The Relation between Inferior Mesenteric Vein Ligation and Collateral Vessels to Splenic Flexure: Anatomical Landmarks, Technical Precautions and Clinical Significance

PURPOSE: Our aim to assess clinical significance of the relation between inferior mesenteric vein ligation and collateral blood supply (meandering mesenteric artery) to the splenic flexure with elaboration more in anatomical landmarks and technical tips. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We review the literature regarding the significance of the collateral vessels around inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) root and provide our prospective operative findings, anatomical landmarks and technical tips. We analyzed the incidence and pattern of anatomic variation of collateral vessels around the IMV. RESULTS: A total of 30 consecutive patients have been prospectively observed in a period between June 25-2012 and September 7-2012. Nineteen males and eleven females with mean age of 63 years. Major colorectal procedures were included. There were three anatomical types proposed, based on the relation between IMV and the collateral vessel. Type A and B in which either the collateral vessel crosses or runs close to the IMV with incidence of 43.3% and 13.3%, respectively, whereas type C is present in 43.3%. There was no definitive relation between the artery and vein. No intra or postoperative ischemic events were reported. CONCLUSION: During IMV ligation, inadvertent ligation of Arc of Riolan or meandering mesenteric artery around the IMV root "in type A&B" might result in compromised blood supply to the left colon, congestion, ischemia and different level of colitis or anastomotic dehiscence. Therefore, careful dissection and skeletonization at the IMV root "before ligation if necessary" is mandatory to preserve the collateral vessel for the watershed area and to avoid further injury.

Update and Debate Issues in Surgical Treatment of Middle and Low Rectal Cancer

Based on a review of the literature, this paper provides an update on surgical treatment of middle and low rectal cancer and discusses issues of debate surrounding that treatment. The main goal of the surgical treatment of rectal cancer is radical resection of the tumor and surrounding lymphatic tissue. Local excision of early rectal cancer can be another treatment option, in which the patient can avoid possible complications related to radical surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (CRT) has been recommended for patients with cT3-4N0 or any T N+ rectal cancer because CRT shows better local control and less toxicity than adjuvant CRT. However, recent clinical trials showed promising results for local excision after neoadjuvant CRT in selected patients with low rectal cancer. In addition, the "wait and see" concept is another modality that has been reported for the management of tumors that show complete clinical remission after neoadjuvant CRT. Although radical surgery for middle and low rectal cancer is the cornerstone therapy, an ultralow anterior resection with or without intersphincteric resection (ISR) has become an alternative standard surgical method for selected patients. Many studies have reported on the oncological safety of the ISR, but few of them have addressed the issue the functional outcome. Furthermore, an abdominoperineal resection (APR) has problems with high rates of tumor perforations and positive circumferential resection margins, and those factors have contributed to its having a high rate of local recurrence and a poor survival rate for rectal cancer compared with sphincter-saving procedures. Recently, great efforts have been made to reduce these problems, and the total levator excision or the extended APR concept has emerged. Surgical management for low rectal cancer should aim to radically excise the tumor and to preserve as much of the sphincter function as possible by using multidisciplinary approaches. However, further prospective clinical trials are needed for tailored treatment of rectal cancer patients.