-
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Jun 2017Current guidelines recommend radical resection for stage I rectal cancer. However, since screening programs are being installed, an increasing number of cancers are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Current guidelines recommend radical resection for stage I rectal cancer. However, since screening programs are being installed, an increasing number of cancers are being detected in early stages. Endoscopic resection is often performed at the time of diagnosis. This systematic review was undertaken to review the evidence on endoscopic approach vs. radical resection for stage I rectal cancer. Recommendations were issued based on the GRADE methodology and risk stratification used in clinical practice. A systematic search (until March 2015) identified 2 meta-analyses and 1 additional randomized trial. For the primary outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival and metastasis-free survival) no evidence could be found on the superiority of local or radical resection. Secondary outcomes (blood loss, hospital stay, operative time, number of permanent stomas and perioperative deaths) were in favour of local resection. The authors strongly recommend radical resection for T2 rectal cancer, but consider 'en bloc' local resection sufficient for pT1 sm1 rectal cancers when confirmed pathologically. Discussion by a multidisciplinary team and adequate surveillance remain mandatory.
Topics: Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Rectal Neoplasms; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28477746
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.03.008 -
Colorectal Disease : the Official... Jan 2014A systematic analysis was conducted of trials comparing the effectiveness of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) with radical resection (RR) for T1 and T2 rectal... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials comparing the effectiveness of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical resection in the management of early rectal cancer.
AIM
A systematic analysis was conducted of trials comparing the effectiveness of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS) with radical resection (RR) for T1 and T2 rectal cancer.
METHOD
An electronic search was carried out of trials reporting the effectiveness of TEMS and RR in the treatment of T1 and T2 rectal cancers.
RESULTS
Ten trials including 942 patients were retrieved. There was a trend toward a higher risk of local recurrence (odds ratio 2.78; 95% confidence interval 1.42, 5.44; z = 2.97; P < 0.003) and overall recurrence (P < 0.01) following TEMS compared with RR. The risk of distant recurrence, overall survival (odds ratio 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.49, 1.66; z = 0.33; P = 0.74) and mortality was similar. TEMS was associated with a shorter operation time and hospital stay and a reduced risk of postoperative complications (P < 0.0001). The included studies, however, were significantly diverse in stage and grade of rectal cancer and the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
CONCLUSION
Transanal endoscopic microsurgery appears to have clinically measurable advantages in patients with early rectal cancer. The studies included in this review do not allow firm conclusions as to whether TEMS is superior to RR in the management of early rectal cancer. Larger, better designed and executed prospective studies are needed to answer this question.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Carcinoma; Humans; Microsurgery; Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Staging; Proctoscopy; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24330432
DOI: 10.1111/codi.12474 -
Colorectal Disease : the Official... May 2024Transanal total mesorectal (taTME) excision is a method used to assist in the radical removal of the rectum. By adopting the concept of natural orifice surgery, it... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Transanal total mesorectal (taTME) excision is a method used to assist in the radical removal of the rectum. By adopting the concept of natural orifice surgery, it offers potential benefits over conventional techniques. Early enthusiasm for this strategy led to its rapid and widespread adoption. The imposing of a local moratorium was precipitated by the discovery in Norway of an uncommon multifocal pattern of locoregional recurrence. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the incidence of local recurrence after taTME for rectal cancer.
METHOD
Conforming to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines checklist, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. This included case series and comparative studies between taTME and preferentially laparoscopic procedures published between 2010 and 2021.
RESULTS
There were a total of 1175 studies retrieved. After removal and screening for quality and relevance, the final analysis contained 40 studies. The local recurrence rate following taTME was 3.4% (95% CI 2.9%-3.9%, I = 0%) in 4987 patients with follow-up durations ranging from 0.7 to 5.5 years. Compared with laparoscopic TME, local recurrence was not statistically different for the taTME group (p = 0.076); however, it was less probable (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.24-1.09, I = 0%). Systemic recurrence and circumferential resection margin status were secondary outcomes; however, the differences were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
Our data suggest that the local recurrence for regular laparoscopic and transanal TME surgeries may be comparable, suggesting that taTME can be performed without influencing locoregional oncological outcomes in patients treated at specialized institutions and who have been cautiously selected.
Topics: Humans; Rectal Neoplasms; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Proctectomy; Laparoscopy; Female; Treatment Outcome; Male; Middle Aged; Aged; Rectum; Incidence
PubMed: 38590019
DOI: 10.1111/codi.16982 -
Medicine Jan 2024Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) are popular mid and low rectal cancer trends. However, there is currently... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) are popular mid and low rectal cancer trends. However, there is currently no systematic comparison between LaTME and TaTME of mid and low rectal cancer. Therefore, we systematically study the perioperative and pathological outcomes of LaTME and TaTME in mid and low rectal cancer.
METHODS
Articles included searching through the Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, and Web of science for articles on LaTME and TaTME. We calculated pooled standard mean difference (SMD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The protocol for this review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022380067).
RESULTS
There are 8761 participants included in 33 articles. Compared with TaTME, patients who underwent LaTME had no statistical difference in operation time (OP), estimated blood loss (EBL), postoperative hospital stay, over complications, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, anastomotic stenosis, wound infection, circumferential resection margin, distal resection margin, major low anterior resection syndrom, lymph node yield, loop ileostomy, and diverting ileostomy. There are similarities between LaTME and TaTME for 2-year DFS rate, 2-year OS rate, distant metastasis rat, and local recurrence rate. However, patients who underwent LaTME had less anastomotic leak rates (RR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70-0.97; I2 = 10.6%, P = .019) but TaTME had less end colostomy (RR 1.96; 95% CI: 1.19-3.23; I2 = 0%, P = .008).
CONCLUSION
This study comprehensively and systematically evaluated the differences in safety and effectiveness between LaTME and TaTME in the treatment of mid and low rectal cancer through meta-analysis. Patients who underwent LaTME had less anastomotic leak rate but TaTME had less end colostomy. There is no difference in other aspects. Of course, in the future, more scientific and rigorous conclusions need to be drawn from multi-center RCT research.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Rats; Rectum; Anastomotic Leak; Margins of Excision; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Rectal Neoplasms; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38277570
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036859 -
ANZ Journal of Surgery Mar 2022Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) represents a novel approach to rectal dissection. Although many structured training programs have been developed worldwide to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) represents a novel approach to rectal dissection. Although many structured training programs have been developed worldwide to assist surgeons in implementing this new technique, the learning curve (LC) of taTME has yet to be conclusively defined. This is particularly important given the concerns regarding the complication profile and oncological safety of taTME. The aim of this review was to provide an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis of the LC for taTME, comparing the difference of outcomes between the LC and after learning curve (ALC) groups.
METHODS
An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2010-2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases. All studies comparing taTME procedures before and after LC were analysed.
RESULTS
Seven retrospective studies of prospectively collected databases were included, comparing 333 (51.0%) patients in the LC group and 320 (49.0%) patients in the ALC group. There was a significantly reduced number of adverse intra-operative events, anastomotic leaks and improved quality of mesorectal excision in the ALC group.
CONCLUSION
This review shows that there is a significant improvement in clinical outcomes between the LC and ALC groups which supports the need for careful mastery and ongoing technical refinement during the LC in taTME. This procedure should be performed on a subset of carefully selected patients in the hands of experienced and well-trained teams dedicated to ongoing audit.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Learning Curve; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Retrospective Studies; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34676655
DOI: 10.1111/ans.17262 -
Medicine Jul 2018Recently, in order to overcome the shortcomings of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of low rectal cancer, a new kind of surgical procedure, transanal total... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Recently, in order to overcome the shortcomings of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of low rectal cancer, a new kind of surgical procedure, transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME), has rapidly become a research hotspot in the field of rectal cancer surgery study. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for the patients with rectal cancer.
METHODS
Relevant studies were searched from the databases of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of science. All relevant studies were collected to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TaTME for patients with rectal cancer. The quality of the included studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) and Cochrane Library Handbook 5.1.0. Data analysis was conducted using the Review Manager 5.3 software.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies including 859 patients were included in our analysis. In terms of efficacy, compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME), meta-analysis showed that the rate of complete tumor resection increased and the risk of positive circumferential margins decreased in the TaTME group. For complete tumor resection and positive circumferential margins in the TaTME group, the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 1.93 and 1.09 to 3.42 (P = .02) and 0.43 and 0.22 to 0.82 (P = .01), respectively. Concerning safety, results showed that the rates of postoperative complications were similar in the 2 groups, and differences in the risk of ileus and anastomotic leakage were not statistically significant (OR = 0.75, 95%CI = 0.51-1.09, P = .13; OR = 0.91, 95%CI = 0.46-1.78, P = .78; OR = 0.79, 95%CI = 0.45-1.38, P = .40).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this meta-analysis show that TaTME is associated with a reduced positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) rate, and could achieve complete tumor resection and improved the long-term survival in patients with mid- and low-rectal cancer.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 29995787
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011410 -
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 -
Anticancer Research Apr 2018Several studies report outcomes of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEMS) surgery in combination with radiotherapy, however the combination of those treatments is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Radiotherapy May Offer a Recurrence and Survival Benefit in Rectal Cancers Treated Surgically with Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND/AIM
Several studies report outcomes of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEMS) surgery in combination with radiotherapy, however the combination of those treatments is provided mostly on an adhoc individual basis and the role of radiotherapy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to identify the effect of neo-adjuvant or adjuvant radiotherapy in the oncological outcomes of rectal cancer treated surgically with TEMS.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature on MEDLINE and Pubmed databases. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and meta-analyzed using an inverse variance heterogeneity model to calculate overall (pooled) effect sizes for survival or recurrence of disease against neo+/-adjuvant treatment.
