Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (19)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = trans-anal total mesorectal excision

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
20 pages, 580 KiB  
Systematic Review
Guidance on the Surgical Management of Rectal Cancer: An Umbrella Review
by Ionut Negoi
Life 2025, 15(6), 955; https://doi.org/10.3390/life15060955 - 13 Jun 2025
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 864
Abstract
This umbrella review synthesizes international guidelines on the surgical management of rectal cancer to provide unified recommendations tailored to local healthcare organizations. This review emphasizes the importance of surgical centralization in high-volume centers, which maximizes outcomes, reduces morbidity, and increases survival rates. Minimally [...] Read more.
This umbrella review synthesizes international guidelines on the surgical management of rectal cancer to provide unified recommendations tailored to local healthcare organizations. This review emphasizes the importance of surgical centralization in high-volume centers, which maximizes outcomes, reduces morbidity, and increases survival rates. Minimally invasive approaches, such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery, are highlighted for their perioperative benefits, although careful patient selection and surgical expertise are required. Mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotics is recommended to effectively reduce complications, including surgical site infections and anastomotic leakage. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols have been shown to significantly improve postoperative recovery and reduce hospital stay duration. Comprehensive perioperative care, including venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and infection control, is essential for optimal patient outcomes. This review underscores the need for structured training, certification, and regular audits for advanced techniques such as robotic surgery and transanal total mesorectal excision. Implementation of a national database is recommended to support ongoing improvements in rectal cancer surgery. This review centralizes evidence-based recommendations to guide surgical decision-making and harmonize the multidisciplinary care for patients with rectal cancer. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 2723 KiB  
Article
Combined TaTME with SP Robot for Low Anterior Resection in Rectal Cancer: rSPa TaTME
by Nouran O. Keshk, Mauricio E. Perez-Pachon, Ibrahim Gomaa, Sara Aboelmaaty, David W. Larson, Kristen K. Rumer and Sherief F. Shawki
Cancers 2025, 17(8), 1328; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17081328 - 15 Apr 2025
Viewed by 617
Abstract
Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) remains the gold standard for the resection of rectal cancer regardless of the modality: open, laparoscopic, or robotic. The transanal TME (TaTME) approach has been utilized to overcome the difficulties encountered with the dissection of tumors in [...] Read more.
Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) remains the gold standard for the resection of rectal cancer regardless of the modality: open, laparoscopic, or robotic. The transanal TME (TaTME) approach has been utilized to overcome the difficulties encountered with the dissection of tumors in the distal pelvis. Recently, a single-port robotic approach (rSPa) was introduced, where three arms and a camera emanate from a 2.5 cm diameter port. This report presents the first experience in the United States combining those two approaches (rSPa TaTME) in rectal cancer, evaluating its safety and oncologic outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective review of our prospectively maintained rectal cancer database. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, neoadjuvant treatment, and oncologic and surgical outcomes were recorded. Results: Between May 2022 and August 2024, ten patients (six females, four males) with a median age at surgery of 53 years (range: 38–85) and a mean BMI of 26 (±5) kg/m2 were included for analysis. The median distance of tumors from the anorectal junction was 3.2 cm (range: 2–5.3 cm). All patients had negative margins, with eight complete TME specimens, one near complete, and one incomplete. The mean number of lymph nodes harvested was 24 (±11). The average operative time was 351 (243–411) min. The average length of stay was four days. The ileostomy was reversed in nine out of ten patients. Six patients experienced complications within 30 days of surgery. There were no local or distal recurrences, with a mean follow-up of 20 months (range: 4–30). Conclusions: rSPa TaTME is a unique and innovative method of combining two minimally advanced approaches for the resection of distal rectal cancers, with acceptable surgical and oncologic outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotic Surgery for Gastrointestinal (GI) Malignancies)
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 3645 KiB  
Review
Cutting Edge: A Comprehensive Guide to Colorectal Cancer Surgery in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
by Ionut Eduard Iordache, Lucian-Flavius Herlo, Razvan Popescu, Daniel Ovidiu Costea, Luana Alexandrescu, Adrian Paul Suceveanu, Sorin Deacu, Gabriela Isabela Baltatescu, Alina Doina Nicoara, Nicoleta Leopa, Andreea Nelson Twakor, Andrei Octavian Iordache and Liliana Steriu
J. Mind Med. Sci. 2025, 12(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmms12010006 - 11 Mar 2025
Viewed by 786
Abstract
Over the past two decades, surgical techniques in colorectal cancer (CRC) have improved patient outcomes through precision and reduced invasiveness. Open colectomy, laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted procedures, and advanced rectal cancer treatments such as total mesorectal excision (TME) and transanal TME are discussed in [...] Read more.
