological outcome, potentially at the expense of surgical and functional complications. However, there remain several areas of controversy resulting from a distinct lack of clarity regarding effective patient selection, lymph node size criteria, the role and extent of routine neoadjuvant treatment versus surgery alone in selected cases, the impact on patient survival metrics and whether the existing data are even valid in the era of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT). Furthermore, the lack of widely disseminated surgical standardisation and expertise in performing this procedure potentially contributes to the lack of utilisation in certain countries and regions. In this narrative review, we summarize the current state of the literature and attempt to answer the question of what oncological benefits there are, if any, from LPLND after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer, and whether these justify the risks and potential need for inter-hospital transfer.

Short-term outcomes of 47 selective laparoscopic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer: A retrospective study

This study aims to analyze the safety, feasibility, and short-term oncology outcomes of selective laparoscope lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) with total mesorectal excision surgery. Between December 2019 and May 2023, LLND with total mesorectal excision surgery was performed in 47 selected patients with advanced rectal cancer. Surgical complications and 2-year oncology survival outcomes were analyzed in the study. All 47 procedures were technically successful without converting conversion to open surgery. The mean operation time was 200.6 minutes (135-321 minutes), and the mean estimated blood loss was 92.9 mL (range 10-2000 mL). The most common postoperative complications were anastomotic (8.5%, n = 4), ileus (6.4%, n = 3), and chyle leakage (4.3%, n = 2). Lateral pelvic lymph node metastases were found in 19 (40.4%) patients. When divided into lateral pelvic lymph node positive and negative groups, there was no significant impact on overall survival (94.4% vs 100%, Log-rank P = .596) and local recurrence-free survival (LFRS) (76.7% vs 89.6%, Log-rank P = .210), except disease-free survival (DFS) (58.3% vs 90.2%, Log-rank P = .005). Subgroup analysis showed similar short-term survival outcomes between the pN+ group and the internal iliac metastasis group (Log-rank P of overall survival, LFRS, and DFS were all ˃.05). LRFS and DFS in the obturator or external iliac metastasis group were worse than those in the internal iliac metastasis group when the follow-up time was extended (Log-rank P of LFRS and DFS were .05 and .063). Selective laparoscopy LLND for rectal cancer is safety and feasibility, and its complications are manageable. Oncology survival outcomes for lateral pelvic lymph node metastases limited to the internal iliac are similar to the pN+ stage; therefore, it should be treated positively.

The effectiveness and safety of rectal modular dissection for male middle and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: the short-term outcome

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of rectal modular dissection (RMD) in male patients with middle and low rectal cancer. RMD is a technique used to guide the surgical procedure for rectal mobilization, with the ultimate goal of achieving total mesorectal excision. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of RMD, a single-center, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial was carried out. Methods: Eligible patients were randomly assigned into two groups: the RMD group and the traditional rectal mobilization (TRM) group. Demographic characteristics, perioperative data and pathological results of the surgical specimens were collected for analysis. additionally, assessments of urogenital function and defecation function were conducted for all participants. Results: A total of 103 patients (RMD group 53 patients and TRM group 50 patients) were included to analyzed. There were no significant differences in age, body mass index, ASA classification, and tumor characteristics between two groups. The RMD group had significantly lower blood loss (P = 0.00), shorter operative duration (P = 0.00), and shorter hospital stay (P = 0.04) compared to the TRM group. The complete rate of mesorectal excision was higher in the RMD group (98.1%) compared to the TRM group (86.0%, P = 0.02). In terms of functional outcomes, the RMD group had better evaluation scores for urethral function (IPSS score, P = 0.01), erectile function (IIEF-5 score, P = 0.00) and defecation function (LARS score, P = 0.00) at the one-year postoperative follow-up. The 1-year disease-free survival rate was similar between the two groups (P = 0.28). Conclusions: These results suggest that RMD is an effective and safe approach for achieving total mesorectal excision while promoting better functional outcomes for patients. The trial was registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100052094).

Distant Metastasis is the Dominant Cause of Treatment Failure after Lateral Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Lateral Lymph Node Metastasis: Results of the Large Multicenter Lateral Node Study in China

Background: Lateral lymph node (LLN) metastases (LLNM) are often associated with poor prognosis. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic significance and postoperative recurrence pattern in rectal cancer patients with LLNM after LLN dissection (LLND). Materials and Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective case-control study where propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was introduced. From January 2012 to December 2019, 259 patients with clinical suspicion of LLNM who underwent LLND without neoadjuvant therapy were included in the study. They were divided into the negative (n = 197) and positive (n = 62) LLN groups. Primary endpoints were 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Results: After PSM, the DMFS rate in the positive LLN group was significantly worse (67.9 vs. 52.5%, P = 0.012). Pathological LLNM (HR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.55-6.05; P = 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for DMFS. Patients in the positive LLN group had a higher proportion of distant metastases in all recurrence patterns (92.3% vs 82.6%). Among patients with LLN metastasis, metastases to the common iliac and external iliac arteries were the independent prognostic factor for DMFS (HR: 2.85; 95% CI, 1.31-4.67; P = 0.042). No significant different was observed for prognosis between patients with metastases to the obturator or internal iliac vessels and patients with a N2b stage. Conclusion: Distant metastasis is the main cause of treatment failure after LLND in patients with LLNM. Because of the low completion rate of adjuvant chemotherapy, preoperative chemotherapy or total neoadjuvant therapy may be considered before LLND. In addition, patients with metastasis to external iliac and common iliac vessels have an extremely poor prognosis, and systemic chemotherapy instead of LLND should be recommended.