Rectal Cancer and Radiation in Colitis.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. When IBD patients develop a rectal cancer, this should be treated with the same oncological principles and guidelines as the general population. Rectal cancer treatment includes surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy (RT). Many IBD patients will require a total proctocolectomy with an ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) and others, restoration of intestinal continuity may not be feasible or advisable. The literature is scarce regarding outcomes of IPAA after RT. In the present review, we will summarize the evidence regarding RT toxicity in IBD patients and review surgical strategies and outcomes of IPAA after RT.

Chemoradiation and Local Excision Versus Total Mesorectal Excision for T2N0 Rectal Cancer: Comparison of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes From 2 Prospective Studies.

OBJECTIVE: Compare oncological long-term and short-term outcomes between patients with distal cT2NO rectal cancer treated with chemoradio-therapy and local excision (CRT + LE) and patients treated with total mesorectal excision (TME). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies showed that CRT + LE is equivalent to TME in local tumor control and survival for T2N0 rectal cancer. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with cT2N0 rectal adenocarcinoma treated with CRT + LE in the ACOSOG Z6041 trial were compared to a cohort of 79 patients with pT2N0 tumors treated with upfront TME in the Dutch TME trial. Survival, short-term outcomes, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were compared between groups. RESULTS: Three patients (4%) in the CRT + LE group required abdominoperineal resection, compared with 31 (40%) in the TME group. Forty TME patients (51%) required a permanent stoma. CRT-related toxicity occurred in 43% of the CRT + LE patients; however, TME patients had a higher rate of complications requiring reoperation (1 vs 9%; P = 0 .03). Five-year disease-free survival {88.2% [confidence interval (CI), 77.7%-93.9%] vs 88.3% [CI, 78.7%-93.7%]; P = 0.88} and overall survival [90.3% (CI, 80.8%-95.3%) vs 88.4% (CI, 78.9%-93.8%); P = 0 .82] were similar in the 2 groups. Compared to baseline, overall HRQOL decreased in the CRT + LE group and improved in the TME group. In both groups, patients with sphincter preservation had worse HRQOL scores 1 year after surgery. Conclusions: In patients who underwent CRT + LE, oncological outcomes were similar to those of patients who underwent TME, with fewer complications requiring reoperation but significant CRT toxicity. Although overall HRQOL decreased in the CRT + LE group and improved in TME patients, when considering anorectal function, results were worse in both groups.

Management, Functional Outcomes, and Quality of Life After Development of Pelvic Sepsis in Patients Undergoing Re-Do Ileal Pouch Anal Anastomosis.

