Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 39
Filter
1.
Ann Surg Open ; 4(1): e263, 2023 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37600875

ABSTRACT

Background: Total mesorectal excision has been the gold standard for the operative management of rectal cancer. The most frequently used minimally invasive techniques for surgical resection of rectal cancer are laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and transanal total mesorectal excision. As studies comparing the costs of the techniques are lacking, this study aims to provide a cost overview. Method: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent total mesorectal resection between 2015 and 2017 at 11 dedicated centers, which completed the learning curve of the specific technique. The primary outcome was total in-hospital costs of each technique up to 30 days after surgery including all major surgical cost drivers, while taking into account different team approaches in the transanal approach. Secondary outcomes were hospitalization and complication rates. Statistical analysis was performed using multivariable linear regression analysis. Results: In total, 949 patients were included, consisting of 446 laparoscopic (47%), 306 (32%) robot-assisted, and 197 (21%) transanal total mesorectal excisions. Total costs were significantly higher for transanal and robot-assisted techniques compared to the laparoscopic technique, with median (interquartile range) for laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and transanal at €10,556 (8,642;13,829), €12,918 (11,196;16,223), and € 13,052 (11,330;16,358), respectively (P < 0.001). Also, the one-team transanal approach showed significant higher operation time and higher costs compared to the two-team approach. Length of stay and postoperative complications did not differ between groups. Conclusion: Transanal and robot-assisted approaches show higher costs during 30-day follow-up compared to laparoscopy with comparable short-term clinical outcomes. Two-team transanal approach is associated with lower total costs compared to the transanal one-team approach.

3.
BMC Gastroenterol ; 23(1): 214, 2023 Jun 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37337197

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The sole presence of deep submucosal invasion is shown to be associated with a limited risk of lymph node metastasis. This justifies a local excision of suspected deep submucosal invasive colon carcinomas (T1 CCs) as a first step treatment strategy. Recently Colonoscopy-Assisted Laparoscopic Wedge Resection (CAL-WR) has been shown to be able to resect pT1 CRCs with a high R0 resection rate, but the long term outcomes are lacking. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety, effectiveness and long-term oncological outcomes of CAL-WR as primary treatment for patients with suspected superficial and also deeply-invasive T1 CCs. METHODS: In this prospective multicenter clinical trial, patients with a macroscopic and/or histologically suspected T1 CCs will receive CAL-WR as primary treatment in order to prevent unnecessary major surgery for low-risk T1 CCs. To make a CAL-WR technically feasible, the tumor may not include > 50% of the circumference and has to be localized at least 25 cm proximal from the anus. Also, there should be sufficient distance to the ileocecal valve to place a linear stapler. Before inclusion, all eligible patients will be assessed by an expert panel to confirm suspicion of T1 CC, estimate invasion depth and subsequent advise which local resection techniques are possible for removal of the lesion. The primary outcome of this study is the proportion of patients with pT1 CC that is curatively treated with CAL-WR only and in whom thus organ-preservation could be achieved. Secondary outcomes are 1) CAL-WR's technical success and R0 resection rate for T1 CC, 2) procedure-related morbidity and mortality, 3) 5-year overall and disease free survival, 4) 3-year metastasis free survival, 5) procedure-related costs and 6) impact on quality of life. A sample size of 143 patients was calculated. DISCUSSION: CAL-WR is a full-thickness local resection technique that could also be effective in removing pT1 colon cancer. With the lack of current endoscopic local resection techniques for > 15 mm pT1 CCs with deep submucosal invasion, CAL-WR could fill the gap between endoscopy and major oncologic surgery. The present study is the first to provide insight in the long-term oncological outcomes of CAL-WR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CCMO register (ToetsingOnline), NL81497.075.22, protocol version 2.3 (October 2022).


