Long-term outcome of early-stage rectal cancer undergoing standard resection and local excision

Oncological outcomes of local excision versus radical surgery for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Local resection (LR) methods for rectal cancer are generally considered in the palliative setting or for patients deemed a high anaesthetic risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare oncological outcomes of LR and radical resection (RR) for early rectal cancer in the context of staging and surveillance assessment.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Emcare databases was performed for studies that reported data on clinical outcomes for both LR and RR for early rectal cancer from January 1995 to April 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed. The quality of assessment was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool for randomised controlled trials.

RESULTS

Twenty studies with 12,022 patients were included: 6,476 patients had LR and 5,546 patients underwent RR. RR led to an improvement in 5-year overall survival (OR 1.84; 95 % CI 1.54-2.20; p < 0.0001; I2 20 %) and local recurrence (OR 3.06; 95 % CI 2.02-4.64; p < 0.0001; I2 39 %) when compared to LR. However, when staging and surveillance methods were clearly adopted in LR cases, there was an improvement in R0 rates (96.7 % vs 85.6 %), 5-year disease-free survival (93.0 % vs 77.9 %) and overall survival (81.6 % vs 79.0 %) compared to when staging and surveillance was not reported/performed.

CONCLUSIONS

LR may be appropriate for selected patients without poor prognostic factors in early rectal cancer. This study also highlights that there is currently no single standardised staging or surveillance approach being adopted in the management of early rectal cancer. A more specified and standardised preoperative staging for patient selection as well as clinical and image-based surveillance protocols is needed.

Endoscopic and trans-anal local excision vs. radical resection in the treatment of early rectal cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The management of early-stage rectal cancer in clinical practice is controversial. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare oncological and postoperative outcomes for T1T2N0M0 rectal cancers managed with local excision in comparison to conventional radical resection.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, Embase and Cochrane electronic databases was performed. Relevant studies were selected using PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes measured were 5-year local recurrence and overall survival. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative complication, 30-day mortality, positive margin and permanent stoma formation.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials and 27 observational studies contributed 8570 patients for analysis. Radical resection was associated with reduced 5-year local recurrence in comparison to local excision. This was statistically significant in comparison to trans-anal local excision (odds ratio (OR) 0.23; 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.30) and favourable in comparison to endoscopic techniques (OR 0.40; 95% confidence interval 0.13-1.23) although this did not reach clinical significance. Positive margin rates were lowest for radical resection. However, 30-day mortality rates, perioperative complications and permanent stoma rates all favoured local excision with no statistically significant difference between endoscopic and trans-anal techniques.

CONCLUSION

Radical resection of early rectal cancer is associated with the lowest 5-year local recurrence rates and the lowest rate of positive margins. However, this must be balanced with its higher 30-day mortality and complication rates as well as the increased risk of permanent stoma. The emerging potential role of neoadjuvant therapy prior to local resection, and the heterogeneity of its use, as an alternative treatment for early rectal cancer further complicates the treatment paradigm and adds to controversy in this field.

Risk factors of recurrence in TNM stage I colorectal cancer

Purpose

TNM stage I colorectal cancer (CRC) can recur, although the recurrence rate is low. Few studies have evaluated the risk factors for TNM stage I CRC recurrence. This study aimed to evaluate the TNM stage I CRC recurrence rate, as well as risk factors for recurrence.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we reviewed the database of patients who had undergone surgery for TNM stage I CRC between November 2008 and December 2014 without receiving neoadjuvant therapy or transanal excision for rectal cancer. Our analysis included 173 patients. Primary lesions were found in the colon of 133 patients and in the rectum of 40 patients.

Results

The CRC recurrence rate was 2.9% (5 out of 173 patients). For colon cancer patients, tumor size was not associated with higher recurrence risk (P = 0.098). However, for rectal cancer patients, both tumor size (≥3 cm) and T stage were associated with higher recurrence risk (P = 0.046 and P = 0.046, respectively). Of the 5 recurrent cases, 1 patient exhibited disease progression despite treatment, 1 patient maintained stable disease status after recurrence treatment, and 3 patients had no evidence of a tumor after recurrence treatment.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that tumor size and T stage are predictors of stage I rectal cancer recurrence, and careful monitoring and follow-up of patients with larger tumors may be warranted.

Rectal tubular adenoma with submucosal pseudoinvasion misdiagnosed as adenocarcinoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Differential diagnosis of colorectal intramucosal tumors from invasive adenocarcinoma is important in clinical practice due to the different risks of lymph node metastasis and different treatment options. The phenomenon of a colorectal adenoma with part of the gland entering the submucosa is known as pseudoinvasion of the adenoma, which is a major challenge for pathological diagnosis. It is essential to raise awareness of colorectal adenoma with submucosal pseudoinvasion clinically to avoid overtreatment.

CASE SUMMARY

We describe a case of rectal adenoma with submucosal pseudoinvasion in a 48-year-old man. The patient was admitted to Jinhua People's Hospital due to a change in stool habit for 5 d. We performed colonoscopy, and the results suggested a submucosal bulge approximately 1.0 cm × 1.0 cm in size in the rectum 8 cm from the anal verge, with red surface erosion. Ultrasound colonoscopy was also performed and a homogeneous hypoechoic mass about 0.52 cm × 0.72 cm in size was seen at the lesion, protruding into the lumen with clear borders and invading the submucosa. Endoscopic surgery was then performed and the pathological specimen showed a tubular adenoma with high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (intramucosal carcinoma) involving the adenolymphatic complex. In addition, we performed a literature review of rectal tubular adenoma with submucosal pseudoinvasion to obtain a deeper understanding of this disease.

CONCLUSION

The aim of this study was to improve awareness of this lesion for clinicians and pathologists to reduce misdiagnosis.

Initial local excision for clinical T1 rectal cancer showed comparable overall survival despite high local recurrence rate: a propensity-matched analysis

PURPOSE

Local excision (LE) is an alternative initial treatment for clinical T1 rectal cancer, and has avoided potential morbidity. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of LE compared with total mesorectal excision (TME) for clinical T1 rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between January 2000 and December 2011, we retrospectively reviewed from multicenter data in patients with clinically suspected T1 rectal cancer treated with either LE or TME. Of 1,071 patients, 106 were treated with LE and 965 were treated with TME. The data were analyzed using propensity score matching, with each group comprising 91 patients.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, the median follow-up time was 60.8 months (range, 0.6-150.6 months). After adjustment for the necessary variables, patients who underwent LE showed a significantly higher local recurrence rate than did those who underwent TME; however, there were no differences in disease-free survival and overall survival. In the multivariate analysis, age (hazard ratio [HR], 9.620; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.415-27.098; P<0.001) and angiolymphatic invasion (HR, 3.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-9.89; P=0.012) were independently associated with overall survival. However, LE was neither associated with overall survival nor disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

LE for clinical T1 rectal cancer yielded a higher local recurrence rate than did TME. Nevertheless, LE provided comparable overall survival rate and can be proposed as an optional treatment in terms of organ-preserving strategies.

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.

MRI Evaluation of the Response of Rectal Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy

MRI plays a critical role in the staging and restaging of rectal cancer. Although newly diagnosed early-stage rectal cancers may immediately be amenable to surgical resection, patients with advanced disease first undergo neoadjuvant therapy that consists of a combination of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Evaluation of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy is best performed with MRI, given its superior soft-tissue contrast and its ability to allow multiplanar imaging and functional evaluation. In this setting, MRI allows accurate evaluation of primary tumor staging, which is determined on the basis of the depth of invasion within and through the rectal wall and the involvement of adjacent organs. MRI can also be used to evaluate posttreatment morphologic components within the tumors, including fibrosis and mucinous changes that have been shown to correlate with the response to treatment. Additional features such as the circumferential resection margin and extramural vascular invasion-factors shown to affect prognosis and local recurrence-are also assessed before and after therapy. Functional assessment with diffusion-weighted MRI and perfusion MRI plays a role in predicting tumor aggressiveness and the likelihood of response to treatment, as well as the extent of residual tumor after therapy. Lymph node staging is also performed at MRI, with assessment of not only lymph node size but also the internal architecture and signal intensity characteristics. ^©RSNA, 2019 See discussion on this article by Wasnik and Al-Hawary .

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.

For Patients with Early Rectal Cancer, Does Local Excision Have an Impact on Recurrence, Survival, and Quality of Life Relative to Radical Resection?

BACKGROUND

The most appropriate treatment for early-stage rectal cancers is controversial. The advantages of local excision regarding morbidity and function must be weighed against poorer oncologic efficacy. This study aimed to clarify further the role for local excision in the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, SCOPUS, and Cochrane databases was conducted. Relevant studies were selected using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data addressing five key questions about outcomes of local versus radical resection of rectal cancer were analyzed.

RESULTS

The 16 studies identified by this study were mostly retrospective, and none were randomized. Local excision was associated with fewer complications and better functional outcome than radical resection. Of 12 studies evaluating local recurrence, 6 showed a higher local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision. Two additional studies showed no increase in local recurrence rate among patients who underwent local excision of T1 lesions but a significantly higher local recurrence rate among those who underwent local excision of T2 lesions. High histologic grade, angiolymphatic invasion, perineural invasion, and depth within submucosa were features associated with a higher risk of local recurrence. In 7 of 15 studies, long-term survival was reduced compared with that of patients who underwent radical resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Although local excision for early-stage rectal cancer is associated with increased local recurrence and decreased overall survival compared with radical resection, local excision may be appropriate for select individuals who have T1 tumors with no adverse pathologic features.

Local Excision and Endoscopic Resections for Early Rectal Cancer

Radical surgery is considered as the standard treatment for rectal cancer. Transanal local excision has been considered an interesting alternative for the management of selected patients with rectal cancers for many decades. Different approaches had been considered for local excision, from endoscopic submucosal dissection to resections using platforms, such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery or transanal minimally invasive surgery. Identifying the ideal candidate for this approach is crucial, as a local failure after local excision is associated with poor outcomes, even for an initial early rectal tumor. In this article, the diagnostic tools and criteria to select patients for local excision, the different modalities used, and the outcomes are discussed.

Analysis of local recurrences after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for low risk rectal carcinoma

AIM

Rates of local recurrence (LR) after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for rectal carcinoma vary; the reasons remain unclear. We analyzed LR after TEM for low-risk pT1 (G1/2/X, L0/X) rectal carcinoma to investigate the influence of completeness of resection and occult lymph node metastasis on risk of LR.

METHOD

LR location and stage, completeness of resection of primary carcinoma (minimal distance between tumor and resection line ≤1 mm vs >1 mm), and incidence of involved lymph nodes in resected LR specimens were collected, and tumor characteristics of LR were compared with primary carcinoma. Distant metastasis and overall and cancer-specific survival were determined.

RESULTS

LR developed in 14 patients; in 2/4 with R1/X resection, in 3/8 (38%) with clear margins (R0) but a minimal distance of ≤1 mm, and in 9/88 (10%) with formally complete resection. Six of nine patients with formally complete resection underwent radical surgery for LR; in five out of these six, lymph nodes were not involved. In 5/14 patients, LR was poorly differentiated compared to primary carcinoma. Main LR causes were incomplete tumor resection or tumor persistence after formally complete resection. Overall (p = 0.008) and cancer-specific (p < 0.001) survival was lower in LR patients compared to non-LR patients, even if lymph nodes were uninvolved.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that most LRs after TEM for low-risk rectal cancer were caused by residual tumor at the previous excision site and not by undetected lymph node metastases. By improved standardization of surgical techniques to ensure complete resection of carcinomas and thorough pathological assessments, most LRs seem to be avoidable.

Survival after local excision or radical resection for early-stage colorectal cancer

AIM: To compare the overall survival after local excision or radical resection for early-stage colorectal cancer.

METHODS: Patients who met the criteria were screened from the SEER database between 1998 and 2008, and they were divided into a local excision group and a radical resection group according to the mode of surgery. Each group was further divided into colon or rectal cancer subgroup according to the location of tumor. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine the overall survival between the two groups and independent prognostic factors.

RESULTS: A total of 13975 cases were included in the study. Of 13647 cases receiving radical resection, 10389 had colon cancer and 3258 had rectal cancer. Of 148 cases receiving local excision, 62 had colon cancer and 86 had rectal cancer. Tumors at T1 stage tended to receive local excision, while tumors at T2 stage were more inclined to accept radical resection (P < 0.001). Univariate survival analysis showed that there were statistical differences between the two groups in 5-year and 10-year survival rates of patients with stage T1 colon cancer, althougn no significant differences were noted in patients with stage T2 colon cancer and those with both stages T1 and T2 rectal cancer. Multivariate survival factor analysis showed that gender, age, race, tumor size, tumor differentiation and mode of surgery were independent prognostic factors, but both colon cancer and rectal cancer had their own characteristics.

