-
BMC Gastroenterology Jun 2024Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has improved the laparoscopic dissection for rectal cancer in the narrow pelvis. Although taTME has more clinical benefits...
Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has improved the laparoscopic dissection for rectal cancer in the narrow pelvis. Although taTME has more clinical benefits than laparoscopic surgery, such as a better view of the distal rectum and direct determination of distal resection margin, an intraoperative urethral injury could occur in excision ta-TME. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and efficacy of the ta-TME with IRIS U kit surgery. This retrospective study enrolled 10 rectal cancer patients who underwent a taTME with an IRIS U kit. The study endpoints were the safety of access (intra- or postoperative morbidity). The detectability of the IRIS U kit catheter was investigated by using a laparoscope-ICG fluorescence camera system. Their mean age was 71.4±6.4 (58-78) years; 80 were men, and 2 were women. The mean operative time was 534.6 ± 94.5 min. The coloanal anastomosis was performed in 80%, and 20% underwent abdominal peritoneal resection. Two patients encountered postoperative complications graded as Clavien-Dindo grade 2. The transanal approach with IRIS U kit assistance is feasible, safe for patients with lower rectal cancer, and may prevent intraoperative urethral injury.
Topics: Humans; Rectal Neoplasms; Male; Female; Aged; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Urethra; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Feasibility Studies; Postoperative Complications; Operative Time; Proctectomy; Intraoperative Complications; Rectum; Anastomosis, Surgical; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 38886646
DOI: 10.1186/s12876-024-03279-8 -
BJS Open May 2024
Topics: Humans; Rectal Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Laparoscopy; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 38869240
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae069 -
Techniques in Coloproctology Jun 2024Retrorectal tumors are uncommon lesions developed in the retrorectal space. Data on their minimally invasive resection are scarce and the optimal surgical approach for...
BACKGROUND
Retrorectal tumors are uncommon lesions developed in the retrorectal space. Data on their minimally invasive resection are scarce and the optimal surgical approach for tumors below S3 remains debated.
METHODS
We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive resection of retrorectal tumors between 2005 and 2022 at two tertiary university hospital centers, by comparing the results obtained for lesions located above or below S3.
RESULTS
Of over 41 patients identified with retrorectal tumors, surgical approach was minimally invasive for 23 patients, with laparoscopy alone in 19, with transanal excision in 2, and with combined approach in 2. Retrorectal tumor was above S3 in 11 patients (> S3 group) and below S3 in 12 patients (< S3 group). Patient characteristics and median tumor size were not significantly different between the two groups (60 vs 67 mm; p = 0.975). Overall median operative time was 131.5 min and conversion rate was 13% without significant difference between the two groups (126 vs 197 min and 18% vs 8%, respectively; p > 0.05). Final pathology was tailgut cyst (48%), schwannoma (22%), neural origin tumor (17%), gastrointestinal stromal tumor (4%), and other (19%). The 90-day complication rates were 27% and 58% in the > S3 and < S3 groups, respectively, without severe morbidity or mortality. After a median follow-up of 3.3 years, no recurrence was observed in both groups. Three patients presented chronic pain, three anal dysfunction, and three urinary dysfunction. All were successfully managed without reintervention.
CONCLUSIONS
Minimally invasive surgery for retrorectal tumors can be performed safely and effectively with low morbidity and no mortality. Laparoscopic and transanal techniques alone or in combination may be recommended as the treatment of choice of benign retrorectal tumors, even for lesions below S3, in centers experienced with minimally invasive surgery.
Topics: Humans; Retrospective Studies; Male; Female; Middle Aged; Laparoscopy; Aged; Rectal Neoplasms; Tertiary Care Centers; Adult; Operative Time; Treatment Outcome; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Aged, 80 and over; Rectum
PubMed: 38860990
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-024-02938-y -
International Journal of Colorectal... Jun 2024Solitary fibrous tumors (SFT) are a rare entity of in majority benign neoplasms. Nevertheless, up to 20% of cases show a malignant tendency with local infiltration or... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Solitary fibrous tumors (SFT) are a rare entity of in majority benign neoplasms. Nevertheless, up to 20% of cases show a malignant tendency with local infiltration or metastasis. Commonly arising in the thoracic cavity, only few cases of SFT of the mesorectal tissue have been reported in the literature. Complete surgical resection, classically by posterior approach, is the treatment of choice. The purpose of this review is to demonstrate the safety and suitability of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) as a surgical approach for the resection of benign pararectal solid tumors.
METHODS
We report the case of a 52-year-old man who was diagnosed incidentally with SFT of the distal mesorectum. Resection by TAMIS was performed. Based on this case, we describe the steps and potential benefits of this procedure and provide a comprehensive review of the literature.
RESULTS
Histopathology confirms the completely resected SFT. After uneventful postoperative course and discharge on day four, follow-up was recommended by a multidisciplinary board by clinical examination and MRI, which showed a well-healed scar and no recurrence up to 3 years after resection.
