Restorative Rectal Cancer Surgery Research Articles

IDEAL Stage 2a/b prospective cohort study of transanal transection and single-stapled anastomosis for rectal cancer.

There are several anastomotic techniques available to facilitate restorative rectal cancer surgery after total mesorectal excision (TME), including double-stapled anastomosis (DST) and handsewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA). However, to date no one technique is superior with regard to anastomotic leakage (AL) or functional outcomes. Transanal transection single-stapled anastomosis (TTSS) aims to overcome some of the technical challenges and offer comparable clinical and functional outcomes to traditional anastomotic techniques. The aim of this study was to explore the role of TTSS in modern rectal cancer surgery and to provide comparative clinical and functional outcome data with DST and CAA. A prospective cohort study was undertaken to assess the safety and clinical and patient-reported outcomes associated with the TTSS procedure. All patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer with an anastomosis performed within 6 cm of the anal verge between January 2016 and April 2021 were prospectively enrolled into this study. Clinical and patient-reported outcome data, including low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) assessment, were collected. The primary endpoint was anastomotic leakage within 30 days. A total of 275 patients participated in this study, with 70 (25%) patients undergoing a TTSS, 110 (40%) undergoing a DST and 95 (35%) undergoing a CAA. Patients undergoing a CAA had more distal tumours than those having a TTSS or DST, with a median tumour height of 5, 7 and 9 cm (p < 0.001), respectively. We observed a statistically significant reduction in AL in the TTSS group compared with the DST group, with rates of 8.6% versus 20.9% (p = 0.028). There was no difference in LARS scores between patients undergoing TTSS and DST (p = 0.228), while patients with a CAA had worse LARS scores than TTSS patients (p = 0.002). TTSS is a technically safe and feasible anastomotic technique in rectal cancer surgery as an alternative to DST and CAA. Its advantages over DST are a reduced AL rate and, over CAA, improved function. It should therefore be considered as an alternative technique to improve clinical and patient-reported outcomes in restorative rectal cancer surgery.

Anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery: Retrospective analysis of risk factors.

Anastomotic leakage (AL) after restorative surgery for rectal cancer (RC) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. To ascertain the risk factors by examining cases of AL in rectal surgery in this retrospective cohort study. To identify risk factors for AL, a review of 583 patients who underwent rectal resection with a double-stapling colorectal anastomosis between January 2007 and January 2022 was performed. Clinical, demographic and operative features, intraoperative outcomes and oncological characteristics were evaluated. The incidence of AL was 10.4%, with a mean time interval of 6.2 ± 2.1 d. Overall mortality was 0.8%. Mortality was higher in patients with AL (4.9%) than in patients without leak (0.4%, P = 0.009). Poor bowel preparation, blood transfusion, median age, prognostic nutritional index < 40 points, tumor diameter and intraoperative blood loss were identified as risk factors for AL. Location of anastomosis, number of stapler cartridges used to divide the rectum, diameter of circular stapler, level of vascular section, T and N status and stage of disease were also correlated to AL in our patients. The diverting ileostomy did not reduce the leak rate, while the use of the transanastomic tube significantly did. Clinical, surgical and pathological factors are associated with an increased risk of AL. It adversely affects the morbidity and mortality of RC patients.

Influence of non-clinical factors on restorative rectal cancer surgery: An analysis of four specialized population-based digestive cancer registries in France.

This study aims to measure the association between deprivation, health care accessibility and health care system with the likelihood of receiving non-restorative rectal cancer surgery (NRRCS). All adult patients who had rectal resection for invasive adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2007 and 2016 in four French specialised cancer registries were included. A multilevel logistic regression with random effect was used to assess the link between patient and health care structure characteristics on the probability of NRRCS. 2997 patients underwent rectal cancer resection in 68 health care structures: 708 (23.63%) had NRRCS. The likelihood of receiving NRCCS was associated with patients' characteristics (97%): age, sub peritoneal rectal tumors, neoadjuvant therapy, residual tumour and stage III . There was no impact of European Deprivation Index or remoteness on NRRCS. Inter-health care structure variability was modest (3%), of which 50% was explained by the high group volume of colorectal procedures and the type of health care structure which were associated with less NRRCS (p<0.01). There is an influence of operating volume and type of structure on the probability of NRRCS, but it has truly little importance in explaining differences in performances. The probability of NRRCS is mainly affected by clinical determinant.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): A nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group.

