Is There Any Reason Not to Perform Standard Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision?

The curative treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is currently based on chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). Laparoscopy has developed considerably because of obvious clinical benefits such as reduced pain and shorter hospital stay. Recently, several prospective randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up have showed that laparoscopy is noninferior to laparotomy with the same oncologic outcomes in terms of survival and local control rate. However, laparoscopic TME remains a challenging procedure requiring a high level of expertise and a long learning curve to ensure an adequate and safe resection. The only relative contraindication of laparoscopic rectal surgery is T4 rectal cancer extended beyond the plane of TME. In this situation, it is reasonable to consider an open resection to avoid an uncomplete resection. In obese and elderly patients, laparoscopic TME also provides the same benefits as in nonobese and younger patients but may be more difficult to achieve. This review summarizes current knowledge on the place of laparoscopic TME in the treatment of rectal cancer.

Adjuvant treatment for resected rectal cancer: impact of standard and intensified postoperative chemotherapy on disease-free survival in patients undergoing preoperative chemoradiation-a propensity score-matched analysis of an observational database.

AIMS: Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected rectal cancer is widely used. However, studies on adjuvant treatment following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and total mesorectal excision (TME) have yielded conflicting results. Recent studies have focused on adding oxaliplatin to both preoperative and postoperative therapy, making it difficult to assess the impact of adjuvant oxaliplatin alone. This study was aimed at determining the impact of (i) any adjuvant treatment and (ii) oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant treatment on disease-free survival in CRT-pretreated, R0-resected rectal cancer patients. METHOD: Patients undergoing R0 TME following 5-fluorouracil (5FU)-only-based CRT between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2010, were selected from a nationwide registry. After propensity score matching (PSM), comparison of disease-free survival (DFS) using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test was performed in (i) patients receiving no vs. any adjuvant treatment and (ii) patients treated with adjuvant 5FU/capecitabine without vs. with oxaliplatin. RESULTS: Out of 1497 patients, 520 matched pairs were generated for analysis of no vs. any adjuvant treatment. Mean DFS was significantly prolonged with adjuvant treatment (81.8 ± 2.06 vs. 70.1 ± 3.02 months, p < 0.001). One hundred forty-eight matched pairs were available for analysis of adjuvant therapy with or without oxaliplatin, showing no improvement in DFS in patients receiving oxaliplatin (76.9 ± 4.12 vs. 79.3 ± 4.44 months, p = 0.254). Local recurrence rate was not significantly different between groups in either analysis. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant CRT and TME surgery under routine conditions, adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved DFS. No benefit was observed for the addition of oxaliplatin to adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting.

The predictive value of LGR for distant metastasis-free survival in locally advanced rectal cancer patients.

Studies show that inflammation induced by cancer is a key factor in carcinogenesis. Here, we sought to assess the relationship between patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and the lymphocyte to neutrophil granulocyte ratio (LGR) prior to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis of 326 LARC patients who underwent total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, we were able to determine the ideal LGR cutoff value. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and univariate and multivariate Cox regression to study the clinical characteristics of LARC patients in comparison between the low LGR group and the high LGR group. DMFS analysis was one of the primary clinical variables examined. We discovered that the low LGR group of LARC patients had a longer DMFS than the high LGR group. The median duration of follow-up for LARC patients was 89.4 months, with a significantly lower DMFS observed in the high LGR group compared to the low LGR group. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that LARC patients with low LGR levels, early ypTNM stages, and BRAF wild had longer DMFS. LGR prior to nCRT was a critical prognostic indicator that contributed extra predictive value beyond conventional clinicopathological characteristics to predict the outcome of LARC patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by TME surgery.

Delaying surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer has no influence in surgical approach or short-term clinical outcomes.

AIMS: In rectal cancer, increasing the interval between the end of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and surgery could improve the pathological complete response (pCR) rates, allow full-dose neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and select patients with a clinical complete response (cCR) for inclusion in a "watch & wait" program (W&W). However, controversy arises from waiting more than 8-12 weeks after CRT, as it might increase fibrosis around the total mesorectal excision (TME) plane potentially leading to technical difficulties and higher surgical morbidity. This study evaluates the type of surgical approach and short term post-operative outcomes in patients with rectal cancer that were operated before and after 12 weeks post CRT. METHODS: Patients from three centres (two in the UK, one in Portugal) who received rectal cancer surgery following neoadjuvant CRT between 2007 and 2016 were identified from prospectively maintained databases. Preoperative CRT was given to patients with high risk for local recurrence (threatened CRM ≤2 mm or T4 in staging MRI). The baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes of patients that were operated <12 weeks and ≥12 weeks after finishing CRT were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 470 patients received rectal cancer surgery, of those 124 (26%) received neoadjuvant CRT. Seventy-six patients (61%) were operated ≥12 weeks after end of neoadjuvant-CRT and 48 < 12 weeks. Patients in the ≥12 weeks cohort had a higher BMI (27 vs 25, p = 0.030) and lower lymph node yield (11 vs 14, p = 0.001). The remaining of the baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups (age, operating surgeon, gender, ASA grade, T stage, surgical approach, operation). Operation time, blood loss, conversion rate, length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, 30-day reoperation rate, anastomotic leak rate, 30-day mortality, CRM clearance, and ypT0 rates were similar between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that delaying surgery ≥12 weeks did not affect morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, there was no difference in short term surgical outcomes between patients operated before or after 12 weeks following CRT. The type of surgical procedures and the proposed approach did not differ due to waiting after CRT. Delaying surgery by ≥ 12 weeks is safe, feasible and does not result in higher surgical morbidity.

