Outcomes of Distal Rectal Cancer Patients Who Did Not Qualify for Watch-and-Wait: Comparison of Intersphincteric Resection Versus Abdominoperineal Resection.

INTRODUCTION: Total mesorectal excision (TME) with intersphincteric resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis (ISR-CAA) has been shown to be oncologically safe in patients with distal rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. The introduction of the watch-and-wait (WW) strategy for rectal cancer patients with a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy is changing the profile of patients undergoing TME surgery immediately following neoadjuvant treatment. The outcomes of ISR-CAA for patients with locally advanced rectal cancers not qualifying for WW have not been investigated. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing the outcomes of ISR-CAA and abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients with distal rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy and not qualifying for WW, at a comprehensive cancer center with an established WW program. The primary outcome was local recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients had ISR-CAA and 79 had APR. Median follow-up was 61.1 months. The two groups were similar in sex, tumor stage, grade, and distance from the anal verge, but patients in the APR group were older on average. An R0 resection was achieved in 94% of ISR-CAA patients and 91% of APR patients. Patients in the ISR-CAA group had a lower 5-year rate of local recurrence-free survival (79% vs. 93%; p = 0.038) compared with the APR group; however, 5-year disease-free survival did not differ significantly between groups (67% for ISR-CAA and 64% for APR; p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: The local recurrence rate after ISR-CAA may be higher than after APR for patients without a clinical complete response to neoadjuvant therapy requiring TME surgery.

Blood perfusion assessment by near-infrared fluorescence angiography of epiploic appendages in prevention of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for ultra-low rectal cancer: a case-matched study.

BACKGROUND: The role of intraoperative near-infrared fluorescence angiography with indocyanine green in reducing anastomotic leakage (AL) has been demonstrated in colorectal surgery, however, its perfusion assessment mode, and efficacy in reducing anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (LsISR) need to be further elucidated. AIM: Aim was to study near-infrared fluorescent angiography to help identify bowel ischemia to reduce AL after LsISR. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective case-matched study was conducted in one referral center. A total of 556 consecutive patients with ultra-low rectal cancer including 140 patients with fluorescence angiography of epiploic appendages (FAEA)were enrolled. Perfusion assessment by FAEA in the monochrome fluorescence mode. Patients were divided into two groups based on perfusion assessment by FAEA. The primary endpoint was the AL rate within 6 months, and the secondary endpoint was the structural sequelae of anastomotic leakage (SSAL). RESULTS: After matching, the study group (n = 109) and control group (n = 190) were well-balanced. The AL rate in the FAEA group was lower before (3.6% vs. 10.1%, P = 0.026) and after matching (3.7% vs. 10.5%, P = 0.036). Propensity scores matching analysis (OR 0.275, 95% CI 0.035-0.937, P 0.039), inverse probability of treatment weighting (OR 0.814, 95% CI 0.765-0.921, P 0.002), and regression analysis (OR 0.298, 95% CI 0.112-0.790, P = 0.015), showed that FAEA was an independent protector factor for AL. This technique can significantly shorten postoperative hospital stay [9 (6-13) vs. 10 (8-13), P = 0.024] and reduce the risk of SSAL (1.4% vs. 6.0%, P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Perfusion assessment by FAEA can achieve better visualization in LsISR and reduce the incidence of AL, subsequently avoiding SSAL after LsISR.

Robotic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a cumulative sum analysis for the learning curve.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the learning curve of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 89 patients who underwent robot-assisted intersphincteric resection. All surgeries were performed by the same group of surgeons at our institution between June 2016 and April 2021. The learning curve was evaluated using a cumulative sum analysis and the best-fit curve. The different stages of the learning curve were compared based on patient characteristics and short-term clinical outcomes to evaluate their impact on clinical efficacy. RESULTS: The minimum number of cases required to overcome the learning curve was 47. The learning curve was divided into the learning improvement and proficiency stages. Significant differences were observed in the operation time and the number of lymph nodes between the two stages (P < 0.05), whereas no significant differences were found in intraoperative blood loss, first postoperative exhaust time, postoperative complications, 3-year progression-free survival, overall survival, and local recurrence-free survival (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer exhibits a learning curve that can be divided into two stages: namely, learning improvement and proficiency. Achieving proficiency requires a minimum of 47 surgical cases.

