Total Mesorectal Excision

Minimally-invasive conventional up-to-down laparoscopic approach is a widespread alternative for rectal cancer resection. Its potential benefits towards open surgery have been shown to rely, however, at secondary clinical outcomes, and its oncological non-inferiority compared with the traditional open approach has not been demonstrated yet. In this scenario, robotic-assisted minimally-invasive rectal resection has gained increasing popularity and promising expectancies. This narrative review aims to assemble the most updated evidence available and to discuss the future perspectives and challenges for this emergent surgical tool. The main benefit over conventional laparoscopy appears to be a reduction of conversion rates to open surgery, whereas the oncologic and functional outcomes seem similar than the other alternatives. Increased costs are the main limitation of the widespread of robotic technology. Low quality of the current evidence is remarkable.

To evaluate the impact of chemoradiation administered pre-or postoperatively on prognosis in females following R0 extended resection with sphincterpreserving total mesorectal excision (TME) for locally advanced rectal cancer and to assess the association between chemoradiation and intra-and postoperative variables.

Background Urinary and sexual dysfunctions are frequent after surgery for rectal cancer. Total mesorectal excision (TME) improves local recurrence and survival rates, and does not hamper recognition and sparing of hypogastric and pelvic splanchnic nerves. It is not known how laparoscopic rectal resection could change functional complication rates. Materials and Methods From a global series of 1,216 laparoscopic interventions for colorectal diseases, 35 cases of males less than 70 years old, undergoing rectal resection and TME for a T1-3M0 medium and low rectal cancer were selected. Urinary and sexual functions after the operations were retrospectively recorded by means of specific tools (International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and IIEF questionnaires, respectively). Results None of the patients necessitated permanent or intermittent catheterization. More than half the patients had no complaints about urinary functions; about one third had nocturia; 72% of the patients had an IPSS less that 10, and no case of IPSS worse that 31 was recorded. Sexual desire was reduced and spontaneous erectile function was impaired in almost half the cases, while induced erections were possible in about 90% of cases; about 70% of patients still had the possibility of penetration and a normal ejaculation and orgasm after the intervention. Discussion and Conclusions The present series confirms previous data and contribute to the creation of a benchmark specifically related to the laparoscopic approach to which surgeons should face when informing the patients before the operation. While severe urinary dysfunction is rare, sexual impairment remains a serious concern after rectal resection with TME.

Introduction Laparoscopic resection of low rectal cancer poses significant technical difficulties for the surgeon. There is a lack of published follow-up data in relation to the surgical, oncological and survival outcomes in these patients. Aim The aim of this study is to evaluate the surgical, oncological and survival outcomes in all patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancer. Methods Consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancers were included in the study. Clinical, pathological and follow-up data were recorded over a 4-year period. The mean follow-up was 25 months Results A total of 53 patients were included in the study, 30 of whom were males. The mean age was 64.14 years (range, 34-86 years). The mean hospital stay was 8.2 days (range, 4-42 days). Fifty were completed laparoscopically and three were converted to an open procedure. Thirty-eight were anterior resections and 15 were abdominoperineal resections. Twenty-four patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The total mesorectal excision was optimal in 51 (98%) cases. There were no anastomotic sequelae and no surgical mortality. There was no local recurrence detected. The overall survival (mean follow-up, 25 months) was 93.5%. Conclusion Laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancers permits optimum oncological control. In our series, this technical approach is associated with excellent 4-year survival and clinical outcomes.

Aim: The use of robotic-assisted laparoscopy seems fully adapted to pelvic surgery. However, few studies focus on robotic-assisted abdominoperineal resection (RAAPR). The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility, short-term postoperative outcomes, and pathological results of RAAPR. In addition, we provide a detailed description of the operative procedure and a brief review of the current literature.

Methods: Between January 2013 and April 2018, we performed a total of 428 robotic surgeries, including 294 colorectal resections (68.7%). Data were prospectively collected and included demographics, intraoperative findings, postoperative outcomes, and pathological data. For this study, we included the first 20 consecutive RAAPRs performed with the four-arm da Vinci Si surgical system (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA).

Results: Twenty patients (nine men) with a mean age of 68 years and a mean BMI of 24.5 ± 5.0 kg/m2 underwent RAAPR for low rectal adenocarcinoma (80%) or squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal. Sixteen (80%) patients underwent preoperative pelvic radiotherapy and eight (40%) had a history of previous abdominal surgery. Mean operative duration was 218 ± 52 min. There was no conversion to open surgery. Mortality, reoperation, and morbidity rate were 5%, 25%, and 60%, respectively. Three (15%) patients presented perineal complications. Mean length of hospital stay was 20 days. Three (15%) patients had pT4 tumor. Mesorectal excision was considered complete in 90%. On average, 16.5 ± 7.2 lymph nodes were retrieved.

