Rate Of Circumferential Resection Margin Research Articles

Feasibility of robot-assisted surgery for defining circumferential resection margins for rectal cancer: a retrospective study

BackgroundLocal recurrence is a major problem after surgery for rectal cancer. Precision of the circumferential resection margin (CRM) has been shown to be an independent predictor of local recurrence. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of robotic surgery for defining the CRM.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery at Tokushima University Hospital from January 2012 to April 2023 was included in this study to evaluate risk factors for CRM involvement. Short-term outcomes, including CRM rates, as well as long-term outcomes, were compared between patients who had undergone robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery following propensity score analysis.ResultsA total of 223 patients were analyzed in this study. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that lymph node metastasis was the most significant predictive factor for CRM involvement (p = 0.030), and that robot-assisted surgery tended to lead to less CRM involvement (p = 0.085). The CRM involvement rate for robotic and laparoscopic surgery before propensity score matching was 4.7% and 11.7%, respectively. Following propensity score matching, the CRM involvement rate for robotic surgery was 4.5% versus 11.4% for laparoscopic surgery. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates for patients who had undergone robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery were not significantly different before or after matching (DFS before matching: p = 0.876, DFS after matching: p = 0.805, OS before matching: p = 0.511, OS after matching: p = 0.458).ConclusionRobot-assisted surgery may be useful in defining the CRM for rectal cancer.

Transperineal minimally invasive surgery during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer could improve short-term outcomes: A single-institution retrospective cohort study.

Transperineal minimally invasive surgery (TpMIS) during laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) is an emerging approach that allows for the precise treatment of lower rectal cancer. However, evidence regarding the efficacy of TpMIS is insufficient. This study evaluated the efficacy of TpMIS during laparoscopic APR for patients with lower rectal cancer. Patients who underwent laparoscopic APR with TpMIS (TpMIS group; n = 12) and those who underwent conventional laparoscopic APR for low rectal cancer (conventional group; n = 13) were enrolled consecutively in this retrospective study. Standardized TpMIS was performed at our institution. Patient and tumor characteristics and intraoperative, postoperative, and pathological outcomes were compared between groups. The primary outcome was postoperative perineal wound infection. No patients in the TpMIS group experienced postoperative perineal wound infection; however, five (38.5%) patients in the conventional group experienced postoperative perineal wound infection (significant difference; p = 0.016). The estimated blood loss (median, 81mL vs. 463mL) and incidence of postoperative urinary dysfunction (8.3% vs. 46.1%) were significantly lower in the TpMIS group than in the conventional group. The postoperative hospital stay (median, 13 vs. 20days) of the TpMIS group was significantly shorter than that of the conventional group. Pathological outcomes did not differ between groups. The positive circumferential resection margin rates of the TpMIS and conventional groups were 8.3% and 15.4%, respectively. TpMIS during laparoscopic APR was associated with significant improvements in the postoperative outcomes of patients with low rectal cancer.

Structured training pathway for robotic colorectal surgery: Short-term outcomes from five UK centres.

The aim of this study was to assess the short-term outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery implemented through a structured, standardized training pathway in five colorectal centres in the United Kingdom. A multicentre retrospective observational study was conducted, involving 523 consecutive patients who underwent robotic colorectal resection between 2015 and 2019. All participating centres followed the European Academy of Robotic Colorectal Surgery training pathway. Patient data, including demographics, operative details, postoperative outcomes and pathology results, were collected and analysed. The study included 447 rectal resections and 76 colonic operations. The median age of the patients was 64.7 years, with the majority of patients (70%) being men. The mean body mass index was 27.4 kg/m2, and 89.7% of the patients underwent surgery for malignancy. The overall conversion rate to open surgery was 4.2%. The median length of stay was 6 days and there was no 30-day mortality. The readmission and reoperation rates were 8.8% and 7.3%, respectively. The anastomotic leak rate was 4.1% for rectal resections and 3.9% for colonic resections. Pathological examination showed a positive circumferential resection margin rate of 2.6%. Through the implementation of a structured, standardized training pathway, the participating colorectal centres in the UK achieved safe and effective robotic colorectal surgery pathways with favourable short-term oncological and clinical outcomes. Further studies examining long-term and functional outcomes are needed to assess the broader impact of robotic surgery in colorectal procedures.