BACKGROUND: The data on management and outcomes of pelvic sepsis after re-do IPAA are scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to report our management algorithm of pelvic sepsis in the setting of re-do IPAA and compare functional outcomes and quality of life after successful management of pelvic sepsis with a no sepsis control group. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This investigation is based on a single academic practice group experience on re-do IPAA. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent re-do IPAA for ileal pouch failure between September 2016 and September 2020 were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Management of pelvic sepsis was reported. Functional outcomes, restrictions, and quality-of-life scores were compared between the sepsis and no sepsis groups. RESULTS: One-hundred ten patients were included in our study, of whom 25 (22.7%) developed pelvic sepsis. Twenty-three patients presented with pelvic sepsis before ileostomy closure, and 2 patients presented with pelvic sepsis after ileostomy closure. There were 6 pouch failures in the study period due to pelvic sepsis. Our management was successful in 79% of the patients with median follow-up of 26 months. Treatments included interventional radiology abscess drainage (n = 7), IV antibiotics alone (n = 5), interventional radiology drainage and mushroom catheter placement (n = 1), mushroom catheter placement (n = 1), and endoluminal vacuum-assisted closure (n = 1). Average number of bowel movements, urgency, incontinence, pad use, and seepage were comparable between the pelvic sepsis and no pelvic sepsis groups ( p > 0.05). Lifestyle alterations, Cleveland Global Quality of Life scores, and happiness with the results of the surgery were similar ( p > 0.05). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its low study power and limited follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic sepsis is common after re-do IPAA, and management varies according to the location and size of the abscess/sinus. If detected early, our management strategy was associated with high pouch salvage rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B823 . MANEJO, RESULTADOS FUNCIONALES Y CALIDAD DE VIDA DESPUS DEL DESARROLLO DE SEPSIS PLVICA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDAS A RECONFECCIN DE ANASTOMOSIS ANAL CON BOLSA ILEAL: ANTECEDENTES:Los datos sobre el tratamiento y los resultados de la sepsis pélvica después de reconfección de anastomosis anal, de la bolsa ileal son escasos.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio es informar nuestro algoritmo de manejo de la sepsis pélvica en el contexto de reconfección de anastomosis anal de la bolsa ileal y comparar los resultados funcionales y la calidad de vida después del manejo exitoso de la sepsis pélvica con un grupo de control sin sepsis.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Esta investigación se basa en una experiencia de un solo grupo de práctica académica sobre reconfección de IPAA.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron en el estudio pacientes que se sometieron a una nueva anastomosis anal, del reservorio ileal por falla del reservorio ileal entre el 09/2016 y el 09/2020.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se informó el manejo de la sepsis pélvica. Los resultados funcionales, las restricciones y las puntuaciones de calidad de vida, se compararon entre los grupos con sepsis y sin sepsis.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron 110 pacientes en nuestro estudio, de los cuales 25 (22,7) desarrollaron sepsis pélvica. Veintitrés pacientes presentaron sepsis pélvica antes del cierre de la ileostomía y 2 pacientes presentaron sepsis pélvica después del cierre de la ileostomía. Hubo 6 fallas de la bolsa en el período de estudio debido a sepsis pélvica. Nuestro manejo fue exitoso en el 79% de los pacientes con una mediana de seguimiento de 26 meses. Los tratamientos incluyeron drenaje de abscesos IR (n = 7), antibióticos intravenosos solos (n = 5), drenaje IR y colocación de catéter en forma de hongo (n = 1), colocación de catéter en forma de hongo (n = 1) y cierre endoluminal asistido por vacío (n = 1). El número promedio de evacuaciones intestinales, urgencia, incontinencia, uso de almohadillas y filtraciones fueron comparables entre los grupos con sepsis pélvica y sin sepsis pélvica ( p > 0,05). Las alteraciones del estilo de vida, las puntuaciones de la Calidad de vida global de Cleveland y la felicidad con los resultados de la cirugía fueron similares ( p > 0,05).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio está limitado por su bajo poder de estudio y su tiempo de seguimiento limitado.CONCLUSIONES:La sepsis pélvica es común después de la reconfección de anastomosis anal de la bolsa ileal y el manejo varía según la ubicación y el tamaño del absceso / seno. Si se detecta temprano, nuestra estrategia de manejo se asoció con altas tasas de recuperación de la bolsa. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B823 . (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

Operative, long-term and quality of life outcomes after salvage of failed re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis.

AIM: Approximately 20%-40% of the patients with re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) experience pouch failure. Salvage surgery can be attempted in this patient group with severe aversion to permanent ileostomy. The literature regarding secondary IPAA revision after re-do IPAA failure is scarce. METHODS: All patients who underwent a secondary IPAA revision after re-do IPAA failure between September 2016 and July 2021 in a single centre were included. Short- and long-term outcomes and quality of life in this patient group are reported. RESULTS: Ten patients who had secondary IPAA revision for re-do IPAA failure were included. All patients had ulcerative colitis. Nine of these patients had pelvic sepsis and one patient had a mechanical issue. Mucosectomy and handsewn anastomosis was performed in nine patients. The existing pouch was salvaged in six patients and four patients had pouch excision and re-creation. Two patients had postoperative pelvic sepsis. Pouch retention rate was 78% in a median of 28 months. None of the patients had short-gut syndrome. The procedure was associated with good quality of life (median Cleveland Global Quality of Life Index 0.8). All patients would undergo the same surgery if needed. CONCLUSION: Secondary IPAA revision after a failed re-do IPAA can be an option in patients with severe aversion to permanent ileostomy if re-do IPAA fails and it is associated with good outcomes. This patient group should be carefully evaluated and referred to specialized centres if required.

Pelvic Pouch Failure: Treatment Options.

Up to 30% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) will require surgical management of their disease during their lifetime. An ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) is the gold standard of care, giving patients the ability to be free from UC's bowel disease and avoid a permanent ostomy. Despite surgical advancements, a minority of patients will still experience pouch failure which can be debilitating and often require further surgical interventions. Signs and symptoms of pouch failure should be addressed with the appropriate workup and treatment plans formulated according with the patient's wishes. This article will discuss the identification, workup, and treatment options for pouch failure after IPAA.

Assessing tumor response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer with rectoscopy and 18F-FDG PET/CT: results from a prospective series.

INTRODUCTION: rectoscopy and 18F-FDG PET/CT as a diagnostic algorithm for the assessment of tumor response in rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) is very useful. MATERIAL AND METHODS: this was a prospective longitudinal study in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant CRT. Patients were assessed after CRT completion with a digital rectal examination, proctoscopy and 18F-FDG PET/CT. Patients were subdivided as clinical (cCR) or radiologic (rCR) responders and non-responders according to tumor response. Clinical and radiological re-assessment was compared with the surgical specimen. Pathological tumor regression (pCR) grade was determined according to Mandard's classification. Of the 68 patients included, 15 (22 %) presented pCR in the surgical specimen and tumor persistence (non-PCR) was detected in the remaining 53 (78 %). Clinical assessment (DRE+ rectoscopy) identified 15 patients as cCR and 53 as non-cCR, two were false positives and two were false negatives. The overall accuracy was 94 %. 18F-FDG PET/CT identified 18 patients as rCR and 50 as non-rCR, one was a false positive and four were false negatives. The overall accuracy was 92 %. A combination of clinical findings and 18F-FDG PET/CT resulted in an accuracy of 96 %. The combination of clinical findings + 18F-FDG PET/CT was able to correctly identify all cases of pCR, with the exception of one case that presented a tumor regression of 80 %. In this series, 18F-PET-CT and clinical assessment had excellent accuracies in differentiating PCR from non-PCR after CRT completion. PET-CT combined with clinical assessment had a better accuracy than both modalities independently. 18F-FDG PET/CT is a valid tool that complements the clinical assessment of tumor response.

Assessment of the Value of Comorbidity Indices for Risk Adjustment in Colorectal Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Comorbidity indices (CIs) are widely used in retrospective studies. We investigated the value of commonly used CIs in risk adjustment for postoperative complications after colorectal surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing colectomy without stoma for colonic neoplasia at a single institution from 2009 to 2014 were included. Four CIs were calculated or obtained for each patient, using administrative data: Charlson-Deyo (CCI-D), Charlson-Romano (CCI-R), Elixhauser Comorbidity Score, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Outcomes of interest in the 90-day postoperative period were any surgical complication, surgical site infection (SSI), Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade 3 or higher complication, anastomotic leak or abscess, and nonroutine discharge. Base models were created for each outcome based on significant bivariate associations. Logistic regression models were constructed for each outcome using base models alone, and each index as an additional covariate. Models were also compared using the DeLong and Clarke-Pearson method for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, with the CCI-D as the reference. RESULTS: Overall, 1813 patients were included. Postoperative complications were reported in 756 (42%) patients. Only 9% of patients had a CD grade 3 or higher complication, and 22.8% of patients developed an SSI. Multivariable modeling showed equivalent performance of the base model and the base model augmented by the CIs for all outcomes. The ROC curves for the four indices were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of CIs added little to the base models, and all CIs performed similarly well. Our study suggests that CIs do not adequately risk-adjust for complications after colorectal surgery.

