-
PloS One 2023Minimally invasive total mesorectal excision is increasingly being used as an alternative to open surgery in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. This...
OBJECTIVES
Minimally invasive total mesorectal excision is increasingly being used as an alternative to open surgery in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. This systematic review aimed to compare the total, operative and hospitalization costs of open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excision.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) (S1 File) A literature review was conducted (end-of-search date: January 1, 2023) and quality assessment performed using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria.
RESULTS
12 studies were included, reporting on 2542 patients (226 open, 1192 laparoscopic, 998 robot-assisted and 126 transanal total mesorectal excision). Total costs of minimally invasive total mesorectal excision were higher compared to the open technique in the majority of included studies. For robot-assisted total mesorectal excision, higher operative costs and lower hospitalization costs were reported compared to the open and laparoscopic technique. A meta-analysis could not be performed due to low study quality and a high level of heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was caused by differences in the learning curve and statistical methods used.
CONCLUSION
Literature regarding costs of total mesorectal excision techniques is limited in quality and number. Available evidence suggests minimally invasive techniques may be more expensive compared to open total mesorectal excision. High-quality economical evaluations, accounting for the learning curve, are needed to properly assess costs of the different techniques.
Topics: Humans; Robotics; Rectal Neoplasms; Proctectomy; Laparoscopy; Hospitalization; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Rectum; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37506122
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289090 -
Surgical Endoscopy Sep 2020Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) appeared to be a challenging alternative to Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision (LaTME) for low and middle rectal cancer.... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) appeared to be a challenging alternative to Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision (LaTME) for low and middle rectal cancer. However, evidence remains low on the possible benefits of TaTME. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of comparative studies between TaTME and LaTME.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted on Medline, Embase, and Cochrane database. The following outcomes were assessed: conversion, operative time, morbidity, length of stay, readmission rate, and pathological and oncological results.
RESULTS
After review of 756 identified records, 14 studies were included (case-matched control n = 10, prospective cohort n = 3, retrospective study n = 1) comparing 495 TaTME and 547 LaTME. No randomized trial was available. Following criteria were significantly improved after TaTME vs. LaTME: readmission's rate (9% after TaTME vs. 18% after LaTME, OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.26-0.74, p = 0.002), length of stay (OR - 2.17, 95%CI - 3.68 to - 0.66, p = 0.005), overall morbidity (34 vs. 41%, OR 0.65, 95%CI 0.46-0.91, p = 0.001), major morbidity (8.7 vs. 14%, OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.34-0.83, p = 0.005), anastomotic leak (6.4 vs. 11.6%, OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.31-0.93, p = 0.03), and circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement (4 vs. 8.8%, OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.27-0.86, p = 0.01). No significant differences were observed between TaTME and LaTME regarding conversion's rate (3.2 vs. 8.8%, p = 0.09), operative time (OR - 10.73, p = 0.26), intraoperative complications (8.1 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.48), minor morbidity (27.9 vs. 29.6%, p = 0.27), positive distal resection margin (1.4 vs. 1.4%, p = 0.93), complete TME (75 vs. 75%, p = 0.74), harvested lymph nodes (OR 0.38, p = 0.44), and local recurrence rate (3.5 vs. 2.2%, p = 0.64).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis based on nonrandomized studies suggests that TaTME seems better than LaTME in terms of overall and major morbidities, anastomotic leak, readmission rate, CRM involvement, and length of stay. These results need to be confirmed by randomized controlled trial.
Topics: Aged; Anastomotic Leak; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Readmission; Postoperative Care; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Publication Bias; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Retrospective Studies; Risk; Time Factors; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 31617090
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-07160-8 -
Minerva Surgery Aug 2021Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a safe procedure and the rates of intra- and postoperative complications are low. The information in the literature on the...
INTRODUCTION
Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is a safe procedure and the rates of intra- and postoperative complications are low. The information in the literature on the management of these complications is limited, and so their importance may be either under- or overestimated (which may in turn lead to under- or overtreatment). The present article reviews the most relevant series of TEM procedures and their complications and describes various approaches to their management.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic review of the literature, including TEM series of more than 150 cases each. We analyzed the population characteristics, surgical variables and intraoperative and postoperative complications.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 1043 records were found. After review, 1031 were excluded. The review therefore includes 12 independent cohorts of TEM procedures with a total of 4395 patients. The rate of perforation into the peritoneal cavity was 5.1%, and conversion to abdominal approach was required in 0.8% of cases. The most frequent complications were acute urinary retention (AUR, 4.9%) and rectal bleeding (2.2%). Less common complications included abscesses (0.99%) and rectovaginal fistula (0.62%). Mortality rates were low, with a mean value of 0.29%.