Pathologic Outcomes and Survival in Patients with Rectal Cancer and Increased Body Mass Index

Introduction: We assessed the association between increased body mass index (BMI) and rectal cancer outcomes. Methods: We included patients who underwent surgery for stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma who were divided according to BMI at diagnosis: ideal BMI (18.5–24.9 kg/m2) and increased BMI (≥25 kg/m2). Groups were compared using univariate association analyses relative to baseline characteristics, pathologic outcomes, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Main outcome measures involved circumferential resection margin (CRM), pathologic TNM stage, total mesorectal incision (TME) grade, OS, and DFS. Results: 243 patients (64.6% male; median age 59 years) with a median BMI of 26.3 kg/m2 were included. 62.1% had BMI ≥25 kg/m2. Increased BMI patients had similar proportions of males (66.9% vs. 60.9%; p = 0.407) and comorbidities (ASA III: 47% vs. 37.4%; p = 0.24) to ideal BMI patients. There were no significant differences in cN1-2 stage (p = 0.279) or positive CRM (p = 0.062) rates. The groups had similar complete/near-complete TME, pathologic TN stage, and survival rates. Pathologic and survival outcomes were also similar with a BMI cutoff of 30. Conclusions: There was a trend toward more nodal involvement in preoperative assessment and less CRM involvement in the final pathology of patients with increased BMI. Complete/near-complete TME and survival rates were comparable between the groups.

Commentary on 'Circumferential resection margin rates in esophageal cancer resection- oncological equivalency and comparable clinical outcomes between open versus minimally invasive techniques: a retrospective cohort study'.

Commentary on 'Circumferential resection margin rates in esophageal cancer resection- oncological equivalency and comparable clinical outcomes between open versus minimally invasive techniques: a retrospective cohort study'.

Circumferential resection margin rates in esophageal cancer resection: oncological equivalency and comparable clinical outcomes between open versus minimally invasive techniques - a retrospective cohort study.

Radical surgery for esophageal cancer requires macroscopic and microscopic clearance of all malignant tissue. A critical element of the procedure is achieving a negative circumferential margin (CRM) to minimize local recurrence. The utility of minimally invasive surgery poses challenges in replicating techniques developed in open surgery, particularly for hiatal dissection in esophago-gastrectomy. In this study, the technical approach and clinical and oncological outcomes for open and laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy are described with particular reference to CRM involvement. This cohort study included all patients undergoing either open or laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy between January 2004 and June 2022 in a single tertiary center. A standard surgical technique for hiatal dissection of the esophago-gastric junction developed in open surgery was adapted for a laparoscopic approach. Clinical parameters, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, and mortality data were collected and analyzed by a Mann-Whitney U or Fisher's exact method. Overall 447 patients underwent an esophago-gastrectomy in the study with 219 open and 228 laparoscopic procedures. The CRM involvement was 18.8% in open surgery and 13.6% in laparoscopic surgery. The 90-day-mortality for open surgery was 4.1 compared with 2.2% for laparoscopic procedures. Median Intensive care unit (ITU), inpatient LOS and 30-day readmission rates were shorter for laparoscopic compared with open esophago-gastrectomy (ITU: 5 versus 8 days, P= 0.0004; LOS: 14 versus 20 days, P= 0.022; 30-day re-admission 7.46 versus 10.50%). Postoperative complication rates were comparable across both cohorts. The rates of starting adjuvant chemotherapy were 51.8 after open and 74.4% in laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy. This study presents a standardized surgical approach to hiatal dissection for esophageal cancer. The authors present equivalence between open and laparoscopic esophago-gastrectomy in clinical, oncological, and survival outcomes with similar rates of CRM involvement. The authors also observe a significantly shorter hospital length of stay with the minimally invasive approach.

Specimen extraction through natural orifices with Cai tubes in gastrointestinal surgery: a single-institute series of 234 cases

