Short- and long-term outcomes as well as anal function of transanal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon or rectal cancer resection: a retrospective study with over 5-year follow-up.

Abstract

IntroductionTo date, long-term safety including functional outcomes of transanal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) for colorectal cancer resection has not been confirmed.AimTo explore the short- and long-term outcomes as well as anal function of transanal NOSES versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon or rectal cancer resection.Material and methodsA retrospective review of data from a prospectively maintained database was performed to analyze the data of 69 patients who underwent transanal NOSES for sigmoid colon or rectal cancer resections and another 69 matched patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic (CL) surgery. Anal function of patients was evaluated using the Wexner fecal incontinence scale postoperatively.ResultsTransanal NOSES resulted in faster recovery of intestinal function, shorter postoperative length of stay, less incisional pain, fewer postoperative complications and shorter scars than CL surgery (p < 0.05). The two groups had similar overall survival (p = 0.863) and disease-free survival (p = 0.961). Wexner scores of the NOSES group at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery were higher than in the CL group (p < 0.05), and there was no difference between the two groups at 12, 18 and 24 months after surgery.ConclusionsTransanal NOSES achieves similar survival outcomes to CL surgery. Transanal NOSES has the advantages of faster recovery, shorter postoperative hospital stay, less incisional pain, shorter scars, etc. However, transanal NOSES can indeed impair anal function, needing more attention.