Conclusion: RAAPR is feasible, with acceptable pathologic and short-term outcomes. The current literature does not demonstrate significant differences between robotic and laparoscopic APR. Indeed, we cannot justify its use in routine on the basis on the available evidence.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to examine the outcome of cancer of the lower rectum, particularly the rates of local recurrence and survival for tumors located in this area that have been treated by anterior or abdominoperineal resections. METHODS: A prospective, observational, national, cohort study which is part of the Norwegian Rectal Cancer Project. The present cohort includes all patients undergoing total mesorectal excision in 47 hospitals during the period November 1993 to December 1999. A total of 2,136 patients with rectal cancer within 12 cm of the anal verge were analyzed; there were 1,315 (62 percent) anterior resections and 821 (38 percent) abdominoperineal resections. The lower edge of the tumor was located 0 to 5 cm from the anal verge in 791 patients, 6 to 8 cm in 558 patients, and 9 to 12 cm in 787 patients. According to the TNM classification, there were 33 percent Stage I, 35 percent Stage II, and 32 percent Stage III. RESULTS: Univariate analyses: The five-year local recurrence rate was 15 percent in the lower level, 13 percent in the intermediate level, and 9 percent in the upper level (P = 0.014). It was 10 percent local recurrence after anterior resection and 15 percent after abdominoperineal resection (P = 0.008). The five-year survival rate was 59 percent in the lower level, 62 percent in the intermediate level, and 69 percent in the upper level (P < 0.001), respectively, and it was 68 percent in the anterior-resection group and 55 percent in the abdominoperineal-resection group (P < 0.001). Multivariate analyses: The level of the tumor influenced the risk of local recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1–2.3), but the operative procedure, anterior resection vs. abdominoperineal resection, did not (hazard ratio, 1.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.7–1.8). On the contrary, operative procedure influenced survival (hazard ratio, 1.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 1–1.6), but tumor level did not (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.9–1.5). In addition to patient and tumor characteristics (T4 tumors), intraoperative bowel perforation and tumor involvement of the circumferential margin were identified as significant prognostic factors, which were more common in the lower rectum, explaining the inferior prognosis for tumors in this region. CONCLUSIONS: T4 tumors, R1 resections, and/or intraoperative perforation of the tumor or bowel wall are main features of low rectal cancers, causing inferior oncologic outcomes for tumors in this area. If surgery is optimized, preventing intraoperative perforation and involvement of the circumferential resection margin, the prognosis for cancers of the lower rectum seems not to be inherently different from that for tumors at higher levels. In that case, the level of the tumor or the type of resection will not be indicators for selecting patients for radiotherapy.

P urpose: The aim of the present study was to investigate how the Quality of Life of patients with rectal cancer changes over time after laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision. Methods: Patients completed the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36, and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and a colorectal specific European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire before laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision, on discharge from hospital and at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Patients were treated by laparoscopic low anterior resection or laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. Results: Fifty-one patients (mean age: 64 years, 29 (57 percent) male) participated in this study, of whom 38 (75 percent) underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection and 13 (25 percent) laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. Compared with preoperative scores on the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36, patients reported a deterioration in physical functioning (74 vs. 80, p=0.009), and improved mental functioning (76 vs. 70, p=0.007) at 3 months. Improvement in emotional wellbeing was reported both on the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (78 vs. 53, p=0.006) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (84 vs. 69, p<0.001). At one year, improvements in global Qualify of Life (82 vs. 68, p=0.001) and symptoms like fatigue (18 vs. 32, p<0.001), pain (5 vs. 12, p=0.009) and appetite loss (3 vs. 13, p=0.01) were reported. However, sexual functioning was worse from 3 months onward until one year after surgery (47 vs. 66, p=0.004). Patients who underwent low anterior resection experienced less sexual dysfunction than patients after abdominoperineal resection (21 vs. 56, p=0.004). Conclusion: One year after laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for rectal cancer, patients reported improvement in some important Quality of Life outcomes, including global Quality of Life, despite a decrease in sexual functioning. 96 Chapter 6

The additional use of radiotherapy has changed the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) dramatically. But a major achievement has been the development of total mesorectal excision (TME) as a surgical standard and the recognition that the surgeon is the predominant prognostic factor. The benefit of preoperative hypofractionated radiotherapy (SCRT; five fractions each of 5 Gy), initially established by the Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial, has been demonstrated in conjunction with TME by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. The concept of combined neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (conventional radiation of about 50 Gy with chemotherapy) has not been compared over surgery alone with TME. However, the German Rectal Cancer Study Group recently demonstrated that preoperative radiochemotherapy (RCT) was better than postoperative radiochemotherapy in terms of local control.