Over the past two decades, surgical techniques in colorectal cancer (CRC) have improved patient outcomes through precision and reduced invasiveness. Open colectomy, laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted procedures, and advanced rectal cancer treatments such as total mesorectal excision (TME) and transanal TME are discussed in this article. Traditional open colectomy offers reliable resection but takes longer to recover. Laparoscopic surgery transformed CRC care by improving oncological outcomes, postoperative pain, and recovery. Automated surgery improves laparoscopy’s dexterity, precision, and 3D visualisation, making it ideal for rectal cancer pelvic dissections. TME is the gold standard treatment for rectal cancer, minimising local recurrence, while TaTME improves access for low-lying tumours, preserving the sphincter. In metastatic CRC, palliative procedures help manage blockage, perforation, and bleeding. Clinical examples and landmark trials show each technique’s efficacy in personalised care. Advanced surgical techniques and multidisciplinary approaches have improved CRC survival and quality of life. Advances in CRC treatment require creativity and customised surgery. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 3095 KiB  
Article
Long-Term Outcomes of Patients with Poor Prognostic Factors Following Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEMS) for Early Rectal Cancer
by Muneeb Ul Haq, Khaled Noureldin, David Mark Pritchard, Arthur Sun Myint, Carrie A. Duckworth, Ngu Wah Than, David M. Hughes, Shakil Ahmed and Muhammad Ahsan Javed
Biomedicines 2025, 13(2), 521; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines13020521 - 19 Feb 2025
Viewed by 736
Abstract
Background: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) is an organ-preserving approach for treatment of early rectal cancer (ERC). However, adverse histopathological features identified post-TEMS often necessitate adjuvant therapy. This study aims to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who underwent TEMS and were offered [...] Read more.
Background: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) is an organ-preserving approach for treatment of early rectal cancer (ERC). However, adverse histopathological features identified post-TEMS often necessitate adjuvant therapy. This study aims to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of patients who underwent TEMS and were offered adjuvant treatments with total mesorectal excision (TME), chemoradiotherapy (CRT), radiotherapy (RT), active surveillance, or dose escalation with contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB). Methods: This study included patients treated with TEMS for ERC between September 2012 and December 2022, with follow-up until December 2023. Patients with adverse histopathological features (extra-mural venous invasion, lympho-vascular invasion, R1 margins, tumour budding) were assigned to adjuvant treatments. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to mitigate selection bias. Results: Of the 117 patients, 24 underwent TME, 17 received CRT, 25 received RT, 14 underwent active surveillance, and 37 patients received CXB boost along with CRT. The median follow-up was 60 months (IQR 52–73). During this time, 29 patients developed recurrence, and 15 died. The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 78.6%, and disease-free survival (DFS) was 70.9%. Compared to CXB, the mortality risk for CRT (HR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.20–3.28; p = 0.77) and TME (HR = 3.68; 95% CI: 0.46–29.79; p = 0.22) was not significantly different. However, TME was associated with a significantly higher recurrence risk compared to CXB (HR = 7.57; 95% CI: 1.23–46.84; p = 0.029). Conclusions: An organ-preserving strategy with CRT or CRT combined with a CXB boost may offer comparable long-term outcomes and reduced recurrence risks for patients undergoing TEMS for ERC with poor prognostic features. Further research with larger cohorts is needed to validate these results. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 274 KiB  
Review
Early Rectal Cancer: Advances in Diagnosis and Management Strategies
by Huda Mohammed, Hadeel Mohamed, Nusyba Mohamed, Rajat Sharma and Jayesh Sagar
Cancers 2025, 17(4), 588; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17040588 - 9 Feb 2025
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2071
