Surgical outcomes of Turnbull-Cutait delayed coloanal anastomosis with pull-through versus immediate coloanal anastomosis with diverting stoma after total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Theoretical advantages of Turnbull-Cutait pull-through delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) are a reduced risk of anastomotic leak and therefore avoidance of stoma. Gradually abandoned in favor of immediate coloanal anastomosis (ICAA) with diverting stoma, DCAA has regained popularity in recent years in reconstructive surgery for low RC, especially when combined with minimally invasive surgery (MIS). The aim of this study was to perform the first meta-analysis, exploring the safety and outcomes of DCAA compared to ICAA with protective stoma. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL and Google Scholar databases was performed for studies published from January 2000 until December 2020. The systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review on Interventions recommendations and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Out of 2626 studies screened, 9 were included in the systematic review and 4 studies in the meta-analysis. Outcomes included were postoperative complications, pelvic sepsis and risk of definitive stoma. Considering postoperative complications classified as Clavien-Dindo III, no significant difference existed in the rate of postoperative morbidity between DCAA and ICAA (13% versus 21%; OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.38-3.62; p = 0.78; I2 = 20%). Patients in the DCAA group experienced a lower rate of postoperative pelvic sepsis compared with patients undergoing ICAA with diverting stoma (7% versus 14%; OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.16-0.85; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%). The risk of definitive stoma was comparable between the two groups (2% versus 2% OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.15-3.85; p = 0.75; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: According to the limited current evidence, DCAA is associated with a significant decrease in pelvic sepsis. Further prospective trials focusing on oncologic and functional outcomes are needed.

Local excision and treatment of early node-negative anal squamous cell carcinomas in a highly HIV prevalent population.

BACKGROUND: Anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) is an uncommon cancer associated with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. There has been increasing interest in providing organ-sparing treatment in small node-negative ASCC's, however, there is a paucity of evidence about the use of local excision alone in people living with HIV (PLWH). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of local excision alone in this patient population. METHODS: We present a case series of stage 1 and stage 2 ASCC in PLWH and HIV negative patients. Data were extracted from a 20-year retrospective cohort study analysing the treatment and outcomes of patients with primary ASCC in a cohort with a high prevalence of HIV. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included in the analysis. Fifty-seven (61%) were PLWH. Thirty-five (37%) patients received local excision alone as treatment for ASCC, they were more likely to be younger (p = 0.037, ANOVA) and have either foci of malignancy or well-differentiated tumours on histology (p = 0.002, Fisher's exact test). There was no statistically significant difference in 5-year disease-free survival and recurrence between treatment groups, however, patients who had local excision alone and PLWH were both more likely to recur later compared to patients who received other treatments for ASCC. (72.3 months vs 27.3 months, p = 0.06, ANOVA, and 72.3 months vs 31.8 months, p = 0.035, ANOVA, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We recommend that local excision be considered the sole treatment for stage 1 node-negative tumours that have clear margins and advantageous histology regardless of HIV status. However, PLWH who have local excision alone must have access to an expert long-term surveillance programme after treatment to identify late recurrences.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing adverse events and functional outcomes of different pouch designs after restorative proctocolectomy.

AIM: There is no consensus as to which ileoanal pouch design provides better outcomes after restorative proctocolectomy. This study compares different pouch designs. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature was performed. A random effects meta-analytical model was used to compare adverse events and functional outcome. RESULTS: Thirty comparative studies comparing J, W, S and K pouch designs were included. No significant differences were identified between the different pouch designs with regard to anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, pelvic sepsis, wound infection, pouch fistula, pouch ischaemia, perioperative haemorrhage, small bowel obstruction, pouchitis and sexual dysfunction. The W and K designs resulted in fewer cases of pouch failure compared with the J and S designs. J pouch construction resulted in a smaller maximum pouch volume compared with W and K pouches. Stool frequency per 24 h and during daytime was higher following a J pouch than W, S or K constructions. The J design resulted in increased faecal urgency and seepage during daytime compared with the K design. The use of protective pads during daytime and night-time was greater with a J pouch compared to S or K. The use of antidiarrhoeal medication was greater after a J reservoir than a W reservoir. Difficulty in pouch evacuation requiring intubation was higher with an S pouch than with W or J pouches. CONCLUSION: Despite its ease of construction and comparable complication rates, the J pouch is associated with higher pouch failure rates and worse function. Patient characteristics, technical factors and surgical expertise should be considered when choosing pouch design.

Mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma of the colon and rectum.

Mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma (MANEC) are rare cancers of the gastrointestinal (GI) and pancreatobiliary tract. They are characterized by the presence of a combination of epithelial and neuroendocrine elements, where each component represents at least 30% of the tumour. Review of literature and consolidation of clinicopathological data. Sixty-one cases of colorectal MANEC have been reported in literature and one seen in this centre. The median age of the patients affected was 61.9 ± 12.4 years (20-94 years). Male to female ratio is 1.0:1.2. Presentations were similar to other colorectal malignancies. 58.0% of colorectal MANECs were found in the right colon, 8.1% cases in the transverse, 16.1% in the left colon, 16.1% in the rectum. These tumours appeared invasiveness 79.1% were T3-T4. Over 90% of cases were presented with metastatic disease. The majority of patient underwent surgical resection of the primary cancer (96.6%). Of these, 10 operations (17.9%) were emergency operations due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. Three patients received first line palliative care. In eight cases (13.8%), patients underwent adjuvant chemotherapy. The median overall survival after diagnosis was 10 ± 2.4 months (95% CI: 5.37-14.64 months). MANECs are rare but aggressive colorectal cancers. Surgical resection of localized disease with adjuvant chemotherapy appears to significantly improve survival in small case series. Further understanding through the sharing of experiences is required.

The effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival and recurrence after curative rectal cancer surgery in patients who are histologically node negative after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether adjuvant chemotherapy will affect recurrence rate or disease-free and overall survival in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who were staged with MRI node-positive disease (mrN+) preoperatively. These patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with curative rectal cancer surgery and their pathological staging was negative for nodal disease (ypN0). There is no consensus on the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in such patients. METHOD: Patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and underwent curative rectal cancer surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma staged as [mrTxN+M0] on MRI staging and who on pathological staging were found to be [ypTxN0M0] were retrospectively identified from January 2008 December 2012 from two tertiary referral centres (Royal Marsden Hospital, London and Saint-Andre Hospital, Bordeaux). RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-three patients were recruited and, after propensity matching at a ratio of 2:1, n = 80 patients were divided to receive adjuvant (n = 28) or no adjuvant treatment (n = 52). A comparison of adjuvant chemotherapy vs no adjuvant therapy showed that the mean overall survival was 2.67 vs 3.60 years (P = 0.42) and disease-free survival was 2.27 vs 3.32 years (P = 0.14). CONCLUSION: This study found no significant difference in survival or disease recurrence between patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy and patients who did not. There is no clear evidence to support or dismiss the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients who were node positive on preoperative MRI and node negative on histopathological staging. Further multicentre prospective randomized trials are needed to identify the appropriate treatment regime for this group of patients.

The selection process can improve the outcome in locally advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer: activity and results of a dedicated multidisciplinary colorectal cancer centre.