Subject(s)
Carcinoma , Colonic Neoplasms , Colorectal Neoplasms , Humans , Quality of Life , Prospective Studies , Colonic Neoplasms/surgery , Colonoscopy , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Treatment Outcome , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Multicenter Studies as Topic
4.
BJS Open ; 7(2)2023 03 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37011059

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The introduction of the sigmoid take-off definition might lead to a shift from rectal cancers to sigmoid cancers. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the clinical impact of the new definition. METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they underwent an elective, curative total mesorectal excision for non-metastasized rectal cancer between January 2015 and December 2017, were registered in the Dutch Colorectal Audit as having a rectal cancer according to the previous definition, and if MRI was available. All selected rectal cancer cases were reassessed using the sigmoid take-off definition. The primary outcome was the number of patients reassessed with a sigmoid cancer. Secondary outcomes included differences between the newly defined rectal and sigmoid cancer patients in treatment, perioperative results, and 3-year oncological outcomes (overall and disease-free survivals, and local and systemic recurrences). RESULTS: Out of 1742 eligible patients, 1302 rectal cancer patients were included. Of these, 170 (13.1 per cent) were reclassified as having sigmoid cancer. Among these, 93 patients (54.7 per cent) would have been offered another adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment according to the Dutch guideline. Patients with a sigmoid tumour after reassessment had a lower 30-day postoperative complication rate (33.5 versus 48.3 per cent, P < 0.001), lower reintervention rate (8.8 versus 17.4 per cent, P < 0.007), and a shorter length of stay (a median of 5 days (i.q.r. 4-7) versus a median of 6 days (i.q.r. 5-9), P < 0.001). Three-year oncological outcomes were comparable. CONCLUSION: Using the anatomical landmark of the sigmoid take-off, 13.1 per cent of the previously classified patients with rectal cancer had sigmoid cancer, and 54.7 per cent of these patients would have been treated differently with regard to neoadjuvant therapy or adjuvant therapy.


Subject(s)
Rectal Neoplasms , Sigmoid Neoplasms , Humans , Rectum/diagnostic imaging , Rectum/surgery , Rectum/pathology , Sigmoid Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Rectal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging
5.
Lancet Haematol ; 10(4): e250-e260, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36863386

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A third of patients with colorectal cancer who are eligible for surgery in high-income countries have concomitant anaemia associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to compare the efficacy of preoperative intravenous and oral iron supplementation in patients with colorectal cancer and iron deficiency anaemia. METHODS: In the FIT multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial, adult patients (aged 18 years or older) with M0 stage colorectal cancer scheduled for elective curative resection and iron deficiency anaemia (defined as haemoglobin level of less than 7·5 mmol/L (12 g/dL) for women and less than 8 mmol/L (13 g/dL) for men, and a transferrin saturation of less than 20%) were randomly assigned to either 1-2 g of ferric carboxymaltose intravenously or three tablets of 200 mg of oral ferrous fumarate daily. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with normalised haemoglobin levels before surgery (≥12 g/dL for women and ≥13 g/dL for men). An intention-to-treat analysis was done for the primary analysis. Safety was analysed in all patients who received treatment. The trial was registered at ClincalTrials.gov, NCT02243735, and has completed recruitment. FINDINGS: Between Oct 31, 2014, and Feb 23, 2021, 202 patients were included and assigned to intravenous (n=96) or oral (n=106) iron treatment. Treatment began a median of 14 days (IQR 11-22) before surgery for intravenous iron and 19 days (IQR 13-27) for oral iron. Normalisation of haemoglobin at day of admission was reached in 14 (17%) of 84 patients treated intravenously and 15 (16%) of 97 patients treated orally (relative risk [RR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·55-2·10]; p=0·83), but the proportion of patients with normalised haemoglobin significantly increased for the intravenous treatment group at later timepoints (49 [60%] of 82 vs 18 [21%] of 88 at 30 days; RR 2·92 [95% CI 1·87-4·58]; p<0·0001). The most prevalent treatment-related adverse event was discoloured faeces (grade 1) after oral iron treatment (14 [13%] of 105), and no treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths were observed in either group. No differences in other safety outcomes were seen, and the most common serious adverse events were anastomotic leakage (11 [5%] of 202), aspiration pneumonia (5 [2%] of 202), and intra-abdominal abscess (5 [2%] 202). INTERPRETATION: Normalisation of haemoglobin before surgery was infrequent with both treatment regimens, but significantly improved at all other timepoints following intravenous iron treatment. Restoration of iron stores was feasible only with intravenous iron. In selected patients, surgery might be delayed to augment the effect of intravenous iron on haemoglobin normalisation. FUNDING: Vifor Pharma.