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most prevalent cause of cancer-related death and the third most common cancer globally. Early-stage rectal cancer is defined by lesions confined to the bowel wall, without extension beyond the submucosa in T1 or the muscularis propria in [...] Read more.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most prevalent cause of cancer-related death and the third most common cancer globally. Early-stage rectal cancer is defined by lesions confined to the bowel wall, without extension beyond the submucosa in T1 or the muscularis propria in T2, with no indication of lymph node involvement or distant metastasis. The gold standard for managing rectal cancer is total mesorectal excision (TME); however, it is linked to considerable morbidities and impaired quality of life. There is a growing interest in local resection and non-operative treatment of early RC for organ preservation. Local resection options include three types of transanal endoscopic surgery (TES): transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), transanal endoscopic operations (TEO), and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), while endoscopic resection includes endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Although the oncological outcome of local resection of early rectal cancer is debated in the current literature, some studies have shown comparable outcomes with radical surgery in selected patients. The use of adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in early rectal cancer management is also controversial in the literature, but a number of studies have reported promising outcomes. This review focuses on the available literature regarding diagnosis, staging, and management strategies of early rectal cancer and provides possible recommendations. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Gastrointestinal Malignancy: Epidemiology and Risk Factors)
11 pages, 681 KiB  
Article
Incidence and Risk Factors for Low Anterior Resection Syndrome following Trans-Anal Total Mesorectal Excision
by Shani Y. Parnasa, Ido Mizrahi, Brigitte Helou, Adiel Cohen, Mahmoud Abu Gazala, Alon J. Pikarsky and Noam Shussman
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(2), 437; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13020437 - 13 Jan 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1716
Abstract
Background: Trans-anal total mesorectal excision (Ta-TME) is a novel approach for the resection of rectal cancer. Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a frequent functional disorder that might follow restorative proctectomy. Data regarding bowel function after Ta-TME are scarce. The aim of this [...] Read more.
Background: Trans-anal total mesorectal excision (Ta-TME) is a novel approach for the resection of rectal cancer. Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a frequent functional disorder that might follow restorative proctectomy. Data regarding bowel function after Ta-TME are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for the development of LARS following Ta-TME. Methods: A prospectively maintained database of all patients who underwent Ta-TME for rectal cancer at our institution was reviewed. All patients who were operated on from January 2018 to December 2021 were evaluated. The LARS score questionnaire was used via telephone interviews. Incidence, severity and risk factors for LARS were evaluated. Results: Eighty-five patients underwent Ta-TME for rectal cancer between January 2018 and December 2021. Thirty-five patients were excluded due to ostomy status, death, local disease recurrence, ileal pouch or lack of compliance. Fifty patients were included in the analysis. LARS was diagnosed in 76% of patients. Anastomosis distance from dentate line was identified as a risk factor for LARS via multivariate analysis (p = 0.042). Neo-adjuvant therapy, hand sewn anastomosis and anastomotic leak did not increase the risk of LARS. Conclusion: LARS is a frequent condition following ta-TME, as it is used for other approaches to low anterior resection. Anastomosis distance from dentate line is an independent risk factor for LARS. In this study neo-adjuvant therapy, hand sewn anastomosis and anastomotic leak did not increase the risk of LARS. Further studies with longer follow-up times are required to better understand the functional outcomes following Ta-TME. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Laparoscopic and Surgical Treatment for Colorectal Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 318 KiB  
Review
What Is the Comparative Efficacy of Surgical, Endoscopic, Transanal Resection, and Radiotherapy Modalities in the Treatment of Rectal Cancer?
by Alexandru Isaic, Alexandru Cătălin Motofelea, Dan Costachescu, Gheorghe Nicusor Pop, Bogdan Totolici, Dorel Popovici and Razvan Gheorghe Diaconescu
Healthcare 2023, 11(16), 2347; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11162347 - 20 Aug 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1881
Abstract
Background: Rectal cancer is a significant healthcare burden, and effective treatment is crucial. This research aims to compare the effectiveness of surgical and endoscopic resection, transanal resection, and radiotherapy. Methods: A literature analysis was conducted in order to identify relevant studies, by comparing [...] Read more.
