Short-term Outcomes of Transanal versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies

Conversion rate to open surgery during transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer: a single-center experience

Minimally invasive techniques for rectal cancer have demonstrated considerable advantages in terms of faster recovery and less post-operative complications. However, due to the complex anatomy and a limited surgical field, conversion to open surgery is still sometimes required, with a negative impact on the short-and long-term outcomes. The purpose of this study was to analyse the conversion rate to open abdominal surgery during laparoscopic transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) procedures performed at a high-volume Italian referral center. All consecutive TaTME performed for mid-to-low rectal cancer between 2015 and 2023 were reviewed, independently if treated with a primary anastomosis (with/without a diverting ostomy) or an end stoma. All procedures were performed using a standardized approach by the same surgical team. Patients with benign diagnosis that underwent different-from rectal resection procedures and cases pre-operatively scheduled for open surgery were excluded. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of conversion, defined as an un-planned intraoperative switch to open surgery using a midline laparotomy. Secondary aims included the comparison of patients who had a longer vs shorter operative time. Out of 220 patients, 210 were selected. In 187 cases, a primary anastomosis was performed, while 23 patients received a terminal colostomy (1 in the converted group; 22 in the full MIS- TaTME group, 10.6%). A surgical approach modification occurred in two cases, with a conversion rate of 0.95%. Median operative time was 281 min. Reasons for conversions included intra-operative difficulties impairing the mini-invasive procedure without intra-operative complications in one case, and difficulties in the laparoscopic control of an intraoperative bleeding due to a splenic lesion in another patient. Male sex and a higher BMI were found to be statistically significantly associated to longer operative time (respectively: p = 0.001 and p = 0.0025). In a high-volume center, a standardized TaTME is associated to a low conversion rate to open abdominal surgery.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Low Anterior Resection Syndrome following Trans-Anal Total Mesorectal Excision

BACKGROUND

Trans-anal total mesorectal excision (Ta-TME) is a novel approach for the resection of rectal cancer. Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a frequent functional disorder that might follow restorative proctectomy. Data regarding bowel function after Ta-TME are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for the development of LARS following Ta-TME.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database of all patients who underwent Ta-TME for rectal cancer at our institution was reviewed. All patients who were operated on from January 2018 to December 2021 were evaluated. The LARS score questionnaire was used via telephone interviews. Incidence, severity and risk factors for LARS were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients underwent Ta-TME for rectal cancer between January 2018 and December 2021. Thirty-five patients were excluded due to ostomy status, death, local disease recurrence, ileal pouch or lack of compliance. Fifty patients were included in the analysis. LARS was diagnosed in 76% of patients. Anastomosis distance from dentate line was identified as a risk factor for LARS via multivariate analysis (p = 0.042). Neo-adjuvant therapy, hand sewn anastomosis and anastomotic leak did not increase the risk of LARS.

CONCLUSION

LARS is a frequent condition following ta-TME, as it is used for other approaches to low anterior resection. Anastomosis distance from dentate line is an independent risk factor for LARS. In this study neo-adjuvant therapy, hand sewn anastomosis and anastomotic leak did not increase the risk of LARS. Further studies with longer follow-up times are required to better understand the functional outcomes following Ta-TME.

Impact of the approach on conversion to open surgery during minimally invasive restorative total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to explore the impact of the approach on conversion in patients undergoing minimally invasive restorative total mesorectal excision within a single unit.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with rectal cancer undergoing minimally invasive restorative total mesorectal excision between January 2006 and June 2020 were included. Subjects were classified according to the presence or absence of conversion. Baseline variables and short-term outcomes were compared. Regression analyses were conducted to assess the relationship between the approach and conversion.