Role of the Interval from Completion of Neoadjuvant Therapy to Surgery in Postoperative Morbidity in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Increasing the interval from completion of neoadjuvant therapy to surgery beyond 8 weeks is associated with increased response of rectal cancer to neoadjuvant therapy. However, reports are conflicting on whether extending the time to surgery is associated with increased perioperative morbidity. METHODS: Patients who presented with a tumor within 15 cm of the anal verge in 2009-2015 were grouped according to the interval between completion of neoadjuvant therapy and surgery: < 8 weeks, 8-12 weeks, and 12-16 weeks. RESULTS: Among 607 patients, the surgery was performed at < 8 weeks in 317 patients, 8-12 weeks in 229 patients, and 12-16 weeks in 61 patients. Patients who underwent surgery at 8-12 weeks and patients who underwent surgery at < 8 weeks had comparable rates of complications (37% and 44%, respectively). Univariable analysis identified male sex, earlier date of diagnosis, tumor location within 5 cm of the anal verge, open operative approach, abdominoperineal resection, and use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy alone to be associated with higher rates of complications. In multivariable analysis, male sex, tumor location within 5 cm of the anal verge, open operative approach, and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy administered alone were independently associated with the presence of a complication. The interval between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery was not an independent predictor of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Delaying surgery beyond 8 weeks from completion of neoadjuvant therapy does not appear to increase surgical morbidity in rectal cancer patients.

Pelvic MRI after induction chemotherapy and before long-course chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer: What are the imaging findings?

OBJECTIVES: To determine the appearance of rectal cancer on MRI after oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (ICT) and make a preliminary assessment of MRI's value in predicting response to total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT). METHODS: In this IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant, retrospective study between 1 January 2010-20 October 2014, pre- and post-ICT tumour T2 volume, relative T2 signal intensity (rT2SI), node size, signal intensity and border characteristics were assessed in 63 patients (65 tumours) by three readers. The strength of association between the reference standard of histopathological percent tumour response and tumour volume change, rT2SI and lymph node characteristics was assessed with Spearman's correlation coefficient and Wilcoxon's rank sum test. Cox regression was used to assess association between DFS and radiological measures. RESULTS: Change in T2 volume was not associated with TNT response. Change in rT2SI showed correlation with TNT response for one reader only using selective regions of interest (ROIs) and borderline correlation with response using total volume ROI. There was a significant negative correlation between baseline and post-ICT node size and TNT response (r = -0.25, p = 0.05; r = -0.35, p = 0.005, readers 1 and 2, respectively). Both baseline and post-induction median node sizes were significantly smaller in complete responders (p = 0.03, 0.001; readers 1 and 2, respectively). Change in largest baseline node size and decrease in post-ICT node signal heterogeneity were associated with 100% tumour response (p = 0.04). Nodal sizes at baseline and post-ICT MRI correlated with DFS. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing post-ICT MRI, tumour volume did not correlate with TNT response, but decreased lymph node sizes were significantly associated with complete response to TNT as well as DFS. Relative T2SI showed borderline correlation with TNT response. KEY POINTS: • MRI-based tumour volume after induction chemotherapy and before chemoradiotherapy did not correlate with overall tumour response at the end of all treatment. • Lymph node size after induction chemotherapy and before chemoradiotherapy was strongly associated with complete pathological response after all treatment. • Lymph node sizes at baseline and post-induction chemotherapy MRI correlated with disease-free survival.

Anorectal Function and Quality of Life in Patients With Early Stage Rectal Cancer Treated With Chemoradiation and Local Excision.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about anorectal function and quality of life after chemoradiation followed by local excision, which is an alternative to total mesorectal excision for selected patients with early rectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to prospectively assess anorectal function and health-related quality of life of patients with T2N0 rectal cancer who were treated with an alternative approach. DESIGN: This was a prospective, phase II trial. SETTINGS: The study was multicentric (American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z6041). INTERVENTIONS: Patients with stage cT2N0 rectal adenocarcinomas were treated with an oxaliplatin/capecitabine-based chemoradiation regimen followed by local excision. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anorectal function and quality of life were assessed at enrollment and 1 year postoperatively with the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Questionnaire. Results were compared, and multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of outcome. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients (98%) were evaluated at enrollment and 66 (92%) at 1 year. Compared with baseline, no significant differences were found on Fecal Incontinence Severity Index scores at 1 year. Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life results were significantly worse in the lifestyle (p < 0.001), coping/behavior (p < 0.001), and embarrassment (p = 0.002) domains. There were no differences in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy overall score, but the physical well-being subscale was significantly worse and emotional well-being was improved after surgery. Treatment with the original chemoradiation regimen predicted worse depression/self-perception and embarrassment scores in the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life, and male sex was predictive of worse scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy overall score and trial outcome index. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, relatively short follow-up, and absence of information before cancer diagnosis were study limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Chemoradiation followed by local excision had minimal impact on anorectal function 1 year after surgery. Overall quality of life remained stable, with mixed effects on different subscales. This information should be used to counsel patients about expected outcomes.

Organ-Preserving Strategies for the Management of Near-Complete Responses in Rectal Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.

In recent years, organ preservation has been considered a feasible alternative to total mesorectal excision for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. However, the degree of tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy is variable. A fraction of the patients who did not achieve a complete response had grossly visible tumors. These patients, with clearly incomplete clinical response, need a total mesorectal excision. In addition, some patients with a significant tumor response still have some abnormalities in the bowel wall, such as superficial ulceration or tissue nodularity, which, while not conclusive for the presence of a tumor, are indicative of the possibility of a residual tumor in the bowel wall or in mesorectal lymph nodes. The management of patients with a so-called near-complete clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy is controversial. In this article, we will review the clinical and radiological criteria that define a clinical response to neoadjuvant therapy, possible treatment strategies, and follow-up protocols. We will also discuss patient and tumor characteristics that in our opinion can be useful in selecting the most appropriate treatment alternative. Although organ preservation and quality of life are important, the primary goal of treatment for these patients should be local tumor control and long-term survival.

Impact of Organ-Preserving Strategies on Anorectal Function in Patients with Distal Rectal Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: Organ-preserving strategies have been considered for patients with distal rectal cancer and complete or near-complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation to avoid the functional consequences of radical surgery. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery and no immediate surgery (watch and wait) have been considered in selected patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare anorectal function following these 2 organ-preserving strategies (transanal endoscopic microsurgery and watch and wait) for rectal cancer with complete or near-complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation. DESIGN: This study is based on the comparison of prospectively collected data. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a single center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation (50.4-54 Gy and 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) were prospectively studied. Patients with complete clinical response were managed by watch and wait. Patients with near-complete response (≤3 cm, ycT1-2N0) were managed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional outcomes were determined by anorectal manometry and Fecal Incontinence Index and Quality of Life assessment. RESULTS: Two groups of patients were included in the study. Twenty-nine patients with near-complete response undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery and 53 with complete response after watch and wait were assessed. Baseline features were similar between groups. Patients undergoing transanal endoscopic microsurgery had worse resting/squeeze pressures (p = 0.004) and rectal capacity (p = 0.002). In addition, their incontinence scores (2.3 vs. 6.5; p < 0.001) and quality-of-life questionnaire responses (in all domains; p ≤ 0.01) were significantly worse in comparison with patients undergoing watch and wait. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the small sample size and the absence of baseline anorectal function information. CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative management of patients with complete clinical response following chemoradiation results in better anorectal function in comparison with patients with near-complete response managed by transanal endoscopic microsurgery. In the absence of clinically detectable residual cancer, this latter approach may result in significant worsening of anorectal function.

