Safety and prognosis analysis of transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic mesorectal excision for mid-low rectal cancer / 中华胃肠外科杂志

Objective: To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME) for mid-to-low rectal cancer and to evaluate the learning curve of taTME. Methods: This study was a retrospective cohort study. Firstly, consecutive patients undergoing total mesorectal excision who were registered in the prospective established database of Division of Colorectal Diseases, Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital during July 2014 to June 2020 were recruited. The enrolled patients were divided into taTME and laTME group. The demographic data, clinical characteristics, neoadjuvant treatment, intraoperative and postoperative complications, pathological results and follow-up data were extracted from the database. The primary endpoint was the incidence of anastomotic leakage and the secondary endpoints included the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and the 3-year local recurrence rate. Independent t-test for comparison between groups of normally distributed measures; skewed measures were expressed as M (range). Categorical variables were expressed as examples (%) and the χ(2) or Fisher exact probability was used for comparison between groups. When comparing the incidence of anastomotic leakage, 5 variables including sex, BMI, clinical stage evaluated by MRI, distance from tumor to anal margin evaluated by MRI, and whether receiving neoadjuvant treatment were balanced by propensity score matching (PSM) to adjust confounders. Kaplan-Meier curve and Log-rank test were used to compare the DFS of two groups. Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze and determine the independent risk factors affecting the DFS of patients with mid-low rectal cancer. Secondly, the data of consecutive patients undergoing taTME performed by the same surgical team (the trananal procedures were performed by the same main surgeon) from February 2017 to March 2021 were separately extracted and analyzed. The multidimensional cumulative sum (CUSUM) control chart was used to draw the learning curve of taTME. The outcomes of 'mature' taTME cases through learning curve were compared with laTME cases and the independent risk factors of DFS of 'mature' cases were also analyzed. Results: Two hundred and forty-three patients were eventually enrolled, including 182 undergoing laTME and 61 undergoing taTME. After PSM, both fifty-two patients were in laTME group and taTME group respectively, and patients of these two groups had comparable characteristics in sex, age, BMI, clinical tumor stage, distance from tumor to anal margin by MRI, mesorectal fasciae (MRF) and extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) by MRI and proportion of receiving neoadjuvant treatment. After PSM, as compared to laTME group, taTME group showed significantly longer operation time [(198.4±58.3) min vs. (147.9±47.3) min, t=-4.321, P<0.001], higher ratio of blood loss >100 ml during surgery [17.3% (9/52) vs. 0, P=0.003], higher incidence of anastomotic leakage [26.9% (14/52) vs. 3.8% (2/52), χ(2)=10.636, P=0.001] and higher morbidity of overall postoperative complications [55.8%(29/52) vs. 19.2% (10/52), χ(2)=14.810, P<0.001]. Total harvested lymph nodes and circumferential resection margin involvement were comparable between two groups (both P>0.05). The median follow-up for the whole group was 24 (1 to 72) months, with 4 cases lost, giving a follow-up rate of 98.4% (239/243). The laTME group had significantly better 3-year DFS than taTME group (83.9% vs. 73.0%, P=0.019), while the 3-year local recurrence rate was similar in two groups (1.7% vs. 3.6%, P=0.420). Multivariate analysis showed that and taTME surgery (HR=3.202, 95%CI: 1.592-6.441, P=0.001) the postoperative pathological staging of UICC stage II (HR=13.862, 95%CI:1.810-106.150, P=0.011), stage III (HR=8.705, 95%CI: 1.104-68.670, P=0.040) were independent risk factors for 3-year DFS. Analysis of taTME learning curve revealed that surgeons would cross over the learning stage after performing 28 cases. To compare the two groups excluding the cases within the learning stage, there was no significant difference between two groups after PSM no matter in the incidence of anastomotic leakage [taTME: 6.7%(1/15); laTME: 5.3% (2/38), P=1.000] or overall complications [taTME: 33.3%(5/15), laTME: 26.3%(10/38), P=0.737]. The taTME was still an independent risk factor of 3-year DFS only analyzing patients crossing over the learning stage (HR=5.351, 95%CI:1.666-17.192, P=0.005), and whether crossing over the learning stage was not the independent risk factor of 3-year DFS for mid-low rectal cancer patients undergoing taTME (HR=0.954, 95%CI:0.227-4.017, P=0.949). Conclusions: Compared with conventional laTME, taTME may increase the risk of anastomotic leakage and compromise the oncological outcomes. Performing taTME within the learning stage may significantly increase the risk of postoperative anastomotic leakage.

Interpretation of Chinese expert consensus on protective ostomy for mid-low rectal cancer in China (version 2022) / 中华胃肠外科杂志

This paper describes the background of Chinese expert consensus on protective ostomy for middle and low rectal cancer in China, interprets some key issues such as unification of relevant terminology and concepts, clinical value and indications of protective stoma, and clarifies surgical principles and details and perioperative ostomy care.

Chinese expert consensus on protective ostomy for mid-low rectal cancer (version 2022) / 中华胃肠外科杂志

The rate of sphincter-preserving surgery for mid-low rectal cancer is increasing, but anastomotic leakage remains to be one of the common serious complications after operation. How to reduce the morbility and mortality of anastomotic leakage is always a hot and difficult point in colorectal surgery. Protective ostomy is a common method to deal with the above problems in clinical practice. However, some problems such as inappropriate stoma and stoma-related complications etc. become the current clinical challenges. The purpose of this consensus focusing on indication of ostomy, clinical value, ostomy skills, prevention of stoma complications, reversion of stoma and stoma nursing aims to provide guidance for the clinical practice of protective ostomy in the operation of mid-low rectal cancer in China.