Short-term outcomes of the "minimal skin incision and no stoma" procedure in needlescopic intersphincteric resection and delayed coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Needlescopic surgery is a minimally invasive procedure that uses thin trocars with 3-mm diameter. We used Turnbull-Cutait pull-through and delayed coloanal anastomosis in needlescopic surgery to avoid diverting ileostomy during intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. In this study, we aim to assess the diverting ileostomy avoidance rate and technical safety of this "minimal skin incision and no stoma" procedure. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study was conducted at the Cancer Institute Hospital, a tertiary referral center in Japan. Between January 2017 and December 2020, 11 patients underwent needlescopic intersphincteric resection with diverting ileostomy (NSI group), and 19 patients underwent needlescopic intersphincteric resection with delayed coloanal anastomosis (NSD group) for low rectal cancer. Data regarding patient backgrounds and short-term outcomes, including diverting ileostomy avoidance rate, pathological results, and postoperative defecatory function, were compared between the groups. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the NSI and NSD groups with respect to patient background, operation time (239 min versus 220 min, p = 0.68), estimated blood loss (45 g versus 25 g, p = 0.29), R0 resection rate (100% versus 100%, p = 1.00), and length of postoperative hospital stay (16 days versus 17 days, p = 0.42). The diverting ileostomy avoidance rate was 94.4% in the NSD group. The LARS and Wexner scores 12 months after surgery were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Needlescopic intersphincteric resection and delayed coloanal anastomosis can be safely performed in selected patients with a high rate of diverting ileostomy avoidance and comparable short-term outcomes.

The impact of plasma-rich platelet injection to perianal sphincters on incontinence and quality of life in patients with rectal cancer after low anterior or intersphincteric resection: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Incontinence is not rare after rectal cancer surgery. Platelet-rich plasma may promote tissue repair and generation but has never been tested for the treatment of anal incontinence. This study evaluated the impact of platelet-rich plasma injection on the severity of incontinence and quality of life after low rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort proof of concept study in a colorectal cancer institution. Patients had undergone low anterior or intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer and had a Wexner score > 4. Ten milliliters of platelet-rich plasma were injected into the internal and external sphincters under endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) guidance. Primary outcome measure was > 2 point improvement in Wexner score (improved group). The patients were assessed with endo-anal ultrasound examination, manometry, the Wexner Questionnaire and SF-36 Health Surveys, and patients were asked whether they used pads and antidiarrheal medications before and 6 months after PRP injection. RESULTS: Of 20 patients included in the study, 14 (70%) were men, and the average age was 56.8 (SD = 9.5) years. No statistically significant difference was found in Wexner scores before and after PRP injection (p = 0.66). Seven (35%) patients experienced a > 2 point improvement in Wexner score. Rectal manometry demonstrated improved squeezing pressure (p = 0.0096). Furthermore, physical functioning scoring (p = 0.023), role limitation (p = 0.016), emotional well-being (p = 0.0057) and social functioning (p = 0.043) domains on the SF-36 questionnaire improved. One (5%) and three (15%) patients stopped using pads and antidiarrheal medications. CONCLUSION: Platelet-rich plasma injection does not restore Wexner scores, but more than one-third of patients may benefit from this application with an improvement of > 2 points in their scores. Platelet-rich plasma injection may improve squeezing pressure and certain life quality measures for incontinent patients after rectal cancer surgery.

