Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery Versus Total Mesorectal Excision in ypT0-1 Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Radiochemotherapy: Postoperative Morbidity, Functional Results, and Long-term Oncologic Outcome.

BACKGROUND: In patients with locally advanced extraperitoneal rectal cancer, a multidisciplinary approach represents the standard treatment. However, considering the favorable prognosis in patients with major or complete response, radical surgery might represent overtreatment. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate postoperative short-term morbidity, functional outcome, and oncologic long-term outcome in patients with rectal cancer treated with local excision by transanal endoscopic microsurgery or radical surgery and to determine who achieved a complete or major pathological response (ypT0-1) after neoadjuvant treatment. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. SETTING: The study was conducted at a single center. PATIENTS: Patients who had received neoadjuvant treatment by local excision with a major or complete pathological response at histological examination (transanal endoscopic microsurgery group) were compared to patients treated by radical surgery with the same pathological response (total mesorectal excision group). INTERVENTIONS: The interventions included local excision by transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery with total mesorectal excision. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative short-term morbidity, functional outcome 1 year after surgery, and oncologic long-term outcome were measured. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were included in the study (35 in the transanal endoscopic microsurgery group and 58 in the mesorectal excision group). In the total mesorectal excision group, a sphincter-saving approach was possible in 89.7% (vs 100%; p = 0.049); a protective temporary stoma was necessary in 74.1% of radical procedures (vs 0%; p < 0.001), and 13.8% of these became permanent. Short-term postoperative morbidity was lower after local excision (14.3% vs 46.6%; p = 0.002). One year after surgery, the transanal endoscopic microsurgery group recorded better evacuation and continence function than the total mesorectal excision group. Oncologic outcome was similar between the groups. LIMITATIONS: This study had a retrospective design. CONCLUSION: If a major or complete pathological response occurs after neoadjuvant treatment, an organ-sparing approach by local excision seems to offer the same oncologic results as radical surgery, but it has a better postoperative morbidity rate and better functional results. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B901 .Microcirugía endoscópica transanal versus escisión total del mesorrecto en cáncer de recto ypT0-1 después de radioquimioterapia preoperatoria: morbilidad posoperatoria, resultados funcionales y resultado oncológico a largo plazo. ANTECEDENTES: En pacientes con cáncer rectal extraperitoneal localmente avanzado, un abordaje multidisciplinario con radioquimioterapia preoperatoria y cirugía con escisión total del mesorrecto representa el tratamiento estándar. En pacientes que obtienen una respuesta mayor o completa, la cirugía radical puede representar un sobretratamiento, considerando el pronóstico favorable de estos casos. OBJETIVO: Evaluar la morbilidad posoperatoria a corto plazo, el resultado funcional y el resultado oncológico a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer de recto tratados con escisión local mediante microcirugía endoscópica transanal o mediante cirugía radical y que obtuvieron una respuesta patológica completa o mayor (ypT0-1) después del tratamiento neoadyuvante. DISEO: Este fue un estudio retrospectivo. AJUSTE: El estudio se realizó en un solo centro. ESCENARIO: El estudio se realizó en un solo centro. PACIENTES: Se comparó a los pacientes tratados, tras tratamiento neoadyuvante (1996-2016), mediante escisión local con respuesta patológica mayor o completa al examen histológico (grupo de microcirugía endoscópica transanal), con los pacientes tratados mediante cirugía radical con la misma respuesta patológica (grupo de escisión mesorrectal total). INTERVENCIONES: Extirpación local mediante microcirugía endoscópica transanal y cirugía radical con escisión mesorrectal total. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Morbilidad posoperatoria a corto plazo, resultado funcional a un año después de la cirugía (evaluado con una puntuación de evacuación y continencia) y resultado oncológico a largo plazo. LIMITACIONES: Las limitaciones de este estudio incluyen su diseño retrospectivo. CONCLUSIN: Si se produce una respuesta patológica mayor o completa después del tratamiento neoadyuvante, un abordaje con preservación de órganos mediante escisión local parece ofrecer los mismos resultados oncológicos que la cirugía radical, pero tiene una menor tasa de morbilidad postoperatoria y mejores resultados funcionales un año después de la cirugía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B901 . (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio ).

Rectal Sparing Approach after preoperative Radio- and/or Chemo-therapy (ReSARCh): a prospective, multicenter, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Rectal-sparing approaches for patients with rectal cancer who achieved a complete or major response following neoadjuvant therapy constitute a paradigm of a potential shift in the management of patients with rectal cancer; however, their role remains controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of rectal-sparing approaches to preserve the rectum without impairing the outcomes. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, observational study investigated the outcomes of patients with clinical stage II-III mid-low rectal adenocarcinoma treated with any neoadjuvant therapy, and either transanal local excision or watch-and-wait approach, based on tumor response (major or complete) and patient/surgeon choice. The primary endpoint of the study was rectum preservation at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Secondary endpoints were overall, disease-free, local and distant recurrence-free, and stoma-free survival at 3 years. RESULTS: Of the 178 patients enrolled in 16 centers, 112 (62.9%) were managed with local excision and 66 (37.1%) with watch-and-wait. At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 36.1 (30.6-45.6) months, the rectum was preserved in 144 (80.9%) patients. The 3-year rectum-sparing, overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, and distant recurrence-free survival was 80.6% (95% CI 73.9-85.8), 97.6% (95% CI 93.6-99.1), 90.0% (95% CI 84.3-93.7), 94.7% (95% CI 90.1-97.2), and 94.6% (95% CI 89.9-97.2), respectively. The 3-year stoma-free survival was 95.0% (95% CI 89.5-97.6). The 3-year regrowth-free survival in the watch-and-wait group was 71.8% (95% CI 59.9-81.2). CONCLUSIONS: In rectal cancer patients with major or complete clinical response after neoadjuvant therapy, the rectum can be preserved in about 80% of cases, without compromising the outcomes.