Intersphincteric Resection Group Research Articles

Revolutionizing sphincter preservation in ultra-low rectal cancer: exploring the potential of transanal endoscopic intersphincteric resection (taE-ISR): a propensity score-matched cohort study.

With the optimization of neoadjuvant treatment regimens, the indications for intersphincteric resection (ISR) have expanded. However, limitations such as unclear surgical field, impaired anal function, and failure of anal preservation still exist. Transanal total mesorectal excision can complement the drawbacks of ISR. Therefore, this study combined these two techniques and proposed transanal endoscopic intersphincteric resection (taE-ISR), aiming to explore the value of this novel technique in anal preservation for ultra-low rectal cancer. Four high-volume centres were involved. After 1:1 propensity score-matching, patients with ultra-low rectal cancer underwent taE-ISR ( n =90) or ISR ( n =90) were included. Baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, pathological results, and follow-up were compared between the two groups. A nomogram model was established to assess the potential risks of anal preservation. The incidence of adjacent organ injury (0.0% vs. 5.6%, P =0.059), positive distal resection margin (1.1% vs. 8.9%, P =0.034), and incomplete specimen (2.2% vs. 13.3%, P =0.012) were lower in taE-ISR group. Moreover, the anal preservation rate was significantly higher in taE-ISR group (97.8% vs. 82.2%, P =0.001). Patients in the taE-ISR group showed a better disease-free survival ( P =0.044) and lower cumulative recurrence ( P =0.022) compared to the ISR group. Surgery procedure, tumour distance, and adjacent organ injury were factors influencing anal preservation in patients with ultra-low rectal cancer. taE-ISR technique was safe, feasible, and improved surgical quality, anal preservation rate and survival outcomes in ultra-low rectal cancer patients. It held significant clinical value and showed promising application prospects for anal preservation.

Transanal local excision versus intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer with stage ypT0-1ycN0 after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: an inverse probability weighting analysis for oncological and functional outcomes.

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of local excision (LE) and intersphincteric resection (ISR) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who achieved a significant or complete pathological response following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. We performed a retrospective analysis of data from patients with stage ypT0-1ycN0 low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy who underwent LE or ISR between June 2016 and June 2021. Baseline characteristics, short-term outcomes, long-term oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes, were compared between the two groups. To reduce the selection bias, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed. This study included 106 patients (LE group: n = 51, ISR group: n = 55). There were significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups (P < 0.05). After IPTW, there were almost no significant differences in baseline data between the two groups. The LE group showed less postoperative complications and better function outcomes compared to the ISR group. The LE group had significantly lower rates of complications (13.7% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.014). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of long-term oncological outcomes. For patients with locally advanced low rectal cancer achieving significant or complete pathological response after neoadjuvant therapy, both LE and ISR present comparable oncological outcomes. Yet, LE seems to show more advantages in terms of postoperative complications and functional outcomes. These findings offer important insights for surgical decision-making, emphasizing the necessity to consider both oncological and functional outcomes in selecting the optimal surgical approach.

Low anterior resection syndrome and quality of life after intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched study.

Our aim was to perform a propensity score-matched study to compare the long-term functional outcomes and quality of life following intersphincteric resection vs. low anterior resection (LAR) with very low anastomosis. Patients who underwent intersphincteric resection or low anterior resection with low anastomosis (≤ 4cm from the anal verge) for rectal cancer between January 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively included. A propensity score-matching process was performed. Functional outcomes and quality of life were assessed using theEuropean Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version (EQ-5D-3L), EORC-QLQ C30, EORC-QLQ CR29, Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS), Wexner, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaires. The primary outcome was the presence of LARS at least 12months after surgery. The second outcome was the postoperative quality of life of included patients. After propensity matching, 128 patients were included, including 58 males and 70 females with a median age of 59.5. Patients in the intersphincteric resection group showed a higher incidence of incontinence to flatus (32.8% versus 14.0%, p = 0.043) and stools (42.2% versus 21.9%, p = 0.046), pain/discomfort (25.0% versus 7.8%, p = 0.001), and bowel dysfunction, while the LARS scores (15.0 versus 13.2, p = 0.461) and major LARS rates (26.6% versus 14.1%, p = 0.078) were comparable in both groups. ISR leads to increased bowel incontinence rate and increased anal pain, without affecting the grade of low anterior resection syndrome, fecal urgency, and clustering. LAR might be the preferred sphincteric-preserving approach when negative resection margins and a safe anastomosis are guaranteed. Patients should be fully informed about potential functional impairment after sphincter-preservation procedures.

Transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

Anus-preserving surgery for low rectal cancer has always been a serious difficulty for surgeons. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) are commonly used Anus-preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical use of two surgical methods. A total of 152 patients with low rectal cancer were treated with taTME in 75 cases and ISR in 77 cases. After propensity score matching, 46 patients in each group were included in the study. Perioperative outcomes, anal function scores (Wexner incontinence score) and quality of life scores (EORTC QLQ C30, EORTC QLQ CR38) at least 1year after surgery were compared between the two groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of surgical outcomes, pathological examination of surgical specimens, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications, except for patients in the taTME group who had their indwelling catheters removed later. Anal Wexner incontinence score was lower in taTME group than ISR group (P < 0.05). On the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, the physical function and role function scores in the ISR group were lower than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05), while the fatigue, pain symptoms, and constipation scores in the ISR group were higher than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05). On the EORTC QLQ-CR38 scale, the scores of gastrointestinal symptoms and defecation problems in the ISR group were higher than those in the taTME group (P < 0.05). Compared with ISR surgery, taTME surgery is comparable in terms of surgical safety and short-term efficacy, and has better long-term anal function and quality of life. From the perspective of long-term anal function and quality of life, taTME surgery is a better surgical method for the treatment of low rectal cancer.

Comparison of anal function and quality of life after conformal sphincter preservation operation and intersphincteric resection of very low rectal cancer: a multicenter, retrospective, case–control analysis

PurposeConformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) is a sphincter preservation operation for very low rectal cancers. Compared to intersphincteric resection (ISR), CSPO retains more dentate line and distal rectal wall, and also avoids damaging the nerves in the intersphincteric space. This study aimed to compare the postoperative anal function and quality of life between the CSPO and ISR.MethodPatients with low rectal cancer undergoing CSPO (n = 117) and ISR (n = 66) were included from Changhai and Huashan Hospital, respectively, between 2011 and 2020. A visual analog scale (range 0–10) was utilized to evaluate satisfaction with anal function and quality of life. The anal function was evaluated with Wexner scores and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. Quality of life was evaluated with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38.ResultsThe CSPO group had more male patients (65.8% vs. 50%, p = 0.042), more preoperative chemoradiotherapy (33.3% vs. 10.6%, p < 0.001), lower tumor position (3.45 ± 1.13 vs. 4.24 ± 0.86 cm, p < 0.001), and more postoperative chemotherapy (65% vs. 13.6%, p < 0.001) compared to the ISR group. In addition, CSPO patients had shorter postoperative stay (6.63 ± 2.53 vs. 7.85 ± 4.73 days, p = 0.003) and comparable stoma reversal rates within 1 year after surgery (92.16% vs. 96.97%, p = 0.318). Multivariable analysis showed that CSPO significantly contributed to higher satisfaction with anal function (beta = 1.752, 95% CI 0.776–2.728) and with quality of life (beta = 1.219, 95% CI 0.374–2.064), but not to Wexner, LARS score, or EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38.ConclusionCSPO improved the satisfaction with anal function and quality of life but utilized more preoperative chemoradiotherapy. CSPO may be an alternative choice for patients with very low rectal cancers in better physical health and with higher requirements for anal function and quality of life.

Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection vs. transanal total mesorectal excision in overweight patients with low rectal cancer.