Risk factors, quality of life, and oncological effects of refractory anastomotic leakage for laparoscopic intersphincteric resection.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Refractory anastomotic leakage (RAL) after intersphincteric resection (ISR) usually leads to failure of protective stoma reversal in ultralow rectal cancers. The aim of this study is to assess the risk factors and oncological outcomes of both anastomotic leakage (AL) and RAL, and quality of life (QoL) of RAL after laparoscopic ISR (LsISR). METHODS: A total of 371 ultralow rectal cancer patients with LsISR were enrolled from a tertiary colorectal surgery referral center. Risk factors for AL and RAL were identified by logistic regression. Three-year disease-free survival (DFS) of AL and RAL was analyzed by the Cox regression. QoL of RAL group (compared with non-RAL group) was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires. RESULTS: The rates of AL and RAL after LsISR accounted for 8.4% (31/371) and 4.6% (17/371) in this cohort, respectively. Non-left colic artery preservation (odds ratio [OR] = 3.491, P = 0.009), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) (OR = 6.038, P < 0.001), and lower anastomosis height (OR = 5.271, P = 0.010) were independent risk factors for AL, while nCRT (OR = 11.602, P < 0.001) was the only independent risk factor for RAL. Male (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.989, P = 0.014), age > 60 years (HR = 1.877, P = 0.018), and lymph node metastasis (HR = 2.125, P = 0.005) were independent risk factors of poor 3-year DFS, but not RAL (P = 0.646). RAL patients have significantly worse global health status, worse emotional and social function scores at the late postoperative stage, and worse urinary and sexual function at the early postoperative stage (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was an independent risk factor for RAL after LsISR. RAL shows similar oncological outcomes, but with poor QoL.

Conformal sphincteric resection for ultra-low rectal cancer located below the dentate line: A pilot report.

AIM: Sphincter-sparing surgery can be achieved in most cases of low rectal cancer with the development of intersphincteric resection. However, abdominoperineal resection is still inevitable for patients with tumours located below the dentate line. To address this, we have developed a procedure called conformal sphincteric resection (CSR) in which the corresponding part of the subcutaneous portion of the external anal sphincter and the perianal skin on the tumour side is removed to achieve a safe distal resection margin and lateral resection margin while the dentate line and the internal anal sphincter on the tumour-free side are preserved as much as possible, to achieve sphincter preservation without compromising oncological safety and functional acceptability, and to render tumour location no longer a contraindication for sphincter-sparing surgery. This is the first study to describe the concept, indication and surgical procedure of CSR and to report its preliminary surgical, oncological and functional results. METHODS: This is a retrospective, single-centre, single-arm pilot study conducted at Huashan Hospital, Fudan University. Demographic, clinicopathological, oncological and functional follow-up data were collected from 20 consecutive patients with rectal tumours located below the dentate line who underwent laparoscopic CSR by the same surgical team from June 2018 to March 2022. RESULTS: The mean distance of the tumour's lower edge from the anal verge was 13.1 ± 6.0 mm. The mean distal resection margin was 10.6 ± 4.3 mm. All circumferential resection margins were negative. There were no instances of perioperative mortality. The complication rate was 25% but all were Clavien-Dindo Grade I. Among the 20 cases, 17 were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma, one with squamous cell carcinoma and two with adenoma featuring high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia. Pathological TNM staging revealed two, seven, five, five and one case(s) in Stages 0, I, II, III and IV, respectively. The median follow-up period was 20 months (interquartile range 22 months), with no withdrawals. The overall and disease-free survival rates were both 95%. The mean Wexner incontinence score and low anterior resection syndrome score recorded 18 months following diverting ileostomy closure were 6.3 ± 3.8 and 27.3 ± 3.6, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study has proposed the CSR procedure for the first time, which is a technically feasible, oncologically safe and functionally acceptable procedure for carefully selected patients with rectal tumours located below the dentate line.

Should anorectal manometry be routine before stoma reversal in patients after an intersphincteric resection?

