Stoma-Free Intersphincteric Resection in Low Rectal Cancer Without Radiotherapy: A Prospective Cohort Study on Safety and Recovery.

Objective: To explore clinical features and prognosis factors of surgical complications after intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Methods: The clinical data of 132 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent ISR following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy from September 2010 to June 2017 at Department of Colorectal Surgery, Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University were retrospectively reviewed. There were 100 males and 32 females, with the age of (52.9±11.4) years and distance to anal verge of 3.9 cm. Records of perioperative complication (POC) within 30 days after surgery, anastomotic leakage (AL), and anastomotic stenosis (AS) were analyzed. POC was recorded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. AL was graded by ISREC system and classified into the early AL within 30 days after surgery and delayed AL beyond 30 days. AS was defined as narrowing of the bowel lumen at the anastomosis that prevented passage through a colonoscope with a 12 mm diameter. According to the shape of narrowing, AS was recorded as the stenosis in situ or stenosis with long-segment bowel above. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to identify risk factors of anastomotic complications. Results: Among the 132 patients, full-dose radiotherapy and diverting stoma were performed in 128 (97.0%) patients, respectively. In entire cohort, AL was found in 41 (31.1%) patients, including 32 patients with clinical leakage (24.2%). The median time for diagnosis of AL was 37 days (2 to 214 days) after surgery. There were 25 patients (18.9%) who were diagnosed with delayed AL beyond 30 days. Chronic presacral sinus formation was detected in 22 of 129 (17.1%) patients at 12 months from surgery. Among the 128 eligible patients, 36 (28.1%) were diagnosed as AS, including 24 (18.8%) patients with stenosis in situ and 12 (9.4%) patients with bowel stenosis above. After a median follow-up of 26 months, 7(5.3%) patients received permanent colostomy and the other 20(15.2%) patients retained a persistent ileostomy, owing to anastomotic complications. Results of multivariate analysis showed that radiation colitis was an independent prognosis factor of AL after ISR (OR=5.04, 95% CI: 2.05 to 12.43, P=0.000); male gender (OR=5.19, 95% CI: 1.24 to 21.75, P=0.024) and AL (OR=8.49, 95% CI: 3.32 to 21.70, P=0.000) were independent prognosis factors of AS after ISR. Conclusions: Surgical complications are common after ISR for low rectal cancer patients with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. A high rate of AL is observed after long-term follow-up, which is associated with AS. Increasing awareness of anastomotic complications after ISR should be raised, especially for male patients with radiation colitis.

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer has been described as the ultimate sphincter-saving procedure. Laparoscopic ISR has been proved safe with early postoperative benefits. Recently, some colorectal surgeons have begun to perform robot-assisted ISR to harness the advantages of the da Vinci robotic system. The authors present their short-term results for a robotic technique of ISR. Data from 29 consecutive patients at a single institution with very low rectal cancer (<4cm) from the anal verge who underwent robot-assisted ISR were prospectively collected between December 2007 and March 2010. The study enrolled 23 men and 6 women with a median age of 61.5years (range, 36-82years). Their median body mass index (BMI) was 23.3kg/m(2) (range, 17.9-32.5kg/m(2)). The median distance of the tumor from the anal verge was 3cm (range, 1-4cm). The median operative time was 325min (range, 235-435min), with a console time of 130min (range, 110-210min). There were no conversions to open surgery. A protecting ileostomy was performed for all the patients. The median blood loss was less than 50ml (range,<50-1,000ml). The median size of the tumor was 3cm (range, 0-6.9cm), and the median number of lymph nodes harvested was 16 (range, 1-44). The median distal margin was 0.8cm (range, 0-4cm), and one margin was positive. The circumferential margin was negative (>2mm) for 27 patients. Therefore, complete resection (R0) was achieved for 26 (90%) of the 29 patients. The median hospital stay was 9days (range, 5-15days). Nine patients experienced complications, including three anastomotic leaks (10%). All the leaks were managed conservatively. No surgical mortalities occurred. Robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer is feasible, and its short-term outcome is acceptable.

