Perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a retrospective study of 672 patients.

Although there's growing information about the long-term oncological effects of robotic surgery for rectal cancer, the procedure is still relatively new. This study aimed to assess the long-term oncological results of total mesorectal excision (TME) performed laparoscopically versus robotically in the setting of rectal cancer. Restrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. A total of 489 laparoscopic (L-TME) and 183 robotic total mesorectal excisions (R-TME) were carried out by a single surgeon between 2013 and 2023. The groups were compared in terms of perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes. In the R-TME and L-TME groups, male sex predominated (75.4% and 57.3%, respectively), although the robotic group was significantly greater (p = 0.008). There was no conversion in R-TME group, whereas three (0.6%) converted to open surgery in L-TME group. The R-TME group had a statistically significant higher number of distal rectal tumors (85%) compared to the L-TME group (54.6%). Only three (1.7%) patients in the R-TME group received abdomineperineal resection (APR); in contrast, 25 (5%) patients in the L-TME group received APR (p < 0.001). For R-TME, the mean follow-up was 70.7 months (range 18-138) and for L-TME, it was 60 months (range 14-140). Frequency of completed mesorectum was significantly greater in R-TME group (98.9% vs 94.2%, p < 0.001). The 5 year overall survival rates for R-TME and L-TME groups were 89.6% and 88.7%, respectively. The 5 year disease-free survival for R-TME and L-TME groups were 84.1% and 81.1%, respectively. The local recurrences rates were 7.6% and 6.3%, respectively in R-TME and L-TME groups (p = 0.274). R-TME is characterized by no conversion and improved mesorectal integrity. R-TME had longer operation time. The long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between groups.

Robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving resections have similar peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes in female patients with rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare perioperative, long-term oncological, and anorectal functional outcomes of robotic total mesorectal excision (R-TME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (L-TME) sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision in female patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database was performed. Sixty-eight cases (L-TME, n = 34; R-TME, n = 34) were performed by a single surgeon (January 2014-January 2019). Patient characteristics, perioperative recovery, postoperative complications, pathology results, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Clinical characteristics did not differ between the groups. Mean operating time was longer in R-TME (165.50 ± 95.50 vs. 124.50 ± 82.60 min, p < 0.001). There was no conversion to open surgery in both groups. Mesorectal integrity was complete in both groups (100%). Length of distal and circumferential resection margins (CRM) did not differ between groups. CRM involvement was observed in 1 (2.8%) and 1 (2.8%) in L-TME and R-TME patients, respectively. Incidence of anastomotic leakage was 5.8% (n = 2) in L-TME and 8.8% (n = 3) in R-TME, respectively. Mean length of follow-up was 62.5 (36-102) months for R-TME and 63 (36-103) months for L-TME. Five-year overall survival rates were 92.8% in L-TME and 89.6% in R-TME. Disease-free survival rates were 87.5% in L-TME and 89.6% in R-TME. Local recurrence rates were 3.0% for both groups. Mean Wexner score for L-TME and R-TME patients was: 9.42 ± 8.23 and 9.22 ± 3.64 (p = 0.685), respectively. Daily stool frequency was similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Robotic total mesorectal excision (R-TME) and laparoscopic TME (L-TME) have similar perioperative, oncological, and anorectal functional results in female patients with rectal cancer. The robotic approach for rectal cancers in female patients could be not as critical as for male patients.

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.

Robotic male and laparoscopic female sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer share similar specimen quality, complication rates and long-term oncological outcomes.

The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes between laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision in female patients (F-Lap-TME) and robotic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision in male patients (M-Rob-TME) with mid-low rectal cancer (RC). A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. 170 cases (F-Lap-TME: 60 patients; M-Rob-TME: 110 patients) were performed by a single surgeon (January 2011-January 2020). Clinical characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Operating time was longer in M-Rob-TME than in F-Lap-TME group (185.3 ± 28.4 vs 124.5 ± 35.8 min, p < 0.001). There was no conversion to open surgery in both groups. Quality of mesorectum was complete/near-complete in 58 (96.7%) and 107 (97.3%) patients of F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME (p = 0.508), respectively. Circumferential radial margin involvement was observed in 2 (3.3%) and 3 (2.9%) in F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME patients (p = 0.210), respectively. Median length of follow-up was 62 (24-108) months in the F-Lap-TME and 64 (24-108) months in the M-Rob-TME group. Five-year overall survival rates were 90.5% in the F-Lap-TME and 89.6% in the M-Rob-TME groups (p = 0.120). Disease-free survival rates in F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME groups were 87.5% and 86.5% (p = 0.145), respectively. Local recurrence rates were 5% (n = 3) and 5.5% (n = 6) (p = 0.210), in the F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME groups, respectively. The robotic technique can potentially overcome some technical challenges related to the pelvic anatomical difference between sex compared to laparoscopy. Laparoscopic and robotic approach, respectively in female and male patients provide similar surgical specimen quality, perioperative outcomes, and long-term oncological results.