RESULTS
A total of 48 studies were included in the qualitative meta-analysis which included 3,285 patients with rectal cancer. The overall survival odds ratio (OR), was 9.39 (95% CI=6.1-14.4) with a Cochran's Q variable of 151.7 on 47 degrees of freedom (d.f.) (p=0.000). Recurrence-free OR was 8.7 (95%CI=6.58-11.44) with a Cochran's Q variable of Q=145.2 on 44 d.f. (p=0.000). Studies which contained more than 10% of pT3 tumours, and provided neo+/-adjuvant treatment in more than 35% of cases, were associated with survival benefit, as demonstrated by an overall odds of survival of 32.2 (95%CI=16.3-63.5, p=0.001, Q=8.4, p=0.21). Studies that contained more than 10% of pT3 tumours and provided neo+/-adjuvant treatment in more than 20% of the cases had an overall effect size of recurrence-free odds of 20.23 (95%CI=13.84-29.57, p=0.000, Q=2.18, p=0.54).
CONCLUSION
There seems to be a benefit from radiotherapy on overall survival and recurrence-free odds, which is more apparent in cohorts with more than 10% of pT3 tumours. Our results suggest that neo-adjuvant or adjuvant radiotherapy should be considered for inclusion in formal treatment protocols for rectal cancers treated with TEMS as they offer a recurrence and survival benefit.
Topics: Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectal Neoplasms; Survival Analysis; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29599303
DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12425 -
World Neurosurgery Jan 2017The pituitary adenoma causing acromegaly is typically resected through a transsphenoidal approach and visualized with an operating microscope or endoscope. We undertook... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The pituitary adenoma causing acromegaly is typically resected through a transsphenoidal approach and visualized with an operating microscope or endoscope. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the clinical efficacy of endoscopic and microsurgical approaches.
METHODS
Relevant studies using either endoscopic or microscopic transsphenoidal approaches for growth hormone pituitary adenomas were identified until February 2016. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical end points.
RESULTS
We identified 31 studies, in which 950 patients underwent endoscopic transsphenoidal resection and 2137 patients underwent microsurgical transsphenoidal resection. Patients undergoing microsurgery were less likely to present with hypothyroidism (10.7% vs. 19.1%, P = 0.033, 462 vs. 156 patients) and less likely to have macroadenomas (66.9% vs. 83.8%, P ≤ 0.001, 1484 vs. 884 patients); adenomas with cavernous sinus invasion (21.3% vs. 44.4%, P = 0.036, 592 vs. 558 patients); and a lower mean tumor volume (17.84 vs. 20.54 mm, P = 0.012, 158 vs. 248 patients). Patients treated via the endoscopic approach were more likely to achieve remission for noninvasive macroadenomas (83.8% vs. 66.9%, P ≤ 0.001, 115 vs. 365 patients). Sinusitis (15.6% vs. 2.6%, P < 0.001, 241 vs. 295 patients) and intraoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (21.6% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.022, 697 vs. 127 patients) were more common in patients treated endoscopically, and meningitis (0.7% vs. 1.7%, P = 0.027, 511 vs. 1513 patients) was more common in patients undergoing a microsurgical approach.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study shows the clinical utility of the endoscopic approach and demonstrates potential benefits including increased remission rates with noninvasive macroadenomas and a lower rate of meningitis.
Topics: Adenoma; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Comorbidity; Female; Growth Hormone-Secreting Pituitary Adenoma; Humans; Male; Microsurgery; Middle Aged; Neuroendoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Sphenoid Bone; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27756664
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.10.029 -
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