CONCLUSIONS
Awareness and knowledge of TEM complications and their management can play an important role in their treatment and patient safety. Here, we present a review of the most important TEM series and their complication rates and describe various approaches to their management.
Topics: Female; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33433070
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-5691.20.08405-9 -
Surgical Endoscopy Sep 2022The standard treatment of rectal carcinoma is surgical resection according to the total mesorectal excision principle, either by open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The standard treatment of rectal carcinoma is surgical resection according to the total mesorectal excision principle, either by open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal technique. No clear consensus exists regarding the length of the learning curve for the minimal invasive techniques. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the current literature regarding the learning curve of minimal invasive TME.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for studies with the primary or secondary aim to assess the learning curve of either laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal TME for rectal cancer. The primary outcome was length of the learning curve per minimal invasive technique. Descriptive statistics were used to present results and the MINORS tool was used to assess risk of bias.
RESULTS
45 studies, with 7562 patients, were included in this systematic review. Length of the learning curve based on intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, pathological outcomes, or a composite endpoint using a risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis was 50 procedures for the laparoscopic technique, 32-75 procedures for the robot-assisted technique and 36-54 procedures for the transanal technique. Due to the low quality of studies and a high level of heterogeneity a meta-analysis could not be performed. Heterogeneity was caused by patient-related factors, surgeon-related factors and differences in statistical methods.
CONCLUSION
Current high-quality literature regarding length of the learning curve of minimal invasive TME techniques is scarce. Available literature suggests equal lengths of the learning curves of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal TME. Well-designed studies, using adequate statistical methods are required to properly assess the learning curve, while taking into account patient-related and surgeon-related factors.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Learning Curve; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Robotics; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35697853
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09087-z -
International Journal of Colorectal... Jun 2021There is concern that transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) may result in poorer functional outcomes as compared to laparoscopic TME (LaTME). These concerns arise... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparing functional outcomes between transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
There is concern that transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) may result in poorer functional outcomes as compared to laparoscopic TME (LaTME). These concerns arise from the fact that TaTME entails both a low anastomosis and prolonged dilatation of the anal sphincter from the transanal platform.
OBJECTIVES
This paper aimed to assess the comparative functional outcomes following TaTME and LaTME, with a focus on anorectal and genitourinary outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
A meta-analysis and systematic review was performed on available literature between 2000 and 2020 from the PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases.
STUDY SELECTION
All comparative studies assessing the functional outcomes following taTME versus LaTME in adults were included.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE
Functional anorectal and genitourinary outcomes were evaluated using validated scoring systems.
RESULTS
A total of seven studies were included, consisting of one randomised controlled trial and six non-randomised studies. There were 242 (52.0%) and 233 (48.0%) patients in the TaTME and LaTME groups respectively. Anorectal functional outcomes were similar in both groups with regard to LARS scores (30.6 in the TaTME group and 28.3 in the LaTME group), Jorge-Wexner incontinence scores, and EORTC QLQ C30/29 scores. Genitourinary function was similar in both groups with IPSS scores of 5.5 to 8.0 in the TaTME group, and 3.5 to 10.1 in the LaTME group. (p = 0.835).
CONCLUSION
This review corroborates findings from previous studies in showing that the transanal approach is not associated with increased anal sphincter damage. Further prospective clinical trials are needed in this field of research.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 33580808
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-03849-2 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery May 2024Transanal minimally invasive surgery has theoretical advantages for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery. We performed a systematic review assessing technical approaches... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Transanal minimally invasive surgery has theoretical advantages for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery. We performed a systematic review assessing technical approaches to transanal IPAA (Ta-IPAA) and meta-analysis comparing outcomes to transabdominal (abd-IPAA) approaches.
METHODS
Three databases were searched for articles investigating Ta-IPAA outcomes. Primary outcome was anastomotic leak rate. Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, post operative morbidity, and length of stay (LoS). Staging, plane of dissection, anastomosis, extraction site, operative time, and functional outcomes were also assessed.
RESULTS
Searches identified 13 studies with 404 unique Ta-IPAA and 563 abd-IPAA patients. Anastomotic leak rates were 6.3% and 8.4% (RD 0, 95% CI -0.066 to 0.065, p = 0.989) and conversion rates 2.5% and 12.5% (RD -0.106, 95% CI -0.155 to -0.057, p = 0.104) for Ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. Average LoS was one day shorter (MD -1, 95% CI -1.876 to 0.302, p = 0.007). A three-stage approach was most common (47.6%), operative time was 261(± 60) mins, and total mesorectal excision and close rectal dissection were equally used (49.5% vs 50.5%). Functional outcomes were similar. Lack of randomised control trials, case-matched series, and significant study heterogeneity limited analysis, resulting in low to very low certainty of evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
Analysis demonstrated the feasibility and safety of Ta-IPAA with reduced LoS, trend towards less conversions, and comparable anastomotic leak rates and post operative morbidity. Though results are encouraging, they need to be interpreted with heterogeneity and selection bias in mind. Robust randomised clinical trials are warranted to adequately compare ta-IPAA to transabdominal approaches.
