Turnbull-Cutait pull-through coloanal anastomosis versus standard coloanal anastomosis plus diverting ileostomy for low anterior resection: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

PURPOSE: Coloanal anastomosis with loop diverting ileostomy (CAA) is an option for low anterior resection of the rectum, and Turnbull-Cutait coloanal anastomosis (TCA) regained popularity in the effort to offer patients a reconstructive option. In this context, we aimed to compare both techniques. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus were searched for studies published until January 2024. Odds ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled with a random-effects model. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q test and I2 statistics, with p-values inferior to 0.10 and I2 >25% considered significant. Statistical analysis was conducted in RStudio version 4.1.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Registered number CRD42024509963. RESULTS: One randomized controlled trial and nine observational studies were included, comprising 1,743 patients, of whom 899 (51.5%) were submitted to TCA and 844 (48.5%) to CAA. Most patients had rectal cancer (52.2%), followed by megacolon secondary to Chagas disease (32.5%). TCA was associated with increased colon ischemia (OR 3.54; 95% CI 1.13 to 11.14; p < 0.031; I2 = 0%). There were no differences in postoperative complications classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb, anastomotic leak, pelvic abscess, intestinal obstruction, bleeding, permanent stoma, or anastomotic stricture. In subgroup analysis of patients with cancer, TCA was associated with a reduction in anastomotic leak (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.97 p = 0.04; I2 = 34%). CONCLUSION: TCA was associated with a decrease in anastomotic leak rate in subgroups analysis of patients with cancer.

[Chinese expert consensus for resection margin in rectal cancer surgery (2024 edition)].

Colorectal cancer is the second most common malignant tumor in China, with rectal cancer accounting for approximately 50% of all cases. While neoadjuvant therapy is essential for diagnosis and treatment, proctectomy with radical resection remains indispensable. Especially for middle and low rectal cancer, the length of the distal resection margin is critical for prognosis, organ preservation, and postoperative quality of life. However, determining a "safe" margin to ensure the radical resection (R0) while maximizing the function of the anal sphincter poses a significant challenge for surgeons. Aiming at this, we conducted a comprehensive review of authoritative guidelines and literature domestically and internationally. We divided the issues related to resection margin in proctectomy into three chapters: (1) the concept and definition of the resection margin; (2) the evaluation of the resection margin in preoperative, intra-operative, and post-operative stages; and (3) radical resection of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. With the help of the Delphi method, the expert group voted twice for 14 recommendations and finally established the "Chinese Expert Consensus for Resection Margin in Rectal Cancer Surgery (2024 version)". This consensus serves as a valuable reference for clinicians to carry out proctectomy of rectal cancer, which can improve patient's quality of life without affecting their prognosis.

[Influence of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on peritoneal wound healing after abdominoperineal resection].

Objective: To study the influence of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on peritoneal wound recovery after abdominoperineal resection (APR). Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of data of 219 patients who had been pathologically diagnosed with low rectal cancer and undergone APR in the Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College of Huazhong University of Science and Technology between January 2018 and December 2021. Of these patients, 158 had undergone surgery without any pre-surgical treatment (surgery group), 35 had undergone surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy group), and 26 had undergone surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group). The primary outcome was perineal wound complications occurring within 30 days. The status of wound healing was classified into the following three levels: Level A: abnormal wound seepage that improved after wound discharge; Level B: wound infection and dehiscence; and Level C: Level B plus fever. The patients' general condition, tumor status, perianal wound healing level, and intra- and post-operative recovery were recorded. Results: None of the study patients had any complications during surgery. The duration of surgery was 240.0 (180.0-300.0) minutes, 240.0 (225.0-270.0) minutes and 270.0 (240.0-356.2) minutes in the surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy groups, respectively (H=6.508, P=0.039). The rates of perineal wound complications were 34.6% (9/26) and (22.9%, 8/35)in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group and the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group, being significantly higher than that in the surgery group (10.1%, 16/158). After adjusting for patient age and sex using a logistic regression model, the risk of complications was still higher in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy than in the surgery group (OR=4.6, 95%CI: 1.7-12.7; OR=2.6, 95%CI: 1.0-6.8), these differences being statistically significant (both P<0.05). The duration of hospital stay was 9.5 (7.0-12.0) days, 10.0 (8.0-17.0) days and 11.5 (9.0-19.5) days for patients in the surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy groups, respectively (H=0.569, P=0.752). However, after adjusting for patient age and sex by using a generalized linear model, hospital stay was longer in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy than in the surgery group (ß [95% CI]: 4.4 [0.5-8.4], P=0.028). After surgery, 155 of 219 patients required further adjuvant chemotherapy. A higher proportion of patients with than without wound complications did not attend for follow-up (32.2% [10/31] vs. 16.1% [20/124]); this difference is statistically significant (χ2=4.133, P=0.023). Conclusions: In patients with low rectal cancer, neoadjuvant radiotherapy may be associated with an increased risk of perineal wound infection and non-healing.