Background: Rectal cancer is a significant healthcare burden, and effective treatment is crucial. This research aims to compare the effectiveness of surgical and endoscopic resection, transanal resection, and radiotherapy. Methods: A literature analysis was conducted in order to identify relevant studies, by comparing the different surgical approaches and variables affecting treatment decisions. The findings were analyzed and synthesized to provide a comprehensive overview. Results: Surgical treatment, particularly TME (total mesorectal excision), proved consistent efficacy in achieving complete tumor resection and improving long-term survival. Endoscopic treatment and transanal resection techniques were promising for early-stage tumors but were associated with higher local recurrence rates. Radiotherapy, especially in combination with chemotherapy, played a crucial role in locally advanced cases, improving local control and reducing recurrence risk. Patient data, tumor characteristics, and healthcare system factors were identified as important factors in treatment modality selection. Conclusion: Surgical treatment, specifically TME, remains the recommended standard approach for rectal cancer, providing excellent oncological outcomes. Endoscopic treatment and transanal resection techniques can be considered for selected early-stage cases, while radiotherapy is beneficial for locally advanced tumors. Treatment decisions should be personalized based on patient and tumor characteristics, considering the available resources and expertise within the healthcare system. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancer)
14 pages, 279 KiB  
Article
Surgical Outcomes, Long-Term Recurrence Rate, and Resource Utilization in a Prospective Cohort of 165 Patients Treated by Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Distal Rectal Cancer
by Severin Gloor, Gioia Pozza, Rebekka Troller, Markus Wehrli and Michel Adamina
Cancers 2023, 15(4), 1190; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15041190 - 13 Feb 2023
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 2207
Abstract
A transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a smart alternative to a conventional TME. However, worrisome reports of a high recurrence and complications triggered a moratorium in a few countries. This study assessed the outcomes and resource utilization of a taTME. Consecutive patients [...] Read more.
A transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a smart alternative to a conventional TME. However, worrisome reports of a high recurrence and complications triggered a moratorium in a few countries. This study assessed the outcomes and resource utilization of a taTME. Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer treated by a taTME were prospectively included. Outcomes were reported as the median and interquartile range (IQR). One hundred sixty-five patients (67% male and 33% female) with a tumor 7 cm (IQR 5–10) from the anal verge were followed for 50 months (IQR 32–79). The resection margins were threatened in 25% of the patients, while 75% of the patients received neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. A good mesorectal dissection and clear margins were achieved in 96% of the specimens, and 27 lymph nodes (IQR 20–38) were harvested. Ninety-day major morbidity affected 36 patients (21.8%), including 12 with anastomotic leakages (7.2%). A recurrence occurred locally in 9 patients (5.4%), and 44 patients had a distant metastasis (26.7%). The five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were 67% and 90%, respectively. A multivariate analysis found a long operation and frailty predicted an anastomotic leak, while a positive distal margin and lymph nodes predicted a local recurrence and distant metastasis. A two-team taTME saved 102 min of operative time and EUR 1385 when compared to a one-team approach. Transanal total mesorectal excision produced sound surgical quality and excellent oncologic outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Contemporary Treatment of Colorectal Cancer)
14 pages, 1524 KiB  
Article
Challenges and Learning Curves in Adopting TaTME and Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Cusum Analysis
by Pere Planellas, Lídia Cornejo, Anna Pigem, Núria Gómez-Romeu, David Julià-Bergkvist, Nuria Ortega, José Ignacio Rodríguez-Hermosa and Ramon Farrés
Cancers 2022, 14(20), 5089; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14205089 - 18 Oct 2022
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 2641
Abstract
New techniques are being developed to improve the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. This paper analyzes the learning curves for transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and robot-assisted surgery in our colorectal surgery department. We analyzed retrospectively data from patients undergoing curative [...] Read more.