RESULTS

During the study period, 318 patients underwent a restorative proctectomy. Of these, 240 met the inclusion criteria. Robotic and laparoscopic approaches were undertaken in 147 (61.3%) and 93 (38.8%) cases, respectively. A transanal approach was utilised in 62 (25.8%) cases (58.1% in combination with a robotic transabdominal approach). Conversion to open surgery occurred in 30 cases (12.5%). Conversion was associated with an increased overall complication rate (P = 0.003), surgical complications (P = 0.009), superficial surgical site infections (P = 0.02) and an increased length of hospital stay (P = 0.006). Robotic and transanal approaches were both associated with decreased conversion rates. The multiple logistic regression analysis, however, showed that only a transanal approach was independently associated with a lower risk of conversion (OR 0.147, 0.023-0.532; P = 0.01), whilst obesity was an independent risk factor for conversion (OR 4.388, 1.852-10.56; P < 0.00).

CONCLUSIONS

A transanal component is associated with a reduced conversion rate in minimally invasive restorative total mesorectal excision, regardless of the transabdominal approach utilised. Larger studies will be required to confirm these findings and define which subgroup of patients could benefit from transanal component when a robotic approach is undertaken.

S184: preoperative sarcopenia is associated with worse short-term outcomes following transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Malnutrition and deconditioning impact postoperative morbidity and mortality. Computed tomography (CT) body composition variables are used as markers of nutritional status and sarcopenia. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of sarcopenia, using CT variables, on postoperative outcomes following transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was an institutional retrospective cohort analysis of consecutive rectal cancer patients who underwent TaTME between April 2014 and May 2020. Psoas muscle index (PMI) was calculated from diagnostic CT scans. Based on previous studies, patients in the lowest PMI tertile by gender were considered sarcopenic. Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Readmission rates and postoperative complications were compared between groups. Backward stepwise logistic regression was used to determine the association between sarcopenia and 30-day postoperative complications.

RESULTS

85 patients were analyzed, of which 63% were male, with a median age of 59 (IQR: 51-65), and median BMI of 28 (IQR: 24-32). Of the entire cohort, 34% (n = 29) were sarcopenic (median PMI 5.39 IQR: 4.49-6.71). No significant difference in baseline characteristics between sarcopenic and nonsarcopenic patients were observed. 55% of sarcopenic patients experienced a complication within 30 days compared to 24% of nonsarcopenic patients (p = 0.01). 41% of sarcopenic patients required hospital readmission within 30 days compared to 17% of their nonsarcopenic counterparts (p = 0.014). Sarcopenic patients also experienced significantly higher rates of post-operative small bowel obstruction (10% vs. 0%, p = 0.04). Multivariable analyses identified that sarcopenic patients have a fourfold increase in odds of experiencing a 30-day postoperative complication (OR: 4.44, 95%CI: 1.6-12.4, p < 0.05) after adjusting for gender.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative sarcopenia is associated with increased 30-day postoperative complications following TaTME for rectal cancer. Postoperative complications can have serious oncologic implications by delaying adjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, preoperative recognition of sarcopenia prior to undergoing TaTME for rectal cancer may provide an opportunity for early intervention with prehabilitation programs.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A nationwide comparison of short-term outcomes after transanal, open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted total mesorectal excision

AIM

Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery has several limitations. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) can potentially overcome these limitations. The aim of this study was to compare the rates of non-radical surgery and anastomotic leakage after TaTME, open TME (OpTME), laparoscopic TME (LaTME) and robotic TME (RoTME) procedures in a nationwide cohort.

METHODS

We extracted the demographic, perioperative and pathological data of patients who underwent a curative OpTME, LaTME, RoTME or TaTME procedure between January 2014 and December 2018 from the national database of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). We conducted multiple group-comparisons, uni- and multivariate analyses to determine the factors associated with positive resection margin (+RM) and anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

We included 2393 patients (OpTME = 205, LaTME = 1163, RoTME = 713 and TaTME = 312). The rate of +RM was 5.7% after TaTME. The lowest rate of +RM was achieved after RoTME (8.2%, 4.7%, 2.52%, and 5.7%, after OpTME, LaTME, RoTME and TaTME respectively, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, having a T4 tumour and intraoperative bowel perforation were associated with the risk of +RM (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). The factors associated with anastomotic leakage in multivariate analysis were male gender, high BMI and intraoperative bowel perforation (p < 0.001, p = 0.049, p = 0.002, respectively). TaTME was associated with the highest rate of sphincter-saving procedures (79.8%, p < 0.001), the lowest rate of bowel perforation (2.9%, p = 0.028) and the lowest rate of conversion to open surgery (1.3%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide audit of TME approaches, the rate of +RM was lowest after RoTME. No differences were found between the four approaches regarding the risk of anastomotic leakage. TaTME offered advantages related to sphincter-saving, perforation and conversion.