Low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, a propensity score matching cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare low Hartmann's procedure (LHP) with abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer (RC) regarding postoperative complications. METHOD: RC patients receiving radical LHP or APR from 2015 to 2019 in our center were retrospectively enrolled. Patients' demographic and surgical information was collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline information. The primary outcome was the incidence of major complications. All the statistical analysis was performed by SPSS 22.0 and R. RESULTS: 342 individuals were primarily included and 134 remained after PSM with a 1:2 ratio (50 in LHP and 84 in APR). Patients in the LHP group were associated with higher tumor height (P < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the two groups for the incidence of major complications (6.0% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.290), and severe pelvic abscess (2% vs. 0%, P = 0.373). However, the occurrence rate of minor complications was significantly higher in the LHP group (52% vs. 21.4%, P < 0.001), and the difference mainly lay in abdominal wound infection (10% vs. 0%, P = 0.006) and bowel obstruction (16% vs. 4.8%, P = 0.028). LHP was not the independent risk factor of pelvic abscess in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated a comparable incidence of major complications between LHP and APR. LHP was still a reliable alternative in selected RC patients when primary anastomosis was not recommended.

IRIS U kit usefulness in transanal total mesorectal excision for lower rectal cancer to avoid urethral injury.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has improved the laparoscopic dissection for rectal cancer in the narrow pelvis. Although taTME has more clinical benefits than laparoscopic surgery, such as a better view of the distal rectum and direct determination of distal resection margin, an intraoperative urethral injury could occur in excision ta-TME. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and efficacy of the ta-TME with IRIS U kit surgery. This retrospective study enrolled 10 rectal cancer patients who underwent a taTME with an IRIS U kit. The study endpoints were the safety of access (intra- or postoperative morbidity). The detectability of the IRIS U kit catheter was investigated by using a laparoscope-ICG fluorescence camera system. Their mean age was 71.4±6.4 (58-78) years; 80 were men, and 2 were women. The mean operative time was 534.6 ± 94.5 min. The coloanal anastomosis was performed in 80%, and 20% underwent abdominal peritoneal resection. Two patients encountered postoperative complications graded as Clavien-Dindo grade 2. The transanal approach with IRIS U kit assistance is feasible, safe for patients with lower rectal cancer, and may prevent intraoperative urethral injury.

Construction of a nomogram model to predict technical difficulty in performing laparoscopic sphincter-preserving radical resection for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal surgeons are well aware that performing surgery for rectal cancer becomes more challenging in obese patients with narrow and deep pelvic cavities. Therefore, it is essential for colorectal surgeons to have a comprehensive understanding of pelvic structure prior to surgery and anticipate potential surgical difficulties. AIM: To evaluate predictive parameters for technical challenges encountered during laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively gathered data from 162 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Three-dimensional reconstruction of pelvic bone and soft tissue parameters was conducted using computed tomography (CT) scans. Operative difficulty was categorized as either high or low, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to identify predictors of operative difficulty, ultimately creating a nomogram. RESULTS: Out of 162 patients, 21 (13.0%) were classified in the high surgical difficulty group, while 141 (87.0%) were in the low surgical difficulty group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the surgical approach using laparoscopic intersphincteric dissection, intraoperative preventive ostomy, and the sacrococcygeal distance were independent risk factors for highly difficult laparoscopic radical sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer (P < 0.05). Conversely, the anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic inlet/sacrococcygeal distance was identified as a protective factor (P < 0.05). A nomogram was subsequently constructed, demonstrating good predictive accuracy (C-index = 0.834). CONCLUSION: The surgical approach, intraoperative preventive ostomy, the sacrococcygeal distance, and the anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic inlet/sacrococcygeal distance could help to predict the difficulty of laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery.

