Early versus late reversal of diverting loop ileostomy in rectal cancer surgery: a multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Diverting loop ileostomy has become routine in low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. The optimal time for stoma reversal is controversial. The aim of the present study was to compare the results after planned early (within 8-12 days) versus late (> 3 months) stoma reversal. The primary outcomes were morbidity and mortality, as measured by the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) within 30 days after stoma reversal, and the secondary outcomes were morbidity and mortality within 90 days after LAR. This was a multicentre trial including all patients scheduled for anterior low resection for rectal cancer with curative intent. Inclusion period was from April 2011 to December 2018. All patients were randomized 1:1 prior to surgery. Among 257 consecutive and eligible patients, a total of 214 patients were randomized: 107 patients to early stoma reversal and 107 to late reversal. A total of 68 patients were excluded for various reasons, and 146 patients completed the study, with 77 in the early reversal group and 69 in the late reversal group. The patients were asked to complete the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index before surgery (baseline) and at 6 and 12 months after LAR. Ostomy-related complications were evaluated by dedicated ostomy staff using the validated DET score. ClinicalTrials Identifier: NCT01865071. Fifty-three patients (69%) in the early reversal group and 60 patients (87%) in the late reversal group received the intended treatment. There were no significant differences in CCI within 90 days after index surgery with the LAR and within 30 days after stoma reversal between the two groups. There were no differences in patient-reported quality of life but significantly more stoma-related complications in the late reversal group. A total of 5 patients experienced anastomotic leakage (AL) after stoma reversal, 4 in the early reversal group and one in the late reversal group. Early and late stoma reversal showed similar outcomes in terms of overall complications and quality of life. The risk of developing anastomotic leakage after early ostomy reversal is a concern.

A nationwide comparison of short-term outcomes after transanal, open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted total mesorectal excision.

AIM: Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery has several limitations. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) can potentially overcome these limitations. The aim of this study was to compare the rates of non-radical surgery and anastomotic leakage after TaTME, open TME (OpTME), laparoscopic TME (LaTME) and robotic TME (RoTME) procedures in a nationwide cohort. METHODS: We extracted the demographic, perioperative and pathological data of patients who underwent a curative OpTME, LaTME, RoTME or TaTME procedure between January 2014 and December 2018 from the national database of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). We conducted multiple group-comparisons, uni- and multivariate analyses to determine the factors associated with positive resection margin (+RM) and anastomotic leakage. RESULTS: We included 2393 patients (OpTME = 205, LaTME = 1163, RoTME = 713 and TaTME = 312). The rate of +RM was 5.7% after TaTME. The lowest rate of +RM was achieved after RoTME (8.2%, 4.7%, 2.52%, and 5.7%, after OpTME, LaTME, RoTME and TaTME respectively, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, having a T4 tumour and intraoperative bowel perforation were associated with the risk of +RM (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). The factors associated with anastomotic leakage in multivariate analysis were male gender, high BMI and intraoperative bowel perforation (p < 0.001, p = 0.049, p = 0.002, respectively). TaTME was associated with the highest rate of sphincter-saving procedures (79.8%, p < 0.001), the lowest rate of bowel perforation (2.9%, p = 0.028) and the lowest rate of conversion to open surgery (1.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a nationwide audit of TME approaches, the rate of +RM was lowest after RoTME. No differences were found between the four approaches regarding the risk of anastomotic leakage. TaTME offered advantages related to sphincter-saving, perforation and conversion.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: the Slagelse experience 2013-2019.