ObjectiveAnus-preserving surgery in overweight patients with low rectal cancer has been a challenge due to the narrow operating space. Intersphincteric resection (ISR) was once a standard therapeutic option for low rectal cancer. The effectiveness of transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) in treating this group of patients remains uncertain as a new surgical strategy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term effects of taTME with ISR in overweight patients with low rectal cancer.MethodsA total of 53 patients with low rectal cancer were treated with taTME in 31 cases and ISR in 22 cases. The surgery-related data, pathological manifestations of surgical specimens, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications were compared.ResultsPatients in both groups completed the surgery successfully. There were no significant differences in operative time, blood loss, anastomotic distance from the anal verge and ileostomy between the two groups (P > 0.05). TaTME group performed or virtually finished resection of the rectal mesentery, and no positive cases of Circumferential Resection Margin (CRM) or Distal Resection Margin (DRM) were detected in either group. The number of lymph nodes found in surgical specimens did not change significantly between the two groups (P = 0.391). In the subgroup analysis, however, more lymph nodes were detected in female patients undergoing taTME than in male patients (P = 0.028). The ISR group took less time to remove the drainage tubes (P = 0.013) and the same results were obtained in both groups of male patients in the subgroup analysis (P = 0.011). There were no statistically significant differences in time to start liquid diet, time to remove catheters, time to start flatus, time to begin ambulation, postoperative hospital stay, and readmission within 30 days after surgery between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, female patients in the taTME group were initiated ambulation earlier than males in the subgroup analysis (P = 0.034). The difference was insignificant in the occurrence of postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05).ConclusiontaTME is safe and feasible for the treatment of overweight patients with low rectal cancer.

Inter sphincter rectal resection with and without Malone ante grade continence enema in cases with low rectal cancer: A randomized, prospective, single-blind, clinical trial.

Background:Fecal incontinence is the main morbidity of inter-sphincteric resection (ISR) in ultra-low rectal cancer. Malone Ante grade Continence Enema (MACE) has been proposed for these patients. We aimed to compare the quality of life outcomes in cases with ultra-low rectal cancer who had undergone ISR±MACE.Methods:The current randomized clinical study was accomplished for two years from December 2016 to February 2018 in Imam Khomeini Hospital (Sari City, I.R.Iran) on 30 patients (15 in each group) with rectal cancer. The inclusion criteria of the study were stage 1 and 2a of low rectal cancer with type 2 and 3 of Rullier's classification, those who received neoadjuvant chemo radiotherapy. The exclusion criteria were comorbidity diseases, immune deficiency, poor follow-up. The follow-up period was one year. The Quality of Life (Qol) was reported as primary endpoint. The EORTC QLQ-C30 score and Wexner questionnaires were used. SPSS Version 22 was used. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:The mean age of patients was 56.23±years. The overall Qol score was better in the ISR-MACE (P=0.023). The overall Qol was lower in women than in men in both groups. Low anterior resection syndrome score was lower in the ISR plus MACE group than the ISR group (P=0.030). The Wexner score revealed better scores in the ISR with MACE group than the ISR without MACE group (p<0.0001).Conclusion:Patients who underwent ISR plus MACE surgery had better defecation control and better quality of life than patients without MACE.

Comparative study of functional outcomes between ultra-low anterior resection and inter-sphincteric resection: a propensity matched analysis.

Comparative bowel functional outcomes between ultralow anterior resections (ULAR) and inter-sphincteric resection (ISR) for similar tumour and patient characteristics is not known. Single centre study of low rectal caners (<5cm from anal verge) with 1:1 propensity matching of age, sex, body mass index, prior radiation, and surgical approach (open vs. minimally invasive) was performed for the ULAR and ISR groups. Primary outcome measure was Wexner Incontinence scores and Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score at a single time point after stoma reversal. Seventy-two matched patients were included. Median Wexner scores were five and eight for the ULAR and ISR cohorts (p = 0.006). Major incontinence (Wexner >11) was found in 5.6% versus 33% after ULAR and ISR, respectively. Major LARS (score > 29) was demonstrated in 11% versus 25% in ULAR versus ISR (p = 0.293). Majority in both groups has no LARS (score < 20), that is, 72.2% versus 63.9% in ULAR against ISR. Besides these, stool fragmentation (p < 0.001), nocturnal defecation (p < 0.001) and use of anti-diarrhoeal medications (p = 0.023) were significantly more after ISR. Bowel continence was relatively inferior after ISR as compared to an ULAR for low rectal cancers in matched cohorts. Major LARS in ISR was twice as prevalent without statistical differences.

Clinical Efficacy of Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer Compared With Abdominoperineal Resection: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.

