Laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: The myth of reinventing the wheel.

Background & Objective: To review oncological outcomes of laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (LAP-ELAPE) for low rectal cancer.In locally advanced low rectal cancer, ELAPE which is en-bloc resection of levator muscles along with the tumor in a prone position has significantly decreased the rate of having either positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) or tumor perforation. The aim of the study was to determine the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (LAP-ELAPE) for low rectal cancer. Methods: This retrospective study was performed at Shaukat Khanum Cancer Hospital and Research Centre Lahore. Patients who underwent ELAPE for low rectal and anal cancer from January 2014 to December 2019 were selected. Data was collected using an electronic database through a hospital information system. Results: A total of 82 patients were included in the study having a median age of 39 years. Clinically preoperative tumor sizes were T2:2, T3:65, T4:15. Neo-adjuvant chemo radiotherapy was administered to 79 (96.3%) patients. Pathologically tumor sizes were T0:12, T2:15, T3:50, T4:5 with 79.2% (n=65) R0 resections. The mean operative time was 340.36±64.51 minutes and the mean blood loss was 99 milliliters. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6.58±4.64 days. Seventeen (20.7%) cases had pathological circumferential resection margins positive (pCRM<1mm). However, tumor perforation was found in 8(9.8%) patients. Ninety days mortality was none while 36 patients experienced recurrence (local: 23, distant: 30, local + distant 17). The median survival time was 53.00±2.69 months. Conclusion: For locally advanced low rectal cancer, ELAPE has evolved as a safe oncological procedure with acceptable outcomes.

A Case Report on the Use of a Novel Technique for Intra-operative Nasojejunal Tube Placement in a Patient Undergoing Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy.

Esophagectomy is an important cornerstone in the management of esophageal cancer. Post-operative feeding options in Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy include nasojejunal tube (NJT), feeding jejunostomy, and direct oral feeding. NJT is traditionally placed endoscopically or under fluoroscopic guidance. In this case report we present an alternate technique for NJT placement. A 55-year-old male presented to our clinic with dysphagia. On esophagogastroduodenoscopy, a gastroesophageal junction (GOJ) tumor was noted. A diagnosis of moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma was made on biopsy. The patient received eight cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX), following which an Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy was carried out. This case report highlights the technical aspects and potential pitfalls of placing NJT in patients undergoing Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy without the use of endoscopy or fluoroscopic guidance. Direct oral feeding after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy may lead to suboptimal caloric provision while feeding jejunostomy is associated with complications such as dermatitis, wound infection, and intestinal obstruction. On the other hand, endoscopic or fluoroscopic insertion of NJT can expose the anastomosis to potentially harmful mechanical forces. NJT can be easily placed using our technique in patients undergoing hybrid Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. The safety of this technique can be investigated by further studies.