AIM: There is wide disparity in the care of patients with multivisceral involvement of rectal cancer. The results are presented of treatment of advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer from a centre where a dedicated multidisciplinary team (MDT) is central to the management. METHOD: All consecutive MDT referrals between 2010 and 2014 were examined. Analysis was undertaken of the referral pathway, site, selection process, management decision, R0 resection rate, mortality/morbidity/Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification of morbidity, length of stay (LOS) and improvement of quality of life. RESULTS: There were 954 referrals. These included locally advanced primary rectal cancer (LAPRC b-TME) (39.0%), rectal recurrence (RR) (22.0%), locally advanced primary colon cancer (LAPCC T3c/d-T4) (21.1%), colon cancer recurrence (CR) (12.4%), locally advanced primary anal cancer (LAPAC-failure of CRT/T3c/d-T4) (3.0%) and anal cancer recurrence (AR) (2.2%). Among these patients 271 operations were performed, 212 primary and 59 for recurrence. These included 16 sacrectomies, 134 total pelvic exenterations and 121 other multi-visceral exenterative procedures. An R0 resection (no microscopic margin involvement) was achieved in 94.4% and R1 (microscopic margin involvement) in 5.1%. In LAPRC b-TME the R0 rate was 96.1% and for RR it was 79%. The LOS varied from 13.3 to 19.9 days. RR operations had the highest morbidity (CD 1-2, 33.3%) and LAPRC operations had the highest rate of CD 3-4 complications (18.4%). Most (39.6%) of the referred patients were from other UK hospitals. CONCLUSION: Advanced colorectal cancer can be successfully treated in a dedicated referral centre, achieving R0 resection in over 90% with low morbidity and mortality. Implementation of a standardized referral pathway is encouraged.

Magnetic resonance defecography versus clinical examination and fluoroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance defecography (MRD) allows for dynamic visualisation of the pelvic floor compartments when assessing for pelvic floor dysfunction. Additional benefits over traditional techniques are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to compare detection and miss rates of pelvic floor abnormalities with MRD versus clinical examination and traditional fluoroscopic techniques. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with recommendations from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were accessed. Studies were included if they reported detection rates of at least one outcome of interest with MRD versus EITHER clinical examination AND/OR fluoroscopic techniques within the same cohort of patients. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included: 14 studies compared clinical examination to MRD, and 16 compared fluoroscopic techniques to MRD. Detection and miss rates with MRD were not significantly different from clinical examination findings for any outcome except enterocele, where MRD had a higher detection rate (37.16% with MRD vs 25.08%; OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.21-4.11, p = 0.010) and lower miss rates (1.20 vs 37.35%; OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.20, p = 0.0001) compared to clinical examination. However, compared to fluoroscopy, MRD had a lower detection rate for rectoceles (61.84 vs 73.68%; OR 0.48 95% CI 0.30-0.76, p = 0.002) rectoanal intussusception (37.91 vs 57.14%; OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.66, p = 0.002) and perineal descent (52.29 vs 74.51%; OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.74, p = 0.006). Miss rates of MRD were also higher compared to fluoroscopy for rectoceles (15.96 vs 0%; OR 15.74, 95% CI 5.34-46.40, p < 0.00001), intussusception (36.11 vs 3.70%; OR 10.52, 95% CI 3.25-34.03, p = 0.0001) and perineal descent (32.11 vs 0.92%; OR 12.30, 95% CI 3.38-44.76, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: MRD has a role in the assessment of pelvic floor dysfunction. However, clinicians need to be mindful of the risk of underdiagnosis and consider the use of additional imaging.

A systematic review of transabdominal levator division during abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER).

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the surgical technique, short-term oncological and perioperative outcomes for the transabdominal division of the levator ani muscles during abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER). METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify studies reporting on transabdominal division of the levator ani during APER. A comprehensive literature search was performed using a combination of free-text terms and controlled vocabulary when applicable on the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library. The search period was from January 1945 to December 2015. The following search headings were used: "transabdominal", "transpelvic", "abdominal" or "pelvic" combined with either "levator" or "extralevator" and with "abdominoperineal". RESULTS: Nine publications were identified reporting on 99 participants. The male/female distribution was 1.44:1, respectively, and the mean age was 56.6 (30-77) years. All tumours were less than 5 cm from the anal verge. The preoperative radiological staging was T2 in 18% of cases, T3 in 53.5% and T4 in 28.5%. Transabdominal division of the levators was performed laparoscopically in 55 cases, robotically in 34 and open in 10. The mean operating time was 255 (177-640) min. Mean intraoperative blood loss was 140 (92-500) ml. There were no conversions to open. Circumferential resection margins were positive in two cases, and there was one intraoperative perforation. Mean post-operative length of stay was 9.3 (3-67) days. Follow-up (from 0 to 31 months) revealed 19 perineal wound infections, 15 cases of sexual dysfunction and 7 cases of urinary retention. There was no mortality and 1 readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Transabdominal division of the levators during APER is feasible and reproducible, with acceptable perioperative and good early oncological outcomes. Further comparative studies are needed.