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) 5 years from implementation at a large-volume colorectal unit, including local recurrence, distant metastasis, and survival. BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a relatively new procedure for mid- and low-rectal cancer, with well-documented safety and feasibility. However, data on long-term results are limited. METHODS: This study was based on a prospective data collection via a maintained database in a large colorectal unit. The database included patients who underwent TaTME from December 2013 through July 2019. We have updated the database through a review of patient charts, including radiology and pathology reports. Data collection included operative details, intraoperative findings, postoperative complications, pathologic results, and oncologic results. RESULTS: During the study period, two hundred patients underwent TaTME in the study period (men = 147). The mean BMI was 26.7%, and the mean tumor height from the anal verge was 7.86 cm. Neoadjuvant treatment was given to 22% of patients. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 9.3% of patients, and the overall rate of postoperative complications was 24.5%. The TME specimen was incomplete in 11% of patients, and the CRM was positive in 5.5% of patients. Local recurrence (LR) occurred in seven patients with a follow-up of at least 2 years (4.7%). Distant metastasis (DM) occurred in 12% of patients. The overall survival was 90% and disease-free survival was 81%. The operating time was reduced in the later period of our experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that TaTME is feasible, safe, and had acceptable short-term outcomes and an acceptable rate of LR. The study included, however, one group that was non-randomized, and the follow-up was not long enough for most patients. Studies with longer follow-up data are awaited.

Quality of Life After Surgery for Rectal Cancer: a Comparison of Functional Outcomes After Transanal and Laparoscopic Approaches.

BACKGROUND: The aim in rectal cancer surgery is to cure with minimal impact on the quality of life. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) seems to be a safe and feasible alternative to laparoscopic TME (LaTME). However, limited data are available on the functional outcomes after TaTME. We aimed to study the quality of life (QoL), through questionnaires, comparing different functional outcomes after TaTME and LaTME. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent TME between 2010 and 2017 at Slagelse Hospital, Denmark, were included based on certain criteria. Patients were divided according to the surgical technique (TaTME vs LaTME). The study was based on telephone interviews using the questionnaires: EORTC-QLQ C30, EORTC-QLQ C29, Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) for male patients. Patients in this study had a follow-up time of at least 8 months. RESULTS: Overall, global health status was similar between the groups (p = 0.625). Anorectal symptoms were significantly in disfavor of TaTME including buttock pain (p = 0.011), diarrhea (p = 0.009), clustering of stools (p = 0.017), and urgency (p = 0.032), yet total LARS score was comparable (p = 0.054). We found comparable sexual results and an overall higher satisfaction with urinary status in TaTME group (p = 0.010), yet no difference in IPSS symptoms (p = 0.236). CONCLUSIONS: Anorectal dysfunction may occur after total mesorectal excision (TME) regardless of surgical technique, frequently more in after TaTME. The LARS symptoms and the overall quality of life status were however comparable. TaTME had a positive impact on the reported QoL, related to urinary symptoms.

[Rectal foreign bodies].

Rectal foreign bodies are not uncommon as previously thought and should be recognised as a potentially serious condition. The diagnosis is often delayed due to patient embarrassment and reluctance to seek medical help, which may increase the likelihood of complications. Clinicians should be aware of this condition, as it may be a manifestation of underlying psychiatric conditions, drug trafficking or due to sexual assault.

Effect of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: comparison of short-term outcomes with laparoscopic and open surgeries.

OBJECTIVE: To compare short-term results of total mesorectal excision (TME) for mid and low rectal cancer, achieved by transanal (TaTME), laparoscopic (LaTME), and open (OpTME) approaches. BACKGROUND: The impact of TaTME on the surgical treatment of mid and low rectal cancer has yet to be clarified. METHODS: This is a case-matched study, based on data from a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent TaTME from May 2015 to March 2017, and a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent LaTME and OpTME in the previous period. Each patient in the TaTME group was matched to one LaTME and one OpTME based on sex, BMI, tumor status, and the height of the tumor from the anal verge. Primary end-points were rates of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM), distal resection margin, and the macroscopic quality of the surgical specimen. Composite of these outcomes was compared as an indication for successful surgery. Secondary end-points included intraoperative data and postoperative course and complications. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were included (TaTME = 100, LaTME = 100, OpTME = 100). The three groups were comparable in the baseline characteristics. TaTME resulted in lower rates of incomplete TME specimens than LaTME, but not OpTME (P = 0.016, P = 0.750, respectively). The rates of CRM involvement, mean CRM distance, and the percentages of successful surgery were comparable among the three groups (P = 0.368). The conversion to open surgery occurred only in the LaTME group. TaTME resulted in shorter operation time and less blood loss than the other two groups (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001). Hospital stay was shorter in the TaTME group (P = 0.002); complication rate and mortality were comparable among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: TaTME had, in our hands, some obvious benefits over other approaches. The pathological results were not significantly superior to LaTME and OpTME. The procedure is however feasible and safe. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term oncological and quality of life outcomes.