Objective: To investigate the feasibility of Cai tube-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: This was a descriptive case-series study. Inclusion criteria: (1) colorectal or gastric cancer diagnosed by preoperative pathological examination or redundant sigmoid or transverse colon detected by barium enema; (2) indications for laparoscopic surgery; (3) body mass index <30 kg/m2 (transanal surgery) and 35 kg/m2 (transvaginal surgery); (4) no vaginal stenosis or adhesions in female patients undergoing transvaginal specimen extraction; and (5) patients with redundant colon aged 18-70 years and a history of intractable constipation for more than 10 years. Exclusion criteria: (1) colorectal cancer with intestinal perforation or obstruction, or gastric cancer with gastric perforation, gastric hemorrhage, or pyloric obstruction; (2) simultaneous resection of lung, bone, or liver metastases ; (3) history of major abdominal surgery or intestinal adhesions; and (4) incomplete clinical data. From January 2014 to October 2022, 209 patients with gastrointestinal tumors and 25 with redundant colons who met the above criteria were treated by NOSES utilizing a Cai tube (China invention patent number:ZL201410168748.2) in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Xiamen University. The procedures included eversion and pull-out NOSES radical resection in 14 patients with middle and low rectal cancer, NOSES radical left hemicolectomy in 171 patients with left-sided colorectal cancer, NOSES radical right hemicolectomy in 12 patients with right-sided colon cancer, NOSES systematic mesogastric resection in 12 patients with gastric cancer, and NOSES subtotal colectomy in 25 patients with redundant colons. All specimens were collected by using an in-house-made anal cannula (Cai tube) with no auxiliary incisions. The primary outcomes included 1-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and postoperative complications. Results: Among 234 patients, 116 were male and 118 were female. The mean age was (56.6±10.9) years. NOSES was successfully completed in all patients without conversion to open surgery or procedure-related death. The negative rate of circumferential resection margin was 98.8% (169/171) with both two positive cases having left-sided colorectal cancer. Postoperative complications occurred in 37 patients (15.8%), including 11 cases (4.7%) of anastomotic leakage, 3 cases(1.3%) of anastomotic bleeding, 2 cases (0.9%) of intraperitoneal bleeding, 4 cases (1.7%) of abdominal infection, and 8 cases (3.4%) of pulmonary infection. Reoperations were required in 7 patients (3.0%), all of whom consented to creation of an ileostomy after anastomotic leakage. The total readmission rate within 30 days after surgery was 0.9% (2/234). After a follow-up of (18.3±3.6) months, the 1-year RFS was 94.7%. Five of 209 patients (2.4%) with gastrointestinal tumors had local recurrence, all of which was anastomotic recurrence. Sixteen patients (7.7%) developed distant metastases, including liver metastases(n=8), lung metastases(n=6), and bone metastases (n=2). Conclusion: NOSES assisted by Cai tube is feasible and safe in radical resection of gastrointestinal tumors and subtotal colectomy for redundant colon.

Comparison of the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) and non-ELAPE for low rectal cancer.

This study was performed to retrospectively analyze and compare the related clinical indicators between extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) and non-ELAPE under laparoscopic for low rectal cancer. From June 2018 to September 2021, a total of 80 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent either of the above two types of surgeries at our Hospital were enrolled. Patients were divided into the ELAPE group and non-ELAPE group based on the different surgical methods. Preoperative general indicators, intraoperative indicators, postoperative complications, positive circumferential resection margin rate, local recurrence rate, hospital stay length, hospital expenses, and other related indicators were compared between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the comparison of preoperative indexes between the ELAPE group and non-ELAPE group, including age, preoperative BMI, and gender. Similarly, there were no significant differences in abdominal operation time, total operation time, and the number of intraoperative lymph nodes dissected between the two groups. However, the perineal operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative perforation rate, and positive circumferential resection margin rate were significantly different between the two groups. In the comparison of postoperative indexes, perineal complications, postoperative hospital stay length, and IPSS score were significantly different between the two groups. The use of ELAPE in treating T3-4NxM0 phase low rectal cancer was superior to non-ELAPE in reducing intraoperative perforation rate, positive circumferential resection margin rate, local recurrence rate, etc.

Comparison of Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancers: The COLRAR Randomized Controlled Trial.

To evaluate whether robotic for middle or low rectal cancer produces an improvement in surgical outcomes compared with laparoscopic surgery in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). There is a lack of proven clinical benefit of robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) compared with a laparoscopic approach in the setting of multicenter RCTs. Between July 2011 and February 2016, patients diagnosed with an adenocarcinoma located <10cm from the anal verge and clinically rated T1-4aNxM0 were enrolled. The primary outcome was the completeness of TME assessed by a surgeon and a pathologist. The RCT was terminated prematurely because of poor accrual of data. In all, 295 patients were assigned randomly to a robot-assisted TME group (151 in R-TME) or a laparoscopy-assisted TME group (144 in L-TME). The rates of complete TME were not different between groups (80.7% in R-TME, 77.1% in L-TME). Pathologic outcomes including the circumferential resection margin and the numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were not different between groups. In a subanalysis, the positive circumferential resection margin rate was lower in the R-TME group (0% vs 6.1% for L-TME; P =0.031). Among the recovery parameters, the length of opioid use was shorter in the R-TME group ( P =0.028). There was no difference in the postoperative complication rate between the groups (12.0% for R-TME vs 8.3% for L-TME). In patients with middle or low rectal cancer, robotic-assisted surgery did not significantly improve the TME quality compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT01042743).