Organ preservation for clinical T2N0 distal rectal cancer using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision (ACOSOG Z6041): results of an open-label, single-arm, multi-institutional, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Local excision is an organ-preserving treatment alternative to transabdominal resection for patients with stage I rectal cancer. However, local excision alone is associated with a high risk of local recurrence and inferior survival compared with transabdominal rectal resection. We investigated the oncological and functional outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision for patients with stage T2N0 rectal cancer. METHODS: We did a multi-institutional, single-arm, open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 trial of patients with clinically staged T2N0 distal rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy at 26 American College of Surgeons Oncology Group institutions. Patients with clinical T2N0 rectal adenocarcinoma staged by endorectal ultrasound or endorectal coil MRI, measuring less than 4 cm in greatest diameter, involving less than 40% of the circumference of the rectum, located within 8 cm of the anal verge, and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of at least 2 were included in the study. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy consisted of capecitabine (original dose 825 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 and 22-35), oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) on weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5), and radiation (5 days a week at 1·8 Gy per day for 5 weeks to a dose of 45 Gy, followed by a boost of 9 Gy, for a total dose of 54 Gy) followed by local excision. Because of adverse events during chemoradiotherapy, the dose of capecitabine was reduced to 725 mg/m(2) twice-daily, 5 days per week, for 5 weeks, and the boost of radiation was reduced to 5·4 Gy, for a total dose of 50·4 Gy. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival for all eligible patients (intention-to-treat population) and for patients who completed chemotherapy and radiation, and had ypT0, ypT1, or ypT2 tumours, and negative resection margins (per-protocol group). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00114231. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2006, and Oct 22, 2009, 79 eligible patients were recruited to the trial and started neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Two patients had no surgery and one had a total mesorectal excision. Four additional patients completed protocol treatment, but one had a positive margin and three had ypT3 tumours. Thus, the per-protocol population consisted of 72 patients. Median follow-up was 56 months (IQR 46-63) for all patients. The estimated 3-year disease-free survival for the intention-to-treat group was 88·2% (95% CI 81·3-95·8), and for the per-protocol group was 86·9% (79·3-95·3). Of 79 eligible patients, 23 (29%) had grade 3 gastrointestinal adverse events, 12 (15%) had grade 3-4 pain, and 12 (15%) had grade 3-4 haematological adverse events during chemoradiation. Of the 77 patients who had surgery, six (8%) had grade 3 pain, three (4%) had grade 3-4 haemorrhage, and three (4%) had gastrointestinal adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Although the observed 3-year disease free survival was not as high as anticipated, our data suggest that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by local excision might be considered as an organ-preserving alternative in carefully selected patients with clinically staged T2N0 tumours who refuse, or are not candidates for, transabdominal resection. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute and Sanofi-Aventis.

Fragmented pattern of tumor regression and lateral intramural spread may influence margin appropriateness after TEM for rectal cancer following neoadjuvant CRT.

BACKGROUND: The main tenets of local excision of rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) are that the mucosal scar represents the main focus of residual disease and a solid conglomerate around this rather than being scattered (fragmented) through the bowel wall. METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospective cohort of patients with residual rectal ycT1-2N0 adenocarcinoma with small residual tumors (≤3 cm) following CRT who underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) with 1-cm margins around the residual mucosal abnormality was performed. Distribution and morphology (solid vs. fragmented) of tumor spread were studied and correlated to postoperative oncological outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty patients were included. Twenty percent (n = 6) were ypT1, 60% (n = 18) were ypT2, and 20% (n = 6) were ypT3 tumors. Fragmentation was present in 37%. The mean distance between foci of residual scattered tumor was 3.6 ± 2.0 mm. Lateral spread under normal mucosa was present in 19 specimens (53%; mean extension 4.8 ± 2.4 mm). With a median follow up of 32 months, none of these findings impacted upon development of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Both occult lateral spread and fragmented tumor patterns are common findings after CRT. Despite the potential of occult spread to mislead surgeon choice of resection margin, its presence did not influence oncological outcome in this series.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for residual rectal cancer (ypT0-2) following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: another word of caution.