INTRODUCTION: Anorectal manometry (ARM) is sometimes performed before ostomy reversal in patients with an intersphincteric resection (ISR) to predict bowel function. However, no clinical predictive data exist regarding its utility. METHODS: The single-centre, retrospective data of ISR patients who had an ARM prior to ostomy reversal, and bowel functional assessment with the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) and Wexner incontinence scores at least 6 months after reversal, were considered. Correlation statistics were performed with each of the manometric parameters and functional outcome categories. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included. The median basal and squeeze pressures were 41 and 100 mmHg, respectively. Any LARS (score ≥20) and major incontinence (score ≥11) was observed in 51.7% and 16.9%, respectively. None of the manometric parameters (median basal or maximum squeeze pressure, anal canal length, volume at urge and the ability to expel) correlated with LARS or incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: Anorectal manometry (ARM) before ostomy reversal to predict bowel function at 6 months or beyond was not helpful in patients with an ISR and diverting stoma. No manometric parameter correlated with the LARS or Wexner incontinence scores.

International standardization and optimization group for intersphincteric resection (ISOG-ISR): modified Delphi consensus on anatomy, definition, indication, surgical technique, specimen description and functional outcome.

AIM: Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is an oncologically complex operation for very low-lying rectal cancers. Yet, definition, anatomical description, operative indications and operative approaches to ISR are not standardized. The aim of this study was to standardize the definition of ISR by reaching international consensus from the experts in the field. This standardization will allow meaningful comparison in the literature in the future. METHOD: A modified Delphi approach with three rounds of questionnaire was adopted. A total of 29 international experts from 11 countries were recruited for this study. Six domains with a total of 37 statements were examined, including anatomical definition; definition of intersphincteric dissection, intersphincteric resection (ISR) and ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR); indication for ISR; surgical technique of ISR; specimen description of ISR; and functional outcome assessment protocol. RESULTS: Three rounds of questionnaire were performed (response rate 100%, 89.6%, 89.6%). Agreement (≥80%) reached standardization on 36 statements. CONCLUSION: This study provides an international expert consensus-based definition and standardization of ISR. This is the first study standardizing terminology and definition of deep pelvis/anal canal anatomy from a surgical point of view. Intersphincteric dissection, ISR and uLAR were specifically defined for precise surgical description. Indication for ISR was determined by the rectal tumour's maximal radial infiltration (T stage) below the levator ani. A new surgical definition of T3isp was reached by consensus to define T3 low rectal tumours infiltrating the intersphincteric plane. A practical flowchart for surgical indication for uLAR/ISR/abdominoperineal resection was developed. A standardized ISR surgical technique and functional outcome assessment protocol was defined.

Transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anus-preserving surgery for low rectal cancer has always been a serious difficulty for surgeons. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) are commonly used Anus-preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical use of two surgical methods. METHODS: A total of 152 patients with low rectal cancer were treated with taTME in 75 cases and ISR in 77 cases. After propensity score matching, 46 patients in each group were included in the study. Perioperative outcomes, anal function scores (Wexner incontinence score) and quality of life scores (EORTC QLQ C30, EORTC QLQ CR38) at least 1 year after surgery were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of surgical outcomes, pathological examination of surgical specimens, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications, except for patients in the taTME group who had their indwelling catheters removed later. Anal Wexner incontinence score was lower in taTME group than ISR group (P < 0.05). On the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, the physical function and role function scores in the ISR group were lower than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05), while the fatigue, pain symptoms, and constipation scores in the ISR group were higher than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05). On the EORTC QLQ-CR38 scale, the scores of gastrointestinal symptoms and defecation problems in the ISR group were higher than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Compared with ISR surgery, taTME surgery is comparable in terms of surgical safety and short-term efficacy, and has better long-term anal function and quality of life. From the perspective of long-term anal function and quality of life, taTME surgery is a better surgical method for the treatment of low rectal cancer.

Does anastomotic leakage after intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer influence long-term outcomes? A retrospective observational study.