In recent years, intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been increasingly used to replace abdominoperineal resection (APR) in the surgical treatment of ultra-low rectal cancer. This study was to compare the clinical efficacy of ISR and APR. Between 2012 and 2018, 74 consecutive patients with ultra-low rectal cancer underwent ISR or APR in our medical center. A retrospective comparison of these 2 procedures was performed. A total of 43 patients underwent ISR and 31 underwent APR were included in the study. No significant differences were found between 2 groups in gender, age, BMI, and ASA score. Intersphincteric resection group showed shorter operative time (P = .02) and less blood loss (P = .001). Hospital stays, time to soft diet, and postoperative 30-day complications were not significantly different between the 2 groups. R0 resection achieved 100% in both the groups. As for the long-term outcomes, the survival and recurrence rate were similar between 2 groups. Moreover, the LARS and Wexner score showed that the postoperative anal function after ISR were satisfactory. This study suggested that ISR was feasible and safe for selected patients with ultra-low rectal cancer, with clinically superior outcomes in select patients (small tumors/further from the anal verge) and similar oncological outcomes to APR, and the anal functional outcomes after ISR were acceptable.

Risk Factors for Anorectal Dysfunction After Interspincteric Resection in Patients With Low Rectal Cancer.

Purpose: The objective of this study was to explore the risk factors for anorectal dysfunction after intersphincteric resection in patients with low rectal cancer.Methods: A total of 251 patients who underwent intersphincteric resection from July 2014 to June 2020 were included in this study, for which the Kirwan's grade, Wexner score, and anorectal manometric index were used to evaluate the anorectal function and other parameters including demographics, surgical features, and clinical and pathological characteristics. These parameters were analysed to explore the potential risk factors for anorectal function after intersphincteric resection.Results: In the 251 included patients, 98 patients underwent partial intersphincteric resection, 87 patients underwent subtotal intersphincteric resection, and 66 patients underwent total intersphincteric resection. There were 53 (21.1%) patients who had postoperative complications, while no significant difference was observed between the three groups. Furthermore, 30 patients (45.5%) in the total intersphincteric resection group were classified as having anorectal dysfunction (Kirwan's grade 3–5), which was significantly higher than that in the partial intersphincteric resection group (27.6%) and subtotal intersphincteric resection group (29.9%). The mean Wexner score of patients that underwent total intersphincteric resection was 7.9, which was higher than that of patients that had partial intersphincteric resection (5.9, p = 0.002) and subtotal intersphincteric resection (6.4, p = 0.027). The initial perceived volume was lower in the total intersphincteric resection group than in the partial and subtotal intersphincteric resection groups at 1, 3, and 6 months after intersphincteric resection. In addition, the resting pressure, maximum squeeze pressure, and maximum tolerated volume in the total intersphincteric resection group were worse than those in the partial and subtotal groups at 3 and 6 months after intersphincteric resection. Univariate and multivariate analyses suggested that an age ≥65, total intersphincteric resection, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy were independent risk factors for anorectal dysfunction (P = 0.023, P = 0.003, and P = 0.008, respectively). Among the 66 patients who underwent total intersphincteric resection, 17 patients received preoperative chemoradiotherapy, of which 12 patients (70.6%) were classified as having anorectal dysfunction.Conclusion: The current study concluded that age ≥65, total intersphincteric resection, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy were risk factors for anorectal dysfunction after intersphincteric resection. The morbidity of anorectal dysfunction after total intersphincteric resection for patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy was relatively high, and the indication should be carefully evaluated.

Sphincter-saving surgery versus abdominoperineal resection in low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant treatment with propensity score analysis.

Sphincter-saving operation is the treatment of choice in patients with lower rectal cancer, although abdominoperineal resection (APR) is necessary in some cases for adequate oncological outcomes. This study compared the oncologic outcomes of patients with low rectal cancer undergoing APR and intersphincteric resection (ISR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). We compared 104 patients who underwent ISR for lower rectal cancer between 2008 and 2014 with 79 patients who underwent APR during the same period. Cases in which tumors involved the levator ani muscle or the external anal sphincter, as well as those in which surgeons were unable to obtain a negative distal margin via sphincter-saving operation were excluded. Fifty-two patients who underwent ISR were matched via propensity scoring with 52 patients who underwent APR. The analyzed variables included patient and tumor characteristics and long-term outcomes before and after 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). After matching, there were no significant differences between the two groups in clinical stage and tumor distance from anal verge. Short- and long-term outcomes were similar between the two groups. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 76.3% in the ISR group and 57.8% in the APR group (p = 0.080). The 5-year cancer-specific survival rate was 89.5% in the ISR group and 85.4% in the APR group (p = 0.383). This reveals that ISR and APR have similar oncologic outcomes following nCRT in patients with advanced low rectal cancer adjusted for background variables.