AimAnastomotic leakage after restorative surgery for rectal cancer shows high morbidity and related mortality. Identification of risk factors could change operative planning, with indications for stoma construction. This retrospective multicentre study aims to assess the anastomotic leak rate, identify the independent risk factors and develop a clinical prediction model to calculate the probability of leakage.MethodsThe study used data from 24 Italian referral centres of the Colorectal Cancer Network of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology. Patients were classified into two groups, AL (anastomotic leak) or NoAL (no anastomotic leak). The effect of patient‐, disease‐, treatment‐ and postoperative outcome‐related factors on anastomotic leak after univariable and multivariable analysis was measured.ResultsA total of 5398 patients were included, 552 in group AL and 4846 in group NoAL. The overall incidence of leaks was 10.2%, with a mean time interval of 6.8 days. The 30‐day leak‐related mortality was 2.6%. Sex, body mass index, tumour location, type of approach, number of cartridges employed, weight loss, clinical T stage and combined multiorgan resection were identified as independent risk factors. The stoma did not reduce the leak rate but significantly decreased leak severity and reoperation rate. A nomogram with a risk score (RALAR score) was developed to predict anastomotic leak risk at the end of resection.ConclusionsWhile a defunctioning stoma did not affect the leak risk, it significantly reduced its severity. Surgeons should recognize independent risk factors for leaks at the end of rectal resection and could calculate a risk score to select high‐risk patients eligible for protective stoma construction.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome in Adults with Rectal Cancer in China: a Case Series Analysis

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) comprises a collection of symptoms affecting patients’ defecation after restorative surgery for rectal cancer. The aim of this work was to study the incidence and risk factors for LARS in China. Rectal cancer patients undergoing total mesorectal excision and colorectal anastomosis between May 2012 and January 2015 were identified from a single center. The patients completed the LARS score questionnaire through telephone. The clinical and pathological factors that may influence the occurrence of LARS were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The influence of postoperative recovery time and pelvic dimensions on the occurrence of LARS was also analyzed. This study included 337 patients, at an average age of 61.03 SD11.32. The mean LARS score of the patients was 14.08 (range 0–41). A total of 126 patients (37.4%) developed LARS after surgery, including 63 (18.7%) severe cases. Compared with the scores within the initial 6 postoperative months, the LARS scores of the patients in 6~18 months after the surgery showed significant reductions (p < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, lower locations of anastomosis, pre-surgery radiotherapy, and shorter postoperative recovery time were significant predisposing factors for LARS. A subgroup analysis revealed that patients suffering from LARS over 18 months after surgery were found to have a significantly shorter interspinous distance than those without LARS (p < 0.05). LARS could improve over time after surgery. Lower anastomotic level and pre-surgery radiotherapy are risk factors for LARS.

Delayed coloanal anastomosis: an alternative option for restorative rectal cancer surgery after high-dose pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Restorative total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer after high-dose pelvic radiotherapy for prostate cancer has been reported to provide an unacceptable rate of pelvic sepsis. In a previous publication we proposed that delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) should be performed in this situation. The present study aimed to assess the feasibility and outcomes of this strategy. Between 2000 and 2018, 1094 men were operated on for rectal cancer in our institution. All men with T2/T3 mid and low rectal cancer with preoperative radiotherapy and restorative TME were considered for this study (n=416). Patients with external-beam high-dose radiotherapy (EBHRT) for prostate cancer (70-78Gy) were identified and compared with patients with conventional long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by TME. We compared our already published historical cohort (2000-2012), including arm A (CRT+TME; n=236) and arm B (EBHRT+TME; n=12), with our early cohort (2013-2018), including arm C (CRT+TME; n=158) and arm D (EBHRT+TME-DCAA; n=10). The end-points were morbidity, pelvic sepsis, reoperation rate and quality of the specimen. Overall morbidity was not significantly different between groups. Pelvic sepsis decreased from 50% (arm B) to 10% (arm D) with the use of DCAA (P=0.074), and was similar between arms A, C and D. Quality of the specimen was not significantly different between the four groups. Our results suggest that TME with DCAA in patients with previous EBHRT is feasible, with the same postoperative pelvic sepsis rate as conventional CRT.

