-
Discover Oncology 2021The surgical treatment options for low rectal cancer patients include the Abdominoperineal Resection and the sphincter saving Low Anterior Resection. There is growing... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial
BACKGROUND
The surgical treatment options for low rectal cancer patients include the Abdominoperineal Resection and the sphincter saving Low Anterior Resection. There is growing evidence towards better outcomes for patients being treated with a Low Anterior Resection compared to an Abdominoperineal Resection.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the short term and oncological outcomes in low rectal cancer treatment.
DESIGN
This is a retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data.
SETTING
Rectal cancer patients from a single center in the United Kingdom.
PATIENTS
Patients included all low rectal cancer patients (≤ 6 cm from the anal verge) undergoing Low Anterior Resection or Abdominoperineal Resection between 2006 and 2016.
OUTCOME MEASURES
To identify differences in postoperative complications and disease free and overall survival.
RESULTS
A total of 262 patients were included for analysis (Low Anterior Resection n = 170, Abdominoperineal Resection n = 92). Abdominoperineal Resection patients were significantly older (69 versus 66 years), had lower tumours (3 versus 5 cm), received more neo-adjuvant radiation, had longer hospital stay and more complications (wound infections and wound dehiscence). Low Anterior Resections had a significantly higher number of harvested lymph nodes (17 versus 12) however there was no difference in nodal involvement and R0 resection rate. No significant difference was found for recurrence, overall survival and disease free survival.
LIMITATION
Retrospective review of cancer database and single center data.
CONCLUSION
In the treatment of low rectal cancer Abdominoperineal Resection is associated with higher rates of postoperative complications and longer hospital stay compared to the Low Anterior Resection, with similar oncological outcomes.
PubMed: 33855312
DOI: 10.1007/s12672-021-00400-1 -
Colorectal Disease : the Official... Nov 2021This study aimed to quantify displacement of urogenital organs after abdominoperineal resection (APR), and to explore patient and treatment characteristics associated...
AIM
This study aimed to quantify displacement of urogenital organs after abdominoperineal resection (APR), and to explore patient and treatment characteristics associated with displacement.
METHOD
Patients from 16 centres who underwent APR for primary or recurrent rectal cancer (2001-2018) with evaluable preoperative and 6-18 months postoperative radiological imaging were included in the study. Anatomical landmarks on sagittal images were related to a coordinate system based on reference lines between fixed bony structures and absolute displacements were calculated using the Pythagorean theorem. Rotation of landmarks was measured relative to a pubic-S5 reference line.
RESULTS
There were 248 patients included of which 171 were men and 77 women. The median displacement of the internal urethral orifice was 25 mm in men (maximum 65), and 17 mm in women (maximum 50). Rotation of the internal urethral orifice was in a caudal direction in 160/170 (94%) of men and 65/73 (89%) of women, with a median of 32 degrees (maximum 85) and 33 degrees (maximum 83), respectively. Displacements of the posterior bladder wall, distal end of prostatic urethra and cervix were significantly correlated with the internal urethral orifice. In linear regression analysis, biological mesh reconstruction of the pelvic floor and visceral interposition were significantly associated with increased displacement of the internal urethral orifice, and female gender and any filling of the presacral space with decreased displacement.
CONCLUSIONS
Substantial absolute displacement and rotation of urogenital organs after APR for rectal cancer were observed, but with high variability among both men and women, and being significantly associated with reconstructive interventions.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Pelvic Floor; Perineum; Proctectomy; Rectal Neoplasms; Urethra
PubMed: 34427972
DOI: 10.1111/codi.15885 -
Polski Przeglad Chirurgiczny Apr 2022<b>Introduction:</b> Perineal hernia (PH), also termed pelvic floor hernia, is a protrusion of intraabdominal viscera into the perineum through a defect in...
<b>Introduction:</b> Perineal hernia (PH), also termed pelvic floor hernia, is a protrusion of intraabdominal viscera into the perineum through a defect in the pelvic floor. </br></br> <b>Aim:</b> The study was conducted to evaluate the cases of perineal hernia resulting as a complication of abdominoperineal resection (APR) of rectal cancer. </br></br> <b> Material and methods:</b> 30 cases from 24 articles published in reputable peer reviewed journals were evaluated for eight variables including [I] patient age, [II] gender, [III] time since APR, [IV] clinical presentation, [V] approach to repair, [VI] type of repair, [VII] presence/absence of pelvic adhesions [VIII] complications. </br></br> <b>Results:</b> There was a total of 30 cases (18 males and 12 females) with a mean age of 71.5 years. The time of onset of symptoms ranged from 6 days to 12 years. Perineal lump with pain was the chief presenting feature followed by intestinal obstruction. Different approaches were adopted to repair by various methods. </br></br> <b>Conclusions:</b> Perineal hernia as a complication of abdominoperineal resection is reported increasingly nowadays, as the approach to management of rectal cancer has gradually got shifted from open to minimally invasive in recent years. There is a need to spread awareness about this condition, so that it is actively looked for, during the postoperative follow-up. Management is surgical repair; the approach and type of repair should be individualized.