Predictors for temporary stomas non-closure among non-metastatic rectal cancer patients undergoing curative resection: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: The primary treatment for non-metastatic rectal cancer is curative resection. However, sphincter-preserving surgery may lead to complications. This study aims to develop a predictive model for stoma non-closure in rectal cancer patients who underwent curative-intent low anterior resection. METHODS: Consecutive patients diagnosed with non-metastatic rectal cancer between January 2005 and December 2017, who underwent low anterior resection, were retrospectively included in the Chang Gung Memorial Foundation Institutional Review Board. A comprehensive evaluation and analysis of potential risk factors linked to stoma non-closure were performed. RESULTS: Out of 956 patients with temporary stomas, 10.3% (n = 103) experienced non-closure primarily due to cancer recurrence and anastomosis-related issues. Through multivariate analysis, several preoperative risk factors significantly associated with stoma non-closure were identified, including advanced age, anastomotic leakage, positive nodal status, high preoperative CEA levels, lower rectal cancer presence, margin involvement, and an eGFR below 30 mL/min/1.73m2. A risk assessment model achieved an AUC of 0.724, with a cutoff of 2.5, 84.5% sensitivity, and 51.4% specificity. Importantly, the non-closure rate could rise to 16.6% when more than two risk factors were present, starkly contrasting the 3.7% non-closure rate observed in cases with a risk score of 2 or below (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Prognostic risk factors associated with the non-closure of a temporary stoma include advanced age, symptomatic anastomotic leakage, nodal status, high CEA levels, margin involvement, and an eGFR below 30 mL/min/1.73m2. Hence, it is crucial for surgeons to evaluate these factors and provide patients with a comprehensive prognosis before undergoing surgical intervention.

Robotic, transanal, and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for locally advanced mid/low rectal cancer: European multicentre, propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard surgery for low/mid locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare three minimally invasive surgical approaches for TME with primary anastomosis (laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, and transanal TME). METHODS: Records of patients undergoing laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, or transanal TME between 2013 and 2022 according to standardized techniques in expert centres contributing to the European MRI and Rectal Cancer Surgery III (EuMaRCS-III) database were analysed. Propensity score matching was applied to compare the three groups with respect to the complication rate (primary outcome), conversion rate, postoperative recovery, and survival. RESULTS: A total of 468 patients (mean(s.d.) age of 64.1(11) years) were included; 190 (40.6%) patients underwent laparoscopic TME, 141 (30.1%) patients underwent robotic TME, and 137 (29.3%) patients underwent transanal TME. Comparative analyses after propensity score matching demonstrated a higher rate of postoperative complications for laparoscopic TME compared with both robotic TME (OR 1.80, 95% c.i. 1.11-2.91) and transanal TME (OR 2.87, 95% c.i. 1.72-4.80). Robotic TME was associated with a lower rate of grade A anastomotic leakage (2%) compared with both laparoscopic TME (8.8%) and transanal TME (8.1%) (P = 0.031). Robotic TME (1.4%) and transanal TME (0.7%) were both associated with a lower conversion rate to open surgery compared with laparoscopic TME (8.8%) (P < 0.001). Time to flatus and duration of hospital stay were shorter for patients treated with transanal TME (P = 0.003 and 0.001 respectively). There were no differences in operating time, intraoperative complications, blood loss, mortality, readmission, R0 resection, or survival. CONCLUSION: In this multicentre, retrospective, propensity score-matched, cohort study of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, newer minimally invasive approaches (robotic TME and transanal TME) demonstrated improved outcomes compared with laparoscopic TME.