Complete intersphincteric longitudinal muscle excision May Be key to reducing local recurrence during intersphincteric resection

BackgroundAlthough total mesorectal excision (TME) is regarded as a standard procedure for rectal cancer, technical definition and evaluation method have not yet been investigated for intersphincteric resection (ISR). This study was performed to introduce a complete ISR procedure, and to assess whether total intersphincteric longitudinal muscle excision (TILME) facilitated the completeness of ISR and reduced recurrence. MethodsA total of 1080 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent robot-assisted low anterior resection (LAR) over 10 years were consecutively enrolled. Propensity-score matching of the two LAR groups (ISR vs LAR group, 1:1) and three ISR subgroups (partial vs subtotal vs total ISR subgroup, 2:2:1) was performed by strict adjustment of baseline characteristics. Archived specimens and video-/photo-records were reevaluated to examine completeness of TILME. ResultsComplete-TILME was performed in 84.5% of patients who underwent ISR. Multivariate analysis showed that incomplete-TILME was the only parameter independently associated with increased 5-year cumulative local recurrence (odds ratio = 23.385; 95% confidence interval = 1.492–366.421; p = 0.03), and that incomplete-TILME was independently associated with adipose tissue surrounding the intersphincteric longitudinal muscle, coloanal anastomosis, and total ISR (p < 0.001–0.05). Although mean incontinence scores and anorectal manometry deteriorated to some degree 12–24 months after surgery in all patients, they remained acceptable. The 5-year cumulative DFS (74.1% vs 60%, p = 0.18) and OS (85.9% vs 70%, p = 0.10) rates tended to be higher in patients with complete than incomplete-TILME. ConclusionsThe completeness of TILME appears to be an independent indicator of complete ISR, reducing local recurrence following lower rectal cancer surgery.

Intersphincteric Resection Versus Abdominoperineal Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Background. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) has been the standard surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer for a century. In recent years, intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been increasingly used to avoid the permanent colostomy. Up to now, there is no relevant meta-analysis comparing the clinical efficacy of ISR and APR. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of these 2 procedures. Methods. A comprehensive search of online databases was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to obtain comparative studies of ISR and APR. Then the data from studies that met the inclusion criteria were extracted and analyzed. Results. A total of 12 studies covering 2438 patients were included. No significant differences were found between ISR and APR in gender, body mass index, distance from tumor to anal edge, operative time, and blood loss. In addition, hospital stay (weighted mean differences = -2.98 days; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -3.54 to -2.43; P < .00001) and postoperative morbidity (odds ratio [OR] = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.99; P = .04) were significantly lower in ISR group compared with APR group. However, patients who underwent ISR showed lower pathological T-stage (T3T4%, OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.28 to 0.86; P = .01) and lymph node metastasis rate (OR = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.59 to 1.01; P = .06) compared with those who underwent APR. Moreover, oncological outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusion. ISR may provide a safe alternative to APR, with shorter hospital stays, lower postoperative morbidity, and similar oncological outcomes. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm and update the findings of this analysis.

Oncologic safety and bowel function after ultralow anterior resection with or without intersphincteric resection for low lying rectal cancer: Comparative cross sectional study.

Despite acceptable oncologic outcomes of sphincter preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer, bowel dysfunction occurs. This study aimed to compare the oncologic and functional bowel outcomes between ultralow anterior resection (ULAR) and intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer. One hundred sixty-four patients who underwent ULAR with or without ISR for low rectal cancer between December 2010 and May 2018 were included. The Wexner and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) scores were used to evaluate the bowel function of patients. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between patients. The ISR group had higher incidence of major fecal incontinence than the ULAR group (75.9% vs 49.3%; P = .016). The median Wexner score decreased from 12 to 9 (P = .062) at 1-year follow-up. However, the frequency and urgency/soilage subscales of MSKCC score improved significantly in the ULAR group. ISR and follow-up interval less than 1-year significantly increased the major incontinence risk. The OS in the ULAR and ISR groups was 91.4% and 91.7%. Whereas the DFS in both groups was 79% and 79.2%, respectively. ULAR and ISR are comparable in oncologic outcomes. Severe bowel dysfunctions and major incontinence were noted in ISR group. Careful selection of patients is mandatory.

Intersphincteric Resection Has Similar Long-term Oncologic Outcomes Compared With Abdominoperineal Resection for Low Rectal Cancer Without Preoperative Therapy: Results of Propensity Score Analyses

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.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for a lower rectal tumor.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) for a lower rectal tumor in comparison with a case-control series of patients undergoing open ISR. Quality of life factors and anal function were also evaluated. Between July 2008 and April 2013, 103 patients with lower rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic surgery at the Surgical Oncology Department of Gifu University School of Medicine. A total of 25 patients with lower rectal cancer underwent ISR, and 19/25 patients who underwent laparoscopic ISR were compared with the control group of 6 patients who underwent open ISR. The technical feasibility and safety of ISR, and the short- and long-term outcomes following laparoscopic ISR were evaluated. Additional data associated with fecal incontinence conditions of the postoperative patients were evaluated using the Modified Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale. There was no recorded perioperative mortality, three complications were observed to occur in three patients and the morbidity rate was 15.8%. The postoperative complications detected included bleeding in one patient and ileus in two patients of the laparoscopic ISR group. The rate of severe complications of grade ≥3a was 15.8% and that of grade ≥3b was 5.3%. In the matched case-control study, blood loss was significantly lower in the laparoscopic ISR group. The median postoperative hospital stay was 14.1 days in the laparoscopic ISR group, which was significantly shorter compared with in the open ISR group (18.7 days). Cancer recurrence was detected in one (5%) patient in a single inguinal lymph node. No significant differences between the ISR and ultra-low anterior resection (ULAR) groups were observed in the maximum resting and maximum squeeze pressures; the outcomes for anal function and fecal incontinence were the same for ISR and ULAR. Thus, laparoscopic ISR for lower rectal cancer may provide a benefit in the early postoperative period without increasing morbidity or mortality.

Robot-assisted intersphincteric resection facilitates an efficient sphincter-saving in patients with low rectal cancer.

Few investigations of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection (ISR) are presently available to support this procedure as a safe and efficient procedure. We aimed to evaluate the utility of robot-assisted ISR by comparison between ISR and abdominoperineal resection (APR) using both robot-assisted and open approaches. The 558 patients with lower rectal cancer (LRC) who underwent curative operation was enrolled between July 2010 and June 2015 to perform either by robot-assisted (ISR vs. APR=310 vs. 34) or open approaches (144 vs. 70). Perioperative and functional outcomes including urogenital and anorectal dysfunctions were measured. Recurrence and survival were examined in 216 patients in which >3years had elapsed after the operation. The robot-assisted approach was the most significant parameter to determine ISR achievement among potent parameters (OR=3.467, 95% CI=2.095-5.738, p<0.001). Early surgical complications occurred more frequently in the open ISR group (16 vs. 7.7%, p=0.01). The voiding and male sexual dysfunctions were significantly more frequent in the open ISR (p<0.05). The fecal incontinence and lifestyle alteration score was greater in the open ISR than in the robot-assisted ISR at 12 and 24months, respectively (p<0.05). However, the 3-year cumulative rates of local recurrence and survival did not differ between the two groups. The current procedure of robot-assisted ISR replaced a significant portion of APR to achieve successful SSO via mostly transabdominal approach and double-stapled anastomosis. The robot-assisted ISR with minimal invasiveness might be a help to reduce anorectal and urogenital dysfunctions.

Long-Term Functional Outcomes of Total Mesorectal Excision Following Chemoradiotherapy for Lower Rectal Cancer: Stapled Anastomosis versus Intersphincteric Resection

Aims: To compare the long-term functional outcomes of total mesorectal excision following chemoradiotherapy for lower rectal cancer between stapled anastomosis and intersphincteric resection (ISR). Methods: A total of 105 of 170 sphincter-preserving patients found to be disease-free and anal functional patients were assessed at 6.5 years (range 2.4-13.0 years) of follow-up after surgery. Of these subjects, 87 (double stapling technique [DST]: 41; ISR: 46) of the 105 patients (82.9%) responded to the questionnaire on the low anterior resection syndrome score (LARS score). Results: The total LARS scores in the DST and ISR groups were not significantly different (Major/Minor/No LARS = 23/14/4 and 31/10/5, p = 0.431). When considering each item of the LARS, ISR was associated with poorer incontinence scores than DST. Conversely, the scores for the frequency of bowel movement, clustering and urgency were not different between the 2 groups. In addition, in the multivariate analysis, the tumor distance from the anal verge and postoperative period was independently associated with Major LARS. Conclusion: In this study, we demonstrate the long-term functional outcomes of irradiated lower rectal cancer reconstructed with DST and ISR. Bowel function improves over time; therefore, long-term patient follow-up is important.

Multicentre study of robotic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer.

There is a lack of information regarding the oncological safety of robotic intersphincteric resection (ISR) with coloanal anastomosis. The objective of this study was to compare the long-term feasibility of robotic compared with laparoscopic ISR. Between January 2008 and May 2011, consecutive patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic ISR with coloanal anastomosis from seven institutions were included. Propensity score analyses were performed to compare outcomes for groups in a 1 : 1 case-matched cohort. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival. A total of 334 patients underwent ISR with coloanal anastomosis, of whom 212 matched patients (106 in each group) formed the cohort for analysis. The overall rate of conversion to open surgery was 0.9 per cent in the robotic ISR group and 1.9 per cent in the laparoscopic ISR group. Nine patients (8.5 per cent) in the laparoscopic group and three (2.8 per cent) in the robotic ISR group still had a stoma at last follow-up (P = 0.075). Total mean hospital costs were significantly higher for robotic ISR (€ 12,757 versus € 9223 for laparoscopic ISR; P = 0.037). Overall 3-year local recurrence rates were similar in the two groups (6.7 per cent for robotic and 5.7 per cent for laparoscopic resection; P = 0.935). The combined 3-year disease-free survival rates were 89.6 (95 per cent c.i. 84.1 to 95.9) and 90.5 (85.4 to 96.6) per cent respectively (P = 0.298). Robotic ISR with coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer has reasonable oncological outcomes, but is currently too expensive with no short-term advantages.

Feasibility of Modified Short-Course Radiotherapy Combined With a Chemoradiosensitizer for T3 Rectal Cancer

5-Fluorouracil-based chemotherapy is considered to be a radiosensitizer; however, conventional short-course radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy is generally thought to not be feasible because of the prevalence of side effects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of modified short-course radiotherapy combined with a chemoradiosensitizer for T3 rectal cancer. This study was retrospective in nature and used a prospectively collected database. Patients with T3 rectal cancer located below the peritoneum reflection were selected. A total dose of 25 Gy of radiotherapy was administered in 10 fractions of 2.5 Gy each for 5 days. Radiotherapy was performed with S-1 as a radiosensitizer from day 1 to day 10. Surgery was targeted to be performed 4 weeks after radiotherapy. The morbidity, sphincter-preserving rate, anal function, and long-term outcomes were assessed. All patients (n = 170) completed the radiotherapy regimen and 166 (97.6%) completed the combination regimen with chemotherapy. A total of 149 patients (87.6%) had sphincter-preserving surgery (double stapling technique (DST), 58 patients; intersphincteric resection (ISR), 91 patients), and postoperative complications were relatively mild (anastomotic leakage, 15.4%; intra-abdominal infection, 8.2%). Among those undergoing sphincter preserving surgery, the 5-year local relapse-free survival rate was 94.3% in the DST group, and 89.8% in the ISR group. With respect to the anal function, the Wexner score the first year after stoma closure for the double-stapling technique group was 6 and that for intersphincteric resection was 15; however, the score for the intersphincteric resection group was improved to 8 at 4 years after stoma closure. This study had limitations because it was an uncontrolled, 1-arm, retrospective review with a small sample size. Modified short-course radiotherapy combined with chemoradiosensitizer is a feasible approach for treating T3 rectal cancer. With the use of the short-course approach, efforts to reduce the incidence of side effects by appropriately prolonging the waiting period enable the administration of combination treatment with short-course radiotherapy and chemotherapy.