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Aged; Proctectomy; Rectal Neoplasms; Intestinal Obstruction; Abdominal Cavity; Hernia
PubMed: 36468514
DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0015.7677 -
Medicine Sep 2021To determine the clinical and pathological outcome of locally advanced rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (chemoradiotherapy [CRT]) followed...
To determine the clinical and pathological outcome of locally advanced rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (chemoradiotherapy [CRT]) followed by curative surgery and to identify predictive factors of pathological complete response (pCR).Locally advanced rectal cancer patients undergoing CRT followed by curative surgery from January 2012 to December 2017 were included. Patient's demographic data, pretreatment tumor characteristics, type of CRT regimens, type of surgery, postoperative complications, pathological reports and follow up records were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to identify predictive factors for pCR. Five-year disease free and overall survival were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared between pCR and non-pCR groups.A total of 85 patients were analyzed. Eighteen patients (21.1%) achieved pCR. The sphincter-saving surgery rate was 57.6%. After univariate analyses, tumor length >4 cm (P = .007) and positive lymph nodes (P = .040) were significantly associated with decreased rate of pCR. Complete clinical response was significantly associated with higher rate of pCR (P = .015). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that tumor length >4 cm (P = .010) was significantly associated with decreased rate of pCR. After a median follow-up of 65 months (IQR 34-79), the calculated 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 81.4% and 69.7%, respectively. Patients who achieved pCR tend to had longer 5-year disease-free survival (P = .355) and overall survival (P = .361) than those who did not.Tumor length >4 cm was associated with decreased rate of pCR in locally advanced rectal cancer who had CRT followed by surgery. Longer waiting time or more intense adjuvant treatment may be considered to improved pCR and oncological outcomes.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Proctectomy; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Retrospective Studies; Tertiary Care Centers; Thailand
PubMed: 34559161
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027366 -
Annals of Coloproctology Dec 2020Anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is a relatively rare cancer comprising less than 2.5% of all gastrointestinal malignancies. The standard treatment for anal SCC is... (Review)
Review
Anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is a relatively rare cancer comprising less than 2.5% of all gastrointestinal malignancies. The standard treatment for anal SCC is primary chemoradiation therapy which can result in complete regression. After successful treatment, the 5-year survival is approximately 80%. However, up to 30% of patients experience recurrent persistent or recurrent disease. The role of surgery in the treatment of anal cancer, therefore, is limited to the management of recurrent or persistent disease with abdominoperineal resection and/or en bloc adjacent organ excision. Salvage surgery after irradiated anal cancer can be technically demanding in terms of acquisition of oncologically safe surgical margins and minimization of postoperative morbidity. In addition, 5-year survival outcomes after salvage resection have been reported to vary from 23% to 69%. Positive resection margins are generally regarded as the important risk factor associated with poor survival outcome. Perineal wound complications are the most common major postoperative morbidity. Because of the challenges of primary wound closure after salvage abdominoperineal resection, myocutaneous flap reconstruction has been performed to reduce the severity of perianal would complications. We, therefore, descriptively reviewed contemporary published evidence describing the treatment and outcomes after salvage surgery for persistent or recurrent anal SCC.
PubMed: 33486907
DOI: 10.3393/ac.2020.12.29 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Sep 2021Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an autoimmune-mediated colitis which can present in varying degrees of severity and increases the individual's risk of developing colon...
Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an autoimmune-mediated colitis which can present in varying degrees of severity and increases the individual's risk of developing colon cancer. While first-line treatment for UC is medical management, surgical treatment may be necessary in up to 25-30% of patients. With an increasing armamentarium of biologic therapies, patients are presenting for surgery much later in their course, and careful understanding of the complex interplay of the disease, its management, and the patient's overall health is necessary when considering he appropriate way in which to address their disease surgically. Surgery is generally a total proctocolectomy either with pelvic pouch reconstruction or permanent ileostomy; however, this may need to be spread across multiple procedures given the complexity of the surgery weighed against the overall state of the patient's health. Minimally invasive surgery, employing either laparoscopic, robotic, or transanal laparoscopic approaches, is currently the preferred approach in the elective setting. There is also some emerging evidence that appendectomy may delay the progression of UC in some individuals. Those who treat these patients surgically must also be familiar with the numerous potential pitfalls of surgical intervention and have plans in place for managing problems such as pouchitis, cuffitis, and anastomotic complications.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Colitis, Ulcerative; Elective Surgical Procedures; Humans; Ileostomy; Postoperative Complications; Proctocolectomy, Restorative; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34453611
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-021-02295-6 -
Surgical Endoscopy Oct 2023Research on the utilization of robotic surgical approaches in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. The aims of this study were to identify...
BACKGROUND
Research on the utilization of robotic surgical approaches in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. The aims of this study were to identify temporal trends in robotic utilization and compare the safety of a robotic to laparoscopic operative approach in patients with IBD.
METHODS
Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for IBD were identified using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database (2013-2021). Temporal trends of robotic utilization were assessed from 2013 to 2021. Primary (30-day overall and serious morbidity) and secondary (unplanned conversion to open) outcomes were assessed between 2019 and 2021, when robotic utilization was highest. Multivariable logistic regression was performed.