Beyond total mesorectal excision in locally advanced rectal cancer with organ or pelvic side-wall involvement.

BACKGROUND: In locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), beyond total mesorectal excision (bTME) is often necessary to obtain complete resection (R0). The aim of this study was to identify prognostic determinants and compare morbidity and survival in LARC cases requiring bTME or TME surgery. METHOD: Single centre cohort study of LARC cases where all patients received neoadjuvant radiotherapy (n = 332). Data was registered prospectively in an institutional database linked to the National Registry. RESULTS: bTME surgery was performed in 224 patients, 171 with resections of adjacent organs (bTME-o group) and 53 with pelvic side-wall resections (bTME-pw group). TME surgery was performed in 108 patients. Six deaths occurred within 100 days and severe morbidity was registered in 23.8% of the whole cohort and in 25.4% of the bTME groups. The R0 rates were 93.5%, 84.2%, and 75.5% in the TME, bTME-o, and bTME-pw groups, respectively. Five-year disease free survival (DFS) was 67.3% (TME group), 54.5% (bTME-o group) and 48.7% (bTME-pw group), and five-year overall survival (OS) 78.7%, 69.0% and 60.4% respectively. Patients with involved resection margins (R1), high pT-stage, pN-positivity or poor response to neoadjuvant therapy were associated with inferior DFS and OS. CONCLUSION: In organ-threatening or infiltrating LARC, bTME surgery can be performed with low mortality and acceptable morbidity to obtain a good long-term outcome. Patients with pelvic side-wall infiltration were identified as a subgroup with increased risk of R1 resection and inferior long-term outcome.

Evaluation of endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) and MRI for prediction of circumferential resection margin (CRM) for rectal cancer.

ERUS and MRI are used for preoperative imaging of rectal cancer. Here, we compare ERUS and MRI for accuracy of CRM prediction at mid- and distal rectal locations. In retrospective review, 20 rectal cancer patients having TME surgery had both ERUS and MRI preoperatively: 8 mid rectum and 12 in distal rectum. Predicted CRM by ERUS and MRI were compared to TME pathology. Overall, predicted CRM was 6.5 ± 3.6 mm by ERUS, 7.7 ± 5.0 mm by MRI, and 6.0 ± 4.6 mm by pathology. Overall, correlation coefficients to pathology were 0.77 (p = 0.0004) for ERUS and 0.64 (p = 0.008) for MRI. In distal rectum, correlation coefficients were 0.71 (p = 0.02) for ERUS and -0.10 (p = 0.79) for MRI. In mid rectum, correlation coefficients were 0.92 (p = 0.01) for ERUS and 0.44 (p = 0.38) for MRI. While MRI is used routinely for preoperative rectal cancer imaging, ERUS can provide additional assessment of CRM for mid or distal rectal lesions. Further investigation is needed to support these preliminary ERUS CRM findings in mid and distal rectum.

Unexpected rectal cancer after TEM: outcome of completion surgery compared with primary TME.

BACKGROUND: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) has gained wide-spread acceptance as a safe and useful technique for the resection of rectal adenomas and selected T1 malignant lesions. If the lesion appears >T1 rectal cancer after resection with TEM, a completion TME resection is recommended. The aim of this study was to investigate the results of TME surgery after TEM for rectal cancer. METHODS: In four tertiary referral hospitals for TEM, all patients with completion TME surgery after initial TEM were selected. All eligible patients who were treated with 5 × 5 Gy radiotherapy followed by TME surgery from the Dutch TME trial were selected as reference group. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to calculate odds ratio's (OR) for colostomies and for colo- and ileostomies combined. Local recurrence and survival rates were compared in hazard ratio's (HR) using the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were included in the TEM-COMPLETION group and 881 patients from the TME trial. In the TEM-COMPLETION group, 50.8% of the patients had a colostomy compared to 45.9% in the TME trial, OR 2.51 (p < 0.006). There is no significant difference when ileo- and colostomies are analyzed together. In the TEM-COMPLETION group, 10.2% developed a local recurrence compared to 5.2% in the TME trial, HR 6.8 (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Completion TME surgery after TEM for unexpected rectal adenocarcinoma results in more colostomies and higher local recurrence rates compared to one stage TME surgery preceded with preoperative 5 × 5 Gy radiotherapy. Pre-operative investigations must be optimized to distinguish malignant and benign lesions and prevent avoidable local recurrence and colostomies.