PURPOSE: To determine whether anastomotic leakage (AL) following intersphincteric resection (ISR) for ultralow rectal cancer (uLRC) is associated with long-term negative outcomes. METHODS: Between June 2011 and January 2022, 236 consecutive patients who underwent ISR with diverting ileostomy for uLRC were included. The primary outcome was long-term clinical consequences of AL, including chronic stricture, stoma reversal, and oncological and functional results. RESULTS: Forty-one (17.4%) patients developed symptomatic AL, whereas only two (0.8%) required re-laparotomy due to severe leakage. Patients with leaks had a significantly increased incidence of chronic stricture (29.3% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.001) and stoma non-reversal (34.1% vs. 4.6%, P < 0.0001) than controls. The severe consequences were particularly common in patients with anastomotic separation, resulting in 60% of those presenting with chronic stricture and 50% ending up with stoma non-reversal. After a median follow-up of 59 (range, 7-139) months, AL did not compromise long-term oncological outcomes, including tumor recurrence (9.8% vs. 5.6%, P = 0.3), 5-year disease-free, and overall survival (73.4% vs. 74.8% and 85.1% vs. 85.4%, P = 0.56 and P = 0.55). A total of 149 patients with bowel continuity who completed self-assessment questionnaires were enrolled for functional evaluation. The median follow-up was 24 (range, 12-94) months after ileostomy reversal, and functional results were comparable between patients with and without leaks. CONCLUSION: AL is an unfortunate reality for patients who underwent ISR for uLRC, but the rate of severe leakage is limited. Leaks contribute to possible adverse impacts on chronic stricture and stoma non-reversal, especially for patients with anastomotic separation. However, long-term oncological and functional results may not be compromised. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chictr.org.cn identifier: ChiCTR-ONC-15007506 and ChiCTR2100051614.

Morbidity and oncological outcomes after intersphincteric resection of the rectum for low-lying rectal cancer: experience of a single center in a lower-middle-income country.

BACKGROUND: Intersphincteric resection (ISR) of the rectum for low-lying rectal cancer with colo-anal anastomosis was introduced years ago, allowing for bowel continuity, and avoiding permanent stomas. The colorectal unit of Korle Bu Teaching Hospital adopted this procedure in 2014 when indicated, for the management of rectal cancers, where hitherto, abdominoperineal resection of the rectum with a permanent stoma was indicated. This study aimed to assess morbidity, mortality, and oncological outcomes associated with ISR of the rectum and determine the factors contributing to these. METHODS: This was an observational study from prospectively stored data. All patients who underwent intersphincteric resection of the rectum due to low-lying rectal cancer from July 2014 to June 2021 were included in the study, and their records were assessed for intra-operative and 30-day postoperative complications, as well as mortality and their related risk factors and their oncological outcomes in terms of local recurrence at one year. RESULTS: 102 patients were included in this analysis. Six percent (6/102) of patients had intra-operative complications, including bleeding, and 41% (42/102) had 30-day postoperative complications, which were associated with pelvic side wall attachment of tumor and intra-op complications. Mortality risk was 12.7% (13/102) in the early postoperative period, and nine patients had a local recurrence within the first year of surgery. CONCLUSION: There is a high risk of early postoperative morbidity and mortality after intersphincteric resection of the rectum in our setting. The oncological outcomes are favorable in a population that abhors a permanent colostomy.

Mesorectal reconstruction with pedicled greater omental transplantation to relieve low anterior resection syndrome following total intersphincteric resection in patients with ultra-low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Total intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate anus-preserving surgery for patients with ultra-low rectal cancer (ULRC), which can result in various degrees of anorectal dysfunction. Known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), it seriously affects the postoperative quality of life of patients. The aim of this study was to discuss the value of mesorectal reconstruction with pedicled greater omental transplantation (PGOT) to relieve LARS following total ISR in patients with ULRC, hoping to provide new ideas and strategies for the prevention and improvement of LARS. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed hospitalization data and postoperative anorectal function of 26 ULRC patients, who were met inclusion and exclusion criteria in our center from January 2015 to February 2022. And combined with the results of anorectal manometry and rectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) defecography of some patients, we assessed comprehensively anorectal physiological and morphological changes of the patients after surgery, and their correlation with LARS. RESULTS: In this study, 26 patients with ULRC were enrolled and divided into observation group (n = 15) and control group (n = 11) according to whether PGOT was performed. There were no significant differences in surgical results such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). Postoperative follow-up showed that patients in both groups showed severe LARS within 3 months after surgery, but from the 3rd month after surgery, LARS in both groups gradually began to decrease, especially in the observation group, which showed faster recovery and better recovery, with statistically significant difference (P < 0.001). Through anorectal manometry, the mean rectal resting pressure in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P = 0.010). In addition, the postoperative thickness of the posterior rectal mesenterium in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P = 0.001), and also higher than the preoperative level (P = 0.018). Moreover, rectal MRI defecography showed that the neo-rectum had good compliance under the matting of greater omentum, and its intestinal peristalsis was coordinated. CONCLUSIONS: ULRC patients, with the help of greater omentum, coordinated their neo-rectum peristalsis after total ISR and recovery of LARS was faster and better. PGOT is expected to be an effective strategy for LARS prevention and treatment of ULRC patients after surgery and is worthy of clinical promotion.

