ABSTRACT
AIM: To evaluate patients with proximal rectal cancer (PRC) (> 6 cm up to 12 cm) and distal rectal cancer (DRC) (0 to 6 cm from the anal verge). METHODS: Two hundred and eighteen patients (120 male, 98 female, median age 58 years, range 19-88 years) comprised 100 with PRC and 118 with DRC. The proportion of T1, T2 vs T3, T4 stage cancers was similar in both groups (PRC: T1+T2 = 29%; T3+T4 = 71% and DRC: T1+T2 = -31%; T3+T4 = 69%). All patients had cancer confined to the rectum - those with synchronous distant metastasis were excluded. Surgical resection was with curative intent with or without pre-operative chemoradiation (c-RT). Follow-up was for a median of 35 mo (range: 12 to 126 mo). End points were: 30 d mortality, complications of operation, microscopic tumour- free margins, resection with a tumour-free circumferential margin (CRM) of 1 to 2 mm and > 2 mm, local recurrence, survival and the permanent stoma rate. RESULTS: Overall 30-d mortality was 6% (12): PRC 7 % and DRC 4%. Postoperative complications occurred in 14% with PRC compared with 21.5% with DRC, urinary retention was the complication most frequently reported (PRC 2% vs DRC 9%, P = 0.04). Twelve percent with PRC compared with 37% with DRC were subjected to preoperative c-RT (P = 0.03). A tumour-free CRM of 1 to 2 mm and > 2 mm was reported in 93% and 82% with PRC and 88% and 75% with DRC respectively (PRC vs DRC, P > 0.05). However, local recurrence was 5% for PRC vs 11% for DRC (P < 0.001). Three and five years survival was 65.6% and 60.2% for PRC vs 67% and 64.3% for DRC respectively. No patient with PRC and 23 (20%) with DRC received an abdomino-perineal resection. CONCLUSION: PRC and DRC differ in the rate of abdomino-perineal resection, post-operative urinary retention and local recurrence. Survival in both groups was similar.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of synchronous colorectal liver metastasis in patients referred to a tertiary referral center in Sri Lanka and to evaluate the differences in the clinicopathological features of patients with and without synchronous metastasis. METHODS: Records of 438 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were classified into metastatic group (n = 34, 8%) and non metastastatic group (n = 404, 92%). In the two groups macroscopic features compared were: tumor size (2 cm, 2-5 cm, and >5 cm), site of primary tumor and side of liver involved. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels were recorded. At microscopy, tumor differentiation, invasion and nodal status were evaluated. RESULTS: The rectum was the primary site of the tumor in a majority (60%) of patients. There was no difference in the distribution of the primary site and size of the tumor, pathological stage, lymphatic infiltration and the degree of tumor differentiation in two groups (p > 0.05). Patients with metastasis had higher levels of CEA, higher frequency of vascular infiltration and N3 nodes involved (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The incidence of synchronous colorectal liver metastasis seems to be lower in our patients. Association of higher CEA level, advanced nodal stage and presence of vascular invasion needs to be further assessed with risk of developing metachronous liver metastasis.