Few studies have compared robotic and laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) in rectal cancer. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of recently published studies to compare perioperative outcomes of ISR for the treatment of low rectal cancer. We performed a systematic literature search of the Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic ISR in patients with low rectal cancer. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from articles that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Perioperative outcomes of interest included the rate of diverting stoma, open conversion rate, operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, time to first flatus, and time to initiate the postoperative diet. Oncological outcomes included the number of retrieved lymph nodes, distal resection margin, proximal resection margin, circumferential resection margin, 3-year overall survival, 3-year disease-free survival, and local recurrence. Postoperative complications included overall complications, a Dindo-Clavien classification ≥ III, and anastomotic leakage. All outcomes were compared between the two groups. We included 5 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 510 patients undergoing 273 (53.5%) robotic ISR procedures and 237 (46.5%) laparoscopic ISR procedures. The robotic ISR group lower conversion rate, lower blood loss, and longer operation times than the laparoscopic group. We also noted that fewer lymph nodes were harvested in the robotic ISR group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Other outcomes were similar between the two groups. Robotic and laparoscopic ISR showed comparable perioperative outcomes, functional outcomes, and 3-year oncologic outcomes; however, robotic ISR was associated with a lower conversion rate and less blood loss despite longer operation times compared to laparoscopic ISR. These findings suggest that robotic ISR maybe a safe and effective technique for treating low rectal cancer in selected patients. The potential oncologic and functional benefits of robotic ISR should be evaluated in larger randomized controlled trials.

Background Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been a preferable alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for anal preservation in patients with low rectal cancer. Laparoscopic ISR and robotic ISR have been widely used with the proposal of 2 cm or even 1 cm rule of distal free margin and the development of minimally invasive technology. The aim of this review was to describe the newest advancements of ISR. Methods A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify studies on ISR techniques, preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT), complications, oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes and thereby to summarize relevant information and controversies involved in ISR. Results Although PCRT is employed to avoid positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and decrease local recurrence, it tends to engender damage of anorectal function and patients' quality of life (QoL). Common complications after ISR include anastomotic leakage (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), urinary retention, fistula, pelvic sepsis, and prolapse. CRM involvement is the most important predictor for local recurrence. Preoperative assessment and particularly rectal endosonography are essential for selecting suitable patients. Anal dysfunction is associated with age, PCRT, location and growth of anastomotic stoma, tumour stage, and resection of internal sphincter. Conclusions The ISR technique seems feasible for selected patients with low rectal cancer. However, the postoperative QoL as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

BackgroundTransanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) or intersphincteric resection (ISR) has recently proven to be a valid and safe surgical procedure for low rectal cancer. However, studies focusing on the combination of these two technologies are limited. This study aimed to evaluate perioperative results, long-term oncologic outcomes, and anorectal functions of patients with low rectal cancer undergoing taTME combined with ISR, by comparing with those of patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (laAPR).MethodsAfter 1:1 propensity score matching, 200 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laAPR (n = 100) or taTME combined with ISR (n = 100) between September 2013 and November 2019 were included. Patient demographics, clinicopathological characteristics, oncological outcomes, and anal functional results were analysed.ResultsPatients in the taTME-combined-with-ISR group had less intraoperative blood loss (79.6 ± 72.6 vs 107.3 ± 65.1 mL, P = 0.005) and a lower rate of post-operative complications (22.0% vs 44.0%, P < 0.001) than those in the laAPR group. The overall local recurrence rates were 7.0% in both groups within 3 years after surgery. The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 86.3% in the taTME-combined-with-ISR group and 75.1% in the laAPR group (P = 0.056), while the 3-year overall survival rates were 96.7% and 94.2%, respectively (P = 0.319). There were 39 patients (45.3%) in the taTME-combined-with-ISR group who developed major low anterior resection syndrome, whereas 61 patients (70.9%) had good post-operative anal function (Wexner incontinence score ≤ 10).ConclusionWe found similar long-term oncological outcomes for patients with low rectal cancer undergoing laAPR and those undergoing taTME combined with ISR. Patients receiving taTME combined with ISR had acceptable post-operative anorectal function.