Prone position thoracoscopic-assisted total mesoesophageal excision: initial experiences and benefits of lymph node dissection.

Total mesoesophageal excision (TME) is a promising procedure. Prone position thoracoscopic-assisted TME might be a good choice, even without robust evidence yet. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the safety and efficacy of this procedure. We retrospectively analyzed the short-term outcomes regarding intraoperative unplanned events, postoperative complications, and lymphadenectomy in 61 patients who underwent prone position thoracoscopic-assisted TME from June, 2020 to August, 2021. The learning curve was also defined. Of these sixty-one patients, there were 10, 24 and 27 cases of tumor in the upper, middle, and lower thoracic, respectively. Although there were five cases of unplanned events during surgery, no conversion to thoracotomy occurred. The median thoracic operation time was 113(43-161) minutes, R0 resection rate was 93.4% (57/61), and negative circumferential resection margin rate was 96.7% (59/61). Median overall lymph node dissection was 21(9-47), with 13(5-41) thoracic lymph node dissection. Incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications, cardiovascular complications, and leakage were 9.8%, 3.3%, and 9.8%, respectively, with no death within 30days after operation. The positive rate of middle and lower mediastinal lymph nodes was 1.1%, 3.5%, and 2.4% for upper, middle, and lower tumors, and 5.5%, 1.8%, and 1.3% for pT3-4, pT2, and pT1 patients. Learning curve showed that 36 cases are the best cut-off value for proficiency of prone position thoracoscopic-assisted TME. The prone position thoracoscopic-assisted TME is a safe procedure that is more conducive to thoracic lymph node dissection, especially for middle and lower mediastinum.

145: THE USE OF MACHINE LEARNING FOR REAL-TIME DETECTION OF OESOPHAGEAL AND GASTRIC CANCER BASED ON DIFFUSE REFLECTANCE SPECTROSCOPY: A VALIDATION STUDY

Abstract Background and aim The lack of a fast and accurate intraoperative tumour margin assessment tool contributes to high positive circumferential resection margin rates for oesophageal and gastric cancers, which is associated with local recurrence and poor long-term survival. Diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS) can provide non-invasive, accurate, and real-time tissue classification based on quantification of light reflectance in tissue, providing a unique optical fingerprint of the tissue. This study aimed to validate the use of DRS for discrimination between normal and cancerous tissues based on ex-vivo gastric and oesophageal cancer resection specimens. Methods Consecutive patients undergoing resections for gastric and oesophageal carcinomas at a tertiary referral centre in London between July 2020 and June 2021 were included. Reflectance data in the 468-720 nm spectral range were recorded on ex-vivo specimens within 15 minutes of surgical specimen excision. Based on video recordings of the data acquisition procedure and probe tip tracking, sampling sites were correlated with histological reports manually labeled as either normal or cancer (Figure 1). Following spectral data normalisation and feature selection, four supervised machine learning approaches were tested for classification using 5-fold cross-validation. Overall classification accuracy and Area Under the Curve (AUC) across machine learning approaches were compared. Results A total of 32 patients (median age 68, 75% male) were included. 11,862 mean spectra (2990 spectra for normal oesophagus, 4628 for normal stomach, 2305 for gastric cancer, and 1939 for oesophageal cancer) were collected. For oesophageal cancer, classification accuracy was 96.22 ± 0.50 and AUC was 99.24 ± 0.19, while for gastric cancer, the accuracy was 93.86 ± 0.66, and AUC 98.50 ± 0.28 for gastric cancer. For both malignancy types, Extreme Gradient Boosting was the best performing classifier. The differences in spectral data between patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment and treatment naïve were non-significant. Conclusion Machine learning can be used to accurately differentiate between normal and cancerous oesophageal and gastric tissues in an ex-vivo setting, based on DRS data. Features used for class discrimination should be investigated to find possible physiological correlates of spectral data differences. Future intraoperative validation is required to assess the utility of this technology for real-time tumour margin mapping and its effect on long-term outcomes.