Taeniectomy Versus Transverse Coloplasty as Neorectum After Low Rectal Resection

Restorative surgery for rectal cancer is usually criticized by its functional outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy "taeniectomy" pouch in comparison with transverse coloplasty pouch. This was a prospective controlled study. Most patients who were candidate for low rectal resection presented to colorectal unit at Cairo university hospitals during the period from February 2013 to August 2016 were divided into two groups. The total number of patients enrolled in the study was 180 patients. Ninety patients were subjected to low rectal resection with the transverse coloplasty pouch, and 90 patients were subjected to low rectal resection with the newly described taeniectomy pouch. Safety and feasibility of both techniques were assessed about leakage, operative time, difficulty in evacuation, incontinence, number of daily motions and postoperative urgency. Both groups were assessed clinically, by means of defecography and anorectal manometry. There was no significant statistical difference between taeniectomy and transverse coloplasty regarding postoperative leakage (P value = 0.988), postoperative mortality (P value = 0.99) and functional outcomes including number of motions per day (P value was 0.403 at 3months and 0.361 at 12months), urgency (P value was 0.688), continence grade (P value was 0.320 and 0.683 in 3 and 12months, respectively) and manometric findings. However, taeniectomy is statistically significant better in terms of operative time (P value = 0.001). Taeniectomy is a newly described, technically easier technique for pouch formation after low rectal resection that can be used as a safe and effective alternative for the widely used transverse coloplasty.

Neoadjuvant therapy abolishes the functional benefits of a larger rectal remnant, as measured by magnetic resonance imaging after restorative rectal cancer surgery

BackgroundThe combination of advances in surgical technique and neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer has resulted in more patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery. Unfortunately, numerous patients subsequently experience bowel dysfunction, and may suffer from lifelong severe disability with major impact on their quality of life. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the risk of severe LARS in patients was associated with the length of remnant rectum. MethodsA total of 125 patients who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer were included. Postoperative bowel function was assessed using the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score a minimum of one year following surgery. The length of remnant rectum was measured on postoperative MRI of the pelvis and was correlated with the risk of having major LARS. ResultsOverall, major LARS was observed in 38 per cent of patients. In the patients who underwent surgery alone, major LARS was reported by 27 per cent, and a larger remnant rectum was associated with a better functional outcome. In contrast, 80 per cent of patients who underwent combined preoperative chemoradiotherapy and surgery reported having major LARS. No association between the length of remnant rectum and the risk of major LARS was observed in patients treated with combined neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. ConclusionBoth the length of remnant rectum and preoperative chemoradiotherapy had a major impact on the severity of bowel dysfunction after restorative rectal cancer surgery. No functional benefit from an irradiated rectal remnant was observed.

Gender differences in mortality, quality of life and function after restorative procedures for rectal cancer

Studies investigating the functional outcome after restorative surgery for rectal cancer have mainly focused on the effect of different surgical techniques on bowel habit or sexual activity at a single time-point. The aim of this study was to assess, longitudinally, the effect of rectal cancer treatment on bowel function, quality of life and sexual activity. The study parameters were assessed using self-administered questionnaires, including the Short Form 36 (SF-36), repeatedly, over a 5-year period. Patient details were obtained from the Cleveland Clinic prospective database. There were 260 (186 male) patients. The mean ages of male and female patients at the time of surgery were 60.5 and 57.5 years, respectively. There was no significant difference in comorbidity or stage between the groups. Women had a better overall survival. More women than men had postoperative radiation and perioperative blood transfusions. Men had a higher percentage of hand-sewn anastomoses (23.9%vs 10.8%, P = 0.018), but there was no overall difference in the mean level of anastomosis (2.3 cm vs 1.9 cm, P = 0.38). Men had worse nocturnal bowel function, more incontinence and a poorer mental component score on the SF-36. Pad use increased over time to a greater degree in women. Sexual activity, which was similar in men and women at baseline, had fallen at 5 years in both genders. After restorative resection for rectal cancer, bowel function is worse in men than in women, especially night evacuation at 3 and 5 years postoperatively. Sexual function in both genders declines sharply initially within 1 year postoperatively and more gradually over 5 years.

Anastomotic leak after restorative proctosigmoidectomy for cancer: what are the chances of a permanent ostomy?

The objective of this study is to identify rates and factors associated with permanent diversion following restorative proctosigmoidectomy for rectal cancer when complicated by an anastomotic leak. This study is a retrospective review. The setting of this study is a tertiary referral hospital Patients involved in this study were those who underwent restorative rectal cancer surgery from 1997 through 2008 identified from an institutional cancer database. No interventions were performed in this study. Factors associated with time to ostomy closure and rates of permanent diversion following anastomotic leaks One hundred and thirty patients (mean age 59.7years) were identified, 111 (85%) of whom had stoma diversion at the index surgery. Asymptomatic occult radiological leaks occurred in 52 patients (40%). Seventy-eight patients (60%) underwent ultimate ostomy closure at a median time of 6.3months after the index surgery, which was not significantly affected by previous radiotherapy (p = 0.08). Twelve patients (9%) underwent anastomotic reconstruction. Pathologic stage II or greater (OR 4.42; 1.95-10.04), symptomatic presentation (OR 4.13; 1.86-9.19) and anastomotic disruption >5mm (OR 4.42; 2.01-9.74) were independently associated with permanent diversion. Among all survivors, 33% did not have their ostomy reversed. Stoma diversion constructed after leak detection in 19 patients (15%) did not affect permanent stoma rate (OR 0.86; 0.31-2.34) or time to stoma closure (p = 0.29). The majority of anastomotic leaks after restorative rectal cancer surgery can be salvaged without anastomotic reconstruction. However, in one third of the patients, an anastomotic leak results in a permanent stoma.