Background: Correlation analysis between functional outcomes and different factors (pouch, stoma, ISR type, age and sex) revealed: Pouch formation and type of ISR had significant correlations with some functional aspects.Aim of the Study: To evaluate the oncologic safety and functional outcomes of Intersphincteric Resection (ISR) as an alternative to Abdominoperineal Resection (APR) in low rectal cancer.Patients and Methods: Patients presenting to the National Cancer Institute, Cairo University from May 2014 to October 2014; with locally advanced low (3-6m from the anal verge) rectal cancer and ended their long-course neoadjuvant chem-oradiotherapy were subjected to ISR if eligible. These patients were assessed and followed for the short-term outcomes of ISR.Results: Twenty one patients underwent ISR. There was no mortality. Ten patients had postoperative complications.All cases had free distal margin and one patient had +ve radial margin. The Improvement of all functional aspects occurred with time. Kirwan's grade of continence by the 15th month was: I: 5/16 (31.3%), II: 8 (50%) and III: 3 (18.8%). This is very clear comparing it with 3rd month results: II: 3/19 (15.8%), III: 13 (68.4%) and IV: 3 (15.8%).Conclusion: Intersphincteric resection is an oncologically safe alternative to the standard APR in low rectal cancer, with the added benefit of improving the quality of life by avoiding a permenant stoma, together with acceptable functional out-comes.

Low anterior, ultralow anterior, and intersphincteric resection are conventional, elective anus-sparing techniques for low rectal cancer, and good prognosis depends on a good blood supply and tension-free anastomosis. The goal is to assess the effect of preserving the arc formed by the left colic and proximal inferior mesenteric arteries (IMAs), and first branch of the sigmoid arteries on the anastomotic blood supply, tension, and leakage rate in anus-sparing surgery for low rectal cancer. From 2011 to 2020, a patient with low rectal cancer resection was distributed into the ligation group (42 cases with inferior mesenteric artery ligation) and the preservation group (61 cases with preservation of the left colic and proximal IMAs and first branch of the sigmoid artery). We evaluated patient characteristics, operative results, morbidity, and postoperative follow-up results. There were comparable outcomes between ligation and preservation groups in relations to the number of patients in each operative procedure, duration of surgery, operative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and the number of patients with protective stoma (P >.05). In postoperative morbidity, there were similar outcomes between ligation and preservation groups in terms of anastomotic subclinical dehiscence, bleeding and stricture, and urinary retention (P >.05). There were significant differences in anastomotic leakage and intra-abdominal abscess (P < .05). Preservation of the arterial arc formed by left colic artery, proximal IMA, and the first branch of sigmoid arteries with apical lymph node dissection could increase anastomotic blood supply, reduce anastomotic tension, and leakage rate in anus-saving treatment of low rectal cancer.

Background/Aims: To evaluate the short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) for lower rectal cancer, and to compare them with a case-control series of open ISR. Methods: Between July 2002 and March 2011, 29 patients with lower rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic ISR, and 22 of 29 patients who underwent laparoscopic ISR were compared with the control open ISR group of patients matched for age, gender, operative procedure and pathological stage. Results: There was no perioperative mortality, 8 complications occurred in 7 patients, and the morbidity rate was 24.1% (7/29). Leakage occurred in 1 patient (3.4%) in the laparoscopic ISR group. Regarding the matched case-control study, the operative time was significantly longer (p = 0.0007), but blood loss was significantly lower (p = 0.0003) in the laparoscopic ISR group. The median postoperative hospital stay was 8 days in the laparoscopic ISR group, which was significantly shorter than in the open ISR group (14 days). Postoperative complication rates were similar. In the laparoscopic ISR group, the levels of C-reactive protein on postoperative days 1–3 were significantly lower than in the open ISR group. Conclusions: Laparoscopic ISR for lower rectal cancer provides benefits in the early postoperative period without increasing morbidity or mortality.