LASSO-based nomogram predicts the risk factors of low anterior resection syndrome for middle and low rectal cancer underwent robotic surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to analyze the influencing factors of postoperative Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) in patients with middle and low rectal cancer who underwent robotic surgery. It also seeks to predict the probability of LARS through a visual, quantitative, and graphical nomogram. This approach is expected to lower the risk of postoperative LARS in these patients and improve their quality of life through effective prevention and early intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This research involved patients with middle and low rectal cancer who underwent robotic surgery in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from January 2015 to October 2022. A series of intestinal dysfunction symptoms arising from postoperative rectal cancer were diagnosed and graded using LARS scoring criteria. After the initial screening of all variables related to LARS with Lasso regression, they were included in logistic regression for further univariate and multivariate analysis to identify independent risk factors for LARS. A prediction model was then constructed. RESULTS: The study included 358 patients. The parameters identified by Lasso regression included obstruction, BMI, tumor localization, maximum tumor diameter, AJCC stage, stoma, neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), and postoperative adjuvant therapy (AT). Univariate and multivariate analyses indicated that a higher BMI, lower tumor localization, higher AJCC stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and postoperative adjuvant therapy were independent risk factors for total LARS. The AUC of the prediction nomogram was 0.834, with a sensitivity of 0.825 and specificity of 0.741. The calibration curve demonstrated excellent concordance with the nomogram, indicating the prediction curve fit the diagonal well. CONCLUSION: Higher BMI, lower tumor localization, higher AJCC stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and adjuvant therapy were identified as independent risk factors for total LARS. A new predictive nomogram for postoperative LARS in patients with middle and low rectal cancer undergoing robotic surgery was developed, proving to be stable and reliable. This tool will assist clinicians in managing the postoperative treatment of these patients, facilitating better clinical decision-making and maximizing patient benefits.

Short-term outcomes of robotic tumor-specific mesorectal resection of rectal cancer: surgical techniques in mesorectal division using rolling division of the mesorectum.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to report our surgical techniques for robot-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection, specifically focusing on mesorectal division using rolling division of the mesorectum, and to elucidate short-term outcomes at a single institution. Tumor-specific mesorectal excision (TSME) is commonly performed for resection of a tumor located in the upper rectum. However, especially in a narrow pelvis, it is difficult to perform appropriate mesorectal division at an adequate distance from the tumor in robot-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection. METHODS: Retrospective case series of patients with rectal cancer who underwent robot-assisted TSME using rolling division of mesorectum. Patient characteristics, perioperative clinical results, surgical and pathological details were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients underwent robot-assisted TSME for rectal cancer using rolling division of mesorectum between May 2019 and December 2023.The tumor was located in the upper rectum in 45 patients, middle rectum in 115 patients and lower rectum in 38 patients. The types of resections were 40 high anterior resection and 158 low anterior resections. The median operation time was 175 (range 109-310) min, and median mesorectal division time was 24 (range 15-45) min. Median blood loss was 3 (range 0-20) ml; no patients required blood transfusion. The overall complication rate of Clavien-Dindo classification grades I-IV was 7.1%. Anastomotic leakage was observed in two patients (1.0%) with grade III. There was no surgical mortality in this series. CONCLUSION: This robotic technique for anterior resection is a feasible and reliable procedure for achieving sufficient and safe TSME in this cohort.

A novel perineal exposure method in laparoscopic abdominal perineal resection of rectal cancer: a case series study.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal perineal resection (APR) of rectal cancer, also known as Mile's procedure, is a classic procedure for the treatment of rectal cancer. Through the improvement of surgical skills and neoadjuvant therapy, the sphincter-preserving rate in rectal cancer patients has improved, even in patients with ultralow rectal cancer who underwent APR in the past. However, APR cannot be completely replaced by low anterior resection (LAR) in reality. APR still has its indications, when the tumor affects the external sphincter, etc. Good perineal exposure in APR is difficult and can seriously affect surgical safety and the long-term prognosis. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 16 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent APR at Anqing Municipal Hospital from January 2022 to April 2023, including 11 males and 5 females, with an average age of 64.8 ± 10.3 years. The perineal operation was completed with the Lone-Star® retractor-assisted (LSRA) exposure method. After incising the skin and subcutaneous tissue, a Lone-Star® retractor was placed, and the incision was retracted in surrounding directions with 8 small retractors, which facilitated the freeing of deep tissues. We dynamically adjusted the retractor according to the plane to fully expose the surgical field. RESULTS: All 16 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted APR successfully. Thirteen procedures were performed independently by a single person, and the others were completed by two persons due to intraoperative arterial hemostasis. All specimens were free of perforation and had a negative circumferential resection margin (CRM). Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients, including urinary retention in 1 patient, pulmonary infection in 1 patient, intestinal adhesion in 1 patient and peristomal dermatitis in 1 patient, and were graded as ClavienDindo grade 3 or lower and cured. No distant metastasis or local recurrence was found for any of the patients in the postoperative follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The application of the LSRA exposure method might be helpful for perineal exposure during APR for rectal cancer, which could improve intraoperative safety and surgical efficiency, achieve one-person operation, and increase the comfort of operators.

Total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer: multicentre study comparing oncological outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision in high-volume centres.

BACKGROUND: The routine use of MRI in rectal cancer treatment allows the use of a strict definition for low rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer in expert laparoscopic, transanal and robotic high-volume centres. METHODS: All MRI-defined low rectal cancer operated on between 2015 and 2017 in 11 Dutch centres were included. Primary outcomes were: R1 rate, total mesorectal excision quality and 3-year local recurrence and survivals (overall and disease free). Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, complications and whether there was a perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan. RESULTS: Of 1071 eligible rectal cancers, 633 patients with low rectal cancer were identified. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen (P = 0.337), R1 rate (P = 0.107), conversion (P = 0.344), anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.942), local recurrence (P = 0.809), overall survival (P = 0.436) and disease-free survival (P = 0.347) were comparable among the centres. The laparoscopic centre group had the highest rate of perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan (10.4%), compared with robotic expert centres (5.2%) and transanal centres (2.1%), P = 0.004. The main reason for this change was stapling difficulty (43%), followed by low tumour location (29%). Multivariable analysis showed that laparoscopic surgery was the only independent risk factor for a change in the preoperative planned procedure, P = 0.024. CONCLUSION: Centres with expertise in all three minimally invasive total mesorectal excision techniques can achieve good oncological resection in the treatment of MRI-defined low rectal cancer. However, compared with robotic expert centres and transanal centres, patients treated in laparoscopic centres have an increased risk of a change in the preoperative intended procedure due to technical limitations.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome. Anatomical Changes after Anterior Rectal Resection.

In this editorial, the authors bring to the attention of surgeons a personal point of view with the intention of offering a series of anatomical arguments to explain the high rate of functional complications following ultralow rectal resections, resections dominated by faecal incontinence of various intensities. Having as a starting point the anatomy of the pelvic floor and the posterior perineum, the authors are concerned with the functional outcomes of the sphincter-saving anterior rectal resection, regarding the low and ultralow resection. Technically, a conservative surgery for low rectal cancer has been currently performed. If 25 years ago the abdominoperineal resection was the gold standard for rectal cancer located under 7cm from the anal verge, nowadays the preservation of the anal canal as a partner for colon anastomosis has been accomplished. Progressively, from a desire to preserve the normal passage of stool into the anal canal, as anatomically and physiologically as possible, the distal limit of resection was lowered to 2-4 cm from the anal verge and ultra-low anastomoses were created, within the anal sphincter complex. The stated goal: keep the oncological safety standard and, at the same time, avoid definitive colostomy. Starting from the normal anatomy of the pelvic floor and the anorectal segment, the authors take a look at the alterations of the visceral, muscular, and nerve structures as a consequence of the low anterior resection and, particularly, the ultralow anterior resection. A significant degree of functional outcomes regarding defecation, with the onset of marked disabilities of anal continence, the major consequence being anal incontinence (30-70%), have been noticed. The authors go under review for the main anatomical and physiological changes that accompany anterior rectal resection. Conclusions: Thus, the following questions arise: what is the lower limit of resection to avoid total fecal incontinence? Is total incontinence a greater handicap than colostomy or is it not? The answers cannot be supported by solid arguments at this time, but the need to initiate future studies dedicated to this problem emerges.