New techniques are being developed to improve the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. This paper analyzes the learning curves for transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and robot-assisted surgery in our colorectal surgery department. We analyzed retrospectively data from patients undergoing curative and elective surgery for rectal cancer ≤12 cm from the anal verge. We excluded extended surgeries. We used cumulative sum (CUSUM) curve analysis to identify inflection points. Between 2015 and 2021, 588 patients underwent surgery for rectal cancer at our center: 67 taTME and 79 robot-assisted surgeries. To overcome the operative time learning curve, 14 cases were needed for taTME and 53 for robot-assisted surgery. The morbidity rate started to decrease after the 17th case in taTME and after the 49th case in robot-assisted surgery, but it is much less abrupt in robot-assisted group. During the initial learning phase, the rate of anastomotic leakage was higher in taTME (35.7% vs. 5.7%). Two Urological lesions occurred in taTME but not in robot-assisted surgery. The conversion rate was higher in robot-assisted surgery (1.5% vs. 10.1%). Incorporating new techniques is complex and entails a transition period. In our experience, taTME involved a higher rate of serious complications than robot-assisted surgery during initial learning period but required a shorter learning curve. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotic Cancer Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 2200 KiB  
Article
Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME) versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Lower Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis
by Yueh-Chen Lin, Ya-Ting Kuo, Jeng-Fu You, Yih-Jong Chern, Yu-Jen Hsu, Yen-Lin Yu, Jy-Ming Chiang, Chien-Yuh Yeh, Pao-Shiu Hsieh and Chun-Kai Liao
Cancers 2022, 14(17), 4098; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14174098 - 24 Aug 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2814
Abstract
Studies have reported positive short-term and histopathological results of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for mid-low rectal cancer. The long-term oncological outcomes are diverse, and concerns regarding the high local recurrence (LR) rate of TaTME have recently increased. We retrospectively analyzed 298 consecutive [...] Read more.
Studies have reported positive short-term and histopathological results of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for mid-low rectal cancer. The long-term oncological outcomes are diverse, and concerns regarding the high local recurrence (LR) rate of TaTME have recently increased. We retrospectively analyzed 298 consecutive patients who underwent Laparoscopic TME (LapTME) or TaTME between January 2015 and December 2019. Propensity score-matching (PSM) was performed with patients matched for demographics and stage. After PSM, 63 patients were included in each group. The TaTME group had a longer mean operative time (394 vs. 333 min, p < 0.001). The blood loss, diverting stoma rate, and conversion rate were similar. Postoperatively, TaTME and LapTME had compatible complications, recovery, and hospital stay. A similar specimen quality was detected in both groups. After a mean follow-up period of 41–47 months, TaTME had less LR than LapTME (9.5% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.031). The 3-year overall survival was 80.3% in the TaTME group and 73.6% in the LapTME group (p = 0.331). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 72.0% in the TaTME group and 56.6% in the LapTME group (p = 0.038). In conclusion, better DFS and fewer LR events were observed after TaTME; thus, TaTME can be considered a safe and feasible approach in patients with low rectal cancer. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cancer Minimally Invasive Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 763 KiB  
Review
Artificial Intelligence in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Present and Future Perspectives
by Giuseppe Quero, Pietro Mascagni, Fiona R. Kolbinger, Claudio Fiorillo, Davide De Sio, Fabio Longo, Carlo Alberto Schena, Vito Laterza, Fausto Rosa, Roberta Menghi, Valerio Papa, Vincenzo Tondolo, Caterina Cina, Marius Distler, Juergen Weitz, Stefanie Speidel, Nicolas Padoy and Sergio Alfieri
Cancers 2022, 14(15), 3803; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14153803 - 4 Aug 2022
Cited by 31 | Viewed by 5360
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) and computer vision (CV) are beginning to impact medicine. While evidence on the clinical value of AI-based solutions for the screening and staging of colorectal cancer (CRC) is mounting, CV and AI applications to enhance the surgical treatment of CRC [...] Read more.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and computer vision (CV) are beginning to impact medicine. While evidence on the clinical value of AI-based solutions for the screening and staging of colorectal cancer (CRC) is mounting, CV and AI applications to enhance the surgical treatment of CRC are still in their early stage. This manuscript introduces key AI concepts to a surgical audience, illustrates fundamental steps to develop CV for surgical applications, and provides a comprehensive overview on the state-of-the-art of AI applications for the treatment of CRC. Notably, studies show that AI can be trained to automatically recognize surgical phases and actions with high accuracy even in complex colorectal procedures such as transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME). In addition, AI models were trained to interpret fluorescent signals and recognize correct dissection planes during total mesorectal excision (TME), suggesting CV as a potentially valuable tool for intraoperative decision-making and guidance. Finally, AI could have a role in surgical training, providing automatic surgical skills assessment in the operating room. While promising, these proofs of concept require further development, validation in multi-institutional data, and clinical studies to confirm AI as a valuable tool to enhance CRC treatment. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Reviews in Cancer Therapy)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1227 KiB  
