RESUMO
The primary goal of surgery for rectal cancer is to achieve an oncologically safe resection, i.e., a radical resection with a sufficient safe margin. Total mesorectal excision has been introduced for radical surgery of rectal cancer and has yielded greatly improved oncologic outcomes in terms of local recurrence and cancer-specific survival. Along with oncologic outcomes, functional outcomes, such as voiding and sexual function, have also been emphasized in patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery to improve quality of life. Intraoperative nerve damage or combined excision is the primary reason for sexual and urinary dysfunction. In the past, these forms of damage could be attributed to the lack of anatomical knowledge and poor visualization of the pelvic autonomic nerve. With the adoption of minimally invasive surgery, visualization of nerve structure and meticulous dissection for the mesorectum are now possible. As the leading hospital employing this technique, we have adopted minimally invasive platforms (laparoscopy, robot-assisted surgery) in the field of rectal cancer surgery and standardized this technique globally. Here, we review a standardized technique for rectal cancer surgery based on our experience at Severance Hospital, suggest some practical technical tips, and discuss a couple of debatable issues in this field.
RESUMO
Purpose@#Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is managed by chemoradiotherapy (CRT), followed by surgery. Herein we reported patients with metastases during or after CRT. @*Methods@#Data of patients with LARC who received CRT from 2008 to 2017 were reviewed. Patients with metastases after CRT were included. Those with metastatic tumors at the initial diagnosis were excluded. @*Results@#Fourteen patients (1.3%) of 1,092 who received CRT presented with metastases. Magnetic resonance circumferential resection margin (mrCRM) and mesorectal lymph nodes (LNs) were positive in 12 patients (85.7%). Meanwhile, magnetic resonance extramural vascular invasion (mrEMVI) was positive in 10 patients (71.4%). Magnetic resonance tumor regression grade (mrTRG) 4 and mrTRG5 was detected in 5 and 1 patient respectively. Ten patients (71.4%) underwent combined surgery and 3 (21.4%) received palliative chemotherapy. @*Conclusion@#Patients with metastases after CRT showed a higher rate of positive mrCRM, mrEMVI, mesorectal LNs, and poor tumor response. Further studies with a large number of patients are necessary for better survival outcomes in LARC.
RESUMO
Purpose@#Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is managed by chemoradiotherapy (CRT), followed by surgery. Herein we reported patients with metastases during or after CRT. @*Methods@#Data of patients with LARC who received CRT from 2008 to 2017 were reviewed. Patients with metastases after CRT were included. Those with metastatic tumors at the initial diagnosis were excluded. @*Results@#Fourteen patients (1.3%) of 1,092 who received CRT presented with metastases. Magnetic resonance circumferential resection margin (mrCRM) and mesorectal lymph nodes (LNs) were positive in 12 patients (85.7%). Meanwhile, magnetic resonance extramural vascular invasion (mrEMVI) was positive in 10 patients (71.4%). Magnetic resonance tumor regression grade (mrTRG) 4 and mrTRG5 was detected in 5 and 1 patient respectively. Ten patients (71.4%) underwent combined surgery and 3 (21.4%) received palliative chemotherapy. @*Conclusion@#Patients with metastases after CRT showed a higher rate of positive mrCRM, mrEMVI, mesorectal LNs, and poor tumor response. Further studies with a large number of patients are necessary for better survival outcomes in LARC.
RESUMO
Many patients develop a variety of bowel dysfunction after sphincter preserving surgeries (SPS) for rectal cancer. The bowel dysfunction usually manifests in the form of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), which has a negative impact on the patients' quality of life. This study reviewed the LARS after SPS, its mechanism, risk factors, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment based on previously published studies. Adequate history taking, physical examination of the patients, using validated questionnaires and other diagnostic tools are important for assessment of LARS severity. Treatment of LARS should be tailored to each patient. Multimodal therapy is usually needed for patients with major LARS with acceptable results. The treatment includes conservative management in the form of medical, pelvic floor rehabilitation and transanal irrigation and invasive procedures including neuromodulation. If this treatment failed, fecal diversion may be needed. In conclusion, Initial meticulous dissection with preservation of nerves and creation of a neorectal reservoir during anastomosis and proper Kegel exercise of the anal sphincter can minimize the occurrence of LARS. Pre-treatment counseling is an essential step for patients who have risk factors for developing LARS.