Chemoradiation and consolidation chemotherapy for rectal cancer provides a high rate of organ preservation with a very good long-term oncological outcome: a single-center cohort series.

AIM: To report long-term oncological outcomes and organ preservation rate with a chemoradiotherapy-consolidation chemotherapy (CRT-CNCT) treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHOD: Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database was performed. Oncological outcomes of mid-low LARC patients (n=60) were analyzed after a follow-up of 63 (50-83) months. Patients with clinical complete response (cCR) were treated with the watch-and-wait (WW) protocol. Patients who could not achieve cCR were treated with total mesorectal excision (TME) or local excision (LE). RESULTS: Thirty-nine (65%) patients who achieved cCR were treated with the WW protocol. TME was performed in 15 (25%) patients and LE was performed in 6 (10%) patients. During the follow-up period, 10 (25.6%) patients in the WW group had regrowth (RG) and 3 (7.7%) had distant metastasis (DM). Five-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 90.1% and 71.6%, respectively, in the WW group. Five-year OS and DFS were 94.9% (95% CI: 88-100%) and 80% (95% CI: 55.2-100%), respectively, in the RG group. For all patients (n=60), 5-year TME-free DFS was 57.3% (95% CI: 44.3-70.2%) and organ preservation-adapted DFS was 77.5% (95% CI: 66.4-88.4%). For the WW group (n=39), 5-year TME-free DFS was 77.5% (95% CI: 63.2-91.8%) and organ preservation-adapted DFS was 85.0% (95% CI: 72.3-97.8%). CONCLUSION: CRT-CNCT provides cCR as high as 2/3 of LARC patients. Regrowths, developed during follow-up, can be successfully salvaged without causing oncological disadvantage if strict surveillance is performed.

Robotic vs. laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a case matched study reporting a median of 7-year long-term oncological and functional outcomes.

Aim of this study was to compare operative, long-term oncological and functional outcomes of laparoscopic (LISR) and robotic (RISR) intersphincteric resection in low-lying rectal cancer. Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database was performed. 115 cases (LISR, n = 55; RISR, n = 60) were performed by a single surgeon (January 2011-January 2020). Clinical characteristics did not differ between the groups. Operating time was longer in RISR (160.0 ± 45.7 vs. 205.0 ± 36.5 min, p = 0.035). There was no conversion in RISR, whereas in LISR, two patients (3.6%) converted to open surgery. Complete mesorectum was 61.8% and 83.3% for LISR and RISR (p = 0.046), respectively. Circumferential radial margin involvement was 10.9% and 8.3% in LISR and RISR (p = 0.365), respectively. Median follow-up was 82.8 (30-138) months for LISR and 83.6 (30-138) months for RISR. Three-, five-, and seven-year overall survival rates (OS) for LISR and RISR were: 88.6%, 80.4%, 73.4% and 90.4%, 86.3%, 76.9%, respectively. Three-, five-, and seven-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates for LISR and RISR were 80.5%, 75.2%, 70.4% and 84.4%, 81.4%, 79.8% (p = 0.328), respectively. Three-, five-, and seven-year local recurrence-free survival rates in LISR and RISR were: 96.1%, 92.6%, 88.4% and 96.7%, 94.2%, 90.4% (p = 0.573), respectively. Mean Wexner score for LISR (n = 32) and RISR (n = 40) was: 10.5 ± 4.7 and 9.8 ± 4.2 (p = 0.782), respectively. Colostomy-free survival in LISR and RISR was: 3 years 94.5%/95.2%, 5 years 89.1%/91.7%, and 7 years 83.6%/85.0%. RISR is associated with better mesorectal integrity, no conversion, and lower postoperative complication rate. RISR has longer operation time. Oncological and anorectal functional outcomes are similar in both groups.