Surgical Techniques for Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer: One Size Does Not Fit All.

Abdominoperineal resection (APR) of rectal cancer is associated with poorer oncological outcomes than anterior resection. This may be due to higher rates of intra-operative perforation (IOP) and circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement causing higher recurrence rates and surgical complications. To address these concerns, several centers advocated a change in technique from a standard APR to a more radical extra-levator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE). Initial reports showed that ELAPE reduced IOP rates and CRM involvement but increased wound complications and longer surgical duration. However, many of these studies had unacceptable rates of IOP and CRM before retraining in ELAPE. This may indicate that it was a sub-optimal surgical technique, which improved upon training, that had influenced the high CRM and IOP rates rather than the technique itself. Subsequent studies demonstrated that the CRM involvement rate for ELAPE was not always lower than for standard APR and, in some cases, significantly higher. The morbidity of ELAPE can be high, with studies reporting higher adverse events than APR, especially in terms of wound complications from the larger perineal incision required in ELAPE. Whether ELAPE improves short- or long-term oncological outcomes for patients has not been clearly demonstrated. The authors propose that all centers performing rectal cancer surgery audit surgical outcomes of patients undergoing APR or ELAPE and examine CRM involvement, IOP rates, and local recurrence rates, preferably through a national body. If rates of adverse technical or oncological outcomes exceed acceptable levels, then retraining in the appropriate surgical techniques may be indicated.

Variation in the volume-outcome relationship after rectal cancer surgery in the United States: Retrospective study with implications for regionalization

BackgroundPrevious studies have demonstrated improved outcomes for patients with rectal cancer treated at higher-volume hospitals. However, little is known whether heterogeneity in this effect exists. The objective was to test whether the effect of increased annual rectal cancer resection volume on outcomes is consistent across all hospitals treating rectal cancer. MethodsAdult stage I to III patients who underwent surgical resection for rectal adenocarcinoma from 2004 to 2016 were identified in the National Cancer Database. ResultsWe included 120,522 patients treated at 763 hospitals in this retrospective cohort study. Higher volume was linearly and incrementally related to outcomes in unadjusted analyses. In adjusted models, for an average patient at the average hospital, the effect of increasing the annual caseload of rectal cancer resections by 20 resections per year was associated with 8%, (hazard ratio = 0.92, 95% confidence interval = 0.87, 0.97), 18% (odds ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.70, 0.98), and 16% (odds ratio = 0.84, 95% confidence interval = 0.73, 0.95) relative reductions in 5-year overall survival, 30-, and 90-day mortality, respectively, and with a 19% (odds ratio = 1.19, 95% confidence interval = 1.04, 1.36) relative increase in the rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. These effects varied by individual hospitals such that 39% of hospitals do not see any benefit in 5-year overall survival associated with higher volumes. Increased volume was associated with lower positive circumferential resection margin rates at 19% of the hospitals. ConclusionThis study confirms that higher-volume hospitals have improved outcomes after rectal cancer surgery. However, there exists significant variation in these effects induced by individual within-hospital effects. Regionalization policies may need to be flexible in identifying the hospitals that would achieve enhanced benefits from treating a larger volume of patients.

Distinctive features of small vessels on the mesorectal and parietal pelvic fascia as important landmarks in guiding precise inter-fascial dissection for low rectal cancer.

The confinement of the pelvis and the complexity of pelvic fascial anatomy still pose difficulties in achieving good quality surgery for rectal cancer. We aimed to introduce small vessels on the mesorectal fascia and the parietal pelvic fascia as novel landmarks to aid in the identification of the inter-fascial dissection plane. Besides, the perioperative, survival, and functional outcomes of this surgical technique were reported. We first described that small vessels running on the mesorectal fascia and the parietal pelvic fascia showed distinctive features, which included (1) small vessels on the parietal fascia took the same orientation as the ureter or the sympathetic and parasympathetic nerve; (2) small vessels on the mesorectal fascia were coursing cranially and medially on the anterolateral aspect, and medially and caudally on the posterolateral aspect; (3) small vessels on the mesorectal fascia became invisible at the interface between the pelvic wall and the mesorectal fascia. These features could be applied in fascial identification and separation. Then, we reported the outcomes of low rectal cancer surgery with small vessels-guided technique. From 2013 to 2016, a consecutive series of 310 patients with low rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with small vessels-guided technique. The positive rate of circumferential resection margin was 3.2%, and complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 97.8% (303/310) patients. The 3-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence rates were 89.4%, 79.7%, and 2.6%, respectively. The urinary function was considered normal in 96.8% of patients, with a moderate dysfunction in 3.2% of patients. Besides, 29.5% of male patients occurred sexual function injury. Distinctive features of small vessels on the parietal pelvic fascia and the mesorectal fascia can serve as novel and additive landmarks in guiding precise inter-fascial dissection for low rectal cancer.