Cylindrical abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer using the Hugo RAS system: The first ever case report for rectal cancer.

In May 2023, the Hugo RAS system obtained pharmaceutical approval for use in gastroenterological surgery in Japan. It is expected to be particularly effective in rectal cancer surgery, which require the manipulation of the deep pelvic cavity and communication with surgeons operating from the intraperitoneal and anal approaches. A 68-year-old woman presented to our hospital with bloody stools and was diagnosed with cStage I (cT2N0M0) rectal cancer and underwent abdominoperineal resection employing the Hugo RAS system. Two arm carts were placed on the left and right lateral sides with an interleg space, and trocars were placed in a straight line between the right superior iliac spine and umbilicus. Herein, we report the first abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer using the Hugo RAS system.

Short- and long-term morbidity after Taylor flap (oblique rectus abdominis flap) for perineal reconstruction after abdominoperineal resection: A single-center series of 140 patients.

BACKGROUND: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) leads to a substantial loss of tissue and a high rate of complications. The Taylor flap is a musculocutaneous flap used in reconstruction after APR. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to analyze the short and long-term morbidity of reconstruction with a Taylor flap (oblique rectus abdominis flap) after APR and to identify the risk factors for postoperative complications. METHODS: We retrospectively included all patients who had undergone APR with immediate reconstruction with a Taylor flap in our department between July 2000 and June 2018. Demographics, oncological data, treatment, and short- and long-term morbidity were reviewed. RESULTS: Among the 140 patients included, we identified early minor complications in 42 patients (30%) and 14 early major complications (10%). Total necrosis of the flap requiring its removal occurred in four patients (2.8%). Eleven patients (7.9%) presented with a midline incision hernia, and seven (5%) presented with a subcostal incision hernia. No perineal hernia was found. No risk factors for the complications were identified. CONCLUSION: The Taylor flap is a safe procedure with few complications and limited donor site morbidity. Moreover, it prevents perineal hernias. These results confirm that the Taylor flap is a well-suited procedure for reconstruction after APR.

The Effect of (Chemo)Radiotherapy on Enlarged Lateral Lymph Nodes in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard of care for most patients with locally advanced rectal cancer in The Netherlands consists of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by resection. Enlarged lateral lymph nodes (LLNs), especially in the iliac compartment, appears to be associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. Little is known about the risk of local recurrence after nCRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and enlarged LLNs on pretreatment MRI-scan located in the internal iliac, obturator, external iliac, or common iliac compartment. Patients were treated with nCRT and response to therapy was evaluated with MRI-scan. The primary endpoint was local lateral recurrence after nCRT. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Out of 260 patients treated for rectal cancer, a total of 46 patients with enlarged LLNs (18% of all patients) were included between 2012 and 2019 in 2 Dutch hospitals. No patients had lateral lymph node recurrence (LLNR) after nCRT. Only 1 patient had local recurrence of rectal cancer after radical resection during a median follow up of 3 years. Disseminated disease was seen in 12 patients and 9 patients died during follow-up, which result in an overall survival rate of 80.4%. Postoperative complications were seen in 41% of patients. There was no 90-days postoperative mortality. CONCLUSION: Enlarged LLNs are rare after nCRT and no LLNR was found after nCRT in our study population. This could suggest that nCRT only with or without an extra radiotherapeutic boost on enlarged LLNs already reduces the risk of LLNR.

The conundrum of total neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer.

Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has fast become the paradigm in the management of rectal cancer. The widespread adoption of this approach across the world, not only for locally advanced cancers but even for cancers that otherwise would not merit chemotherapy, leads both to an increase in treatment-related toxicity for patients and burdens the healthcare services of the country. It is important to tailor treatment to each patient based not only on the tumour but, even more importantly, on the patient's expectations and goals. The intent of treatment while prescribing TNT needs to be clear, understanding that not all patients are suitable for an organ preservation (watch and wait) approach and that the survival benefits of TNT are not as obvious as most proponents believe.