Intersphincteric resection has been performed as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term results after intersphincteric resection in terms of the morbidity, oncologic safety, and defecatory function. Between 1994 and 2006, 107 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer had curative intersphincteric resection, categorized as total, subtotal, or partial resection of the internal anal sphincter. There were no mortalities. Neorectal mucosal prolapse in patients with total intersphincteric resection and coloanal anastomotic stenosis in patients with subtotal or partial intersphincteric resection were observed as characteristic late complications. The five-year disease-free survival rates classified according to the TNM stage were 100 percent for stage I, 83.5 percent for stage II, and 72.0 percent for stage III cases. The five-year cumulative local recurrence rate after intersphincteric resection was 2.5 percent. Defecatory function, which was evaluated by bowel movement in a 24-hour period, and continence after intersphincteric resection were objectively good. The results of the multivariate analysis revealed that age was the only factor associated with a risk of fecal incontinence. Provided strict selection criteria are used, intersphincteric resection may be the optimal sphincter-preserving surgery for low rectal cancer.

Intersphincteric resection has been performed for very low rectal cancer in place of abdominoperineal resection to avoid permanent colostomy. This study aimed to evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes of intersphincteric resection compared with abdominoperineal resection. In this retrospective study, propensity score matching and stratification analyses were performed to reduce the effects of confounding factors between groups, including age, sex, BMI, CEA value, tumor height, tumor depth, lymph node enlargement, and circumferential resection margin measured by MRI. A database maintained at our institute was used to identify patients during the period between 2000 and 2014. A total of 285 patients who underwent curative intersphincteric resection (n = 112) or abdominoperineal resection (n = 173) for stage I to III low rectal cancer without preoperative chemoradiotherapy were enrolled in this study. The main outcome was recurrence-free survival. Patients in the abdominoperineal resection group were more likely to have a preoperative diagnosis of advanced cancer before case matching. After case matching, clinical outcomes were similar between intersphincteric resection and abdominoperineal resection groups. Five-year relapse-free survival rates were 69.9% for the intersphincteric resection group and 67.9% for abdominoperineal resection group (p = 0.64), and were similar in the propensity score-matched cohorts (89 matched pairs). Three-year cumulative local recurrence rates were 7.3% for intersphincteric resection and 3.9% for abdominoperineal resection (p = 0.13). In the propensity score-matched model, the hazard ratio for recurrence after intersphincteric resection in comparison with abdominoperineal resection was 0.90. Stratification analysis revealed similar recurrence rates (HR, 0.75-1.68) for intersphincteric resection in comparison with abdominoperineal resection. Eight covariates were incorporated into the model, but other covariates were not included. Our findings suggest similar oncologic outcomes for intersphincteric resection and abdominoperineal resection without preoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with low rectal cancer adjusted for background variables. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A661.