Is robotic da Vinci Xi® superior to the da Vinci Si® for sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision? Outcomes in 150 mid-low rectal cancer patients.

The aim of this study was to determine the superiority between the robotic da Vinci Si® (Si group) and da Vinci Xi® (Xi group) generation in patients with mid-low rectal cancer. Between December 2011 and December 2017, 88 patients with mid-low rectal cancer were operated on using the Si robotic system, from January 2018 to May 2021, 62 more patients with mid-low rectal cancer were operated on using the Xi robotic system. Perioperative and postoperative short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate Cox-regression analysis were performed to determine factors affecting operating time. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was also performed to determine the learning curve of the primary surgeon. All patients underwent sphincter saving total mesorectal excision (TME). The overall operating time was significantly shorter in the Xi group (181.3 ± 31.8 min in Si group vs 123.6 ± 25.7 min in the Xi group, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in terms of conversion rates, mean hospital stays, complications and histopathologic data. CUSUM analysis show completion of learning curve in 44th case of Si group. Univariate and multivariate analysis demonstrated that the learning curve of the primary surgeon (p < 0.001) and the type of robotic system (Xi) are only two factors associated with operating time (OR, 95% CI p; 3.656, 0.665-9.339, p < 0.001). Our study found that the robotic da Vinci Xi systems provide significantly shorter operating time comparing with Si systems, when performing sphincter-preserving TME in mid-low rectal cancer patients. Surgical system (da Vinci Xi) and primary surgeon learning curve are two independent risk factors which associated shortened operating time. Postoperative complication rates and histopathologic outcomes are similar in both groups.

Watch and Wait Strategy for Rectal Cancer: How Long Should We Wait for a Clinical Complete Response?

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine how long to wait in locally advanced rectal tumor (LARC) patients who receive total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) and achieve a clinical complete response (cCR), and to identify the clinical parameters that affect the waiting period for the watch-and-wait strategy (W &W). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of patients who achieved cCR between February 2015 and June 2020 were examined retrospectively. The week in which patients with cCR at the end of TNT achieved clearance was determined by reanalyzing recorded endoscopy video images. In the assessment at the time of the initial diagnosis, tumor characteristics, such as digital rectal examination findings, MRI stage, location with respect to the puborectalis muscle, annularity, and tumor size, were recorded prospectively. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients were included in this study. According to the MRI-T stage, 14 cases were cT3a, 22 were cT3b, and 18 were cT3c-T4. Forty-four percent of the cases achieved cCR at 8-10 weeks, 19% at 12-16 weeks, 20% at 16-22 weeks, and 17% at 20-26 weeks. Patients with tumors that were early MRI-T stage (cT3a), negative clinical circumferential resection margin, mobile, small (≤4 cm), located above the puborectalis muscle and showed <180 degrees annularity achieved cCR significantly earlier than those with other tumors (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: In this study, cCR was achieved in less than half (44%) of the cases during the 8-10 week waiting period. In the W&W strategy, the initial assessment for cCR seems insufficient, and we may need to wait up to 26-30 weeks, especially in patients with advanced-stage tumors.

Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Parameters Affecting Functional Outcomes and Survival Rates.

INTRODUCTION: The development of new surgical techniques and devices, as well as the improvements in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy enabled intersphincteric resection (ISR), has reduced permanent colostomy usage. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term oncological and functional outcomes of patients who underwent partial ISR for rectal cancer located less than 5cm from the anal verge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A series of 106 consecutive patients with very low rectal cancer underwent curative partial ISR from January 2006 to September 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. One-hundred-three (97%) of 106 patients received neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence (LR) rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods. The Wexner incontinence score and Kirwan classification were used to evaluate patients' functional results. RESULTS: The median follow up was 60 months (range, 18-174). The estimated five-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 89% and 81.6%, respectively. Five-year local recurrence and distant metastasis rates were 6.6% and 10.4%, respectively. There was no in-hospital and 30-day mortality. The median Wexner score was 9 (range, 0-20) for 72 patients. Age (<65 years, p=0.027) and gender (male, p=0.019) had a positive effect on functional outcomes after surgery. One and five years colostomy-free survival rates were 96% and 89%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Intersphincteric resection techniques are feasible for patients with very low rectal cancer, providing good oncological and functional outcomes.

Acute Ischemic Gangrene of the Rectosigmoid Colon in a Patient With Rectal Cancer in the "Watch-and-Wait" Protocol.