Adoption and success rates of perineal procedures for fistula-in-ano: a systematic review.

AIM: Several sphincter-preserving techniques have been described with extremely encouraging initial reports. However, more recent studies have failed to confirm the positive early results. We evaluate the adoption and success rates of advancement flap procedures (AFP), fibrin glue sealant (FGS), anal collagen plug (ACP) and ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) procedures based on their evolution in time for the management of anal fistula. METHOD: A PubMed search from 1992 to 2015. An assessment of adoption, duration of study and success rate was undertaken. RESULTS: We found 133 studies (5604 patients): AFP (40 studies, 2333 patients), FGS (31 studies, 871 patients), LIFT (19 studies, 759 patients), ACP (43 studies, 1641 patients). Success rates ranged from 0% to 100%. Study duration was significantly associated with success rates in AFP (P = 0.01) and FGS (P = 0.02) but not in LIFT or ACP. The duration of use of individual procedures since first publication was associated with success rate only in AFP (P = 0.027). There were no statistically significant differences in success rates relative to the number of the patients included in each study. CONCLUSION: Success and adoption rates tend to decrease with time. Differences in patient selection, duration of follow-up, length of availability of the individual procedure and heterogeneity of treatment protocols contribute to the diverse results in the literature. Differences in success rates over time were evident, suggesting that both international trials and global best practice consensus are desirable. Further prospective randomized controlled trials with homogeneity and clear objective parameters would be needed to substantiate these findings.

Compression versus hand-sewn and stapled anastomosis in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Anastomotic leaks are a feared complication of colorectal resections and novel techniques that have the potential to decrease them are still sought. This study aimed to compare the anastomotic leak rates in patients undergoing compression anastomoses versus hand-sewn or stapled anastomoses. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes of compression versus conventional (hand-sewn and stapled) colorectal anastomosis were collected from MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The quality of the RCTs and the potential risk of bias were assessed. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated for categorical outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous data. Ten RCTs were included, comprising 1969 patients (752 sutured, 225 stapled, and 992 compression anastomoses). Most used the biofragmentable anastomotic ring. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of anastomotic leak rates (OR 0.80, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.47, 1.37; p = 0.42), stricture (OR 0.54: 95 % CI 0.18, 1.64; p = 0.28) or mortality (OR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.39, 1.26; p = 0.24). Compression anastomosis was associated with an earlier return of bowel function: 1.02 (95 % CI 1.37, 0.66) days earlier (p < 0.001) and a shorter postoperative stay; 1.13 (95 % CI 1.52, 0.74) days shorter (p < 0.001), but significant heterogeneity among studies was observed. There was an increased risk of postoperative bowel obstruction in the compression group (OR 1.87; 95 % CI 1.07, 3.26; p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in wound-related and general complications, or length of surgery. Compression devices do not appear to provide an advantage over conventional techniques in fashioning colorectal anastomoses and are associated with an increased risk of bowel obstruction.

A systematic review of sacral nerve stimulation for low anterior resection syndrome.

AIM: The efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) in low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is largely undocumented. A review of the literature was carried out to study this question. METHOD: Pubmed, Medline and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles up to August 2014. Studies were included if they evaluated the use of SNS following rectal resection and assessed at least one of the following end-points: bowel function, quality of life and ano-neorectal physiology. No restrictions on language or study size were made. RESULTS: Seven papers were identified including one case report and six prospective case series. These included 43 patients with a median follow-up of 15 months. After peripheral nerve evaluation definitive implantation was carried out in 34 (79.1%) patients. Overall, 32 (94.1%) of the 34 patients experienced improvement of symptoms which, based on intention to treat, was 32/43 (74.4%). CONCLUSION: The review suggests that SNS for faecal incontinence in LARS has success rates comparable to its use for other forms of faecal incontinence.

Complete mesocolic excision in colorectal cancer: a systematic review.