In the treatment of very low rectal cancer, a distal resection margin of more than 1 cm can be obtained by partial internal sphincteric resection, allowing a sphincter preserving surgery. Thus, intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been proposed as an alternative to abdominoperineal resection for selected low rectal cancer. The aim of our study was to assess the morbidity, mortality, and the long-term oncologic and functional results of ISR. Charts of patients who had ISR between 1992 and 2004 were reviewed. Cancer-related survival and locoregional recurrence rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Functional outcome was assessed by using a standardized gastrointestinal functional questionnaire. Incontinence was assessed by the continence score of Wexner. Ninety patients (59 males, 31 females) with a tumor at a median distance of 35 mm (range, 22-52) from the anal verge had an ISR. Thirty-seven patients (41%) had preoperative radiotherapy. Histologically complete remission after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (ypT0) was observed in 7 patients (8%), 12 patients (13%) were pT1, 35 patients (39%) pT2, 32 patients (36%) pT3, and 4 patients (4%) pT4. Five patients (5.5%) had synchronous liver metastases. R0 resection was obtained in 85 patients (94.4%). The median distal resection margin on the fixed specimen was 12 mm (range, 5-35) and was positive in 1 case. The circumferential margin was positive (< or =1 mm) in 4 patients (4.4%). There was no mortality. Complication rate was 18.8%: anastomotic leakage occurred in 8 patients (8.8%) and 1 patient had an anovaginal fistula. Five patients (5.6%) underwent secondary abdominoperineal resection: 1 for positive distal margin, 1 for colonic J-pouch necrosis, and 3 for local recurrence. ONCOLOGIC RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 56.2 months (range, 13.3-168.4), local, distant, and combined recurrence occurred in 6 (6.6%), 8 (8.8%), and 2 patients, respectively. Thirteen patients (14.4%) died of cancer recurrence. Five-year overall and disease-free survival was 82% (80-97) and 75% (64-86), respectively. In univariate analysis, overall survival was significantly influenced by pTNM stage and T stage (pT 1-2 vs. 3-4: P = 0.008 and stage I-II vs. III-IV: P = 0.03). In multivariate analysis, we did not find any impact on local recurrence-free survival for the investigated prognostic variables. For a total of 83 patients the mean stool frequency was 2.3 +/- 1.3 per 24 hours. Forty-one percent of patients had stool fragmentation, one-third nocturnal defecation, 19% fecal urgency, and 36% followed low fiber diet. Thirty-four patients (41%) were fully continent, 29 patients (35%) had minor continence problems, and 20 patients (24%) were incontinent. After adjustment for age, gender, tumor level, and pTNM stage, preoperative radiotherapy was the only factor associated with a risk of fecal incontinence [OR (IC 95%) = 3.1 (1.0-9.0), P = 0.04]. In selected patients, ISR is a safe operation with good oncologic results. It achieves good functional results in 76% of patients. Functional results are significantly altered by preoperative radiotherapy.

Laparoscopic sphincter-saving surgery has been investigated for rectal cancer but not for tumours of the lower third. We evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. From 1990 to 2007, patients with rectal tumour below 6 cm from the anal verge and treated by open or laparoscopic curative intersphincteric resection were included in a retrospective comparative study. Surgery included total mesorectal excision with internal sphincter excision and protected low coloanal anastomosis. Neoadjuvant treatment was given to patients with T3 or N+ tumours. Recurrence and survival were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the Logrank test. Function was assessed using the Wexner continence score. Intersphincteric resection was performed in 175 patients with low rectal cancer: 110 had laparoscopy and 65 had open surgery. The two groups were similar according to age, sex, body mass index, ASA score, tumour stage and preoperative radiotherapy. Postoperative mortality (zero) and morbidity (23%vs 28%; P = 0.410) were similar in both groups. There was no difference in 5-year local recurrence (5%vs 2%; P = 0.349) and 5-year disease-free survival (70%vs 71%; P = 0.862). Function and continence scores (11 vs 12; P = 0.675) were similar in both groups. Intersphincteric resection did not alter long-term tumour control of low rectal cancer. The safety and efficacy of the laparoscopic approach for intersphincteric resection are suggested by a similar short- and long-term outcome as obtained by open surgery.