Acute rectal ischemia is a rare entity because the rectum has abundant blood supply from the inferior mesenteric, internal iliac, internal pudendal, and marginal artery with rich collaterals. We present a case of an acute ischemic proctosigmoiditis with a history of rectal cancer who completely recovered after total neoadjuvant treatment and was in the "watch-and-wait" protocol. Urgent laparoscopic low anterior resection and protective ileostomy were performed. Causes of acute rectosigmoid ischemia include old age, diabetes, atherosclerosis, previous aortic surgery due to aneurysm, vasculitis, and radiotherapy. Ischemia may be present as only involving the mucosa, which can be managed conservatively, but full-thickness necrosis requires urgent surgical intervention. Endoscopic examination is the gold standard in initial diagnosis. Ischemic gangrene of the rectosigmoid colon is a rare condition and can be life-threatening unless an urgent surgical intervention is performed.

Sphincter-Saving Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision Provides Better Mesorectal Specimen and Good Oncological Local Control Compared with Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision in Male Patients with Mid-Low Rectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic rectal resection with total mesorectal excision is a technically challenging procedure, and there are limitations in conventional laparoscopy. A surgical robotic system may help to overcome some of the limitations. The aim of our study was to compare long-term oncological outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted as a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. One-hundred-three robotic and 84 laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excisions were performed by a single surgeon between January 2011 and January 2020. Patient characteristics, perioperative recovery, postoperative complications, pathology results, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The patients' characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Median operating time was longer in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (180 minutes versus 140 minutes, p=0.033). Macroscopic grading of the specimen in the robotic group was complete in 96 (93.20%), near complete in four (3.88%) and incomplete in three (2.91%) patients. In the laparoscopic group, grading was complete in 37 (44.04%), near complete in 40 (47.61%) and incomplete in seven (8.33%) patients (p=0.03). The median length of follow up was 48 (9-102) months in the robotic, and 75.6 (11-113) months in the laparoscopic group. Overall, five-year survival was 87% in the robotic and 85.3% in the laparoscopic groups. Local recurrence rates were 3.8% and 7.14%, respectively, in the robotic and laparoscopic groups (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Sphincter-saving robotic total mesorectal excision is a safe and feasible tool, which provides good mesorectal integrity and better local control in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer.

Robotic Sphincter-Saving Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer Treatment: A Single-Surgeon Experience in 103 Consecutive Male Patients.

BACKGROUND: A robotic surgical approach provides advantages compared to laparoscopy in male patients with mid- and low-lying rectal cancer located in the narrow pelvic space. The aim of this report is to present a single-surgeon experience with robotic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer in male patients. METHODS: A series of 103 consecutive male patients who underwent robotic rectal surgery between January 2012 and June 2019 were analyzed retrospectively in terms of demographics, histopathological data, and surgical and oncological outcomes. RESULTS: All of the patients underwent robotic sphincter-saving resection: 76 (73.8%) underwent low-anterior resection and 27 (26.2%) underwent intersphincteric resection with colo-anal anastomosis. There was no conversion. The median distal resection margin of the operative specimen was 3 (0.2-7) cm. The circumferential resection margin was positive in 3 (2.91%) cases. The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 22 (18-42). The median hospital stay was 4 (3-16) days. Whereas the overall morbidity was 13%, there was no in-hospital or 30-day mortality. The median length of follow-up was 48 (9-80) months. The 5-year overall survival rate was 87%. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 84%. Local and distant recurrence rates were 3.8% and 5.82%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In male patients with rectal cancer, a robotic approach is a promising alternative and is expected to overcome the low penetration rate of laparoscopy in this field.