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

AIM

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a surgical approach for treating mid to low rectal cancer as well as other colorectal diseases. Since the procedure is difficult to master, perioperative complications of TaTME should be examined precisely, especially during the early implementation phase of this procedure. The primary aim of this review was to determine a pooled morbidity and anastomotic leakage (AL) rate after TaTME surgery, and the secondary aim was to show the completeness of reporting of complications among the included studies, as well as the correlation between completeness and reported incidence of complications.

METHOD

A systematic review of literature was conducted using Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases, searching for observational studies reporting on complications after TaTME. Studies published between 1 January 2010 and 15 October 2019 were included. Meta-analysis on the proportion of morbidity, AL and intraoperative complications was performed.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies (2446 TaTME cases), consisting of 27 noncomparative studies and 14 comparative studies, were included, after screening 1711 possible studies. The pooled rates of overall morbidity and AL were 30.0% (95% CI 26.4%-34.0%) and 6.8% (95% CI 5.2%-8.9%), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the morbidity rate in studies that reported 30-day results (35.5%; 95% CI 31.8%-39.4%) was significantly higher than the rate in studies that did not define the follow-up length for complications (23.4%; 95% CI 17.8%-30.1%; p = 0.003). The rates of intraoperative urethral injury, rectal injury, vaginal injury and bladder injury were 0.3% (95% CI 0.1%-1.7%), 0.4% (95% CI 0.1%-2.2%), 0.3% (95% CI 0.1%-0.8%) and 0.3% (95% CI 0.1%-1.7%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that pooled perioperative complication rates were within acceptable ranges. However, the significant difference in overall morbidity rate between the studies with 30-day results and the studies without a specified follow-up time, indicates a large under-reporting of complications in many studies.

Impact of Surgical Approach on Surgical Resection Quality in Mid- and Low Rectal Cancer, A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

AIM

To evaluate the evidence concerning the quality of surgical resection in laparoscopic (LapTME), robotic (RobTME) and transanal (TaTME) total mesorectal excision for mid-/low rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was utilized to compare surgical resection involved in these 3 surgical techniques by using ADDIS software. Rates of positive circumferential resection margins (CRMs) were the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

A total of 34 articles, 2 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 32 non-RCTs, were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled data showed CRM positivity in 114 of 1763 LapTME procedures (6.5%), 54 of 1051 RobTME procedures (5.1%) and 60 of 1276 TaTME procedures (4.7%). There was no statistically significant difference among these 3 surgical approaches in terms of CRM involvement rates and all other surgical resection quality outcomes. The incomplete mesorectal excision rates were 9.6% (69/720) in the LapTME group, 1.9% (11/584) in the RobTME group and 5.6% (45/797) in the TaTME group. Pooled network analysis observed a higher but not statistically significant risk of incomplete mesorectum when comparing both LapTME with RobTME (OR = 1.99; 95% CI = 0.48-11.17) and LapTME with TaTME (OR = 1.90; 95% CI = 0.99-5.25). By comparison, RobTME was most likely to be ranked the best or second best in terms of CRM involvement, complete mesorectal excision, rate of distal resection margin (DRM) involvement and length of DRMs. In addition, RobTME achieved a greater mean tumor distance to the CRM than TaTME. It is worth noting that TaTME was most likely to be ranked the worst in terms of CRM involvement for intersphincteric resection of low rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Overall, RobTME was most likely to be ranked the best in terms of the quality of surgical resection for the treatment of mid-/low rectal cancer. TaTME should be performed with caution in the treatment of low rectal cancer.

Beyond transanal total mesorectal excision: short-term outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision in locally advanced rectal cancer requiring resection beyond total mesorectal excision

AIM

The aim of this work was to define the role of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) requiring resection beyond the mesorectal plane.