Update on Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches for Rectal Cancer.

This review aims to clarify the current role of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer, highlighting short- and long-term outcomes from the latest trials and studies. Data from previous trials has been conflicting, with some failing to demonstrate non-inferiority of laparoscopic surgical resection of rectal cancer compared to an open approach and others demonstrating similar clinical outcomes. Robot-assisted surgery was thought to be a promising solution to the challenges faced by laparoscopic surgery, and even though the only randomized controlled trial to date comparing these two techniques did not show superiority of robot-assisted surgery over laparoscopy, more recent retrospective data suggests a statistically significant higher negative circumferential resection margin rate, decreased frequency of conversion to open, and less sexual and urinary complications. Minimally invasive surgery techniques for resection of rectal cancer, particularly robot-assisted, offer clear short-term peri-operative benefits over an open approach; however, current data has yet to display non-inferiority in terms of oncological outcomes.

Hospital variation in sphincter-preservation rates in rectal cancer treatment: results of a population-based study in the Netherlands.

BackgroundThis study aimed to examine the sphincter-preservation rate variations in rectal cancer surgery. The influence of hospital volume on sphincter-preservation rates and short-term outcomes (anastomotic leakage (AL), positive circumferential resection margin (CRM), 30- and 90-day mortality rates) were also analysed.MethodsNon-metastasized rectal cancer patients treated between 2009 and 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Surgical procedures were divided into sphincter-preserving surgery and an end colostomy group. Multivariable logistic regression models were generated to estimate the probability of undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery according to the hospital of surgery and tumour height (low, 5 cm or less, mid, more than 5 cm to 10 cm, and high, more than 10 cm). The influence of annual hospital volume (less than 20, 20–39, more than 40 resections) on sphincter-preservation rate and short-term outcomes was also examined.ResultsA total of 20 959 patients were included (11 611 sphincter preservation and 8079 end colostomy) and the observed median sphincter-preservation rate in low, mid and high rectal cancer was 29.3, 75.6 and 87.9 per cent respectively. After case-mix adjustment, hospital of surgery was a significant factor for patients’ likelihood for sphincter preservation in all three subgroups (P < 0.001). In mid rectal cancer, borderline higher rates of sphincter preservation were associated with low-volume hospitals (odds ratio 1.20, 95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 1.43). No significant association between annual hospital volume and sphincter-preservation rate in low and high rectal cancer nor short-term outcomes (AL, positive CRM rate and 30- and 90-day mortality rates) was identified.ConclusionThis population-based study showed a significant hospital variation in sphincter-preservation rates in rectal surgery. The annual hospital volume, however, was not associated with sphincter-preservation rates in low, and high rectal cancer nor with other short-term outcomes.

Predictors of Positive Circumferential Resection Margin in Rectal Cancer: A Current Audit of the National Cancer Database.