The impact of total neo-adjuvant treatment on nonoperative management in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer: The evaluation of 66 cases.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to assess if adherence to a total-neoadjuvant-treatment (TNT) protocol followed by observation(watch-and-wait) led to the successful nonoperative-management of low-rectal-cancer. METHODS: In this study, patients with primary, resectable-T3-T4, N0-N1 distal-rectal-adenocarcinoma underwent-chemoradiotherapy + consolidation-chemotherapy (TNT). During the-TNT-period, endoscopy, MRI, and FDG-PET/CT were performed. We allocated patients with complete-clinical-tumor-regression, who underwent endoscopy every two months, MRI every-four-months, and PET/CT every-six-months-after-treatment, to the observation-group(OG). All other patients were referred for surgery. The OG was followed-up. The primary endpoint was local tumor-ecurrence after allocation to the OG. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2018, we enrolled 66-patients. Of 60-patients who were eligible to participate, 39 had complete-clinical-response(cCR) and were allocated to the OG, six underwent local-excision (LE), and 15 underwent total-mesorectal-excision (TME). The median follow-up duration was 22 (9-42) months. The local-recurrence-rate in the OG was 15.3%, and the LE and TME rates were 16.6% and 0%, respectively. All recurrence cases were salvaged through either LE or TME. The-distant-metastasis rate was 5.1%, 16.6%, and 12.5% in the OG, LE, and TME groups, respectively. The endoscopic negative-predictive-value(NPV) was 50%, and the positive-predictive-value(PPV) was 76.9% in the surgery group (LE + TME). MRI; NPV-50%, PPV-76.9%. PET/CT; NPV-100%, PPV-93.3%. Six patients(28.57%) from surgery group achieved complete pathological response (cPR). CONCLUSION: Our results indicated a high proportion of selected-rectal-cancers with-cCR after neo-adjuvant-therapy could potentially be managed non-operatively, and major surgery may be avoided.

The long-term oncological outcomes of the 140 robotic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a single surgeon experience.

Robotic surgery became more popularly in the colorectal surgical field. The aim of the study was to evaluate of the oncological outcomes which patients who underwent the robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. A series of 140 consecutive patients who underwent robotic rectal surgery between January 2012 and June 2019 was analyzed retrospectively in terms of demographics, pathological data, and surgical and oncological outcomes. There were 104 (74.28%) male and 36 (25.71%) female patients. The tumor was located in the lower rectum in 84 (60%) cases, in the mid rectum in 38 (27.14%) cases, and in the upper rectum in 18 (12.85%) cases. Ninety-eight (70%) of the patients has received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. All the patients underwent robotic sphincter-preserving surgery, 101 (72.14%) patients low-anterior resection, and 39 (27.85%) patients underwent intersphincteric resection with colo-anal anastomosis. There were no conversions. The circumferential resection margin was positive in five (3.57%) patients. The median distal resection margin of the operative specimen was 3.2 (0.2-7) cm. The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 22 (16-42). TME quality in the in our study was rated as complete in 88.57% (n124) of patients, nearly complete in 7.14% (n10) of patients; and 4.28% (n6) of incomplete. The median hospital stay was 3.5 (3-12) days. In-hospital and 1-month mortality was zero. The median length of follow-up was 40 (2-80) months. The 5-year overall survival rate was 92.78%. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 90%. Locally recurrence and distance recurrence rate was 3.57% (n5/140) and 2.85% (n4/140), respectively. Robotic rectal cancer surgery has a good oncological outcomes and feasible tool in the field of the rectal surgery, but required a steep learning curve.

Robotic versus laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision for mid or low rectal cancer in male patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: comparison of long-term outcomes.

The aim of our study was to compare long term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision (TME) in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer (RC) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT). The study was conducted as a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database, and we analyzed 14 robotic and 65 laparoscopic sphincter-saving TME (R-TME and L-TME, respectively) performed by one surgeon between 2005 and 2013. Patient characteristics, perioperative recovery, postoperative complications and pathology results were compared between the two groups. The patient characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Median operating time was longer in the R-TME than in the L-TME group (182 min versus 140 min). Only two conversions occurred in the L-TME group. No difference was found between groups regarding perioperative recovery and postoperative complication rates. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the RTME than in the L-TME group (32 versus 23, p = 0.008). The median circumferential margin (CRM) was 10 mm in the R-TME group, 6.5 mm in the L-TME group (p = 0.047. The median distal resection margin (DRM) was 27.5 mm in the R-TME, 15 mm in the L-TME group (p = 0.014). Macroscopic grading of the specimen in the R-TME group was complete in all patients. In the L-TME group, grading was complete in 52 (80%) and incomplete in 13 (20%) cases (p = 0.109). Median follow-up 87 months (1-152). Whereas local recurrence was seen in eight cases (10.12%) and distant metastasis was seen in 18 cases (22.7%). Overall, 5 years survival was 83.3% in R-TME, 75% in L-TME groups. R-TME is a safe and feasible procedure that facilitates performing of TME in male patients with mid to low RC after NCRT.