Topics: Humans; Proctocolectomy, Restorative; Anastomotic Leak; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome; Length of Stay; Colonic Pouches; Operative Time; Anastomosis, Surgical
PubMed: 38705912
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-024-03343-7 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Feb 2023In the treatment of early-stage rectal cancer, a growing number of studies have shown that transanal endoscopic microsurgery is one of the alternatives to radical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
In the treatment of early-stage rectal cancer, a growing number of studies have shown that transanal endoscopic microsurgery is one of the alternatives to radical surgery adhering to total mesorectal excision that can reduce the incidence of adverse events without compromising treatment outcomes. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the safety and treatment effect of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery adhering to total mesorectal excision to provide a basis for clinical treatment selections.
METHOD
We searched the literatures of four major databases, PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane Library, without limitation of time. The literatures included randomized controlled studies and cohort studies comparing two surgical procedures of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery adhering to total mesorectal excision. Treatment effectiveness and safety results of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery were extracted from the included literatures and statistically analyzed using RevMan5.4 and stata17.
RESULT
Ultimately, 13 papers were included in the study including 5 randomized controlled studies and 8 cohort studies. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the treatment effect and safety of both transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical surgery in distant metastasis (RR, 0.59 (0.34, 1.02), P > 0.05), overall recurrence (RR, 1.49 (0.96, 2.31), P > 0.05), disease-specific-survival (RR, 0.74 (0.09, 1.57), P > 0.05), dehiscence of the sutureline or anastomosis leakage (RR, 0.57 (0.30, 1.06), P > 0.05), postoperative bleeding (RR, 0.47 (0.22, 0.99), P > 0.05), and pneumonia (RR, 0.37, (0.10, 1.40), P > 0.05) were not significantly different. However, they differ significantly in perioperative mortality (RR, 0.26 (0.07, 0.93, P < 0.05)), local recurrence (RR, 2.51 (1.53, 4.21), P < 0.05),_overall survival_ (RR, 0.88 (0.74, 1.00), P < 0.05), disease-free-survival (RR, 1.08 (0.97, 1.19), P < 0.05), temporary stoma (RR, 0.05 (0.01, 0.20), P < 0.05), permanent stoma (RR, 0.16 (0.08, 0.33), P < 0.05), postoperative complications (RR, 0.35 (0.21, 0.59), P < 0.05), rectal pain (RR, 1.47 (1.11, 1.95), P < 0.05), operation time (RR, -97.14 (-115.81, -78.47), P < 0.05), blood loss (RR, -315.52 (-472.47, -158.57), P < 0.05), and time of hospitalization (RR, -8.82 (-10.38, -7.26), P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Transanal endoscopic microsurgery seems to be one of the alternatives to radical surgery for early-stage rectal cancer, but more high-quality clinical studies are needed to provide a reliable basis.
Topics: Humans; Microsurgery; Neoplasm Staging; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Retrospective Studies; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36800079
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-023-04341-9 -
Colorectal Disease : the Official... May 2024Restorative proctocolectomy with transabdominal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (abd-IPAA) has become the standard surgical treatment for medically refractory ulcerative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Restorative proctocolectomy with transabdominal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (abd-IPAA) has become the standard surgical treatment for medically refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). However, it requires a technically difficult distal anorectal dissection and anastomosis due to the bony confines of the deep pelvis. To address these challenges, the transanal IPAA approach (ta-IPAA) was developed. This novel approach may offer increased visibility and range of motion compared with abd-IPAA, although its postoperative benefits remain unclear. The aim of this work was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare and inform the frequency of postoperative outcomes between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA for patients with UC.
METHOD
Several databases were searched from inception until May 2022 for studies reporting postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing ta-IPAA. Reviewers, working independently and in duplicate, evaluated studies for inclusion and graded the risk of bias. Odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD) and prevalence ratio (PR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Sensitivity analysis was performed.