Neorectal prolapse following proctectomy: a novel application of mesh sacral pexy.

Neorectal prolapse following proctectomy for cancer has seldom been reported and treatment has mostly consisted in the resection of the prolapse via a perineal approach. Management of a patient with neorectal J-pouch prolapse using mesh sacral pexy via an abdominal approach is reported. By analogy with native rectal prolapse due to pelvic static disorders, laparoscopic mesh sacral pexy is likely to afford the same advantages of low morbidity and durability when applied to neorectal prolapse following rectal cancer surgery.

Comparison of anal function and quality of life after conformal sphincter preservation operation and intersphincteric resection of very low rectal cancer: a multicenter, retrospective, case-control analysis.

PURPOSE: Conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) is a sphincter preservation operation for very low rectal cancers. Compared to intersphincteric resection (ISR), CSPO retains more dentate line and distal rectal wall, and also avoids damaging the nerves in the intersphincteric space. This study aimed to compare the postoperative anal function and quality of life between the CSPO and ISR. METHOD: Patients with low rectal cancer undergoing CSPO (n = 117) and ISR (n = 66) were included from Changhai and Huashan Hospital, respectively, between 2011 and 2020. A visual analog scale (range 0-10) was utilized to evaluate satisfaction with anal function and quality of life. The anal function was evaluated with Wexner scores and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. Quality of life was evaluated with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38. RESULTS: The CSPO group had more male patients (65.8% vs. 50%, p = 0.042), more preoperative chemoradiotherapy (33.3% vs. 10.6%, p < 0.001), lower tumor position (3.45 ± 1.13 vs. 4.24 ± 0.86 cm, p < 0.001), and more postoperative chemotherapy (65% vs. 13.6%, p < 0.001) compared to the ISR group. In addition, CSPO patients had shorter postoperative stay (6.63 ± 2.53 vs. 7.85 ± 4.73 days, p = 0.003) and comparable stoma reversal rates within 1 year after surgery (92.16% vs. 96.97%, p = 0.318). Multivariable analysis showed that CSPO significantly contributed to higher satisfaction with anal function (beta = 1.752, 95% CI 0.776-2.728) and with quality of life (beta = 1.219, 95% CI 0.374-2.064), but not to Wexner, LARS score, or EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38. CONCLUSION: CSPO improved the satisfaction with anal function and quality of life but utilized more preoperative chemoradiotherapy. CSPO may be an alternative choice for patients with very low rectal cancers in better physical health and with higher requirements for anal function and quality of life.