AIM: Several studies have suggested an increased lymph node yield, reduced locoregional recurrence and increased disease-free survival after complete mesocolic excision (CME) for colorectal cancer. This review was undertaken to assess the use of CME for colon cancer by evaluating the technique and its clinical outcome. METHOD: A literature search of publications was performed using PubMed and Medline. Only studies published in English were included. Studies assessed for quality and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. End-points included number of lymph nodes per patient, quality of the plane of mesocolic excision, postoperative mortality and morbidity, 5-year locoregional recurrence and 5-year cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: There were 34 articles comprising 12 retrospective studies, nine prospective studies and 13 original articles including case series, observational studies and editorials. Of the prospective studies, four reported an increased lymph node harvest and a survival benefit. The others reported an improvement in the quality of the specimen as assessed by histopathological examination. Laparoscopic CME has the same oncological outcome as open surgery but completeness of excision during laparoscopy may be compromised for tumours in the transverse colon. CONCLUSION: Studies demonstrate that CME removes significantly more tissue around the tumour including maximal lymph node clearance. There is little information on serious adverse events after CME and a long-term survival benefit has not been proved.

Hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancer: technique and long-term outcome.

AIM: This study compared the operative outcome and long-term survival of three types of hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA) for low rectal cancer. METHOD: Patients presenting with low rectal cancer at a single centre between 2006 and 2014 were classified into three types of hand-sewn CAA: type 1 (supra-anal tumours undergoing transabdominal division of the rectum with transanal mucosectomy); type 2 (juxta-anal tumours, undergoing partial intersphincteric resection); and type 3 (intra-anal tumours, undergoing near-total intersphincteric resection with transanal mesorectal excision). RESULTS: Seventy-one patients with low rectal cancer underwent CAA: 17 type 1; 39 type 2; and 15 type 3. The median age of patients was 61.6 years, with a male/female ratio of 2:1. Neoadjuvant therapy was given to 56 (79%) patients. R0 resection was achieved in 69 (97.2%) patients. Adverse events occurred in 25 (35.2%) of the 71 patients with a higher complication rate in type 1 vs type 2 vs type 3 (47.1% vs 38.5% vs 13.3%, respectively; P = 0.035). Anastomotic separation was identified in six (8.5%) patients and pelvic haematoma/seroma in five (7%); two (8.3%) female patients developed a recto-vaginal fistula. Ten (14.1%) patients were indefinitely diverted, with a trend towards higher long-term anastomotic failure in type 1 vs type 2 vs type 3 (17.6% vs 15.5% vs 6.7%). The type of anastomosis did not influence the overall or disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: CAA is a safe technique in which anorectal continuity can be preserved either as a primary restorative option in elective cases of low rectal cancer or as a salvage procedure following a failed stapled anastomosis with a less successful outcome in the latter. CAA has acceptable morbidity with good long-term survival in carefully selected patients.

Modified right colon inversion technique as a salvage procedure for colorectal or coloanal anastomosis.

AIM: A tension-free well vascularized colorectal or coloanal anastomosis is not always possible following rectal or sigmoid resection. The study reports on the short-term and long-term outcome of a modified right colon inversion technique as a means of facilitating a low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis. METHOD: All patients who underwent right colonic inversion, a modified Deloyers' procedure, were identified retrospectively from the prospective database of the Colorectal Department of the Royal Marsden Hospital from October 2008 to December 2013. RESULTS: There were 14 (nine male) patients of median age 58.7 (45-75) years. The main indication was extensive diverticular disease (50%) and previous colonic surgery (21.4%). A defunctioning stoma was performed in 64.3% which was reversed in all within 3-6 months. Three (21.4%) patients developed postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo 1-2) and none required reoperation. The median duration of follow-up was 11 months. One (7.2%) patient had one bowel movement per day, 10 (71.4%) patients had two bowel movements per day and three (21.4%) patients had three per day. CONCLUSION: The modified right colonic inversion technique is safe and achieves intestinal continuity with a tension-free well vascularized anastomosis. Good function and low morbidity show that the procedure is a credible alternative to ileorectal or ileoanal anastomosis.