METHOD

We performed a retrospective review of the outcomes of a case series of patients undergoing taTME for rectal cancer with mesorectal fascia or adjacent organ involvement.

RESULTS

Eleven patients (six men) underwent taTME for LARC requiring resection beyond total mesorectal excision (TME). All had a restorative procedure. The transabdominal approach was open in five and minimally invasive in six cases. All patients required the resection of at least one adjacent structure, including presacral fascia, internal iliac vessels, nerve roots, uterus, vagina or seminal vesicles. Four patients required a pelvic side-wall lymph node dissection and four had intraoperative radiotherapy. In all cases, the transanal approach was useful to disconnect the rectum distally, resect adjacent organs or control the R1 risk-point. Three patients had a complication of Clavien-Dindo grade III or above (one mechanical bowel obstruction, one pelvic collection and one urine sepsis). There were no anastomotic complications. Ten patients had an R0 resection. During a median follow-up of 11 (8.6-16) months there were no local recurrences, but two patients had distant metastases. During the study period, eight patients underwent closure of their stoma whilst the remaining three have had normal anastomotic assessments and will be closed in the future.

CONCLUSION

This early series shows that implementation of taTME for resections beyond TME may be feasible and safe in a highly selected setting.

Short- and mid-term outcomes of transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Purpose

The current meta-analysis combining mid and low rectal cancer with no meta-analysis only for low rectal cancer was seen. This meta-analysis was to compare the short- and mid-term outcomes of the transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) vs. laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for low rectal cancer.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted using the web-based databases; China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese BioMedical Database, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Wanfang Database. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were evaluated using the Jadad scale and non-RCTs (NRCs) were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results

Ten studies (2 RCTs and 8 NRCs) involving 772 patients were included. Among them, 378 patients underwent TaTME and 394 patients underwent LaTME. Compared with the LaTME group, the conversion rate was low (risk ratio [RR], 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11–0.54; P < 0.001), the circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement was low (RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27–0.86; P = 0.010), and the hospital stay was short (mean difference, −1.72; 95% CI, −2.89 to −0.55; P = 0.004) in the TaTME group. No significant differences were seen in the mesorectal resection quality, CRM distance, distal resection margin (DRM) involvement, DRM distance, local R1 resection, intraoperative complications, morbidity, anastomotic leakage, severe morbidity, mortality, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, and local recurrence rate (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The TaTME is a promising surgical technique and is fully a safe and efficacious option in managing low rectal cancer.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for stage II or III rectal cancer: pattern of local recurrence in a tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

For mid and low rectal cancer, transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has been established as an alternative approach to laparoscopic surgery. However, there are concerns about an unexpected pattern of local recurrence. This study aimed to analyze the pattern of local recurrence for patients treated with TaTME in a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center analysis was performed. Since 2011, all patients with rectal cancer undergoing TaTME with curative intent were prospectively included in a standardized database. Patients with tumors within 12 cm, clinical stage II or III were included. The primary endpoint of the study was the overall local recurrence rate, together with a critical analysis of the patterns of local failures.

RESULTS

Two hundred and five patients were included in this analysis. At the time of surgery, patients had a mean age of 67.1 years (SD 12.3), and 66.8% were male. Neoadjuvant therapy was administered in 73.7%. Mesorectal specimen quality was complete or near-complete in 98.5%, while circumferential resection margin was ≤ 1 mm (including T4 tumors) in 11.8%. After a median follow-up of 34.3 months (95% CI 30.1-38.5), 3.4% (n = 7) presented with local recurrent disease. Six out of the seven patients were also diagnosed with hematogenous metastases. Of the seven patients, three presented with at least one of the following risk factors: T4 tumor, N2 disease, incomplete mesorectal specimen, or positive CRM. Local failure was noted posteriorly (n = 3), laterally (n = 2), anteriorly (n = 1), and in the axial compartment (n = 1). Median time to relapse was 31.5 months (10.3-40.9). The median follow-up after local recurrence was 7.9 (95% CI 6.7-9.1) months, with an overall survival of 85.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

TaTME provided satisfactory local recurrence outcomes, and the most common patterns of failure were in the central pelvis.

