Endoluminal Loco-regional Resection Research Articles

Oncological results after 22 years of experience with endoluminal loco-regional resection by transanal endoscopic microsurgery

Oncological results after 22 years of experience with endoluminal loco-regional resection by transanal endoscopic microsurgery

Endoluminal loco-regional resection by TEM after R1 endoscopic removal or recurrence of rectal tumors

Purpose The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) after R1 endoscopic resection or local recurrence of early rectal cancer after operative endoscopy. Material and methods Twenty patients with early rectal cancer were enrolled, including patients with incomplete endoscopic resection, or complete endoscopic resection of a tumor with unfavorable prognostic factors (group A, ten patients), and local recurrence after endoscopic removal (group B, ten patients). At admission, histology after endoscopic polypectomy was: TisR1(4), T1R0G3(1), T1R1(5) in group A, and TisR0(8), T1R0(2) in group B. All patients underwent ELRR by TEM with nucleotide-guided mesorectal excision (NGME). Results Mean operative time was 150 minutes. Complications occurred in two patients (10%). Definitive histology was: moderate dysplasia(4), pT0N0(3), pTisN0(5), pT1N0(6), pT2N0(2). Mean number of lymph-nodes was 3.1. Mean follow-up was 79.5 months. All patients are alive and disease-free. Conclusions ELRR by TEM after R1 endoscopic resection of early rectal cancer or for local recurrence after operative endoscopy is safe and effective. It may be considered as a diagnostic procedure, as well as a curative treatment option, instead of a more invasive TME.

Tricks to decrease the suture line dehiscence rate during endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM).

ELRR by TEM is a valid alternative to TME in selected patients with early low rectal cancer, with similar long-term oncological results and better Quality of Life. The authors' policy is to close the residual defect, with possibly a higher risk of dehiscence from tension on the suture line. Aim is to evaluate if a modified technique may reduce the risk of dehiscence. The latest series of 50 patients undergoing ELRR was analyzed and patients were divided in two consecutive groups. In Group A, 25 patients underwent ELRR by TEM with the authors' standard technique. In Group B, a subsequent series of 25 patients also underwent ELRR, but the perirectal residual cavity was filled with a hemostatic agent prior to rectal wall closure. After suture completion, the rectal ampulla was stuffed with gauzes to avoid the formation of a perirectal fluid collection, by enlarging the volume of the residual rectal ampulla. A transanal Foley catheter was positioned for gas evacuation. There were no significant differences in mean tumor distance from the anal verge, mean lesion diameter, mean operative time, and pathological staging between the two groups. Neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy (n-RCT) in Groups A and B was performed in 6 and 2 patients, respectively. Suture line dehiscence in Group A occurred in 3 patients (12%) and in group B it was nil. In patients who experienced a dehiscence, mean lesion diameter was 6.3 cm (range 6-7). None of these patients had undergone n-RCT. After ELRR by TEM, suture line dehiscence is presumably related to the wider size of the residual cavity. Obliteration of the residual perirectal space with hemostatic agent and by gauzes' introduction in the rectal ampulla may reduce the risk of postoperative perirectal abscess and thus reduce the suture line dehiscence rate.

Quality-of-life impairment after endoluminal locoregional resection and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision

For selected patients with rectal cancer, endoluminal locoregional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) may be an alternative treatment option to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME). Few data are available on quality of life (QoL) after LTME and TEM. This study aimed to compare short- and medium-term QoL for T1 rectal cancer patients undergoing LTME or ELRR by TEM. This study investigated 35 patients with T1N0 rectal cancer who underwent TEM (n = 17) or LTME (n = 18). Quality of life was evaluated by European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and QLQ-C38 questionnaires preoperatively and then 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Observation 1 month after LTME showed worsening in all items of both questionnaires. After ELRR, the QLQ-CR38 showed worsening of gastrointestinal (p = 0.005) and defecation problems (p = 0.001), and the QLQ-C30 showed worsening of global health status (p = 0.014), physical functioning (p = 0.02) role functioning (p = 0.003), fatigue (p = 0.002), and pain (p = 0.001). The QLQ-CR38 6 months after LTME showed worsening of body image (p = 0.009), micturition (p = 0.035), and gastrointestinal problems (p = 0.011), and the QLQ-C30 showed worsening of physical functioning (p = 0.003), role functioning (p = 0.002), fatigue (p = 0.004), and nausea/vomiting (p = 0.030). After ELRR, neither the QLQ-CR38 nor the QLQ-C30 questionnaire showed any worsening but demonstrated improvement in global health status and physical functioning. The QLQ-CR38 12 months after LTME showed significant improvement in defecation problems (p = 0.004) and weight loss (p = 0.003), and the QLQ-C30 showed significant improvement in global health status (p = 0.001), nausea and vomiting (p = 0.003), and pain (p = 0.005). After ELRR, the QLQ-C30 showed improvement in emotional functioning (p = 0.012), whereas no significant difference was observed by the QLQ-C38. Functional sequelae are present up to 1 month only after ELRR by TEM and up to 6 months after LTME. At 12 months, neither procedure showed a significant difference in QoL compared with preoperative status.

Nucleotide-guided mesorectal excision combined with endoluminal locoregional resection by transanal endoscopic microsurgery in the treatment of rectal tumors: technique and preliminary results

Endoluminal locoregional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is an alternative treatment option for T1N0 rectal cancer and for selected patients with small T2N0 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (n-RCT). The N parameter may remain undefined after transanal surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the role of a modified sentinel lymph node technique to improve N staging that the authors named "nucleotide-guided mesorectal excision" (NGME). The study enrolled 41 patients (24 men and 17 women) with a mean age of 70.5 years. Preoperative staging identified dysplasia with no suspicion for cancer at imaging (n = 8), dysplasia with suspected malignancy at imaging (n = 15), no suspicion of malignancy at imaging after n-RCT (n = 2), cT1N0 (n = 6), cT2N0 (n = 6), cT3N0 (n = 3), and cT3N1 (n = 1). The patients underwent ELRR by TEM with NGME. Before surgery, 99m-technetium-marked nanocolloid was injected into the peritumoral submucosa. After resection, the residual defect was probed to detect residual radioactivity. If present, hot mesorectal fat was excised. With NGME, the mesorectal lymph node harvest increased from 0 to 10. Lymph nodes were isolated in the specimen or in hot mesorectal fat of 20 patients, 8 of whom had undergone n-RCT. The mean lymph node harvest was 2.75 ± 3.01 (range 1-10) in the irradiated patients and 2.91 ± 1.62 (range 1-6) in the nonirradiated patients (p = 0.87). The average number of lymph nodes in the irradiated patients was higher than in a previous historical series. The use of NGME during ELRR by TEM increases the lymph node harvest and may improve staging accuracy after transanal surgery.

Endoluminal locoregional resection versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for t2 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a randomized clinical trial

Endoluminal locoregional resection versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for t2 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a randomized clinical trial

Randomized clinical trial of endoluminal locoregional resection versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for T2 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy

In selected patients with early low rectal cancer, locoregional excision combined with neoadjuvant therapy may be an alternative treatment option to total mesorectal excision (TME). This prospective randomized trial compared endoluminal locoregional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus laparoscopic TME in the treatment of patients with small non-advanced low rectal cancer. Patients with rectal cancer staged clinically as cT2 N0 M0, histological grade G1-2, with a tumour less than 3 cm in diameter, within 6 cm of the anal verge, were randomized to ELRR or TME. All patients underwent long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Fifty patients in each group were analysed. Overall tumour downstaging and downsizing rates after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were 51 and 26 per cent respectively, and were similar in both groups. All patients had R0 resection with tumour-free resection margins. At long-term follow-up, local recurrence had developed in four patients (8 per cent) after ELRR and three (6 per cent) after TME. Distant metastases were observed in two patients (4 per cent) in each group. There was no statistically significant difference in disease-free survival (P = 0·686). In selected patients, ELRR had similar oncological results to TME. Unique Protocol ID: URBINO-LEZ-1995; registration number: NCT01609504 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).