RESULTS
The use of a robotic approach for colectomies and proctectomies increased significantly between 2013 and 2021 (p < 0.001), regardless of disease type. A total of 6016 patients underwent MIS for IBD between 2019 and 2021. 2234 (37%) patients had surgery for UC [robotic 430 (19.3%), lap 1804 (80%)] and 3782 (63%) had surgery for CD [robotic 500 (13.2%), lap 3282 (86.8%)]. For patients with UC, there was no difference in rates of overall morbidity (22.6% vs. 20.7%, p = 0.39), serious morbidity (11.4% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.60) or conversion to open (1.5% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.38) between the laparoscopic and robotic approaches, respectively. There was no difference in overall morbidity between the two groups in patients with CD (lap 14.0% vs robotic 16.4%, p = 0.15), however the robotic group exhibited higher rates of serious morbidity (7.3% vs. 11.2%, p < 0.01), shorter LOS (3 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001) and lower rates of conversion to an open procedure (3.8% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.02). Adjusted analysis showed similar results.
CONCLUSION
The use of the robotic platform in the surgical management of IBD is increasing and is not associated with an increase in 30-day overall morbidity compared to a laparoscopic approach.
Topics: Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Feasibility Studies; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Colectomy; Proctectomy; Laparoscopy; Retrospective Studies; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37620649
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10333-1 -
Techniques in Coloproctology Apr 2022
Topics: Crohn Disease; Hemorrhoids; Humans; Proctectomy
PubMed: 35146586
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-022-02571-7 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Aug 2020Rectal cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Surgical resection for rectal cancer usually requires a proctectomy with respective lymphadenectomy... (Review)
Review
Rectal cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Surgical resection for rectal cancer usually requires a proctectomy with respective lymphadenectomy (total mesorectal excision). This has traditionally been performed transabdominally through an open incision. Over the last thirty years, minimally invasive surgery platforms have rapidly evolved with the goal to accomplish the same quality rectal resection through a less invasive approach. There are currently three resective modalities that complement the traditional open operation: (1) Laparoscopic surgery; (2) Robotic surgery; and (3) Transanal total mesorectal excision. In addition, there are several platforms to carry out transluminal local excisions (without lymphadenectomy). Evidence on the various modalities is of mixed to moderate quality. It is unreasonable to expect a randomized comparison of all options in a single trial. This review aims at reviewing in detail the various techniques in regard to intra-/perioperative benchmarks, recovery and complications, oncological and functional outcomes.
Topics: Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Humans; Laparoscopy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Proctectomy; Rectal Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 32874053
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i30.4394 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology May 2020The incidence of synchronous RCC and colorectal cancer is heterogeneous ranging from 0.03 to 4.85%. Instead, only one case of huge colon carcinoma and renal... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The incidence of synchronous RCC and colorectal cancer is heterogeneous ranging from 0.03 to 4.85%. Instead, only one case of huge colon carcinoma and renal angiomyolipoma was reported. The treatment of synchronous kidney and colorectal neoplasm is, preferably, synchronous resection. Currently, laparoscopic approach has shown to be feasible and safe, and it has become the gold standard of synchronous resection due to advantages of minimally invasive surgery. We presented a case synchronous renal neoplasm and colorectal cancer undergone simultaneous totally robotic renal enucleation and rectal resection with primary intracorporeal anastomosis. As our knowledge, this is the first case in literature of simultaneous robotic surgery for renal and colorectal tumor.
CASE PRESENTATION
A 53-year-old woman was affected by recto-sigmoid junction cancer and a solid 5 cm left renal mass. We performed a simultaneous robotic low anterior rectal resection and renal enucleation. Total operative time was 260 min with robotic time of 220 min; estimated blood loss was 150 ml; time to flatus was 72 h, and oral diet was administered 4 days after surgery. The patient was discharged on the eighth post-operative day without peri- and post-operative complication. The definitive histological examination showed a neuroendocrine tumor pT2N1 G2, with negative circumferential and distal resection margins. Renal tumor was angiomyolipoma. At 23 months follow-up, the patient is recurrence free.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
As our knowledge, we described the first case in literature of simultaneous robotic anterior rectal resection and partial nephrectomy for treatment of colorectal tumor and renal mass. Robotic rectal resection with intracorporeal anastomosis surgery seems to be feasible and safe even when it is associated with simultaneous partial nephrectomy. Many features of robotic technology could be useful in combined surgery. This strategy is recommended only when patients' medical conditions allow for longer anesthesia exposure. The advantages are to avoid a delay treatment of second tumor, to reduce the time to start the post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy, to avoid a second anesthetic procedure, and to reduce the patient discomfort. However, further studies are needed to evaluate robotic approach as standard surgical strategy for simultaneous treatment of colorectal and renal neoplasm.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Colorectal Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Kidney; Kidney Neoplasms; Middle Aged; Neoplasms, Multiple Primary; Nephrectomy; Operative Time; Proctectomy; Rectum; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32366262
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-020-01864-1