RESULTS
Ten retrospective studies comprising 284 patients with ta-IPAA were included. Total mesorectal excision was performed in 61.8% of cases and close rectal dissection in 27.9%. There was no difference in the odds of Clavien-Dindo (CD) I-II complications, CD III-IV and anastomotic leak (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.27-3.40; OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.65-2.16; OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58-3.23; respectively) between ta-IPAA and abd-IPAA. The ta-IPAA pooled CD I-II complication rate was 18% (95% CI 5%-35%) and for CD III-IV 10% (95% CI 5%-17%), and the anastomotic leak rate was 6% (95% CI 2%-10%). There were no deaths reported.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis compared the novel ta-IPAA procedure with abd-IPAA and found no difference in postoperative outcomes. While the need for randomized controlled trails and comparison of functional outcomes between both approaches remains, this evidence should assist colorectal surgeons to decide if ta-IPAA is a viable alternative.
Topics: Humans; Proctocolectomy, Restorative; Colitis, Ulcerative; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome; Colonic Pouches; Anal Canal; Female; Male; Adult; Retrospective Studies; Middle Aged; Anastomosis, Surgical; Anastomotic Leak; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
PubMed: 38594838
DOI: 10.1111/codi.16977 -
Surgical Endoscopy Apr 2020While multiple studies have evaluated endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) to remove large rectal tumors, there remains a... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
While multiple studies have evaluated endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) to remove large rectal tumors, there remains a paucity of data to evaluate their comparative efficacy and safety. The primary aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety of ESD versus TEM for the treatment of rectal tumors.
METHODS
Individualized search strategies were developed from inception through November 2018 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Measured outcomes included pooled enbloc resection rates, margin-negative (R) resection rates, procedure-associated adverse events, and rates of recurrence. This was a cumulative meta-analysis performed by calculating pooled proportions. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran Q test and I statistics, and publication bias by funnel plot using Egger and Begg tests.
RESULTS
Three studies (n = 158 patients; 55.22% male) were included in this meta-analysis. Patients with ESD compared to TEM had similar age (P = 0.090), rectal tumor size (P = 0.108), and diagnosis rate of adenoma to cancer (P = 0.53). ESD lesions were more proximal as compared to TEM (8.41 ± 3.49 vs. 5.11 ± 1.43 cm from the anal verge; P < 0.001). Procedure time and hospital stay were shorter for ESD compared to TEM [(79.78 ± 24.45 vs. 116.61 ± 19.35 min; P < 0.001) and (3.99 ± 0.32 vs. 5.83 ± 0.94 days; P < 0.001), respectively]. No significant differences between enbloc resection rates [OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.22-4.33); P = 0.98; I = 0.00%] and R resection rates [OR 1.16 (95% CI 0.36-3.76); P = 0.80; I = 0.00%] were noted between ESD and TEM. ESD and TEM reported similar rates of adverse events [OR 1.15 (95% CI 0.47-2.77); P = 0.80; I = 0.00%] and rates of recurrence [OR 0.46 (95% CI 0.07-3.14); P = 0.43; I = 0.00%].
CONCLUSION
ESD and TEM possess similar rates of resection, adverse events, and recurrence for patients with large rectal tumors; however, ESD is associated with significantly shorter procedure times and duration of hospitalization. Future studies are needed to evaluate healthcare utilization for these two strategies.
Topics: Adenoma; Anal Canal; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Endoscopic Mucosal Resection; Female; Humans; Length of Stay; Male; Margins of Excision; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Operative Time; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31292744
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06945-1 -
Minerva Surgery Apr 2022Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and transanal endoscopic operation (TEO) have been initially described for local excision of rectal adenomas and selected cases...
INTRODUCTION
Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and transanal endoscopic operation (TEO) have been initially described for local excision of rectal adenomas and selected cases of rectal carcinomas. In the past decade, however, several new indications raised, and others could raise in the future. The aim of this review was to evaluate, both in the literature and in our personal experience, the use of TEM and TEO for non-conventional applications, different from rectal tumors.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We conducted a systematic review of published papers and we selected articles reporting patients who underwent endoscopic surgery for other medical reason than polyp cancer resection, with TEM or TEO. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and bibliographies of the selected studies were searched for articles in English published up to May 2020 to identify all relevant articles. We excluded articles reporting TEM and TEO used for classical indications. We finally report our experience of non-conventional use of TEO in 5 patients with different diseases.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
The research revealed 800 papers and among them we selected 52 articles for a total of 697 patients. Of all patients, only 52 had intraoperative or postoperative complications, with only 10 patients requiring major surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study suggests that TEM and TEO may be valid alternatives to traditional surgery in situations other than its classical indication. These findings can positively impact on the care of patients, who could benefit from less invasive surgical procedures associated with lower morbidity.
Topics: Adenoma; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Endoscopy; Humans; Rectal Neoplasms; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery
PubMed: 34047531
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-5691.21.08774-8