Subject(s)
Anemia, Iron-Deficiency , Colorectal Neoplasms , Adult , Male , Humans , Female , Iron , Anemia, Iron-Deficiency/etiology , Anemia, Iron-Deficiency/complications , Hemoglobins , Dietary Supplements , Colorectal Neoplasms/complications , Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery
6.
Surg Endosc ; 37(3): 1916-1932, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36258000

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The role of diverting ileostomy in total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis is debated. The aim of this study is to gain insight in the clinical consequences of a diverting ileostomy, with respect to stoma rate at one year and stoma-related morbidity. METHODS: Patients undergoing TME with primary anastomosis for rectal cancer between 2015 and 2017 in eleven participating hospitals were included. Retrospectively, two groups were compared: patients with or without diverting ileostomy construction during primary surgery. Primary endpoint was stoma rate at one year. Secondary endpoints were severity and rate of anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate within thirty days and stoma (reversal) related morbidity. RESULTS: In 353 out of 595 patients (59.3%) a diverting ileostomy was constructed during primary surgery. Stoma rate at one year was 9.9% in the non-ileostomy group and 18.7% in the ileostomy group (p = 0.003). After correction for confounders, multivariate analysis showed that the construction of a diverting ileostomy during primary surgery was an independent risk factor for stoma at one year (OR 2.563 (95%CI 1.424-4.611), p = 0.002). Anastomotic leakage rate was 17.8% in the non-ileostomy group and 17.2% in the ileostomy group (p = 0.913). Overall 30-days morbidity rate was 37.6% in the non-ileostomy group and 56.1% in the ileostomy group (p < 0.001). Stoma reversal related morbidity rate was 17.9%. CONCLUSIONS: The stoma rate at one year was higher in patients with ileostomy construction during primary surgery. The incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage were not reduced by construction of an ileostomy. The morbidity related to the presence and reversal of a diverting ileostomy was substantial.


Subject(s)
Anastomotic Leak , Rectal Neoplasms , Humans , Anastomotic Leak/epidemiology , Anastomotic Leak/etiology , Anastomotic Leak/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Rectal Neoplasms/complications , Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects , Anastomosis, Surgical/methods , Ileostomy/methods , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/surgery
7.
Eur J Surg Oncol ; 49(4): 730-737, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36460530

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Oncological outcome might be influenced by the type of resection in total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer. The aim was to see if non-restorative LAR would have worse oncological outcome. A comparison was made between non-restorative low anterior resection (NRLAR), restorative low anterior resection (RLAR) and abdominoperineal resection (APR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort included data from patients undergoing TME for rectal cancer between 2015 and 2017 in eleven Dutch hospitals. A comparison was made for each different type of procedure (APR, NRLAR or RLAR). Primary outcome was 3-year overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 3-year local recurrence (LR) rate. RESULTS: Of 998 patients 363 underwent APR, 132 NRLAR and 503 RLAR. Three-year OS was worse after NRLAR (78.2%) compared to APR (86.3%) and RLAR (92.2%, p < 0.001). This was confirmed in a multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR 1.85 (1.07, 3.19), p = 0.03). The 3-year DFS was also worse after NRLAR (60.3%), compared to APR (70.5%) and RLAR (80.1%, p < 0.001), HR 2.05 (1.42, 2.97), p < 0.001. The LR rate was 14.6% after NRLAR, 5.2% after APR and 4.8% after RLAR (p = 0.005), HR 3.22 (1.61, 6.47), p < 0.001. CONCLUSION: NRLAR might be associated with worse 3-year OS, DFS and LR rate compared to RLAR and APR.


Subject(s)
Digestive System Surgical Procedures , Proctectomy , Rectal Neoplasms , Humans , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective Studies , Digestive System Surgical Procedures/methods , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery
8.
Ann Surg ; 275(5): 933-939, 2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35185125

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified CAL-WR. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The use of segmental colectomy in patients with endoscopically unresectable colonic lesions results in significant morbidity and mortality. CAL-WR is an alternative procedure that may reduce morbidity. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study was performed in 13 Dutch hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were (1) colonic lesions inaccessible using current endoscopic resection techniques (judged by an expert panel), (2) non-lifting residual/recurrent adenomatous tissue after previous polypectomy or (3) an undetermined resection margin after endoscopic removal of a low-risk pathological T1 (pT1) colon carcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, technical success rate and radicality were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 118 patients included (56% male, mean age 66 years, standard deviation ± 8 years), 66 (56%) had complex lesions unsuitable for endoscopic removal, 34 (29%) had non-lifting residual/recurrent adenoma after previous polypectomy and 18 (15%) had uncertain resection margins after polypectomy of a pT1 colon carcinoma. CAL-WR was technically successful in 93% and R0 resection was achieved in 91% of patients. Minor complications (Clavien-Dindo i-ii) were noted in 7 patients (6%) and an additional oncologic segmental resection was performed in 12 cases (11%). Residual tissue at the scar was observed in 5% of patients during endoscopic follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CAL-WR is an effective, organ-preserving approach that results in minor complications and circumvents the need for major surgery. CAL-WR, therefore, deserves consideration when endoscopic excision of circumscribed lesions is impossible or incomplete.


Subject(s)
Adenoma , Carcinoma , Colonic Neoplasms , Colonic Polyps , Laparoscopy , Aged , Carcinoma/surgery , Colonic Neoplasms/pathology , Colonic Neoplasms/surgery , Colonic Polyps/pathology , Colonic Polyps/surgery , Colonoscopy/methods , Female , Humans , Laparoscopy/methods , Male , Margins of Excision , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies
10.
Colorectal Dis ; 23(8): 2020-2029, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33969621

ABSTRACT

AIM: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has been suggested as a potential solution for the resection of challenging mid and low rectal cancer. This relatively complex procedure has been implemented in many centres over the last years, despite the absence of long-term safety data. Recently, concern has arisen because of an increase in local recurrence in the implementation phase. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between accumulated experience and local recurrences. METHOD: An independent clinical researcher performed an external audit of consecutive series of all TaTME procedures in six centres in the Netherlands. Kaplan-Meier estimated local recurrence rates were calculated and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis performed to assess risk factors for local recurrence. Primary outcome was the local recurrence rate in the initial implementation (cases 1-10), continued adoption (cases 11-40) and prolonged experience (case 41 onward). RESULTS: Six hundred and twenty-four consecutive patients underwent TaTME for rectal cancer with a median follow-up of 27 months (range 1-82 months). The estimated 2- and 3-year local recurrence rates were 4.6% and 6.6%, respectively. Cox proportional hazards regression revealed procedural experience to be an independent factor in multivariate analysis next to advanced stage (ycMRF+, pT3-4, pN+) and pelvic sepsis. Corrected analysis projected the 3-year local recurrence rates to be 9.7%, 3.3% and 3.5% for the implementation, continued adoption and prolonged experience cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSION: This multicentre study shows a high local recurrence rate (12.5%) after implementation of TaTME which lowers to an acceptable rate (3.4%) when experience increases. Therefore, intensified proctoring and further precautions must be implemented to reduce the unacceptably high risk of local recurrence at units starting this technique.


Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Rectal Neoplasms , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery , Humans , Learning Curve , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Rectum/surgery , Treatment Outcome
11.
Dis Colon Rectum ; 64(12): 1488-1500, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33990499

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transanal and robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision are techniques that can potentially overcome challenges encountered with a pure laparoscopic approach in patients with rectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the proportion and predictive factors of restorative procedures and subsequent short-term outcomes of 3 minimally invasive techniques to treat low rectal cancer. DESIGN: This is a nationwide observational comparative registry study. SETTINGS: Patients with rectal cancer were selected from the mandatory Dutch ColoRectal Audit. PATIENTS: Patients with low rectal cancer (≤5 cm) who underwent curative minimally invasive total mesorectal excision between 2015 and 2018 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the proportion of restorative procedure, positive circumferential resection margin, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 3466 patients were included for analysis, of which 33% underwent a restorative procedure. Resections were performed laparoscopically in 2845 patients, transanally in 448 patients, and were robot-assisted in 173 patients, with a proportion of restorative procedures of 28%, 66%, and 40%. The transanal approach was independently associated with a restorative procedure (OR, 4.11; 95% CI, 3.21-5.26; p < 0.001). Independent risk factors for a nonrestorative procedure, irrespective of the surgical technique, were age >75 years, ASA physical status ≥3, BMI >30, history of abdominal surgery, clinical T4-stage, mesorectal fascia ≤1 mm, neoadjuvant therapy, and having a procedure in 2015 to 2016 versus 2017 to 2018. The circumferential resection margin involvement was similar for all 3 groups (5.4%, 5.1%, and 5.1%). Short-term postoperative complications were less favorable for the newer techniques than for the laparoscopic approach. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited because of the registry's variables and different group sizes. CONCLUSION: Patients with low rectal cancer in the Netherlands are more likely to receive a restorative procedure with a transanal approach, compared with a laparoscopic or robotic procedure. Short-term oncological outcomes are comparable between the 3 minimally invasive techniques. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B608. INFLUENCIA DE LA TCNICA DE RESECCIN MINIMAMENTE INVASIVA CON PRESERVACIN DE ESFNTERES EN LA RESOLUCIN A CORTO PLAZO EN CANCER DE TERCIO INFERIOR DE RECTO EN LOS PASES BAJOS: ANTECEDENTES:La excisión mesorrectal transanal y asistida por robot son técnicas que potencialmente pueden superar algunos obstáculos que podemos encontrar en un abordaje exclusivamente laparoscópico en pacientes con cáncer de recto.OBJECTIVOS:El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la proporción y los factores de predicción positivos de los procedimientos restauradores y los resultados subsecuentes a corto plazo de tres técnicas mínimamente invasivas para tratar el cáncer de tercio inferior de recto.DISEÑO:Es un estudio comparativo observacional del registro nacional.ESCENARIO:Pacientes con cáncer de recto seleccionados del Registro Oficial de la Auditoría Holandesa Colo-rectal.PACIENTGES:Pacientes con cáncer de tercio inferior de recto (≤5 centimetros) sometidos a excision mesorrectal total mínimamente invasiva curativa.PRINCIPALES PARAMETROS DE EFECTIVIDAD:Proporción de procedimientos restauradores, margen de resección circunferencial positivo y complicaciones postoperatorias.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 3,466 pacientes para análisis, de los cuales 33% fueron sometidos a procedimiento restaurador. Las resecciones fueron laparoscópica en 2,845 pacientes, transanal en 448 y asistidas por robot en 173, con una proporción de procedimientos restauradores en 28%, 66% y 40% respectivamente. El abordaje transanal se correlacionó en forma independiente con el procedimiento restaurador (OR 4.11; 95% CI 4.11; 95% CI 3.21-5.26; p<0.001). Los factores de riesgo independientes para un procedimiento no restaurador, sin tomar en cuenta la técnica quirúrgica fueron: edad >75, American Society of Anesthesiologist ≥3, índice de masa corporal >30, antecedente de cirugía abdominal, Estadio clínico T4, fascia mesorrectal ≤1 millimetro, terapia neoadyuvante y haber sido sometido al procedimiento en 2015-2016 y no en 2017-2018. El margen circunferencial de resección involucrado fue similar para los tres grupos (5.4%, 5.1% y 5.1%). Las complicaciones postquirúrgicas a corto plazo fueron menos favorables para las técnicas nuevas comparadas con el abordaje laparoscópico.LIMTANTES:El estudio tiene la limitación de las variables dependientes del registro y la diferencia entre el número de pacientes en cada grupo.CONCLUSION:Los pacientes con cáncer de tercio inferior de recto en Holanda se tratan con mayor frecuencia mediante un procedimiento restaurador transanal en comparación con los abordajes laparoscópico o robótico. Los resultados favorables desde el punto de vista oncológico a corto plazo son comparables entre las tres técnicas de invasión mínima. Consulte Video Resumenhttp://links.lww.com/DCR/B608.


Subject(s)
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Neoadjuvant Therapy/adverse effects , Organ Preservation/statistics & numerical data , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Aged , Anal Canal/surgery , Female , Humans , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Laparoscopy/methods , Laparoscopy/statistics & numerical data , Male , Margins of Excision , Neoplasm Staging/methods , Netherlands/epidemiology , Organ Preservation/methods , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Predictive Value of Tests , Proctectomy/methods , Proctocolectomy, Restorative/statistics & numerical data , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Risk Factors , Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Robotic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/adverse effects , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/methods , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
12.
Int J Med Robot ; 17(3): e2227, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33452726

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (TME) might offer benefits in less morbidity, better functional and long-term outcome over laparoscopic TME. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing robot-assisted TME for rectal cancer during implementation between May 2015 and December 2019 performed by five surgeons in a single centre were included. Outcomes included local recurrence rate at 3 years, conversion rate, circumferential resection margin (CRM) positivity rate, 30-day postoperative morbidity and outcomes of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) questionnaires. RESULTS: In 105 robot-assisted TME, local recurrence rate at 3 years was 7.4%, conversion to open surgery rate was 8.6%, CRM positivity rate was 5.7%, 73.3% had good quality specimen, postoperative morbidity rate was 47.6% and anastomotic leakage rate was 9.0%. Incidence of major LARS was 55.3%. CONCLUSIONS: results of this study described acceptable morbidity, functional and long-term outcome during implementation of robotic TME for rectal cancer by multiple surgeons in a single centre.


Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Rectal Neoplasms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Surgeons , Hospitals, Teaching , Humans , Morbidity , Postoperative Complications , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Robotics , Syndrome , Treatment Outcome
14.
Cancers (Basel) ; 12(7)2020 Jul 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32635230

ABSTRACT

The guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer crudely state that the best local treatment should be selected from a 'toolbox' of techniques according to patient- and treatment-related factors. We created an interdisciplinary, consensus-based algorithm with specific resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). To pursue consensus, members of the multidisciplinary COLLISION and COLDFIRE trial expert panel employed the RAND appropriateness method (RAM). Statements regarding patient, disease, tumor and treatment characteristics were categorized as appropriate, equipoise or inappropriate. Patients with ECOG≤2, ASA≤3 and Charlson comorbidity index ≤8 should be considered fit for curative-intent local therapy. When easily resectable and/or ablatable (stage IVa), (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy is not indicated. When requiring major hepatectomy (stage IVb), neo-adjuvant systemic therapy is appropriate for early metachronous disease and to reduce procedural risk. To downstage patients (stage IVc), downsizing induction systemic therapy and/or future remnant augmentation is advised. Disease can only be deemed permanently unsuitable for local therapy if downstaging failed (stage IVd). Liver resection remains the gold standard. Thermal ablation is reserved for unresectable CRLM, deep-seated resectable CRLM and can be considered when patients are in poor health. Irreversible electroporation and stereotactic body radiotherapy can be considered for unresectable perihilar and perivascular CRLM 0-5cm. This consensus document provides per-patient and per-tumor resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of CRLM. These criteria are intended to aid tumor board discussions, improve consistency when designing prospective trials and advance intersociety communications. Areas where consensus is lacking warrant future comparative studies.