Transanal lateral lymph node dissection surgery for 5 cases of mid-low rectal cancer / 中华胃肠外科杂志

Objective@#To evaluate the feasibility and safety of transanal lateral lymph node dissection for mid-low rectal cancer.@*Methods@#A descriptive case series research method was used. Clinical and pathological data of 5 mid-low rectal cancer patients who underwent transanal lateral lymph node dissection at Department of Colorectal Surgery, the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from November 2018 to May 2019 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Of 5 cases, 4 were male and 1 was female with mean age of (43.2±13.2) years and mean body mass index of (21.2±2.6) kg/m2; the mean diameter of tumor was (3.2±2.4) cm; the mean distance between tumor and anus was (6.3±2.5) cm; 3 received preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In preoperative TNM staging, 2 cases were T3N1M0, 1 was T3cN2aM0, 1 was T3cN2bM0, and 1 was T2N1M0. All the patients had no intestinal obstruction before operation. Surgical methods: (1) total mesorectal excision: using general transanal and transabdominal methods to mobilize and resect total mesorectum, and dissect No.252, No.253 lymph nodes; (2) transanal lateral lymph node dissection: dissect the adipose lymphoid tissue on the surface of the iliococcygeal muscle, the coccygeal muscle, and the obturator muscle (the No.283 lymph nodes) upward, and dissect No.263d and No.263p lymph nodes with fat tissue sequentially till the bifurcation of the internal and external iliac artery; (3) take out the specimen from anus, and make anastomosis between proximal colon and anal canal. Intraoperative and postoperative variables was observed.@*Results@#All the 5 patients completed surgery successfully, and no patient needed to convert to open approach. The mean operative time was (295.6±97.7) minutes, and the median intraoperative blood loss was 70 (50-500) ml. The mean length of specimen was (12.9±3.0) cm, and the mean number of harvested lymph node was 30.4±9.9. The positive lateral lymph nodes were founder in 4 patients. The median distance between tumor and distal resection margin was 1.5 (1.2-8.0) cm. The resection margin in all the patients was negative. The mean time to postoperative flatus was (4.2±1.6) days, the mean postoperative spontaneous urination was (3.0±1.9) days, time to drainage tube removal was (5.6±1.9) days, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was (9.4±2.1) days. The postoperative TNM staging by pathology was 1 case with T1N0M0, 1 with T2N1M0, 1 with T3N2bM0, and 2 with T3N2M0. Five patients were moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma. Only 1 patient developed postoperative abdominal bleeding, who was healed after conservative treatment. The other 4 patients did not develop any perioperative complications, such as incision infection, presacral abscess, pelvic abscess, anastomotic leakage, or anastomotic stricture. Four patients underwent postoperative chemotherapy. All the patients were followed up for 2 to 28 weeks after surgery and they all felt well. The patients with stoma had fluent bowel.@*Conclusions@#Transanal lateral lymph node dissection is feasible and safe in the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer, which can achieve the purpose of extended radical resection of mid-low movement rectal cancer. Moreover, this procedure is a new method to treat rectal cancer patients with lateral lymph node metastasis.

Chinese expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment for lateral lymph node metastasis of rectal cancer (2019 edition) / 中华胃肠外科杂志

Lateral lymph node metastasis represents a major cause of local pelvic recurrence after curative resection for mid-low rectal cancer. Considerable controversies over issues remain among eastern and western countries, with respect to the diagnosis of lateral lymph node metastasis, the multidisciplinary management regime, indication for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection, and the prognosis of surgical dissection. The purpose of this expert consensus is to improve the understanding of this condition among Chinese specialists, and to help standardizing the diagnosis and therapeutic strategies for lateral lymph node metastasis. Each statement and recommendation in this consensus were generated based on suggestions from at least three experts, agreed by a majority of experts from the Chinese expert panel. The evaluation criteria by U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was adopted for the grading of recommendations. In respect to the aforementioned controversies, the present consensus produced 21 statements on diagnosis and treatment for lateral lymph node metastasis. The pending issues in this consensus need further high-quality clinical practice and research.

Chinese expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment for lateral lymph node metastasis of rectal cancer (2019 edition) / 中华胃肠外科杂志

Lateral lymph node metastasis represents a major cause of local pelvic recurrence after curative resection for mid-low rectal cancer. Considerable controversies over issues remain among eastern and western countries, with respect to the diagnosis of lateral lymph node metastasis, the multidisciplinary management regime, indication for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection, and the prognosis of surgical dissection. The purpose of this expert consensus is to improve the understanding of this condition among Chinese specialists, and to help standardizing the diagnosis and therapeutic strategies for lateral lymph node metastasis. Each statement and recommendation in this consensus were generated based on suggestions from at least three experts, agreed by a majority of experts from the Chinese expert panel. The evaluation criteria by U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was adopted for the grading of recommendations. In respect to the aforementioned controversies, the present consensus produced 21 statements on diagnosis and treatment for lateral lymph node metastasis. The pending issues in this consensus need further high-quality clinical practice and research.