Article
Could Stoma Be Avoided after Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer? Experience with Transanal Tube in 195 Cases
by Antonio Sciuto, Roberto Peltrini, Federica Andreoli, Andrea Gianmario Di Santo Albini, Maria Michela Di Nuzzo, Nello Pirozzi, Marcello Filotico, Federica Lauria, Giuseppe Boccia, Michele D’Ambra, Ruggero Lionetti, Carlo De Werra, Felice Pirozzi and Francesco Corcione
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(9), 2632; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11092632 - 7 May 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3416
Abstract
Anastomotic leakage is the most-feared complication of rectal surgery. Transanal devices have been suggested for anastomotic protection as an alternative to defunctioning stoma, although evidence is conflicting, and no single device is widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this paper is [...] Read more.
Anastomotic leakage is the most-feared complication of rectal surgery. Transanal devices have been suggested for anastomotic protection as an alternative to defunctioning stoma, although evidence is conflicting, and no single device is widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this paper is to investigate the safety and efficacy of a transanal tube for the prevention of leakage following laparoscopic rectal cancer resection. A transanal tube was used in the cases of total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, undamaged doughnuts, and negative intraoperative air-leak test. The transanal tube was kept in place until the seventh postoperative day. A total of 195 consecutive patients were retrieved from a prospective surgical database and included in the study. Of these, 71.8% received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The perioperative mortality rate was 1.0%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients, accounting for an incidence rate of 9.7%. Among these, 13 patients underwent re-laparoscopy and ileostomy, while 6 patients were managed conservatively. Overall, the stoma rate was 6.7%. The use of a transanal tube may be a suitable strategy for anastomotic protection following restorative rectal cancer resection. This approach could avoid the burden of a stoma in selected patients with low anastomoses. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Colorectal Surgery: Current Challenges and Future Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 1676 KiB  
Review
New Frontiers in Management of Early and Advanced Rectal Cancer
by Jordan R. Wlodarczyk and Sang W. Lee
Cancers 2022, 14(4), 938; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14040938 - 14 Feb 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 5678
Abstract
It is important to understand advances in treatment options for rectal cancer. We attempt to highlight advances in rectal cancer treatment in the form of a systematic review. Early-stage rectal cancer focuses on minimally invasive endoluminal surgery, with importance placed on patient selection [...] Read more.
It is important to understand advances in treatment options for rectal cancer. We attempt to highlight advances in rectal cancer treatment in the form of a systematic review. Early-stage rectal cancer focuses on minimally invasive endoluminal surgery, with importance placed on patient selection as the driving factor for improved outcomes. To achieve a complete pathologic response, various neoadjuvant chemoradiation regimens have been employed. Short-course radiation therapy, total neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and others provide unique advantages with select patient populations best suited for each. With a clinical complete response, a “watch and wait” non-operative surveillance has been introduced with preliminary equivalency to radical resection. Various modalities for total mesorectal excision, such as robotic or transanal, have advantages and can be utilized in select patient populations. Tumors demonstrating solid organ or peritoneal spread, traditionally defined as unresectable lesions conveying a terminal diagnosis, have recently undergone advances in hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy. Hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy has demonstrated clear advantages in 5-year survival over standard chemotherapy. With the peritoneal spread of colorectal cancer, HIPEC with cytoreductive therapy has emerged as the preferred treatment. Understanding the various therapeutic interventions will pave the way for improved patient outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Management of Early and Advanced Rectal Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1915 KiB  
Review
Update on Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer
by Simona Giuratrabocchetta, Giampaolo Formisano, Adelona Salaj, Enrico Opocher, Luca Ferraro, Francesco Toti and Paolo Pietro Bianchi
J. Pers. Med. 2021, 11(9), 900; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11090900 - 8 Sep 2021
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 3182
Abstract
The minimally invasive treatment of rectal cancer with Total Mesorectal Excision is a complex and challenging procedure due to technical and anatomical issues which could impair postoperative, oncological and functional outcomes, especially in a defined subgroup of patients. The results from recent randomized [...] Read more.