15.
Ann Surg ; 270(5): 768-774, 2019 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31573984

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop an objective and reliable surgical quality assurance system (SQA) for COLOR III, an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) with laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer. BACKGROUND OF SUMMARY DATA: SQA influences outcome measures in RCTs such as lymph nodes harvest, in-hospital mortality, and locoregional cancer recurrence. However, levels of SQA are variable. METHOD: Hierarchical task analysis of TaTME was performed. A 4-round Delphi methodology was applied for standardization of TaTME steps. Semistructured interviews were conducted in round 1 to identify key steps and tasks, which were rated as mandatory, optional, or prohibited in rounds 2 to 4 using questionnaires. Competency assessment tool (CAT) was developed and its content validity was examined by expert surgeons. Twenty unedited videos were assessed to test reliability using generalizability theory. RESULTS: Eighty-three of 101 surgical tasks identified reached 70% agreement (26 mandatory, 56 optional, and 1 prohibited). An operative guide of standardized TaTME was created. CAT is matrix of 9 steps and 4 performance qualities: exposure, execution, adverse event, and end-product. The overall G-coefficient was 0.883. Inter-rater and interitem reliability were 0.883 and 0.986. To enter COLOR III, 2 unedited TaTME and 1 laparoscopic TME videos were submitted and assessed by 2 independent assessors using CAT. CONCLUSION: We described an iterative approach to develop an objective SQA within multicenter RCT. This approach provided standardization, the development of reliable and valid CAT, and the criteria for trial entry and monitoring surgical performance during the trial.


Subject(s)
Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Proctectomy/methods , Quality Assurance, Health Care , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/methods , Aged , Delphi Technique , Disease-Free Survival , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Internationality , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Invasiveness/pathology , Neoplasm Staging , Observer Variation , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/physiopathology , Proctectomy/mortality , Rectal Neoplasms/mortality , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Survival Analysis , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
16.
Tech Coloproctol ; 23(9): 903-911, 2019 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31599385

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for mid and low rectal cancer has been shown to improve short-term outcomes, mostly due to lower conversion rates and with improved quality of the specimen. However, robust long-term oncological data supporting the encouraging clinical and pathological outcomes are lacking. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing TaTME with curative intent for mid or low rectal cancer in two referral centers in The Netherlands between January 2012 and April 2016 with a complete and minimum follow-up of 36 months were included. The primary outcome was local recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes were disease-free survival, overall survival and development of metastasis. RESULTS: There were 159 consecutive patients. Their mean age was 66.9 (10.2) years and 66.7% of all patients were men. Pathological analysis showed a complete mesorectum in 139 patients (87.4%), nearly complete in 16 (10.1%) and an incomplete mesorectum in 4 (2.5%). There was involvement of the CRM (< 1 mm) in one patient (0.6%) and no patients had involvement of the distal margin (< 5 mm). Final postoperative staging after neoadjuvant therapy was stage 0 in 11 patients (6.9%), stage I in 73 (45.9%), stage II in 31 (19.5%), stage III in 37 (23.3%) and stage IV in 7 (4.4%). The 3-year local recurrence rate was 2.0% and the 5-year local recurrence rate was 4.0%. Median time to local recurrence was 19.2 months. Distant metastases were found in 22 (13.8%) patients and were diagnosed after a median of 6.9 months (range 1.1-50.4) months. Disease-free survival was 92% at 3 years and 81% at 5 years. Overall survival was 83.6% at 3 years and 77.3% at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term follow-up of the current cohort confirms the oncological safety and feasibility of TaTME in two high volume referral centers for rectal carcinoma. However, further robust and audited data must confirm current findings before widespread implementation of TaTME.


Subject(s)
Mesentery/surgery , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Proctectomy/methods , Rectal Neoplasms/therapy , Aged , Anal Canal , Carcinoma/pathology , Carcinoma/secondary , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/etiology , Neoplasm Staging , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Risk Factors , Survival Rate , Time Factors
17.
J Am Coll Surg ; 228(3): 235-244.e1, 2019 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30639298

