RESUMO
Background: Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) or intersphincteric resection (ISR) has recently proven to be a valid and safe surgical procedure for low rectal cancer. However, studies focusing on the combination of these two technologies are limited. This study aimed to evaluate perioperative results, long-term oncologic outcomes, and anorectal functions of patients with low rectal cancer undergoing taTME combined with ISR, by comparing with those of patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (laAPR). Methods: After 1:1 propensity score matching, 200 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laAPR (n = 100) or taTME combined with ISR (n = 100) between September 2013 and November 2019 were included. Patient demographics, clinicopathological characteristics, oncological outcomes, and anal functional results were analysed. Results: Patients in the taTME-combined-with-ISR group had less intraoperative blood loss (79.6 ± 72.6 vs 107.3 ± 65.1 mL, P = 0.005) and a lower rate of post-operative complications (22.0% vs 44.0%, P < 0.001) than those in the laAPR group. The overall local recurrence rates were 7.0% in both groups within 3 years after surgery. The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 86.3% in the taTME-combined-with-ISR group and 75.1% in the laAPR group (P = 0.056), while the 3-year overall survival rates were 96.7% and 94.2%, respectively (P = 0.319). There were 39 patients (45.3%) in the taTME-combined-with-ISR group who developed major low anterior resection syndrome, whereas 61 patients (70.9%) had good post-operative anal function (Wexner incontinence score ≤ 10). Conclusion: We found similar long-term oncological outcomes for patients with low rectal cancer undergoing laAPR and those undergoing taTME combined with ISR. Patients receiving taTME combined with ISR had acceptable post-operative anorectal function.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has recently emerged as a promising novel surgical procedure for rectal cancer. It is believed to hold the potential advantage of providing better access to mobilize the distal rectum and achieving better pathologic results. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of taTME for rectal cancer and summarize the preliminary experience in 10 Chinese hospitals. METHODS: A total of 211 patients were enrolled in this study. Variables for evaluation of safety, feasibility, and oncologic outcomes were retrospectively collected and analysed. RESULTS: The median distance between the tumor and the anal verge was 5.9 cm (range, 1.5-12 cm). The median operating time was 280 min (range, 70-600 min) and the median estimated intra-operative blood loss was 50 mL (range, 10-1,500 mL). The overall rate of complication was 27.9%. Among the 211 patients, 175 (82.9%) had complete TME and 33 (15.6%) had near complete TME. The circumferential resection margin was negative in 97.7% of patients. The patients were followed for a median of 35 months (range, 2-86 months). There was 7.6% (16) mortality, 6.2% (13) had local recurrence, and 12.8% (27) had systemic recurrence. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that 1-, 2-, and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 94.8%, 89.3%, and 80.2%, respectively, and 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 97.4%, 95.7%, and 92.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although limited by its retrospective nature, taTME was safe and feasible in selected patients. Future work with rigorous data recording is warranted.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Currently, the majority cases of the novel down-to-up transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) were performed in a hybrid approach with conventional laparoscopic assistance because of less operative difficulty. However, although cases are limited, the successes of TaTME in a pure approach (without laparoscopic assistance) indicate that the costly and less mini-invasive hybrid TaTME could be potentially avoided. METHODS: In the present single institutional, prospective study, we attempted to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of this approach in rectal cancer by evaluating the short-term results of our first 20 TaTME cases. For the majority of cases, we adopted a strategy that laparoscopic assistance was not introduced unless it was required during the planned pure TaTME procedure. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients (12 males and 8 females) were analyzed in this study, including 11 cases (55 %) of pure TaTME and 9 cases (45 %) of hybrid TaTME. Overall, the median operative time was 200 min (range 70-420), along with a median estimated blood loss of 50 ml (range 20-800). Morbidity rate was 20 % (one urethral injury, two urinary retentions, one anastomotic hemorrhage and one mild anastomotic leak). The median number of harvested lymph nodes was 12 (range 1-20). All specimens were intact in mesorectum without positive distal and circumferential resection margins. Among the 15 patients who were preoperatively scheduled to undertake pure TaTME, four patients (26.7 %) required converting to laparoscopic assistance. Moreover, among these 15 patients, the results of the comparative analysis between female and male subgroups favor the former, suggesting easier operation in them. CONCLUSION: This preliminary study demonstrates that TaTME in rectal cancer is safe and feasible. The strategy of not introducing laparoscopic assistance unless it is required while performing the planned pTaTME should be cautiously explored. Further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up are warranted.