Positive circumferential resection margin is a predictor of local recurrence and worse survival in rectal cancer. National programs aimed to improve rectal cancer outcomes were first created in 2011 and continue to evolve. The impact on circumferential resection margin during this time frame has not been fully evaluated in the United States. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence and predictors of positive circumferential resection margin after rectal cancer resection, across patient, provider, and tumor characteristics. This was a retrospective cohort study. The study was conducted using the National Cancer Database, 2011-2016. Adults who underwent proctectomy for pathologic stage I to III rectal adenocarcinoma were included. Rate and predictors of positive circumferential resection margin, defined as resection margin ≤1 mm, were measured. Of 52,620 cases, circumferential resection margin status was reported in 90% (n = 47,331) and positive in 18.4% (n = 8719). Unadjusted analysis showed that patients with positive circumferential resection margin were more often men, had public insurance and shorter travel, underwent total proctectomy via open and robotic approaches, and were treated in Southern and Western regions at integrated cancer networks (all p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis noted that positive proximal and/or distal margin on resected specimen had the strongest association with positive circumferential resection margin (OR = 15.6 (95% CI, 13.6-18.1); p < 0.001). Perineural invasion, total proctectomy, robotic approach, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, integrated cancer network, advanced tumor size and grade, and Black race had increased risk of positive circumferential resection margin (all p < 0.050). Laparoscopic approach, surgery in North, South, and Midwest regions, greater hospital volume and travel distance, lower T-stage, and higher income were associated with decreased risk (all p < 0.028). This was a retrospective cohort study with limited variables available for analysis. Despite creation of national initiatives, positive circumferential resection margin rate remains an alarming 18.4%. The persistently high rate with predictors of positive circumferential resection margin identified calls for additional education, targeted quality improvement assessments, and publicized auditing to improve rectal cancer care in the United States. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B584. ANTECEDENTES:El margen positivo de resección circunferencial es un predictor de recurrencia local y peor sobrevida en el cáncer de recto. Los programas nacionales destinados a mejorar los resultados del cáncer de recto se crearon por primera vez en 2011 y continúan evolucionando. La repercusión del margen de resección circunferencial durante este período de tiempo no se ha evaluado completamente en los Estados Unidos.OBJETIVO:Determinar la incidencia y los predictores para un margen positivo de resección circunferencial posterior a la resección del cáncer de recto, según las características del paciente, el proveedor y el tumor.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AMBITO:Base de datos nacional de cáncer, 2011-2016.PACIENTES:Adultos que se sometieron a proctectomía por adenocarcinoma de recto con un estadío por patología I-III.PRINCIPALES VARIABLES EVALUADAS:Tasa y predictores para un margen positivo de resección circunferencial, definido como margen de resección ≤ 1 mm.RESULTADOS:De 52,620 casos, la condición del margen de resección circunferencial se informó en el 90% (n = 47,331) y positivo en el 18.4% (n = 8,719). El análisis no ajustado mostró que los pacientes con margen positivo de resección circunferencial se presentó con mayor frecuencia en hombres, tenían un seguro social y viajes más cortos, se operaron de proctectomía total abierta y robótica, y fueron tratados en las regiones del sur y el oeste en redes integradas de cáncer (todos p <0,001). El análisis multivariado destacó que el margen proximal y / o distal positivo de la pieza resecada tenía la asociación más fuerte con el margen postivo de resección circunferencial (OR 15,6; IC del 95%: 13,6-18,1, p <0,001). La invasión perineural, la proctectomía total, el abordaje robótico, la quimioradioterapia neoadyuvante, la red de cáncer integrada, el tamaño y grado del tumor avanzado y la raza afroamericana tenían un mayor riesgo de un margen de una resección positiva circunferencial (todos p <0,050). El abordaje laparoscópico, la cirugía en las regiones Norte, Sur y Medio Oeste, un mayor volumen hospitalario y distancia de viaje, estadio T más bajo y mayores ingresos se asociaron con una disminución del riesgo (todos p <0,028).LIMITACIONES:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo con variables limitadas disponibles para análisis.CONCLUSIONES:A pesar del establecimiento de iniciativas nacionales, la tasa de margen positivo de resección circunferencial continúa siendo alarmante, 18,4%. El índice continuamente elevado junto a los predictores de un margen positivo de resección circunferencial hace un llamado para una mayor educación, evaluaciones específicas de mejora de la calidad y difusión de las auditorías para mejorar la atención del cáncer de recto en los Estados Unidos. Vea el resumen de video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B584. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B584.

Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with partial preservation of Denonvilliers fascia: a comparative study of short-term efficacy and urinary and erectile function

Objective: Postoperative sexual and urinary dysfunctions are common in rectal cancer patients. This study was conducted to compare the short-term efficacy and the impact of surgery on urinary and erectile functions between laparoscopy and robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision (TME) with partial preservation of Denonvilliers fascia. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was carried out. Clinical data of 276 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent TME with partial preservation of Denonvilliers fascia in our department between January 2016 and March 2019, including 143 in robotic group and 133 in laparoscopic group, were analyzed. All the patients were positioned by rigid rectoscope, and the distance between the tumor and the anal verge was ≤7 cm. The urinary and erectile functions were followed up at postoperative 12-month and evaluated by IPSS score (0-7 points as mild symptoms, 8-19 points as moderate symptoms, 20-35 points as severe symptoms; the excellent rate was defined as the rate of mild symptoms) and IIEF-5 score (score ≥ 22 as no dysfunction, 12-21 as mild, 8-11 as moderate, and 5-7 as severe) respectively. Results: There were no significant differences in operation ways between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time of the robotic group was longer than that of the laparoscopic group [(312.5±75.4) minutes vs. (273.9±65.6) minutes, t=4.514, P<0.001]. However, in patients with higher body mass index (BMI ≥25 kg/m(2)), there was no significant difference in operation time between the two groups [(309.3±78.5) minutes vs. (276.1±75.3) minutes, t=1.751, P=0.085]. The time to postoperative flatus [(1.3±0.4) days vs. (1.5±1.0) days, t=-2.037, P=0.046], defecation [1 (1-5) days vs. 1 (1-12) days, Z=-2.209, P=0.008] and liquid diet [(1.0±0.1) days vs. (1.2±0.1) days, t=3.195, P=0.002] in the robotic group were all shorter than those in the laparoscopic group. While postoperative length of hospital stay in the robotic group was longer than that in the laparoscopic group [(8.5±5.5) days vs. (7.2±3.3) days, t=2.419, P=0.016]. There were no significant differences between the two groups in intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate, morbidity of postoperative complications, positive rate of distal resection margin, positive rate of circumferential resection margin, and the number of resected lymph nodes (all P>0.05). At postoperative 12 months, none of the robotic group nor the laparoscopic group had severe urinary dysfunction, and the overall excellent rate of urinary function reached 97.6% (83/85) and 98.4% (61/62) respectively. The rate of normal and mild erectile dysfunction in the robotic group and the laparoscopic group were 92.2% (47/51) and 92.6% (38/41) respectively (P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups was found regarding the urinary and erectile function (both P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared with laparoscopic, the robotic TME with partial preservation of Denonvilliers fascia has no significant differences in surgical safety and short-term efficacy. They have similar advantages in the protection of urinary and erectile function. Meanwhile the robotic surgery presents faster postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function.

High Rate of Positive Circumferential Resection Margin in Colon Cancer: A National Appraisal and Call for Action.

To identify rates of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) for colon cancer surgery in the US. CRM is one of the most important determinants of local control in colorectal cancers. The extent to which CRM involvement exists after colon cancer surgery is unknown. Colon cancer cases with resection 2010 to 2015 were identified from the National Cancer Data Base. Adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, comparisons were made between cases with CRM > 1 mm (negative margin) and those with margin involved with tumor or ≤ 1 mm (positive margin, CRM+). Hospital-level analysis was performed, examining observed-to-expected CRM+ rates. In total, 170,022 cases were identified: 150,291 CRM- and 19,731 CRM+ (11.6%). Pathologic T-category was the greatest predictor of CRM+, with higher rates in pT4(25.8%), pT4A(24.7%), and pT4B(31.5%) versus pT1(4.5%), pT2(6.3%) and pT3 (10.9%, P < 0.001). Within pT4 patients, predictors of CRM+ included signet-ring histology (38.1% vs 26.7% nonmucinous, and 26.9% mucinous adenocarcinoma, P < 0.001), removing < 12 lymph nodes (36.5% vs 26.1% >12, P < 0.001), community facilities (32.7%) versus academic/research (23.6%, P < 0.001), year (30.1% 2010 vs 22.6% 2015, P < 0.001), and hospital volume (24.5% highest quartile vs 32.7% lowest, P < 0.001). Across 1288 hospitals, observed-to-expected ratios for CRM+ ranged from 0 to 7.899; 429 facilities had higher than expected rates. Overall rate of CRM+ in US colon cancer cases is high. Variation exists across hospitals, with higher than expected rates in many facilities. Although biology is a major influencing factor, CRM+ rates represent an area for multidisciplinary improvement in quality of colon cancer care.

Positive Circumferential Resection Margin Rates for Rectal Cancer in the US Remain Persistently High Despite Multimodality Therapy

Rosen, Katherine J. MD; Hsu, Shawn Y. MD; Temple, Larissa K. MD, FACS; Fleming, Fergal J. MD, FACS Author Information