CONCLUSION
SFT of the mesorectum is a very rare entity. To our knowledge, this is the first report on a TAMIS resection for SFT, demonstrated as a safe approach for complete resection of benign pararectal solid tumors.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Solitary Fibrous Tumors; Rectal Neoplasms; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Anal Canal; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Magnetic Resonance Imaging
PubMed: 38847931
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-024-04658-z -
BJS Open May 2024Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard surgery for low/mid locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare three minimally invasive... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard surgery for low/mid locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare three minimally invasive surgical approaches for TME with primary anastomosis (laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, and transanal TME).
METHODS
Records of patients undergoing laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, or transanal TME between 2013 and 2022 according to standardized techniques in expert centres contributing to the European MRI and Rectal Cancer Surgery III (EuMaRCS-III) database were analysed. Propensity score matching was applied to compare the three groups with respect to the complication rate (primary outcome), conversion rate, postoperative recovery, and survival.
RESULTS
A total of 468 patients (mean(s.d.) age of 64.1(11) years) were included; 190 (40.6%) patients underwent laparoscopic TME, 141 (30.1%) patients underwent robotic TME, and 137 (29.3%) patients underwent transanal TME. Comparative analyses after propensity score matching demonstrated a higher rate of postoperative complications for laparoscopic TME compared with both robotic TME (OR 1.80, 95% c.i. 1.11-2.91) and transanal TME (OR 2.87, 95% c.i. 1.72-4.80). Robotic TME was associated with a lower rate of grade A anastomotic leakage (2%) compared with both laparoscopic TME (8.8%) and transanal TME (8.1%) (P = 0.031). Robotic TME (1.4%) and transanal TME (0.7%) were both associated with a lower conversion rate to open surgery compared with laparoscopic TME (8.8%) (P < 0.001). Time to flatus and duration of hospital stay were shorter for patients treated with transanal TME (P = 0.003 and 0.001 respectively). There were no differences in operating time, intraoperative complications, blood loss, mortality, readmission, R0 resection, or survival.
CONCLUSION
In this multicentre, retrospective, propensity score-matched, cohort study of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, newer minimally invasive approaches (robotic TME and transanal TME) demonstrated improved outcomes compared with laparoscopic TME.
Topics: Humans; Rectal Neoplasms; Male; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Female; Middle Aged; Laparoscopy; Propensity Score; Aged; Postoperative Complications; Europe; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Length of Stay; Rectum; Proctectomy
PubMed: 38805357
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae044 -
BJS Open May 2024The routine use of MRI in rectal cancer treatment allows the use of a strict definition for low rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive total... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
Total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer: multicentre study comparing oncological outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision in high-volume centres.
BACKGROUND
The routine use of MRI in rectal cancer treatment allows the use of a strict definition for low rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer in expert laparoscopic, transanal and robotic high-volume centres.
METHODS
All MRI-defined low rectal cancer operated on between 2015 and 2017 in 11 Dutch centres were included. Primary outcomes were: R1 rate, total mesorectal excision quality and 3-year local recurrence and survivals (overall and disease free). Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, complications and whether there was a perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan.
RESULTS
Of 1071 eligible rectal cancers, 633 patients with low rectal cancer were identified. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen (P = 0.337), R1 rate (P = 0.107), conversion (P = 0.344), anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.942), local recurrence (P = 0.809), overall survival (P = 0.436) and disease-free survival (P = 0.347) were comparable among the centres. The laparoscopic centre group had the highest rate of perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan (10.4%), compared with robotic expert centres (5.2%) and transanal centres (2.1%), P = 0.004. The main reason for this change was stapling difficulty (43%), followed by low tumour location (29%). Multivariable analysis showed that laparoscopic surgery was the only independent risk factor for a change in the preoperative planned procedure, P = 0.024.
CONCLUSION
Centres with expertise in all three minimally invasive total mesorectal excision techniques can achieve good oncological resection in the treatment of MRI-defined low rectal cancer. However, compared with robotic expert centres and transanal centres, patients treated in laparoscopic centres have an increased risk of a change in the preoperative intended procedure due to technical limitations.
Topics: Humans; Rectal Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Male; Female; Laparoscopy; Middle Aged; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Hospitals, High-Volume; Netherlands; Treatment Outcome; Disease-Free Survival; Proctectomy; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Anastomotic Leak
PubMed: 38788679
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrae029 -
International Journal of Colorectal... May 2024Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (R-TAMIS) was introduced in 2012 for the excision of benign rectal polyps and low grade rectal cancer. Ergonomic...
INTRODUCTION
Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (R-TAMIS) was introduced in 2012 for the excision of benign rectal polyps and low grade rectal cancer. Ergonomic improvements over traditional laparoscopic TAMIS (L-TAMIS) include increased dexterity within a small operative field, with possibility of better surgical precision. We aim to collate the existing data surrounding the use of R-TAMIS to treat rectal neoplasms from cohort studies and larger case series, providing a foundation for future, large-scale, comparative studies.