LARS is Associated with Lower Anastomoses, but not with the Transanal Approach in Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Resection

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a defecation disorder that frequently occurs after a low anterior resection (LAR) with a total mesorectal excision (TME). The transanal (ta) TME for low rectal pathologies could potentially overcome some of the difficulties encountered with the abdominal approach in a narrow pelvis. However, the impact of the transanal approach on functional outcomes remains unknown. Here, we investigated the effect of the taTME approach on functional outcomes by comparing LARS scores between the LAR and taTME approaches in patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study including 80 patients (n = 40 LAR-TME, n = 40 taTME) with rectal adenocarcinoma. We reviewed medical charts to obtain LARS scores 6 months after the rectal resection or a reversal of the protective ileostomy.

RESULTS

At the 6-month follow-up, 80% of patients exhibited LARS symptoms (44% minor LARS and 36% major LARS). LARS scores were not significantly associated with the T-stage, N-stage, or neo-adjuvant radiotherapy. The mean distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge was 4.0 ± 2.0 cm. The taTME group had significantly lower anastomoses compared with the LAR-TME group (median 4.0 cm [IQR1.8] vs. median 5.0 cm [IQR 2.0], p < 0.001). Univariable analysis revealed significantly higher LARS scores in the taTME group compared with the LAR-TME group (median LARS scores: 29 vs. 25, p = 0.040). However, multivariable regression analysis, adjusting for neo-adjuvant treatment, anastomosis distance from the anal verge, anastomotic leak rate, and body mass index, revealed no significant effect of taTME on the LARS score (adjusted regression coefficient:  - 2.147, 95%CI:  - 2.130 to 6.169, p = 0.359). We also found a significant correlation between LARS scores and the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (regression coefficient:  - 1.145, 95%CI:  - 2.149 to  - 1.141, p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Fifty percentage of patients in this cohort exhibited some LARS symptoms after a mid- or low-rectal cancer resection. As previously described, LARS scores were negatively correlated with the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge. TaTME was after adjustment for the height of the anastomosis not associated with higher LARS at 6 months when compared with LAR-TME.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: 3-year oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer treatment has evolved with the implementation of new surgical techniques. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is the most recent approach developed to facilitate pelvic dissection of mid- and distal rectal tumours. The purpose of this study was to analyse the short- and mid-term oncological outcomes of TaTME.

METHODS

A study was conducted on patients treated with TaTME for rectal cancer at two colorectal units in Portugal between March 2016 and December 2018. Clinical, pathological and oncological data were retrospectively analysed. Primary endpoints were 3-year overall survival, disease-free survival and local recurrence. Secondary endpoints were clinical and pathological outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (31 males, [62%], median age 66 years [range 40-85 years]) underwent TaTME, 49 (98%) for malignant and 1 (2%) for benign disease. There were no cases of conversion, 49 (98%) patients had complete or near-complete mesorectum, all the resections were R0 with adequate distal and circumferential margins. With a median follow-up of 36 months, there were 2 cases (4%) of local recurrence and 3-year estimated overall survival and disease-free survival were 90% and 79%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TaTME can provide safe mid-term oncological outcomes, similar to what has been published for classic and laparoscopic TME. Our results also show how demanding this novel approach can be and the consequent need for audited data and standardized implementation.

Three-year outcome after transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision in locally advanced rectal cancer: a multicenter comparative analysis

Background

For patients with mid and distal rectal cancer, robust evidence on long-term outcome and causal treatment effects of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is lacking. This multicentre retrospective cohort study aimed to assess whether TaTME reduces locoregional recurrence rate compared to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LapTME).

Methods

Consecutive patients with rectal cancer within 12 cm from the anal verge and clinical stage II-III were selected from three institutional databases. Outcome after TaTME (Nov 2011 - Feb 2018) was compared to a historical cohort of patients treated with LapTME (Jan 2000 - Feb 2018) using the inverse probability of treatment weights method. The primary endpoint was three-year locoregional recurrence.