The minimally invasive treatment of rectal cancer with Total Mesorectal Excision is a complex and challenging procedure due to technical and anatomical issues which could impair postoperative, oncological and functional outcomes, especially in a defined subgroup of patients. The results from recent randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery are still conflicting and trans-anal bottom-up approaches have recently been developed. Robotic surgery represents the latest consistent innovation in the field of minimally invasive surgery that may potentially overcome the technical limitations of conventional laparoscopy thanks to an enhanced dexterity, especially in deep narrow operative fields such as the pelvis. Results from population-based multicenter studies have shown the potential advantages of robotic surgery when compared to its laparoscopic counterpart in terms of reduced conversions, complication rates and length of stay. Costs, often advocated as one of the main drawbacks of robotic surgery, should be thoroughly evaluated including both the direct and indirect costs, with the latter having the potential of counterbalancing the excess of expenditure directly related to the purchase and maintenance of robotic equipment. Further prospectively maintained or randomized data are still required to better delineate the advantages of the robotic platform, especially in the subset of most complex and technically challenging patients from both an anatomical and oncological standpoint. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Update on Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 651 KiB  
Article
Preoperative Diagnostic Uncertainty in T2–T3 Rectal Adenomas and T1–T2 Adenocarcinomas and a Therapeutic Dilemma: Transanal Endoscopic Surgery, or Total Mesorectal Excision?
by Xavier Serra-Aracil, Noemi Montes, Laura Mora-Lopez, Anna Serracant, Carles Pericay, Pere Rebasa and Salvador Navarro-Soto
Cancers 2021, 13(15), 3685; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13153685 - 22 Jul 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2191
Abstract
Background: Endorectal ultrasound and rectal magnetic resonance are sometimes unable to differentiate between stages T2 and T3 in rectal adenomas that are possible adenocarcinomas, or between stages T1 and T2 in rectal adenocarcinomas. These cases of diagnostic uncertainty raise a therapeutic dilemma: transanal [...] Read more.
Background: Endorectal ultrasound and rectal magnetic resonance are sometimes unable to differentiate between stages T2 and T3 in rectal adenomas that are possible adenocarcinomas, or between stages T1 and T2 in rectal adenocarcinomas. These cases of diagnostic uncertainty raise a therapeutic dilemma: transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) or total mesorectal excision (TME)? Methods: An observational study of a cohort of 803 patients who underwent TES from 2004 to 2021. Patients operated on for adenoma (group I) and low-grade T1 adenocarcinoma (group II) were included. The variables related to uncertain diagnosis, and to the definitive pathological diagnosis of adenocarcinoma stage higher than T1, were analyzed. Results: A total of 638 patients were included. Group I comprised 529 patients, 113 (21.4%) with uncertain diagnosis. Seventeen (15%) eventually had a pathological diagnosis of adenocarcinoma higher than T1. However, the variable diagnostic uncertainty was a risk factor for adenocarcinoma above T1 (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1–4.7). Group II included 109 patients, eight with uncertain diagnosis (7.3%). Two patients presented a definitive pathological diagnosis of adenocarcinoma above T1. Conclusions: On the strength of these data, we recommend TES as the initial indication in cases of diagnostic uncertainty. Multicenter studies with larger samples for both groups should now be performed to further assess this strategy of initiating treatment with TES. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop