Quality Of Mesorectal Excision Research Articles

Total mesorectal excision quality in rectal cancer surgery affects local recurrence rate but not distant recurrence and survival: population-based cohort study.

The quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen in rectal cancer surgery is assessed with a three-tier grade (mesorectal, intramesorectal and muscularis propria). This study aimed to analyse the prognostic impact of the total mesorectal excision grade on survival, and to identify risk factors for intramesorectal and muscularis propria resection in a population-based setting. All patients in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry with rectal cancer stage I-III ≤ 10 cm from the anal verge, diagnosed 2015-2019, undergoing total mesorectal excision were analysed. Clinical, surgical and pathological data were retrieved and analysed for the following primary outcomes: local and distant recurrence and overall and relative survival; secondary outcomes were risk factors for total mesorectal excision grading (intramesorectal or muscularis propria resection). Of note, postoperative death < 30 days or recurrence within 90 days were exclusion criteria for survival and recurrence analysis. Recurrence-free patients with less than 3 years follow-up, and patients lacking data regarding recurrence, were also excluded from recurrence analyses. Overall, of 7979 patients treated during the study interval, 1499 patients were eligible for recurrence, 2441 patients for survival and 2476 patients for risk-factor analyses, of which 75% were graded mesorectal, 17% intramesorectal and 8% muscularis propria. Median follow-up for survival was 42 (1-77) months. The worst total mesorectal excision grading (muscularis propria resection) was an independent risk factor for local recurrence in multivariable analysis (HR 2.73, 95% c.i. 1.07 to 7.0, P = 0.036). Total mesorectal excision grade had no impact on distant recurrence or survival. Female sex, tumour level <5 cm, abdominoperineal resection, minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic and robotic), high blood loss, long duration of surgery and intraoperative perforation were independent risk factors for worse total mesorectal excision grading (intramesorectal and/or muscularis propria resection) in multivariable analyses. Muscularis propria resection increases the risk of local recurrence but does not seem to affect distant recurrence or survival.

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.

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. 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. 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. 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.

Using CT-Based Pelvimetry and Visceral Obesity Measurements to Predict Total Mesorectal Excision Quality for Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Surgery.

A complete total mesorectal excision is the criterion standard in curative rectal cancer surgery. Ensuring quality is challenging in a narrow pelvis, and obesity amplifies technical difficulties. Pelvimetry is the measurement of pelvic dimensions, but its role in gauging preoperatively the difficulty of proctectomy is largely unexplored. To determine pelvic structural factors associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision after curative proctectomy and build a predictive model for total mesorectal excision quality. Retrospective cohort study. A quaternary referral center database of patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma (2009-2017). Curative-intent proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma. All radiological measurements were obtained from preoperative CT images using validated imaging processing software tools. Completeness of total mesorectal excision was obtained from histology reports. Ability of radiological pelvimetry and obesity measurements to predict total mesorectal excision quality. Of the 410 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 362 underwent a complete total mesorectal excision (88%). Multivariable regression identified a deeper sacral curve (per 100 mm 2 [OR: 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23; p < 0.001]) and a greater transverse distance of the pelvic outlet (per 10 mm [OR:1.41, 95% CI, 1.08-1.84; p = 0.012]) to be independently associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision. An increased area of the pelvic inlet (per 10 cm 2 [OR: 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97; p = 0.02) was associated with a higher rate of complete mesorectal excision. No difference in visceral obesity ratio and visceral obesity (ratio >0.4 vs <0.4) between BMI (<30 vs ≥30) and sex was identified. A model was built to predict mesorectal quality using the following variables: depth of sacral curve, area of pelvic inlet, and transverse distance of the pelvic outlet. Retrospective analysis is not controlled for the choice of surgical approach. Pelvimetry predicts total mesorectal excision quality in rectal cancer surgery and can alert surgeons preoperatively to cases of unusual difficulty. This predictive model may contribute to treatment strategy and aid in the comparison of outcomes between traditional and novel techniques of total mesorectal excision. See Video Abstract . ANTECEDENTES:Una escisión mesorrectal total y completa es el estándar de oro en la cirugía curativa del cáncer de recto. Garantizar la calidad es un desafío en una pelvis estrecha y la obesidad amplifica las dificultades técnicas. La pelvimetría es la medición de las dimensiones pélvicas, pero su papel para medir la dificultad preoperatoria de la proctectomía está en gran medida inexplorado.OBJETIVO:Determinar los factores estructurales pélvicos asociados con la escisión mesorrectal total incompleta después de una proctectomía curativa y construir un modelo predictivo para la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ÁMBITO:Base de datos de un centro de referencia cuaternario de pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de recto (2009-2017).PACIENTES:Proctectomía con intención curativa para adenocarcinoma de recto.INTERVENCIONES:Todas las mediciones radiológicas se obtuvieron a partir de imágenes de TC preoperatorias utilizando herramientas de software de procesamiento de imágenes validadas. La integridad de la escisión mesorrectal total se obtuvo a partir de informes histológicos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Capacidad de la pelvimetría radiológica y las mediciones de obesidad para predecir la calidad total de la escisión mesorrectal.RESULTADOS:De los 410 casos que cumplieron los criterios de inclusión, 362 tuvieron una escisión mesorrectal total completa (88%). Una regresión multivariable identificó una curva sacra más profunda (por 100 mm2); OR:1,14,[IC95%:1,06-1,23,p<0,001], y mayor distancia transversal de salida pélvica (por 10mm); OR:1,41, [IC 95%:1,08-1,84,p=0,012] como asociación independiente con escisión mesorrectal total incompleta. Un área aumentada de entrada pélvica (por 10 cm2); OR:0,85, [IC95%:0,75-0,97,p=0,02] se asoció con una mayor tasa de escisión mesorrectal completa. No se identificaron diferencias en la proporción de obesidad visceral y la obesidad visceral (proporción>0,4 vs.<0,4) entre el índice de masa corporal (<30 vs.>=30) o el sexo. Se construyó un modelo para predecir la calidad mesorrectal utilizando variables: profundidad de la curva sacra, área de la entrada pélvica y distancia transversal de la salida pélvica.LIMITACIONES:Análisis retrospectivo no controlado por la elección del abordaje quirúrgico.CONCLUSIONES:La pelvimetría predice la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total en la cirugía del cáncer de recto y puede alertar a los cirujanos preoperatoriamente sobre casos de dificultad inusual. Este modelo predictivo puede contribuir a la estrategia de tratamiento y ayudar en la comparación de resultados entre técnicas tradicionales y novedosas de escisión mesorrectal total. (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo).

Tumour, narrow pelvis and surgery specific factors for total mesorectal excision quality and morbidity following rectal cancer resection.

Pelvic anatomy is critical in challenging rectal resections. This study investigated how pelvic anatomy relates to total mesorectal excision (TME) quality, anastomotic leakage rate, and long-term oncological outcomes. Patients undergoing elective rectal cancer resection from 2008 to 2017 in an Austrian institution were retrospectively reviewed regardless of the surgical approach. CT scans were analysed for pelvic measurements and volumes. The primary outcomes of interest were the correlation between pelvic dimensions and the TME quality and anastomotic leakage. Subanalysis was done by surgical approach (open, laparoscopic, transanal TME). Secondary outcomes were overall and disease-free survivals. Among 154 eligible patients, 112 were included. The angle between pubic symphysis and promontory significantly correlated with worse TME grades (TME grade 1: mean(s.d.) 102.7(5.7)°; TME grade 2: 92.0(4.4)°; TME grade 3: 91.4(3.6)°; P < 0.001). A significantly lower distance between tumour and circumferential resection margin (CRM) was observed in grade 3 resections, whereas no difference appeared in grade 1 and grade 2 resection (TME grade 1: mean(s.d.) 11.92(9.4) mm; TME grade 2: 10.8(8.1) mm; TME grade 3: 3.1(4.1) mm; P = 0.003). The anastomotic leakage rate was significantly higher in case of a lower CRM (patients with anastomotic leakage: mean(s.d.) 6.8(5.8) mm versus others: 12.6(9.8) mm, P = 0.027), but not associated with pelvimetry measurements. The transanal TME (TaTME) subgroup displayed a wider angle between the pubic symphysis and promontory, younger age and improved TME quality compared to others (respectively, mean TME grades in TaTME versus open versus laparoscopic: 1.0 ± 0.0, 1.5 ± 0.7 and 1.3 ± 0.5, P = 0.013). Finally, oncological survival was not impacted by pelvic measurements or worse TME quality. The angle between the pubic symphysis and promontory and the distance between tumour and CRM were associated with worse TME grades. The anastomotic leakage was associated with a lower CRM but not with pelvimetric measures.

Effect of neoadjuvant therapy on early postoperative complications in rectal cancer.

The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is multimodal. It includes neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCHRT). NCHRT has been shown to reduce the risk of local recurrence. New treatment regimens also have a positive impact on patient survival. NCHRT leads to fibrotic changes in the pelvis and is associated with side effects. NCHRT may have a negative impact on postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to demonstrate whether NCHRT increases the number of early postoperative complications. An analysis of our own cohort of 200 patients with rectal cancer undergoing robotic-assisted surgery between 2018 and 2022 was performed. The cohort was divided into patients who underwent NCHRT and subsequently surgery and patients who underwent primary surgery. The two groups were compared in terms of duration of surgery, blood loss, incidence of anastomotic complications, and quality of mesorectal excision. Patients who underwent NCHRT had a longer operation time, by 34 minutes on average. We did not demonstrate a higher incidence of anastomotic complications in these patients. Patients who underwent primary surgery had a slightly lower blood loss and better quality of mesorectal excision during surgery. Nevertheless, complete or nearly complete mesorectal anastomosis was achieved in more than 85% of cases in both groups. Radiotherapy results in postradiation changes in the lesser pelvis. These changes impair visibility and dissection during surgery. Operations after NCHRT are more technically demanding and take longer but do not have more anastomotic complications. Also, the quality of mesorectal excision is satisfactory in both groups.

Pathologic outcomes of transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of 26 studies.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has the potential advantages for patients with low rectal cancer. The objective of this meta-analysis was to identify the pathologic outcomes between the TaTME and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) in rectal cancer. The literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE with English language restriction. The primary endpoint was circumferential margin (CRM), and the secondary endpoints were distal resection margin (DRM), mesorectal excision quality, and harvested lymph nodes. Our research identified 1090 articles, and 26 studies met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. The positive CRM was lower in the TaTME than the LaTME (OR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.98; P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the positive CRM between the TaTME and LaTME published after 2016 (OR = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.57, 1.12; P = 0.19), prospective study (OR = 2.70; 95% CI = 0.51, 14.24; P = 0.24), respective study (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.55, 1.04; P = 0.09), BMI > 26 (OR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.63, 1.58; P = 0.98), or sample size > 100 (OR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.57, 1.23; P = 0.38). In addition, there was no significant difference observed between the TaTME and LaTME in terms of DRM, mesorectum incompleteness, and harvested lymph nodes. The TaTME is associated with lower positive CRM compared to the LaTME and similar pathologic outcomes including DRM, harvested lymph node, and mesorectal excision quality.

Defining the learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) represents a novel approach to rectal dissection. Although many structured training programs have been developed worldwide to assist surgeons in implementing this new technique, the learning curve (LC) of taTME has yet to be conclusively defined. This is particularly important given the concerns regarding the complication profile and oncological safety of taTME. The aim of this review was to provide an up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis of the LC for taTME, comparing the difference of outcomes between the LC and after learning curve (ALC) groups. An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2010-2020 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane Library databases. All studies comparing taTME procedures before and after LC were analysed. Seven retrospective studies of prospectively collected databases were included, comparing 333 (51.0%) patients in the LC group and 320 (49.0%) patients in the ALC group. There was a significantly reduced number of adverse intra-operative events, anastomotic leaks and improved quality of mesorectal excision in the ALC group. This review shows that there is a significant improvement in clinical outcomes between the LC and ALC groups which supports the need for careful mastery and ongoing technical refinement during the LC in taTME. This procedure should be performed on a subset of carefully selected patients in the hands of experienced and well-trained teams dedicated to ongoing audit.

Robotic rectal resection: oncologic outcomes

Robotic surgery has progressively gained popularity in the treatment of rectal cancer. However, only a few studies on its oncologic effectiveness are currently present, with contrasting results. The purpose of this study is to report a single surgeon’s experience on robotic rectal resection (RRR) for cancer, focusing on the analysis of oncologic outcomes, both in terms of pathological features and long-term results. One-hundred and twenty-two consecutive patients who underwent RRR for rectal cancer from January 2013 to December 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients’ characteristics and perioperative outcomes were collected. The analyzed oncologic outcomes were pathological features [distal (DM), circumferential margin (CRM) status and quality of mesorectal excision (TME)] and long-term outcomes [overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS)]. The mean operative time was 275 (± 60.5) minutes. Conversion rate was 6.6%. Complications occurred in 27 cases (22.1%) and reoperation was needed in 2 patients (1.5%). The median follow-up was 30.5 (5.9–86.1) months. None presented DM positivity. CRM positivity was 2.5% (2 cases) while a complete TME was reached in 94.3% of cases (115 patients). Recurrence rate was 5.7% (2 local, 4 distant and 1 local plus distant tumor relapse). OS and DFS were 90.7% and 83%, respectively. At the multivariate analysis, both CRM positivity and near complete/incomplete TME were recognized as negative prognostic factors for OS and DFS. Under appropriate logistic and operative conditions, robotic surgery for rectal cancer proves to be oncologically effective, with adequate pathological results and long-term outcomes. It also offers acceptable peri-operative outcomes, further confirming the safety and feasibility of the technique.

Association of certification, improved quality and better oncological outcomes for rectal cancer in a specialized colorectal unit.

Centralization of cancer care is expected to yield superior results. In Germany, the national strategy is based on a voluntary certification process. The effect of centre certification is difficult to prove because quality data are rarely available prior to certification. This observational study aims to assess outcomes for rectal cancer patients before and after implementation of a certified cancer centre. All consecutive patients treated for rectal cancer in our certified centre from 2009 to 2017 were retrieved from a prospective database. The dataset was analyzed according to a predefined set of 19 quality indicators comprising 36 quality goals. The results were compared to an identical cohort of patients, treated from 2000 to 2008 just before centre implementation. In total, 1059 patients were included, 481 in the 2009-2017 interval and 578 in the 2000-2008 interval. From 2009 to 2017, 25 of 36 quality goals were achieved (vs. 19/36). The proportion of anastomotic leaks in low anastomoses was improved (13.5% vs. 22.1%, p = 0.018), as was the local 5-year recurrence rate for stage (y)pIII rectal cancers (7.7% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.085), and quality of mesorectal excision (0.3% incomplete resections vs. 5.5%, p = 0.002). Furthermore, a decrease of abdominoperineal excisions was noted (47.1% vs. 60.0%, p = 0.037). For the 2009-2017 interval, local 5-year recurrence rate in stages (y)p0-III was 4.6% and 5-year overall survival was 80.2%. Certification as specialized centre and regular audits were associated with an improvement of various quality parameters. The formal certification process has the potential to enhance quality of care for rectal cancer patients.

LAPAROSCOPIC, OPEN AND TRANSANAL MESORECTAL EXCISION IN RECTAL CANCER SURGERY

INTRODUCTION: there are no studies comparing laparoscopic, open, and transanal mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.AIM: to compare quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) according to the P. Quirke protocol, to assess circular resection margins (CRM), to assess distal resection margins (DRM) and perioperative morbidity.PATIENTS AND METHODS: prospective study was performed to compare the effectiveness of different methods of TME.RESULTS: eighty-eight patients were included in the study, 29 – in the laparoscopic (LA TME) group, 29 – in the open TME group, 30 – in the transanal (TA TME) group. The groups were comparable in clinical, demographic and tumor parameters. There was no significant difference between LA TME, open TME and TA TME in quality of mesorectal excision (p=0.67). There was also no significant difference in rates of positive CRM and positive DRM (p=0.38). No significant difference was obtained between intraoperative and postoperative complications rates (p=0.38; p=0.45). CONCLUSION: all three methods of TME showed the same results for quality, circular and distal resection margins and perioperative morbidity.

Oncological adequacy of laparoscopic rectal cancer resection: An audit in Indian perspective

Background:Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer (LRR) has gained popularity because of better short-term outcomes and less post-operative morbidity. However, LRR is still not endorsed as a standard of care mainly due to concerns centred on oncological safety in comparison with open approach. Moreover, two recent randomised trials (Australian Laparoscopic Cancer of the Rectum [ALaCaRT] and the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group [ACOSOG] Z6051) have failed to prove that LRR is non-inferior to open resection. Studies on oncological adequacy of LRR in the Indian population in terms of quality of mesorectal excision are scarce. In this article, we aim to audit the oncological adequacy of LRR in our centre and thereby critically analyse the reliability of extrapolation of results of ALaCaRT and ACOSOG trials to the Indian population.Methods:We retrospectively analysed the oncological adequacy of LRR in terms of completeness of total mesorectal excision (TME), distal and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status and nodal harvest in patients with rectal cancer who underwent LRR between January 2016 and June 2018 at our centre.Results:Of 157 patients included in this study, a complete TME was achieved in 148 (94.26%) patients and nearly complete in 7 (4.46%) patients. A safe CRM (≥1 mm) was obtained in 151 (96.18%) patients. Distal margin results were negative in 155 (98.73%) patients. Average nodal harvest was 19.86 ± 9.28. Overall surgical success, calculated as a composite measure of negative distal margin and negative CRM and complete TME was 95.54%.Conclusion:Good quality rectal cancer resection can be achieved by experienced laparoscopic surgeons without compromising oncological safety.

The Time Between Chemoradiation and Surgery for Rectal Carcinoma Negatively Influences Mesorectal Excision Quality.

Total mesorectal excision quality (TMEq) is a prognostic factor associated with local recurrence in rectal adenocarcinoma. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) reduces the risk of tumor recurrence, but may compromise TMEq. The time between NCRT and surgery (TTS) and how it influences TMEq and tumor control were evaluated. In prospective registry, 236 patients after NCRT and TME were analyzed. NCRT involved radiotherapy with 45Gy to the pelvis, plus tumor boost dose 5.4Gy with concurrent 5-fluorouracil infusion. NCRT was followed by TME after 9weeks on average (median 9.4 ± SD 2.5). TMEq was parametrically analyzed by standard three-grade system. With median follow-up of 47.5months, 3-year overall survival (OS) was 83.8%, disease-free survival (DFS) was 77.7%, and 6.4% was the rate of local recurrence (LR). TTS was not associated with OS, DFS, or LR. TMEq was found to be associated with LR in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate, where pathological tumor stage and resection margins remained dominant predictors. TMEq was negatively influenced by inferior location of the tumor, longer TTS, higher tumor and nodal stage, presence of tumor perforation, perineural invasion, and close/positive resection margins. Nonetheless, TTS remained a strong predictor of TMEq in multivariate analyses. TTS was proven to be an independent predictor of TMEq. With longer TTS, fewer complete TME with intact mesorectal plane were observed. However, TTS was not associated with survival deterioration or tumor recurrence. These were negatively influenced by other factors interfering with TMEq, especially by pathological tumor stage and resection margins.

Functional outcomes after resections for low rectal tumors: comparison of Transanal with laparoscopic Total Mesorectal excision

BackgroundAim of this study was to evaluate functional outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) in comparison to conventional laparoscopic approach (LaTME) in terms of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).MethodsForty-six patients who underwent total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer between 2013 and 2017 were enrolled. Primary outcome was the severity of faecal incontinence, assessed both before the treatment and 6 months after ileostomy reversal. LARS score and Jorge-Wexner scale were utilized to analyze its severity.ResultsTwenty (87%) from TaTME and 21 (91%) from LaTME group developed LARS postoperatively. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of LARS occurrence (p = 0.63) and severity. The median Wexner score was comparable in both groups (8 [IQR: 4–12] vs 7 [3–11], p = 0.83). Univariate analysis revealed that postoperative complications were a risk factor for LARS development (p = 0.02). Perioperative outcomes, including operative time, blood loss and intraoperative adverse events did not differ significantly between groups either. Five TaTME patients developed postoperative complications, while there were morbidity 6 cases in LaTME group. Quality of mesorectal excision was comparable with 20 and 19 complete cases in TaTME and LaTME groups, respectively.ConclusionsTaTME provided comparable outcomes in terms of functional outcomes in comparison to LaTME for total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancers. Having said that, LARS prevalence is still high and requires further evaluation of the technique.

Lymph nodes detection and the mesorectal excision quality evaluation

Detection and examination of proper number of lymph nodes in patients after rectal resection is important for next treatment and management of patients with rectal carcinoma. There are no clear guideliness for minimal count of lymph nodes, variant recommendations agree on the number of 12 (1014) nodes. There are situations, when is not easy to reach this count, mainly in older age groups and in patients after neoadjuvant, especially radiation therapy. As amodality for improvement of lymph nodes harvesting seems to be establishing of defined protocols originally designed for mesorectal excision quality evaluation. The investigation group was formed by patients examined in 2 three-years intervals before and after implementation of the protocol. Elevation in count of harvested lymph nodes was rated generaly and in relation to age groups and gender. The average count of lymph nodes increased from 10 to 15 nodes, in subset of patients whose received neoadjuvant therapy from 7 to almost 14 nodes. The recommended number of lymph nodes was obtained in all investigated age groups. By the increased number of lymph nodes, rises also possibility of positive nodes found, that can lead to upstaging of the disease, in subset of patients whose received neoadjuvant therapy it is more than 4%. Our conclusions show, that forming of multidisciplinary cooperative groups (chiefly surgeon-pathologist), implementation of defined protocol of surgery, specimen manipulation and investigation by detached specialists lead to benefit consequences for further management and treatment of the patients with colorectal cancer.

Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

AbstractLaparoscopic colorectal resection is used increasingly in colon and rectal cancer treatment. In our study, two NOTES techniques were assessed; laparoscopic colorectal resection with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction (NOSE) in 16 cases and transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME) in 18 cases. Feasibility, short term oncologic outcome, as well as, com-paring both techniques are displayed. Finally, although patients in our study were not randomly assigned to either arm, we could demonstrate better quality of mesorectal excision in the transanal dissection group in comparison to conventional laparoscopy with NOSE technique.

Does transanal local resection increase morbidity for subsequent total mesorectal excision for early rectal cancer?

Local excision is recommended for early rectal cancer (pT1). Complementary total mesorectal excision (cTME) is warranted when bad pathological features are present. The impact of a prior local resection on the outcome remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess if prior local excision increases the morbidity of a subsequent cTME compared with primary TME. From 2001 to 2016 all patients who underwent TME after local excision for rectal adenocarcinoma were studied. All were matched (1:1) with patients who underwent primary TME, without neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. The matching factors included age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score and type of surgery. Short-term morbidity and pathological examination of the resected specimen were compared. Forty-one patients were included (14 women, 34%, mean age 65 ± 11 years), comprising classic transanal excision (66%) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (34%), and were matched to 41 patients who had primary TME. cTME was significantly longer (315 min ± 87 vs 275 min ± 58, P = 0.03). The overall morbidity was 48.8% in the local excision group vs 31.7% in the control group (P = 0.18). Surgical morbidity was 31.7% vs 26.8% (P = 0.8). Anastomotic related morbidity was similar (local excision 17% vs TME 14.6%, P = 0.84) and the mean length of stay was similar (14 days) in both groups. There was a tendency to a worse quality of mesorectal excision in the cTME group (17% vs 5%, P = 0.15). Local excision prior to TME for early rectal cancer tends to increase overall morbidity and may worsen the quality of the mesorectal plane but should be considered as a surgical approach in select cases.

Time to Surgery after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation for Rectal Carcinoma is an Independent Predictor of Total Mesorectal Excision Quality

A three-grade system is standardly used to describe the total mesorectal excision quality (TMEq). TMEq is well known independent prognostic factor associated with local tumor recurrence and disease progression. On the contrary, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) reduces the risk of tumor recurrence in rectal adenocarcinoma, but may influence TMEq. A time to surgery (TTS) after finishing NCRT and its influence on TMEq and tumor control was subject of our evaluation. In prospective registry, 236 patients with complete records after NCRT and TME were analyzed. NCRT involved radiotherapy with 45 Gy in 25 fractions to the pelvic area (rectum, pararectal, presacral, and internal iliac lymph nodes); a supplementary boost dose was applied to the tumor itself (5.4 Gy in 3 fractions). Continuous 5-FU infusion at a dose of 200 mg/m2/24 hours was applied concurrently for the entire duration of radiotherapy. NCRT was followed by TME after 9 weeks in average (median 9.4 +/- SD 2.5, range 3.6 – 19). TMEq was parametrically analyzed as following: I – complete TME with intact mesorectal plane; II – incomplete TME with intramesorectal plane defects > 5 mm deep; III – poor TME with defects to muscularis plane. Log-rank tests, Chí-square tests, and Cox/Logistic/Linear univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to study the purpose. With median follow-up of 47.5 months (6-97): 58 patients (24.6%) have died or were lost to follow-up; 64 patients (17.1%) had tumor recurrence, 15 of them (6.4%) with isolated local recurrence (LR). Three-year overall survival (OS) was 83.8% (95% CI 78.9%-88.7%), with disease-free survival (DFS) of 77.7% (95% CI 72.1%-83.3%). Several characteristics had statistically significant impact on survival and local recurrence; however, TTS was not associated with OS, DFS, or LR. TMEq was found to be associated with LR in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate, where pathological tumor stage and resection margin status remained dominant predictors. TMEq was negatively influenced mainly by lower tumor location, longer TTS, higher tumor and nodal stage, presence of tumor perforation and perineural invasion. TMEq was also associated with close/positive resection margins. Nonetheless, TTS remained a strong predictor of TMEq after multivariate analyses. Time to surgery was proven to be a strong and independent predictor of TMEq in our prospective study, taking into account all eventual confounding factors. With longer time between NCRT and surgery, less complete TME with intact mesorectal plane were observed. However, TTS was not associated with survival deterioration, or increased tumor recurrence at 3 years. These were negatively influenced by other factors interfering with TMEq, especially by pathological tumor stage and resection margin status.

Can pathological reports of rectal cancer provide national quality indicators?

Rectal cancer care has become increasingly complex and requires accurate information. The pathology report is a vital tool for accessing information to gauge a patient's prognosis and to guide treatment decisions. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of histopathological reporting and surgery for rectal cancer in New Zealand using defined quality indicators. This is a retrospective audit of pathological reports of all resected rectal cancer pathology reports submitted to the New Zealand Cancer Registry (NZCR) in 2015. The quality of reporting was assessed using specified criteria: synoptic report, adequate lymph node retrieval, reporting of circumferential resection margin (CRM) and mesorectal excision quality. Surgical outcomes were sphincter preservation rate, CRM clearance and complete mesorectal excision. A total of 803 patients with rectal cancer were reported to the NZCR in 2015, 505 underwent proctectomy. A total of 89.5% of reports were structured, 81.8% reported mesorectal excision quality and 86.7% reported CRM status. Adequate lymph node retrieval was obtained in 65.1%, complete mesorectal excision in 84.6% and positive CRM in 6.2% of cases. Quality varied between laboratories and district health boards. High-volume laboratories had higher quality reporting. Surgeon volume and training was related to adequate lymph node retrieval but not CRM clearance nor mesorectal excision quality. High-quality pathological reporting is associated with the use of synoptic reporting templates. Surgical outcomes for rectal cancer in New Zealand, especially the low rate of CRM involvement, compare favourably with international audits.

Laparoscopic taTME for mid-low rectal cancer: Short- and mid-term results

Recently, taTME for mid-low rectal cancer has shown good results in terms of quality of mesorectal excision and radial resection margin width when compared to the conventional up-to-down TME. RCT are ongoing but data about long-term results are not available yet. We have reviewed the short- and mid-term results of our series of prospectively collected data.

Macroscopic Assessment of Total Mesorectal Excision Quality after Robotic Assisted Rectal Resection for Rectal Cancer in Bulgaria: A Prospective Trial

Summary Total mesorectal excision (TME) is a standard surgical procedure for rectal cancer. Robotic surgery has the potential to minimize the disadvantages of laparoscopic rectal resection. Circumferential margin and macroscopic quality assessment of the resected specimen are the major prognostic factors for local recurrence of the disease. The aim of this study was to research the macroscopic assessment of the quality of TME after robotic-assisted rectal resections for rectal cancer performed in a single center. Data was prospectively collected about macroscopic assessment of the quality of TME in thirteen patients after robotic-assisted rectal resections for rectal cancer between 09.04.2014 and 31.12.2016. After all robotic TMEs, a pathologist made macroscopic assessment of the completeness of the mesorectal excision. The quality of TME was complete in 12 cases and nearly complete in one case. The circumferential and distal resection margins were negative in all cases. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was nine. This study indicated that using robotic surgery for rectal cancer does not lead to worsening the quality of TME. Further studies in this field are necessary.