Results

A total of 710 patients were analysed, 344 in the TaTME group and 366 in the LapTME group. At 3 years, cumulative locoregional recurrence rates were 3.6% (95% CI, 1.1–6.1) in the TaTME group and 9.6% (95% CI, 6.5–12.7) in the LapTME group (HR = 0.4; 95% CI, 0.23–0.69; p = 0.001). Three-year cumulative disease-free survival rates were 74.3% (95% CI, 68.8–79.8) and 68.6% (95% CI, 63.7–73.5) (HR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65–1.02; p = 0.078) and three-year overall survival 87.2% (95% CI, 82.7–91.7) and 82.2% (95% CI, 78.0–86.2) (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53–1.03; p = 0.077), respectively. In patients who underwent sphincter preservation procedures, TaTME was associated with a significantly better disease-free survival (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62–0.98; p = 0.033).

Conclusions

These findings suggest that TaTME may improve locoregional recurrence and disease-free survival rates among patients with mid and distal locally advanced rectal cancer.

Transanal Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision: A Comparative Prospective Clinical Trial from Two Centers

Purpose: Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LapTME) faced many obstacles in obese male with narrow pelvis and bulky mesorectum with increased risk of incomplete mesorectal excision and positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and distal resection margin (DRM). Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is reported to result in a better quality total mesorectal excision (TME) specimen, lower incidence of CRM and DRM involvement, and higher rates of sphincter preservation. To date, there is still a debate about the feasibility and efficacy of transanal versus the laparoscopic approach for TME in middle and low rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective controlled clinical trial where 38 patients of middle or low rectal cancer from two tertiary centers were nonrandomly assigned to either TaTME or LapTME. Results: Eighteen patients were operated by TaTME versus 20 patients by LapTME. Mean body mass index was significantly higher in the TaTME group (30.74 ± 7.79) than in the LapTME group (25.99 ± 4.68) (P = .03). TaTME was associated with more transanal specimen extraction (55.5% versus 20%, P = .06). No significant differences were detected in CRM, DRM, peri- or postoperative complications, or conversion rates with more reported Clavien-Dindo grade III complications in the TaTME group (P = .29). Conclusions: TaTME facilitated rectal cancer surgery in obese patients and increased the chance of transanal specimen extraction with equivalent oncological outcomes to conventional LapTME. Further studies are recommended to build better evidence.

Meta-analysis of transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision in management of rectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate comparative outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic TME (LaTME) in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

We systematically searched multiple databases and bibliographic reference lists. A combination of free text and controlled vocabulary search adapted to thesaurus headings, search operators, and limits were applied. Overall intraoperative complications, overall postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, surgical site infections (SSIs), completeness of mesorectal excision, R0 resection, distal (DRM) and circumferential resection margin (CRM), number of harvested lymph nodes, and procedure time were the evaluated outcome parameters.

RESULTS

We identified 18 comparative studies reporting a total of 2048 patients evaluating outcomes of TaTME (n = 1000) and LaTME (n = 1048) in patients with rectal cancer. TaTME was associated with significantly higher number of R0 resection (OR 1.67, P = 0.01) and harvested lymph nodes (MD 1.08, P = 0.01), and lower rate of positive CRM (OR 0.67, P = 0.04) and conversion to an open procedure (OR 0.17, P < 0.00001) compared with LaTME. However, there was no significant difference in intraoperative complications (OR 1.18, P = 0.54), postoperative complications (OR 0.89, P = 0.24), anastomotic leak (OR 0.88, P = 0.42), SSIs (OR 0.64, P = 0.26), completeness of mesorectal excision (OR 1.43, P = 0.19), DRM (MD 1.87, P = 0.16), CRM (MD 0.36, P = 0.58), and procedure time (MD - 10.87, P = 0.18) between TaTME and LaTME. Moreover, for low rectal tumours, TaTME was associated with significantly lower rate of anastomotic leak and higher number of lymph nodes (MD 2.06, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the meta-analysis of best available evidence (level 2) demonstrated that TaTME may be associated with better short-term oncological outcomes and similar clinical outcomes compared with LaTME, the differences between the two groups were small questioning their clinical relevance. No solid conclusions can be made due to lack of high quality randomised studies.