Surgical Outcomes in Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer Versus Standard Long-course Chemoradiation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the impact of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) for rectal cancers on surgical complications and surgical pathology when compared with standard long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT). BACKGROUND: The oncological benefits of TNT are well published in previous meta-analyses, but there is little synthesized information on how it affects surgical outcomes. A recent study has suggested an increase in local recurrence and higher rates of breached total mesorectal excision (TME) plane in TNT patients. METHODS: This study conformed to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A search was performed in Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane databases, EMBASE and CINAHL to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes between TNT and LCRT. Meta-analyses of pooled proportions between TNT and LCRT were performed, comparing primary outcomes of surgical mortality, morbidity and all reported complications; surgical-pathology differences, namely mesorectal quality, R0 resection rates, circumferential resection margin positive rates, and sphincter preservation rates. Death and progression of disease during neoadjuvant treatment period was also compared. Risk of bias of RCTs was performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 3185 patients with rectal cancer from 11 RCTs were included in the analysis: 1607 received TNT and 1578 received LCRT, of which 1422 (TNT arm) and 1391 (LCRT arm) underwent surgical resection with curative intent. There was no significant difference in mortality [risk ratio (RR)=0.86, 95% CI: 0.13-5.52, P =0.88, I2 =52%] or major complications (RR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.86-1.26, P =0.70, I2 =0%) between TNT and LCRT. There was a significantly higher risk of breached TME in TNT group on pooled analysis (RR=1.49, 95% CI: 1.03-12.16, P =0.03, I2 =0%), and on subgroup analysis there is higher risk of breached TME in those receiving extended duration of neoadjuvant treatment (>17 weeks from start of treatment to surgery) when compared with LCRT (RR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.06-2.44, P =0.03). No difference in R0 resection rates (RR=0.85, 95% CI: 0.66-1.10, P =0.21, I2 =15%), circumferential resection margin positive rates (RR=0.87, 95% CI: 0.65-1.16, P =0.35, I2 =10%) or sphincter preservation rates (RR=1.02, 95% CI: 0.83-1.25, P =0.88, I2 =57%) were observed. There was a significantly lower risk of progression of disease to an unresectable stage during the neoadjuvant treatment period in TNT patients (RR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.39-0.92, P =0.03, I2 =18%). On subgroup analysis, it appears to favor those receiving extended duration of neoadjuvant treatment (RR=0.44, 95% CI: 0.26-0.80, P =0.002), and those receiving induction-type chemotherapy in TNT (RR=0.25, 95% CI: 0.07-0.88, P =0.03). CONCLUSIONS: TNT increases rates of breached TME which can contribute to higher local recurrence rates. TNT, however, improves systemic control by reducing early progression of disease during neoadjuvant treatment period. Further research is warranted to identify patients that will benefit from this strategy.

Long-term outcomes after seton placement for perianal fistulas with and without Crohn's disease.

AIM: Perianal sepsis in Crohn's disease (CD) fistulas is managed with antibiotics and surgical drainage; a noncutting seton is used for an identified transsphincteric fistula tract. The optimal management following seton placement for initial control of perianal sepsis remains to be determined. Our main aim was to assess the success rates of curative surgery, seton removal or long-term indwelling seton in patients with and without CD. METHOD: This was a retrospective cohort of consecutive patients with a perianal fistula treated with a noncutting seton between 2010 and 2019, including 83 CD patients and 94 patients without CD. Initial control of symptomatic perianal infection with a seton and subsequent healing and reintervention rates were compared between the three postseton management strategies. RESULTS: A total of 177 patients, 61% male and 83.1% with complex fistulas, were followed for a median of 23 months (interquartile range 11-40 months). Immunomodulatory treatment was used in 90.4% of CD patients after seton placement. Good initial control of perianal infection was achieved with a seton in CD and non-CD patients, at 92.9% and 96.7%, respectively (p = 0.11). Overall fistula healing or control for CD and non-CD patients was, respectively, 64% and 86% (p = 0.1) after curative surgery, 49% and 71% after seton removal (p = 0.21) and 58% and 50% with long-term seton placement (p = 0.72). Overall reintervention for recurrence was 83% in CD versus 53.1% in non-CD patients during the follow-up period (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Definitive surgery was possible in only a minority of CD patients. Long-term seton management was an effective option in patients with CD with acceptable improvement and recurrence rates.