Surgical management of rectal cancer with synchronous treatment of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and efficacy of synchronous treatments for rectal (RC) and prostate (PC) cancers. METHODS: Single-center retrospective study (2007-2021) of patients treated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and total mesorectal excision (TME) for RC with synchronous PC treatment. The endpoints were 30-day postoperative severe complications, R0 resection rates, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 3-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among the 16 patients, 15 (93.7%) received neoadjuvant pelvic RT (40-50.4 Gray) followed by either transperineal high dose rate prostate brachytherapy (62.5%), prostate external RT boost (25.0%), or androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone (6.3%). One (6.3%) patient received neoadjuvant rectal brachytherapy and ADT. Pelvic RT was combined with chemotherapy in 87.5% of cases. TME was performed in all patients with low anterior resection (87.5%) or abdominoperineal resection (12.5%), primarily using minimally invasive surgery (87.5%). The R0 resection rate was 93.8%. Six (37.5%) patients experienced 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade IIIb complications, including one (7.1%) anastomotic leak. After a median follow-up of 39.0 months, 63.6% of diverting ileostomies were reversed. Three-year DFS from RC was 71.4% (CI 40.2-88.3) and 3-year OS was 84.4% (CI 95% 50.4-95.9). No PC recurrence or death occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Synchronous management of RC and PC with pelvic RT followed by curative prostate RT doses and TME showed acceptable morbidity and oncologic results. Prostate brachytherapy, the most commonly used treatment modality, allowed avoidance of prostatectomy and additional external RT to the rectum. PC should not limit the curative intent of RC, as all recurrences were from rectal origin.

Transanal Endoscopic Surgery: Who Should Be Doing This Procedure?

Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) was introduced in the 1980s, but more widely adopted in the late 2000s with innovations in instrumentation and training. Moreover, the global adoption of minimally invasive approaches to abdominal procedures has led to translatable skills for TES among colorectal and general surgeons. While there are similarities to laparoscopic surgery, TES has unique challenges related to the narrow confines of intraluminal surgery, angled instrumentation, and relatively uncommon indications limiting the opportunity to practice. The following review discusses the current evidence on TES learning curves, including potential limitations related to the broad adoption of TES by general surgeons. This article aims to provide general recommendations for the safe expansion of TES.