Subpopulation analysis of survival in high-risk T1 colorectal cancer: surgery versus endoscopic resection only.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to assess the long-term survival of patients with T1 colorectal cancer (CRC) after local or surgical resection considering the type and number of risk factors for lymph node metastasis. METHODS: This study included patients with high-risk T1 CRC who underwent therapeutic resection at the National Cancer Center, Korea between January 2001 and December 2014. Risk factors included positive resection margin, high-grade histology, deep submucosal invasion, vascular invasion, budding, and no background adenoma (BGA). We statistically divided the population into favorable or unfavorable subpopulations. The favorable subpopulation included the following 5 combinations of risk factors: positive margin only or unconditional for margin status, deep submucosal invasion only, budding only, no BGA only, and budding + no BGA. We analyzed the survival rate according to the resection type (local or surgical) in the total cohort and in each subpopulation. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 466 patients underwent local and surgical resections, respectively. The distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were significantly high in the surgical group (hazard ratio [HR], .20; 95% confidence interval [CI], .06-.61; P = .0045 and HR, .41; 95% CI, .25-.70; P = .0010, respectively). In the favorable subpopulation, both DRFS and OS rates were not significantly different between the surgical and local groups (HR, .26; 95% CI, .02-4.19; P = .3431 and HR, .58; 95% CI, .27-1.23; P = .1534, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Intensive surveillance without additional surgery may be another option in selected cases after of high-risk T1 CRC endoscopic resection.

Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Clipping for Acute Anastomotic Bleeding After Colorectal Surgery.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic bleeding after colorectal surgery is a rare, mostly self-limiting, postoperative complication that could lead to a life-threatening condition. Therefore, prompt management is required. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic clipping for acute anastomotic bleeding after colorectal surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients pathologically diagnosed with colorectal cancer at National Cancer Center, Korea from January 2018 to November 2020, which presented with anastomotic bleeding within the first postoperative week and were endoscopically managed with clips. RESULTS: Nine patients had anastomotic bleeding, underwent endoscopic management, and, therefore, were included in this study. All patients underwent laparoscopic (low/ultralow) anterior resection with mechanical double-stapled anastomosis. Anastomotic bleeding was successfully managed through a colonoscopy with clips on the first trial in all patients. Hypovolemic shock occurred in one patient, following anastomotic breakdown. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic clipping seems to be an effective and safe treatment for anastomotic bleeding with minimal physiologic stress, easy accessibility, and scarce postoperative complications. However, a surgical backup should always be considered for massive bleeding.

Comparison of patient-reported quality of life and functional outcomes following laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The effect of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) on patients' quality of life and functional outcomes is not fully understood. This study aimed to compare the quality of life and bowel, anorectal, and urogenital functions after laparoscopic and TaTME. METHODS: Laparoscopic or TaTME was performed for 202 propensity score-matched patient pairs with rectal cancer between January 2014 and December 2017 at the National Cancer Center, Korea. The outcomes for all patients were assessed using anorectal manometry, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and Colorectal Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-CR38), low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score, Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). This retrospective comparative study included patients who completed anorectal manometry and the questionnaires before treatment and at 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: The EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38 showed comparable outcomes regarding the quality of life in both groups. More patients experienced major LARS in the transanal group at 1 year postoperatively (31.0% vs. 6.8% in the laparoscopic group, P = 0.004). Multivariable analysis revealed no significant difference in the LARS score between the groups at 1 year postoperatively (odds ratio, 2.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-6.72; P = 0.127). Significant differences in the IPSS were not noted between the groups. CONCLUSION: The quality of life and functional outcomes were comparable between the laparoscopic and transanal approaches; however, our findings suggest a higher rate of LARS after TaTME.

Effect of lateral lymph node dissection on the quality of life and genitourinary function after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: This study was performed to evaluate the quality of life and genitourinary function after total mesorectal excision with lateral lymph node dissection compared to those after total mesorectal excision alone following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. METHODS: Among patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery after completing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy between September 2011 and October 2018 at the National Cancer Center, Korea, patients who completed the validated questionnaires before initiation of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively were included in this study. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30), colorectal cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-CR38), and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaire were used for collecting data. RESULTS: The total mesorectal excision alone group and the total mesorectal excision with lateral lymph node dissection group included 52 and 38 patients, respectively. The second group included significantly younger patients (P = 0.024), had a higher incidence of clinical T4 stage disease (P = 0.033), estimated blood loss (P = 0.003), and longer operation time (P < 0.001). Significant differences were not observed between the groups with respect to the EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR38, and IPSS. Multivariable analysis showed that lateral lymph node dissection had no statistically significant association with postoperative urinary dysfunction (P = 0.953). CONCLUSION: The overall quality of life and urinary function after total mesorectal excision does not differ significantly when lateral lymph node dissection is performed as well.

Histopathologic risk factors for lymph node metastasis in patients with T1 colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Evaluating the risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM) is critical for determining subsequent treatments following endoscopic resection of T1 colorectal cancer (CRC). This study analyzed histopathologic risk factors for LNM in patients with T1 CRC. METHODS: This study involved 745 patients with T1 CRC who underwent endoscopic (n = 97) or surgical (n = 648) resection between January 2001 and December 2015 at the National Cancer Center, Korea. LNM in endoscopically resected patients, which could not be evaluated directly, was estimated indirectly based on follow-up results and histopathologic reports of salvage surgery. The relationships of depth of submucosal invasion, histologic grade, budding, vascular invasion, and background adenoma with LNM were evaluated statistically. RESULTS: Of the 745 patients, 91 (12.2%) were found to be positive for LNM. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified deep submucosal invasion (P = 0.010), histologic high grade (P < 0.001), budding (P = 0.034), and vascular invasion (P < 0.001) as risk factors for LNM. Among the patients with one, two, three, and four risk factors, 6.0%, 18.7%, 36.4%, and 100%, respectively, were positive for LNM. CONCLUSION: Deep submucosal invasion, histologic high grade, budding, and vascular invasion are risk factors for LNM in patients with T1 colorectal cancer. If any of these risk factors are present, additional surgery following endoscopic resection should be determined after considering the potential risk of LNM and each patient's situation.