BACKGROUND: Significant tumor downstaging among patients with rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation has raised the issue of offering patients with small residual cancers restricted to the bowel wall an alternative treatment strategy to total mesorectal excision. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery may allow proper primary tumor resection with promising oncological outcomes, less postoperative morbidity, and minimal long-term sexual, urinary, and fecal continence disorders in comparison with radical resection. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the oncological outcomes of patients with residual rectal cancers restricted to the rectal wall (ypT0-2) following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and transanal endoscopic microsurgery. DESIGN: This study considered a prospective cohort of patients with residual rectal cancers following neoadjuvant chemoradiation treated by transanal endoscopic microsurgery and no additional systemic therapy. SETTINGS: This study was a single-institution experience. PATIENTS: Patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum located no more than 7 cm from the anal verge and endorectal ultrasound- or magnetic resonance-staged cT2-4N0-2M0 treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiation (50.4-54 Gy and 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy) were eligible for the study. Patients with small residual tumors (≤3 cm) radiologically staged ycT0-2N0 were treated by transanal endoscopic microsurgery. INTERVENTIONS: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was local recurrence. RESULTS: Of the 27 patients treated by transanal endoscopic microsurgery, 3 had ypT0, 6 had ypT1, and 18 had ypT2 cancers. All patients underwent R0 transanal endoscopic microsurgery excision. Local recurrence was observed in 4 (15%) patients after a median follow-up of 15 months. Only lymphovascular invasion was an independent predictive factor for local failure (p = 0.04). Tumor size, ypT status, T-status downstaging, lateral/radial margins, and tumor regression grade were not predictors of local failure. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the small sample size and limited follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A local failure rate of 15% after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for patients with residual rectal cancers restricted to the bowel wall (ypT0-2) may limit the indication of this procedure to highly selected patients as an alternative to standard radical total mesorectal excision.

Accuracy of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and clinical assessment in the detection of complete rectal tumor regression after neoadjuvant chemoradiation: long-term results of a prospective trial (National Clinical Trial 00254683).

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) therapy may result in significant tumor regression in patients with rectal cancer. Patients who develop complete tumor regression have been managed by treatment strategies that are alternatives to standard total mesorectal excision. Therefore, assessment of tumor response with positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) after neoadjuvant treatment may offer relevant information for the selection of patients to receive alternative treatment strategies. METHODS: Patients with clinical T2 (cT2) through cT4NxM0 rectal adenocarcinoma were included prospectively. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of 54 grays of radiation and 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy. Baseline PET/CT studies were obtained before CRT followed by PET/CT studies at 6 weeks and 12 weeks after the completion of CRT. Clinical assessment was performed at 12 weeks after CRT completion. PET/CT results were compared with clinical and pathologic data. RESULTS: In total, 99 patients were included in the study. Twenty-three patients were complete responders (16 had a complete clinical response, and 7 had a complete pathologic response). The PET/CT response evaluation at 12 weeks indicated that 18 patients had a complete response, and 81 patients had an incomplete response. There were 5 false-negative and 10 false-positive PET/CT results. PET/CT for the detection of residual cancer had 93% sensitivity, 53% specificity, a 73% negative predictive value, an 87% positive predictive value, and 85% accuracy. Clinical assessment alone resulted in an accuracy of 91%. PET/CT information may have detected misdiagnoses made by clinical assessment alone, improving overall accuracy to 96%. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of tumor response at 12 weeks after CRT completion with PET/CT imaging may provide a useful additional tool with good overall accuracy for the selection of patients who may avoid unnecessary radical resection after achieving a complete clinical response. Cancer 2012;3501-3511. © 2011 American Cancer Society.