CONCLUSION: Local excision can obtain the same survival rate as radical surgery in patients with stages T1 and T2 rectal cancer. Compared to local excision, radical resection can offer better overall survival in patients with stage T1 colon cancer, while more cases are needed to analyze the difference in patients with stage T2 colon cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Local Excision in Early Stage Rectal Cancer

Low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection are considered standard treatments for early rectal cancer but may be associated with morbidity in selected patients who are candidates for early distal lesions amenable to local excision (LE). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. The panel recognizes the importance of accurate staging to identify patients who may be candidates for a LE approach. Patients who may be candidates for LE alone include those with small, low-lying T1 tumors, without adverse pathologic features. Several surgical approaches can be utilized for LE however none include lymph node evaluation. Adjuvant radiation±chemotherapy may be warranted depending on the risk of nodal metastases. Patients with high-risk T1 tumors, T2 tumors not amenable to radical surgery may also benefit from adjuvant treatment; however, patients with positive margins or T3 lesions should be offered abdominoperineal resection or low anterior resection. Neoadjuvant radiation±chemotherapy followed by LE in higher risk patients results in excellent local control, but it is not clear if this approach reduces recurrence rates over surgery alone.

Local excision of T1 and T2 rectal cancer: proceed with caution

AIM

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcome between local excision (LE) and total mesorectal excision (TME) for early rectal cancer.

METHOD

After Institutional Review Board approval, charts of patients with T1 or T2 N0M0 rectal adenocarcinoma treated by curative LE or TME without preoperative radiotherapy from 2004 to 2012 were reviewed. Categorical and continuous variables were compared using chi-square analysis and the ANOVA test. Kaplan-Meier analysis compared survival rates.

RESULTS

The study included 153 patients: 79 underwent TME and 74 LE. Postoperative infection was more common after TME (P = 0.009). There was tumour involvement of the margins in 13.5% after LE compared with 0% after TME (P = 0.001). Of the patients treated initially by LE, 13.5% had additional surgery for unfavourable histological findings and 4.1% had residual tumour. Median follow up was 35 (17-96) months. No deaths were recorded in 56 patients with a pT1 lesion. There was no significant difference in local recurrence (P = 0.332) or 3-year disease-free survival (DFS; P = 0.232) between patients having LE or TME. The 68 patients with a T2 lesion had higher local recurrence (P = 0.025) and lower DFS following LE compared with TME (P = 0.044). There was no difference in overall survival (P = 0.351).

CONCLUSION

LE of early rectal cancer is associated with higher local recurrence and decreased DFS. These disadvantages are significant for T2 lesions.

A population-based comparison of overall and disease-specific survival following local excision or abdominoperineal resection for stage I rectal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

The use of local excision (LE) for early stage rectal adenocarcinoma is increasing due to the associated morbidity of radical resection. To determine if survival in stage I rectal cancer differs following LE or abdominoperineal resection (APR), we analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We selected patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2002 with T1-2N0M0 rectal adenocarcinoma measuring ≤4 cm who underwent either local excision with (LE + RT) or without adjuvant radiation (LE alone) or APR alone. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression was also performed to determine the effect of covariates on OS and DSS.

RESULTS

A total of 2,391 patients were identified including 981 (41 %) treated with APR, 1,018 (43 %) treated with LE alone, and 392 (16 %) treated with LE + RT. With a median follow-up of 69 months, there was no difference in OS or DSS seen between the three groups (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). When stratifying by T-stage, there was a significant difference in overall survival between LE alone and APR for T2 disease. However, there was no difference in DSS between these two subgroups. There were no other significant survival differences between all comparable subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large population-based study, there was no difference in long-term DSS between patients who underwent an APR compared to selected patients who underwent LE with or without adjuvant radiation. Although these data further reinforce the promising data regarding the selected use of LE, further prospective studies are needed to further elucidate the role of LE in this setting.

Is adjuvant radiotherapy warranted in resected pT1-2 node-positive rectal cancer?

Background

Stage T1-2 rectal cancers are unlikely to have lymph node metastases and neoadjuvant therapy is not routinely administered. Postoperative management is controversial if lymph node metastases are detected in the resected specimen. We studied the outcomes of patients with pT1-2 node-positive rectal cancer in order to determine whether adjuvant radiotherapy was beneficial.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 284 patients with pathological T1-2 node-positive rectal cancer from a single institution. Outcomes, including local recurrence (LR), distant metastasis (DM), disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS), were studied in patients with detailed TN staging and different adjuvant treatment modalities.

Results

The overall 5-year LR, DM, DFS and OS rates for all patients were 12.5%, 32.9%, 36.4% and 76.8%, respectively. Local control was inferior among patients who received no adjuvant therapy. Patients could be divided into three risk subsets: Low-risk, T1N1; Intermediate-risk, T2N1 and T1N2; and High-risk, T2N2. The 5-year LR rates were 5.3%, 9.8% and 26.4%, respectively (p = 0.005). In High-risk patients, addition of radiotherapy achieved a 5-year LR rate of 9.1%, compared 34.8% without radiotherapy.