Low anterior resection syndrome and quality of life after intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched study.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to perform a propensity score-matched study to compare the long-term functional outcomes and quality of life following intersphincteric resection vs. low anterior resection (LAR) with very low anastomosis. METHODS: Patients who underwent intersphincteric resection or low anterior resection with low anastomosis (≤ 4 cm from the anal verge) for rectal cancer between January 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively included. A propensity score-matching process was performed. Functional outcomes and quality of life were assessed using the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version (EQ-5D-3L), EORC-QLQ C30, EORC-QLQ CR29, Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS), Wexner, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaires. The primary outcome was the presence of LARS at least 12 months after surgery. The second outcome was the postoperative quality of life of included patients. RESULTS: After propensity matching, 128 patients were included, including 58 males and 70 females with a median age of 59.5. Patients in the intersphincteric resection group showed a higher incidence of incontinence to flatus (32.8% versus 14.0%, p = 0.043) and stools (42.2% versus 21.9%, p = 0.046), pain/discomfort (25.0% versus 7.8%, p = 0.001), and bowel dysfunction, while the LARS scores (15.0 versus 13.2, p = 0.461) and major LARS rates (26.6% versus 14.1%, p = 0.078) were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION: ISR leads to increased bowel incontinence rate and increased anal pain, without affecting the grade of low anterior resection syndrome, fecal urgency, and clustering. LAR might be the preferred sphincteric-preserving approach when negative resection margins and a safe anastomosis are guaranteed. Patients should be fully informed about potential functional impairment after sphincter-preservation procedures.

Clinical efficacy of different approaches for laparoscopic intersphincteric resection of low rectal cancer: a comparison study.

BACKGROUND: The operative results of different approaches for the laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (LAISR) of low rectal cancer vary, and the patient characteristics associated with the best outcomes for each procedure have not been reported. We compared the efficacy of different approaches for LAISR of low rectal cancer and discussed the surgical indications for each approach. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from 235 patients with low rectal cancer treated via LAISR from October 2010 to September 2016. Patients underwent either the transabdominal approach for ISR (TAISR, n = 142), the transabdominal perineal approach for ISR (TPAISR, n = 57), or the transanal pull-through approach for ISR (PAISR, n = 36). RESULTS: The PAISR and TAISR groups exhibited shorter operation times and less intraoperative blood loss than the TPAISR group. The anastomotic distance was shorter in the PAISR and TPAISR groups than in the TAISR group. No differences in the ability to perform radical resection, overall complications, postoperative recovery, Wexner score recorded 12 months after ostomy closure, 3-year disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, or overall survival (OS) were observed among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: TAISR, TPAISR, and PAISR have unique advantages and do not differ in terms of operation safety, patient outcomes, or anal function. TPAISR requires a longer time to complete and is associated with more bleeding and a slower recovery of anal function. PAISR should be considered when TAISR cannot ensure a negative distal margin and the tumor and BMI are relatively small; otherwise, TPAISR is required.

Da Vinci SP robotic approach to colorectal surgery: two specific indications and short-term results.

BACKGROUND: Da Vinci® Single Port (dvSP) was recently developed. Its application in colorectal surgery is under investigation. The aim of this study was to explore the safety and feasibility of dvSP for intersphincteric (dvSP-ISR), right colectomy (dvSP-RC), and transverse colectomy (dvSP-TC). Surgical indication and short-term results were analyzed. METHODS: All consecutive patients from a prospective database of patients who underwent dvSP-ISR, dvSP-RC, and dvSP-TC at Korea University Anam Hospital from November 2020 to December 2021, were analyzed. Perioperative, pathological, and oncological short-term outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 7 dvSP-ISR, 5 dvSP-RC, and 1 dvSP-TC were performed. Median age was 56.0 (55.0-61.0) years for the dvSP-ISR and 54.0 (44.7-63.5) years for the dvSP-RC/TC. Median body mass index was 22.8 (17.1-24.8) kg/m2 for the dvSP-ISR and 23.6 (20.8-26.9) kg/m2 for the dvSP-RC/TC. All dvSP-ISR patients received neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy, including one patient with squamocellular carcinoma who was treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/mitomycin. All other patients, excluding one dvSP-RC patient with Crohn's disease, had an adenocarcinoma. Median operation time was 280 (240-370) minutes for the dvSP-ISR and 220 (201-270) minutes for the dvSP-RC/TC. Estimated blood loss was insignificant. No intraoperative complications or conversions to multiport/open surgery was reported. Median post-operative stay was 7.0 (6.0-10.0) days for the dvSP-ISR and 5.0 (4.0-6.7) days for the dvSP-RC/TC. Quality of mesorectum was complete for six patients, and nearly complete for one. Median number of retrieved lymph nodes were 21 (17-25) for the dvSP-ISR and 28 (24-49) for the dvSP-RC/TC. Proximal and distal resection margins were tumor free. Four patients experienced post-operative complications not related to the platform which were: ileus, voiding dysfunction, infected pelvic hematoma, and wound infection. Median follow-up was 9 (6-11) months and 11 (7-17) months for the dvSP-ISR and dvSP-RC/TC, respectively. Two patients had systemic recurrence; all others were tumor free. CONCLUSIONS: The dvSP platform is safe and feasible for intersphincteric resection with right lower quadrant access, and right/transverse colectomy with suprapubic access. Further studies are needed to evaluate benefit differences compared to multiport robotic platform.