[Surgical treatment of mid- and low rectal cancer].

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is standard treatment of mid- and low rectal cancer and has evolved with minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscopic TME has proven to be technically challenging, and recent randomized controlled studies fail to prove it oncologically superior to open TME. Robotic-assisted TME may overcome the technical difficulties and shows comparable oncological results, yet it is associated with significant additional costs. Transanal TME is a promising method which seems to overcome the technical and financial issues of the other techniques, without compromising the short-term oncological results.

[Synchronous sigmoideum- and caecum volvulus]. / Samtidig volvulus i sigmoideum og caecum.

This case presents a synchronous sigmoid- and caecum volvulus in a 69-year old man with Parkinson's disease, hypertension and previous history of colonic volvulus. On admission the patient had abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and constipation. The CT scan showed a sigmoid volvulus with a dilated caecum. The synchronous sigmoideum- and caecum volvulus was diagnosed intraoperatively. Total colectomy and ileostomy was performed.

Transanal total mesorectal excision--a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard surgical treatment for mid and low rectal cancer. The procedure is performed by open, laparoscopic or robotic approaches. Transanal TME (TaTME) is a new procedure that potentially solves some difficulties in the pelvic part of the dissection. We aimed to evaluate the literature on TaTME. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of the literature in the PubMed and Embase databases. Both authors assessed the studies. All publications on TaTME were included with the exception of review articles. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies (336 patients) were included. Only low-quality evidence is available, and the literature consists of case reports and case series. Studies represent the initial experience of surgeons/centres. No precise indication for TaTME is yet specified other than the presence of mid and low rectal tumours, although the potential advantages seem to be related to a bulky mesorectum in the male pelvis. The preliminary results are encouraging and the most serious complication is urethral injury. The oncological results are acceptable, although the follow-up is short. CONCLUSION: TaTME is a feasible approach for mid and low rectal cancers. Long-term follow-up data are awaited regarding functional results, local recurrence and survival, and to facilitate comparison with standard laparoscopic or robotic rectal resections.

Management of anal fistula by ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract - a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) is a sphincter-preserving procedure for treatment of anal fistulas described in 2007 by Rojanasakul et al. Several studies have since then assessed the procedure with varied results. This review assesses the relevant literature on this topic. METHODS: The primary endpoints were healing rates, length of follow-up, time to recurrence and post-operative complications. The secondary endpoints were details of the operative technique. A search was made in the PubMed and Embase electronic databases. Reports where LIFT was combined with other fistula treatment techniques were excluded. Only reports in English were included. Most reports were case studies with no control groups. One report could not be retrieved. RESULTS: A total of 19 original reports were assessed. Details concerning preoperative assessment, antibiotic usage and tract ligation methods varied considerably. Primary healing was achieved in 432 out of 612 (70.6%) patients, and no sphincter function impairments were reported. However, ten out of 19 reports did not include an objective assessment of pre- and post-operative continence. No apparent correlation between length of follow-up and healing rate was found, and the longest time to recurrence was eight months. CONCLUSION: LIFT is a safe procedure that provided a mean healing of 70.6% with no reports of impairment of the sphincter function. Future reports should include a follow-up length of a minimum of eight months. It remains uncertain whether the outcome may be improved by prior seton suture insertion.