Factors related to short-term outcomes and delayed systemic treatment following primary tumor resection for asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of primary tumor resection (PTR) for asymptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer patients to continue prolonged and safe systemic chemotherapy has recently been re-evaluated. However, postoperative complications lead to a prolonged hospital stay and delay systemic treatment, which could result in a poor oncologic outcome. The objective of this study was to identify the risk factors for morbidity and delay of systemic chemotherapy in such patients. METHODS: Between April 2016 and March 2018, 115 consecutive colorectal cancer patients with distant metastasis who had no clinical symptoms and underwent PTR in all participating hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups according to the presence (CD ≥ 2, n = 23) or absence (CD < 2, n = 92) of postoperative complications. RESULTS: The proportion of combined resection of adjacent organs was significantly higher in the postoperative complication group (p = 0.014). Complications were significantly correlated with longer hospital stay (p < 0.001) and delay of first postoperative treatment (p = 0.005). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that combined resection (odds ratio 4.593, p = 0.010) was the independent predictor for postoperative complications. Median survival time was 8.5 months. Postoperative complications were not associated with overall survival, but four patients (3.5%) could not receive systemic chemotherapy because of prolonged postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although PTR for asymptomatic stage IV CRC patients showed an acceptable prognosis, appropriate patient selection is needed to obtain its true benefit.

Combined transabdominal and transperineal endoscopic pelvic exenteration for colorectal cancer: feasibility and safety of a two-team approach.

PURPOSE: Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a highly invasive procedure with high morbidity and mortality rates. Promising options to reduce this invasiveness have included laparoscopic and transperineal approaches. The aim of this study was to identify the safety of combined transabdominal and transperineal endoscopic PE for colorectal malignancies. METHODS: Fourteen patients who underwent combined transabdominal and transperineal PE (T group: 2-team approach, n = 7; O group: 1-team approach, n = 7) for colorectal malignancies between April 2016 and March 2020 in our institutions were included in this study. Clinicopathological features and perioperative outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: All patients successfully underwent R0 resection. Operation time tended to be shorter in the T group (463 minutes) than in the O group (636 minutes, P = 0.080). Time to specimen removal was significantly shorter (258 minutes vs. 423 minutes, P = 0.006), blood loss was lower (343 mL vs. 867 mL, P = 0.042), and volume of blood transfusion was less (0 mL vs. 560 mL, P = 0.063) in the T group, respectively. Postoperative complications were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Combined transabdominal and transperineal PE under a synchronous 2-team approach was feasible and safe, with the potential to reduce operation time, blood loss, and surgeon stress.