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a relatively new and demanding technique for rectal cancer treatment. Results from national datasets are absent and comparative data with laparoscopic TME (lapTME) are scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the initial TaTME experience in the Netherlands, by comparing outcomes with conventional lapTME. STUDY DESIGN: Patients with rectal cancer who underwent curative TaTME or lapTME were selected from the nationwide and mandatory Dutch ColoRectal Audit (DCRA), between January 2015 and December 2017. Primary outcome was circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement. Secondary outcomes included operative details and short-term (<30 days) clinical course. Propensity score matching was performed for 7 factors. RESULTS: There were 3,777 patients included for analysis (TaTME, n = 416, lapTME, n = 3361). Transanal TME was performed in 38 hospitals and lapTME in 90 hospitals. Before matching, the patient category within the TaTME group was technically more challenging in terms of tumor height and preoperative threatened margins. After 1:1 matching, 396 patients were included in each group, with comparable baseline characteristics. Circumferential resection margin involvement was 4.3% after TaTME and 4.0% after lapTME (p = 1.000). Conversion rate was significantly lower in TaTME (1.5% vs 8.6%, p < 0.001). Anastomotic leak rate was not significantly different (16.5% vs 12.2%, p = 0.116). Other postoperative outcomes were also comparable between the groups. Significant independent risk factors for CRM involvement in TaTME were preoperative threatened margin on MRI (odds ratio [OR] 5.48, 95% CI 1.33 to 22.54) and conversion (OR 30.12, 95% CI 3.70 to 245.20). CONCLUSIONS: This first nationwide study shows early experience with adoption of TaTME in the Netherlands. Considering that current data represent initial TaTME experience, acceptable short-term outcomes were demonstrated when compared with the well-established lapTME.


Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Margins of Excision , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Operative Time , Propensity Score , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
18.
Surg Endosc ; 33(1): 79-87, 2019 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29967994

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a safe alternative to laparoscopic TME for mid and low rectal cancer. TaTME allows improved visualization of the surgical planes and margins, and may potentially improve oncological outcomes. However, functional results after total mesorectal excision (TME) are variable and there are currently only a few published studies that include functional data related to the outcomes of TaTME. METHODS: Fifty-four consecutive patients were included in this study: one group included 27 patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior and the other included 27 patients who underwent TaTME. All patients were asked to complete five questionnaires related to quality of life (QOL) and function [EQ-5D-3L, EORTC-QLQ C30, EORTC-QLQ C29, Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score (LARS), and International Prostate Symptom Score IPSS]. All TaTME patients were operated on at The Gelderse Vallei Hospital by a single surgeon and had a follow-up of at least 6.6 months. RESULTS: The EORTC-QLQ C30 and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires showed comparable outcomes in terms of QOL between the two groups. Almost all items evaluated by the EORTC-QLQ C29, including sexual outcomes, were similar between the two groups. One item concerning fecal incontinence, however, was scored worse for TaTME. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of LARS symptoms or urinary function. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic or transanal TME showed comparable functional and QOL outcomes. Although the TaTME technique is still evolving, this study indicates that this technique is a safe alternative to laparoscopic surgery in terms of functional outcomes for mid and low rectal cancers.


Subject(s)
Laparoscopy/methods , Quality of Life , Rectal Neoplasms/psychology , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/methods , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Margins of Excision , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Rectum/surgery
20.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd ; 1622018 May 01.
Article in Dutch | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30020574

ABSTRACT

In 2010 the first report of the application of the flexible transanal port ('operation platform') for the excision of rectal tumours was published. Due to the enhanced vision it provides, adenomas and small malignant rectal tumours can be radically resected with significantly fewer recurrences than with endoscopic mucosal resection or transanal excisions done without this platform. The application of this platform is cheaper and more intuitive than transanal endoscopic microsurgery, while the quality of the local resection, the risk of postoperative complications and the functional and oncological outcomes all appear to be comparable. This is the reason that this flexible platform is now in use in most Dutch hospitals. The flexible port has led to an increase in rectum-sparing treatment for low-risk T1 rectal carcinoma. Nowadays, this platform is also used for the transanal approach during radical rectal surgery for high-risk rectal carcinomas and for rectal operations in patients with benign conditions in the pelvis minor such as severe endometriosis or Crohn's disease.


Subject(s)
Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery/methods , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...