Interpreting Angiographic Anatomy for Restorative Rectal Cancer Surgery

Interpreting Angiographic Anatomy for Restorative Rectal Cancer Surgery

Interpreting Angiographic Anatomy for Restorative Rectal Cancer Surgery

Yeovil District Hospital, Yeovil, United Kingdom, [email protected] Disclosure: The author declares that he has nothing to disclose.

Preservation of sexual and bladder function after laparoscopic rectal surgery

There have recently been reports of higher levels of bladder and sexual dysfunction in men after laparoscopic rectal surgery when compared with those undergoing open surgery. This has led some surgeons to question the role of the laparoscopic approach to rectal surgery. This study represents a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database for a single unit, comprising 2406 patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Bladder function, potency and ejaculation were assessed at postoperative clinic visits for men undergoing laparoscopic low or ultra-low anterior resection and abdominoperineal excision of the rectum. A total of 101 males were identified (median age 62 years: range 20-90 years). Urinary dysfunction was reported by six (6%) patients. Six (6%) patients had sexual dysfunction, manifesting as retrograde ejaculation in four patients and erectile dysfunction in a further two patients. The low rates of sexual dysfunction in this unit may be attributable to pelvic dissection only being undertaken by experienced, dedicated laparoscopic colorectal surgeons. Laparoscopic restorative surgery for rectal cancer has been performed here only since 2001 after considerable experience accrued in operating on benign rectal disease and colon cancer. Studies from elsewhere reporting poorer functional outcomes have probably included a significant number of patients on the surgeons''learning curve'.

Functional outcome following restorative rectal cancer surgery

The trend towards preoperative adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in selected patients with rectal cancer has led to increases in sphincter preservation with a limited understanding of the factors governing unsatisfactory functional outcomes. Data would suggest the need for a more selective use of standard radiotherapeutic fields in low- to intermediate-risk cases where there appears to be limited survival or locoregional recurrence benefit and where there is under-reported toxicity. This article discusses the complex factors which impact on functional outcome following open rectal cancer surgery particularly when it is accompanied by adjuvant therapy.

Techniques for restoring bowel continuity and function after rectal cancer surgery

A very low local recurrence rate of 3%-6% (associated with improved 5 year survival) is possible when proper oncological surgery is performed of mid and distal rectal adenocarcinoma. Restoration of bowel continuity is possible in most cases, without compromise of cancer clearance. Re-anastomosis can be performed with stapled, transabdominal hand-sewn or coloanal pull-through techniques. However after a direct (straight) anastomosis of the colon to the distal rectum/anus, up to 33% of patients have 3 or more bowel movements/d; some can be troubled with up to 14 stools a day. Construction of a 6-cm colonic J-pouch is likely to cause some reversed peristalsis which improves postoperative bowel frequency without causing neo-rectum evacuation problems. Colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis patients have a median of 3 bowel movements a day compared with a median of 6 a day for straight anastomoses, at 1 year after surgery. In the longer term, bowel adaptation may enable the function after a straight anastomosis to approximate that of a colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis. This probably depends in the former, upon whether the more rigid sigmoid colon or more distensible descending colon is used. An additional advantage of the colonic J-pouch-anal anastomosis is the lower risk of anastomotic complications. A more vascularized side-to-end (colonic J-pouch-anal) anastomosis is likely to heal better than an end-to-end (straight) anastomosis. Where the pelvis is too narrow for a bulky colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis, a coloplasty-anal-anastomosis is an option. The latter results in postoperative bowel function comparable with the colonic J-pouch. However, the risk of anastomotic complications is higher possibly related to its end-to-end anastomotic configuration. Laparoscopic techniques for accomplishing all the above are being proven to be effective. Restorative surgery for rectal cancer can be safely and effectively performed with methods to improve bowel function very acceptably; the future advances are likely in laparoscopy.