METHODS
Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched as part of our review. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies or large case series (≥ 5 patients) investigating the use of R-TAMIS to resect rectal neoplasia (benign or malignant) were eligible for inclusion in our analysis. Quality assessment of included studies was performed via the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) risk of bias tool. Outcomes extracted included basic participant characteristics, operative details and histopathological/oncological outcomes.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies on 317 participants were included in our analysis. The quality of studies was generally satisfactory. Overall complication rate from R-TAMIS was 9.7%. Clear margins (R0) were reported in 96.2% of patients. Local recurrence (benign or malignant) occurred in 2.2% of patients during the specified follow-up periods.
CONCLUSION
Our review highlights the current evidence for R-TAMIS in the local excision of rectal lesions. While R-TAMIS appears to have complication, margin negativity and recurrence rates superior to those of published L-TAMIS series, comparative studies are needed.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Anal Canal; Margins of Excision; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38724801
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-024-04645-4 -
Surgical Endoscopy Jun 2024Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is an advanced technique for excision of early rectal cancers. Robotic TAMIS (r-TAMIS) has been introduced as technical...
BACKGROUND
Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is an advanced technique for excision of early rectal cancers. Robotic TAMIS (r-TAMIS) has been introduced as technical improvement and potential alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in early rectal cancers and in frail patients. This study reports the perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes of r-TAMIS for local excision of early-stage rectal cancers.
METHODS
Retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected r-TAMIS database (July 2021-July 2023). Demographics, clinicopathological features, short-term outcomes, recurrences, and survival were investigated.
RESULTS
Twenty patients were included. Median age and body mass index were 69.5 (62.0-77.7) years and 31.0 (21.0-36.5) kg/m. Male sex was prevalent (n = 12, 60.0%). ASA III accounted for 66.7%. Median distance from anal verge was 7.5 (5.0-11.7) cm. Median operation time was 90.0 (60.0-112.5) minutes. Blood loss was minimal. There were no conversions. Median postoperative stay was 2.0 (1.0-3.0) days. Minor and major complication rates were 25.0% and 0%, respectively. Seventeen (85.0%) patients had an adenocarcinoma whilst three patients had an adenoma. R0 rate was 90.0%. Most tumours were pT1 (55.0%), followed by pT2 (25.0%). One patient (5.0%) had a pT3 tumour. Specimen and tumour maximal median diameter were 51.0 (41.0-62.0) mm and 21.5 (17.2-42.0) mm, respectively. Median specimen area was 193.1 (134.3-323.3) cm. Median follow-up was 15.5 (10.0-24.0) months. One patient developed local recurrence (5.0%).
CONCLUSIONS
r-TAMIS, with strict postoperative surveillance, is a safe and feasible approach for local excision of early rectal cancer and may have a role in surgically unfit and elderly patients who refuse or cannot undergo TME surgery. Future prospective multicentre large-scale studies are needed to report the long-term oncological outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Rectal Neoplasms; Male; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Female; Middle Aged; Aged; Retrospective Studies; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome; Operative Time; Length of Stay; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
PubMed: 38710889
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10829-4 -
Cureus Apr 2024Introduction Anorectal diseases are prevalent in the general population and may vary from benign disorders to malignant lesions that can metastasize. There is a variety...
Introduction Anorectal diseases are prevalent in the general population and may vary from benign disorders to malignant lesions that can metastasize. There is a variety of proctologic symptoms associated with each disease. The incidence of proctologic disease varies in different cultures due to dietary habits and variations in lifestyle. The present study was conducted to determine the spectrum of different proctologic diseases in female patients presenting with proctologic symptoms. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Surgery Department of Mardan Medical Complex, Mardan, and Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, from January 2022 to January 2023. Female patients with proctologic symptoms were included, while non-consenting patients were excluded. After obtaining a detailed history and examination by the experienced surgeon, digital rectal examination and proctoscopy/sigmoidoscopy were performed where necessary. Diagnoses were made, and the data regarding proctologic symptoms and their corresponding diagnoses was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY) using mean and standard deviation for quantitative variables and frequency and percentage for qualitative variables. Results The mean age of 500 female study participants was 38.35±16.305 (range: 7-108) years. Bleeding per rectum, constipation, and pain per rectum were the commonest proctologic symptoms seen in 341 (68.2%), 287 (57.4%), and 272 (54.4%) cases, respectively. Anal fissures and hemorrhoids were the commonest proctologic diseases seen in 264 (52.8%) and 60 (12%) cases, respectively. Conclusion Bleeding per rectum is the commonest proctologic symptom in patients. Anal fissures and hemorrhoids are the commonest proctologic diseases in our setup. Bleeding per rectum and hemorrhoids in the female population cause loss of blood, which in turn will aggravate the clinical picture of underlying anemia, if any.
PubMed: 38707048
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57600 -
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