Re-do Laparoscopic Gastrojejunostomy for Gastrojejunal Anastomosis Stricture After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

Stricture of the gastrojejunostomy is a possible complication after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. We present the case of a patient with stricture refractory to endoscopic dilation. The patient underwent laparoscopic revision of the gastrojejunostomy with a hand-sewn anastomosis.

Comparing outcomes of robotic versus open mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of robot-assisted mesorectal excision for rectal cancer, compared with open resection, have not been fully characterized. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of pathologic, short-term, and long-term outcomes in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent total or tumour-specific mesorectal excision at a high-volume cancer centre between 2008 and 2017 was conducted. Outcomes after robotic and open surgery were compared on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Out of 1048 resections performed, 1018 patients were reviewed, with 638 who underwent robotic surgery and 380 open surgery. Robotic surgery was converted to the open approach in 17 (2.7 per cent) patients. Patients who underwent robotic surgery were younger (median 54 (range 22-91) years versus median 58 (range 18-97) years; P < 0.001), had higher tumours (median 80 (range 0-150) mm from the anal verge versus median 70 (0-150) mm; P = 0.001), and were less likely to have received neoadjuvant therapy (64 per cent versus 73 per cent; P = 0.003). For patients who underwent a robotic total mesorectal excision, the operating time was longer (median 283.5 (range 117-712) min versus median 249 (range 70-661) min; P < 0.001). However, the rate of complications was lower (29 per cent versus 45 per cent; P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay was shorter (median 5 (range 1-32) days versus median 7 (range 0-137) days; P < 0.001). Median follow-up of survivors was 2.9 years. The proportion of patients with a positive circumferential resection margin did not differ between the groups, nor did the rate of local recurrence (robotic versus open: 3.7 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 1.9 to 5.6 versus 2.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 1.0 to 4.6; P = 0.400), systemic recurrence (robotic versus open: 11.7 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 8.5 to 14.8 versus 13.0 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 9.2 to 16.5; P = 0.300), or overall survival (robotic versus open: 97.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 96.3 to 99.3 versus 93.5 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. 90.8 to 96.2; P = 0.050). The same results were documented in a subanalysis of 370 matched patients, including 185 who underwent robotic surgery and 185 open surgery, for the overall incidence of any postoperative complications, overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and systemic recurrence. CONCLUSION: In patients with rectal cancer who are candidates for curative resection, robotic mesorectal excision is associated with lower complication rates, shorter length of stay, and equivalent oncologic outcomes, compared with open mesorectal excision.

Hemobilia as a Complication of Transhepatic Percutaneous Biliary Drainage: a Rare Indication for Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration.

BACKGROUND: Hemobilia is the presence of blood in the biliary tree and is a frequent complication after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD).1 Most of these episodes are self-limited; nevertheless, in less than 5% of cases, hemobilia is clinically significant, requiring an intervention (hepatic artery embolization, stenting, or percutaneous thrombin injection).2,3 Adequate treatment requires control of hemorrhage and restoration of bile flow. Surgery is the last resort and is indicated when the other modalities fail. METHODS: A 65-year-old man with multiple comorbidities was admitted with cholangitis. The patient underwent PTBD (Figure 1) but had persistent cholestasis. Thus, he underwent endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), in which a plastic stent was misplaced within the common bile duct (CBD) and could not be removed (Figure 2). Afterwards, as the patient had persistently high bilirubin levels and the previously placed stent was malpositioned, the decision was made to proceed with laparoscopic cholecystectomy and CBD exploration. RESULTS: The operation was performed with choledocoscope guidance, and the CBD was closed over a T-tube. The operative time was 280 min. Postoperative course was uneventful; the T-tube was clamped 1 week after discharge. Four weeks postoperatively, the T-tube cholangiogram showed a patent extrahepatic biliary tree with no filling defects (Figure 3). The T-tube was then removed. CONCLUSIONS: Biliary obstruction secondary to hemobilia is a rare occurrence after PTBD. Surgical CBD exploration is required when conservative management and endoscopic treatment fail and can be done successfully through a minimally invasive approach.