Fall of another myth for colon cancer: Duration of symptoms does not differ between right- or left-sided colon cancers.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Patients with colorectal cancer continue to present with relatively advanced tumors that are associated with poor oncological outcomes. The aim of the present study was to assess the association between localization, symptom duration, and tumor stage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted on patients newly diagnosed with a histologically proven colorectal adenocarcinoma. Standardized questionnaire-interviews were performed. Data were collected on principal presenting symptoms, duration of symptoms (time to first presentation to a doctor and time to diagnosis) and treatment, diagnostic procedures, tumor site, and stage of the tumor (tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM)). RESULTS: A total of 1795 patients with colorectal cancer were interviewed (mean age: 60.76±13.50 years, male patients: 1057, patients aged >50 years: 1444, colon/rectal cancer: 899/850, right side/left side: 383/1250, stage 0-1-2/stage 3-4: 746/923). No statistically significant correlations were found between duration of symptoms and either tumor site or stage. Principal presenting symptoms were significantly associated with left colon cancer. Patients who had "anemia," "change in bowel habits," "anal pruritus or discharge," "weight loss," and "tumor in right colon" had a significantly longer symptom time. CONCLUSION: Symptom duration is not associated with localization, nor is the tumor stage. Diagnosis of colorectal cancer at an earlier stage may be best achieved by screening of the population.

Standardized Laparoscopic Sphincter-preserving Total Mesorectal Excision For Rectal Cancer: Median of 10 Years' Long-term Oncologic Outcome in 217 Unselected Consecutive Patients.

This study was designed to evaluate the impact of a standardized laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) on the long-term oncologic outcome. Unselected consecutive patients with rectal cancer underwent a standardized laparoscopic TME with medial to lateral approach encompassing 9 sequential steps. From 2005 to June 2012, laparoscopic sphincter-preserving TME was attempted in 217 patients. Mean follow-up of all patients was a median of 91 months (range, 3 to 164 mo). The local recurrence rate was 6.5%, and the distant recurrence rate was 19.8%. The 10-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 76.4% and overall survival (OS) was 67.1%. In the converted group, DFS and OS were 50% and 46.7%, respectively. In the laparoscopic group, DFS and OS were 78.3% and 68.5%, respectively. A standardized laparoscopic sphincter-preserving TME resulted in a favorable long-term oncologic outcome in unselected patients with rectal cancer. Conversion to open surgery has impaired OS and DFS.

Thoracoscopic vagal-sparing esophagectomy and colonic interposition for caustic stricture.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is an increasing trend in surgery. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy is applicable and an alternative procedure to conventional esophagectomy in patients especially with end-stage benign diseases like caustic stricture. A 33-year-old female patient was admitted to the department of general surgery with dysphagia. The patient was suffering from caustic stricture due to ingestion of hydrochloric acid. A totally thoracoscopic and laparoscopic vagal-sparing esophagectomy and colonic interposition was performed. As a more physiologic alternative, vagal-sparing esophagectomy is the ideal operation for these patients.

Neoadjuvant hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy plus concomitant 5-fluorouracil infusion in locally advanced rectal cancer: A phase II study.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of neoadjuvant hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (HART) and concurrent chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced infraperitoneal rectal cancer. METHODS: A total of 30 patients with histopathologically confirmed T2-3/N0+ infraperitoneal adenocarcinoma of rectum cancer patients received preoperative 42 Gy/1.5 Gy/18 days/bid radiotherapy and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (325 mg/m2). All patients were operated 4-8 wk after neoadjuvant concomitant therapy. RESULTS: In the early phase of treatment, 6 patients had grade III-IV gastrointestinal toxicity, 2 patients had grade III-IV hematologic toxicity, and 1 patient had grade V toxicity due to postoperative sepsis during chemotherapy. Only 1 patient had radiotherapy-related late side effects, i.e., grade IV tenesmus. Complete pathological response was achieved in 6 patients (21%), while near-complete pathological response was obtained in 9 (31%). After a median follow-up period of 60 mo, the local tumor control rate was 96.6%. In 13 patients, distant metastasis occurred. Disease-free survival rates at 2 and 5 years were 63.3% and 53%, and corresponding overall survival rates were 70% and 53.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although it has excellent local control and complete pathological response rates, neoadjuvant HART concurrent chemotherapy appears to not be a feasible treatment regimen in locally advanced rectal cancer, having high perioperative complication and intolerable side effects. Effects of reduced 5-fluorouracil dose or omission of chemotherapy with the aim of reducing toxicity may be examined in further studies.