Sphincter-saving surgery for ultra-low rectal carcinoma initially indicated for abdominoperineal resection: Is it safe on a long-term follow-up?

BACKGROUND: Rate of abdominoperineal resection (APR) varies from countries and surgeons. Surgical impact of preoperative treatment for ultra-low rectal carcinoma (ULRC) initially indicated for APR is debated. We report the 10-year oncological results from a prospective controlled trial (GRECCAR 1) which evaluate the sphincter saving surgery (SSR). METHODS: ULRC indicated for APR were included (n = 207). Randomization was between high-dose radiation (HDR, 45 + 18 Gy) and radiochemotherapy (RCT, 45 Gy + 5FU infusion). Surgical decision was based on tumour volume regression at surgery. SSR technique was standardized as mucosectomy (M) or partial (PISR)/complete (CISR) intersphincteric resection. RESULTS: Overall SSR rate was 85% (72% ISR), postoperative morbidity 27%, with no mortality. There were no significant differences between the HDR and RCT groups: 10-year overall survival (OS10) 70.1% versus 69.4%, respectively, 10.2% local recurrence (9.2%/14.5%) and 27.6% metastases (32.4%/27.7%). OS and disease-free survival were significantly longer for SSR (72.2% and 60.1%, respectively) versus APR (54.7% and 38.3%). No difference in OS10 between surgical approaches (M 78.9%, PISR 75.5%, CISR 65.5%) or tumour location (low 64.8%, ultralow 76.7%). CONCLUSION: GRECCAR 1 demonstrates the feasibility of safely changing an initial APR indication into an SSR procedure according to the preoperative treatment tumour response. Long-term oncologic follow-up validates this attitude.

Transanterior obturator nerve gateway: a novel approach to achieving intracorporeal distal rectal transection for ultralow rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Intracorporeal rectal transection at the anorectal junction for ultralow rectal cancer is technically difficult due to pelvic width and limited roticulation, which might require a transanal transection or an oblique transection with multiple firings. These procedures were reported to be associated with the increased risk of morbidity. To address these problems, we presented a novel technique Transanterior Obturator Nerve Gateway (TANG) to transect rectum for ultralow rectal cancer and evaluated its safety and feasibility in this study. METHODS: A total of 210 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic coloanal anastomosis with or without partial intersphincteric resection (CAA/pISR) for rectal cancers between January 2017 and January 2020 were included. Eighty of these patients were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM). The perioperative characteristics, TANG-related variables, and genitourinary and anal function outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Among these enrolled patients, 170 patients underwent traditional transection, and 40 underwent TANG transection; the patients were matched to include 40 patients in each group by PSM. After PSM, there were no significant differences in the operating time (p = 0.351) or bleeding volume (p = 0.474) between the two groups. However, the TANG group had fewer cases of conversion to transanal transection (0 vs. 13, p < 0.001). Moreover, the patients in TANG group had a more desirable transection with longer distal resection margin (1.7 vs. 1.1 cm, p < 0.001), shorter stapling line (6.6 vs. 10.3 cm, p < 0.001) and fewer stapler firings (p < 0.001). The overall postoperative complication rates and genitourinary and anal function outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The TANG approach appears to be a safe, feasible and effective approach for intracorporeal ultralow rectal transection with more distal resection, more vertical transection and fewer stapler firings.