To compare the oncology outcomes and anal function among laparoscopic partial, subtotal and total intersphincteric resection(ISR) for low rectal cancers. From June 2011 to February 2016, a total of 79 consecutive patients with low rectal cancers underwent laparoscopic ISR with hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis at our department. According to the distal tumor margin, partial ISR (internal sphincter resection at the dentate line) was used to treat tumors with distance <1 cm from the anal sphincter (n=28), subtotal ISR was adopted for the tumors locating between the dentate line and intersphincteric groove (n=34), and total ISR (resection at the dentate line) was applied in the treatment of intra-anal tumors (n=17). Anal function was evaluated by a standardized gastrointestinal questionnaire, Wexner incontinence score and Kirwan's classification. Metaphase oncological results and postoperative anal function were compared among three groups, and. Other than the distance of tumor low margin to dentate line (P=0.000) and serum CEA level (P=0.040), no significant differences were noted in baseline data among 3 groups (all P>0.05). The median follow up was 21(8-61) months. The 3-year disease-free survival rates in laparoscopic partial, subtotal and total ISR groups were 91.1%, 88.9%, 88.2% (P=0.901) and the 3-year local relapse-free survival rates were 91.1%, 72.9%, 80.2%(P=0.658), whose all differences were not significant. Thirty-eight patients who did not receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and underwent ileostomy closure for at least 24 months completed the evaluation of anal function, including 14 cases in partial group, 15 cases in subtotal group and 9 cases in total group. Of 38 patients, 73.7%(28/38) was classified as good function (Wexner incontinence score ≤10) and no patient adopted a colostomy because of severe fecal incontinence(Kirwan classification=grade 5). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in Wexner incontinence score and Kirwan classification among 3 groups (all P>0.05). However, patients with chronic anastomotic stoma stenosis showed worse anal function than those without stenosis [Wexner incontinence score: 18(9-20) vs 6(0-18), P=0.000; Kirwan grading: 3(2-4) vs. 2(1-4), P=0.002]. As the ultimate sphincter-saving technique, laparoscopic ISR can result in better oncologic outcomes and better anal function for patients with low rectal cancers. The different procedures of ISR may not affect the efficacy, but chronic anastomotic stoma stenosis deteriorates incontinence status.

For a select group of patients proctectomy with intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer may be a viable alternative to abdominoperineal resection, with good oncological outcomes while preserving sphincter function. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence regarding oncological outcomes, morbidity and mortality, and functional outcomes after ISR for low rectal cancer. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to evaluate evidence regarding oncological outcomes, morbidity and mortality after ISR for low rectal cancer. Three major databases (PubMed, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library) were searched. The review included all original articles reporting outcomes after ISR, published in English, from January 1950 to March 2011. Eighty-four studies were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 14 studies involving 1289 patients were included (mean age 59.5 years, 67.0 per cent men). R0 resection was achieved by ISR in 97.0 per cent. The operative mortality rate was 0.8 per cent and the cumulative morbidity rate 25.8 per cent. Median follow-up was 56 (range 1-227) months. The mean local recurrence rate was 6.7 (range 0-23) per cent. Mean 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 86.3 and 78.6 per cent respectively. Functional outcome was reported in eight studies; among these, the mean number of bowel motions in a 24-h period was 2.7. Oncological outcomes after ISR for low rectal cancer are acceptable, with diverse, often imperfect functional results. These data will aid the clinician when counselling patients considering an ISR for management of low rectal cancer.

Patients undergoing intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer often experience persistent bowel dysfunction, psychological distress, and compromised quality of life, especially in the context of preventive stoma creation. These challenges can negatively affect recovery, immune function, and long-term prognosis. Psychosocial interventions, such as narrative therapy and resilience training, may mitigate these effects, yet their integrated application in ISR populations remains unexplored. In this single-center randomized controlled trial, 178 patients with stage I-III low rectal cancer who underwent ISR between October 2019 and October 2021 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University were randomized to receive either standard care or a structured 6-month intervention combining narrative therapy and resilience training. Primary outcomes included psychological resilience (CD-RISC), emotional well-being (HADS), sleep quality (PSQI), and nutritional recovery (serum albumin, prealbumin, BMI). Secondary endpoints encompassed postoperative complications, systemic inflammation (CRP, IL-6, TNF-α), and 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). All analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The intervention group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in psychological and nutritional parameters (all P < .01), fewer complications (12.4% vs. 23.6%, P = .035), and reduced inflammatory markers on postoperative day 7. At 24 months, both DFS (89.2% vs. 75.3%, P = .028) and OS (93.1% vs. 81.6%, P = .031) were significantly higher in the intervention group. Effect sizes (Cohen's d) and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) were assessed to support the interpretation of clinical relevance. An integrated psychosocial intervention significantly enhanced functional recovery and long-term oncologic outcomes following ISR. These findings underscore the value of incorporating structured psychological support into postoperative care for low rectal cancer.