Conclusions

In our study, we provide the detailed outcomes and preliminary survival analysis in a relatively infrequent subset of rectal cancer. Three risk subsets could be identified based on local control for pT1-2 node positive rectal cancer. Postoperative treatment needs to be individualized for patients with pT1-2 node-positive rectal cancer.

Selecting patients with locally advanced rectal cancer for neoadjuvant treatment strategies

Rectal cancer remains a significant problem worldwide. Outcomes vary significantly according to the stage of disease and prognostic factors, including the distance of the tumor from the circumferential resection margin. Accurate staging, including high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging, allows stratification of patients into low-, moderate-, and high-risk disease; this information can be used to inform multidisciplinary team decisions regarding the role of neoadjuvant therapy. Both neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiation reduce the risk of local recurrence compared with surgery alone, but they have little impact on survival. Although there remains a need to reduce overtreatment of those patients at moderate risk, evaluation of intensified regimens for those with high-risk disease is still required to reduce distant failure rates and improve survival in these patients with an otherwise poor prognosis.

Outcomes of local excision for early rectal cancer: a 6-year experience from the largest university hospital in Thailand

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine clinical outcomes of local excision for early rectal cancer from a University Hospital in Thailand.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 22 consecutive patients undergoing local excision for early rectal cancer (clinical and radiological T1/T2) from 2005-2010 at the Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok. Data were collected from patients' medical records, including demographic and clinical characteristics, pathological report and surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

This study included 10 males and 12 females, with average age of 68 years. Nineteen patients (86%) underwent transanal excision and the others had trans-sacral excision. Median operative time was 45 minutes. Postoperative complications occurred in 2 patients (9%); 1 fecal fistula and 1 wound infection following trans-sacral excision. There was no 30-day postoperative mortality. Median hospital stay was 5 days. Pathological reports revealed T1 lesion in 12 cases (55%), T2 lesion in 8 cases (36%) and T3 lesion in 2 cases (9%). Eight patients received additional treatment; one re-do transanal excision, two proctectomies, and five adjuvant chemoradiation. During the median follow-up period of 25 months, local recurrence was detected in 4 patients (18%); two cases of T2 lesions with close or positive margins, and two cases of T3 lesions. Three patients with local recurrence underwent salvage abdominoperineal resection. No local recurrence was found in T1/T2 lesions with free surgical margins.

CONCLUSIONS

Local excision is a feasible and acceptable alternative to radical resection only in early rectal cancer with free resection margins and favorable histopathology.

Toward the non-surgical management of locally advanced rectal cancer

Neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy and long-course chemoradiation (CRT) reduce local recurrence rates when compared to surgery alone and remain widely accepted as standard of care for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. However, surgery is not without complications and a non-surgical approach in carefully selected patients warrants evaluation. A pathological complete response to CRT is associated with a significant improvement in survival and it has been suggested that a longer time interval between the completion of CRT and surgery increases tumor downstaging. Intensification of neoadjuvant treatment regimens to increase tumor downstaging has been evaluated in a number of clinical trials and more recently the introduction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to CRT has demonstrated high rates of radiological tumor regression. Careful selection of patients using high-resolution MRI may allow a non-surgical approach in a subgroup of patients achieving a complete response to neoadjuvant therapies after an adequate time period. Clearly this needs prospective evaluation within a clinical trial setting, incorporating modern imaging techniques, and tissue biomarkers to allow accurate prediction and assessment of response.

Approach to rectal cancer surgery

Rectal cancer is a distinct subset of colorectal cancer where specialized disease-specific management of the primary tumor is required. There have been significant developments in rectal cancer surgery at all stages of disease in particular the introduction of local excision strategies for preinvasive and early cancers, standardized total mesorectal excision for resectable cancers incorporating preoperative short- or long-course chemoradiation to the multimodality sequencing of treatment. Laparoscopic surgery is also increasingly being adopted as the standard rectal cancer surgery approach following expertise of colorectal surgeons in minimally invasive surgery gained from laparoscopic colon resections. In locally advanced and metastatic disease, combining chemoradiation with radical surgery may achieve total eradication of disease and disease control in the pelvis. Evidence for resection of metastases to the liver and lung have been extensively reported in the literature. The role of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal metastases is showing promise in achieving locoregional control of peritoneal dissemination. This paper summarizes the recent developments in approaches to rectal cancer surgery at all these time points of the disease natural history.