Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

To compare the rate of sphincter-saving interventions between transanal and laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision in this particular group of patients. A multicentre observational study was conducted using a prospective database, including patients diagnosed with rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m, who underwent minimally invasive elective surgery over a 5-year period. Exclusion criteria were (1) sphincter and/or puborectalis invasion; (2) multi-visceral resections; (3) palliative surgeries. The study population was divided into two groups according to the intervention: transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. The primary outcome was the rate of sphincter-saving surgery. Secondary outcomes included conversion, postoperative complications, quality of the specimen, and survival. A total of 93 patients were included; 40 (43%) transanal total mesorectal excision were compared to 53 (57%) laparoscopic. In addition, 35 cases of transanal approach were case-matched with an equal number of laparoscopic approaches, based on gender, tumor's height, and neoadjuvant therapy. In both groups, 43% of the patients had low rectal cancer; however, the rate of sphincter-saving surgery was significantly higher in the transanal group (97% vs. 71%, p = 0.003). There were no conversions to open surgery in the transanal group, compared to 2 cases in the laparoscopic group (6%) (p = 0.246). The percentage of major complications was similar, including the rate of anastomotic leakage (10% transanal vs. 19% laparoscopic, p = 0.835). In our experience, higher percentages of sphincter-saving procedures and lower conversion rates are potential benefits of using the transanal approach in a complex surgical setting population of obese patients with mid-low rectal tumors when compared to laparoscopic.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13304-023-01676-4DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

total mesorectal
16
mesorectal excision
16
laparoscopic total
12
rectal cancer
12
rate sphincter-saving
12
laparoscopic
8
compared laparoscopic
8
mid-low rectal
8
obese patients
8
transanal
8

Similar Publications

A major cause of cancer death, colorectal cancer is becoming more common in younger people. The comparative effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) as surgical interventions for mid-low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) remains uncertain. To systematically evaluate oncological, perioperative, and survival outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer following nCRT.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Lateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN) metastasis is a poor prognostic factor in rectal cancer, but the optimal management strategy is debated. This multicenter retrospective study investigated the role of LPLN dissection (LPLND), with total mesorectal excision (TME), after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT), aiming to identify patients who may benefit from LPLND.

Patients And Methods: A total of 559 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and LPLN involvement from 2009 to 2018 were included (KROG 22-09).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Predicting tumor regression grade (TRG) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) preoperatively accurately is crucial for providing individualized treatment plans. This study aims to develop transrectal contrast-enhanced ultrasound-based (TR-CEUS) radiomics models for predicting TRG.

Methods: A total of 190 LARC patients undergoing NCRT and subsequent total mesorectal excision were categorized into good and poor response groups based on pathological TRG.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (with radiation omission) for locally advanced rectal cancer has been evaluated in several randomized controlled trials. While oncologic outcomes have been well described, the impact of this treatment strategy on surgical outcomes is unknown.

Objective: To evaluate how important surgical outcomes were reported in previous trials comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy to chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer and to perform a meta-analysis of available data.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF