Clinicopathological Outcomes in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Undergoing Preoperative Short-Versus Long-course Chemoradiotherapy With Delayed Surgery.

BACKGROUND/AIM: We aimed to compare the clinicopathological outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after short- or long-course concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) followed by delayed surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 94 patients with cT3-4N0-2M0 rectal cancer who received CCRT between 2010 and 2017 were reviewed. Short-course radiotherapy (RT) was delivered with a median total dose of 25 Gy in five fractions (n=27), and long-course RT was delivered with a median total dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions (n=67). The following concurrent chemotherapy regimens were administered: 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin in 58 and capecitabine in 24; in 12 cases agents were unknown. The median interval between CCRT and surgery was 8 weeks. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered after surgery in 80 patients (5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin, n=54; capecitabine, n=9; other, n=14; and unknown, n=3). Propensity-score matching analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The median follow-up duration was 4.3 years. There were no statistically significant differences between the short- and long-course RT groups in sphincter preservation (85.2% vs. 92.5%, p=0.478), pathological complete remission (18.5% vs. 14.9%, p=0.905), downstaging (44.4% vs. 26.9%, p=0.159), and negative circumferential resection margin (92.6% vs. 89.6%, p=0.947) rates. No differences were found in survival outcomes between the short- and long-course groups at 3 years (overall survival: 91.8% vs. 88.1%, p=0.790; disease-free survival, 75.2% vs. 72.5%, p=0.420; locoregional relapse-free survival, 90.5% vs. 98.4%, p=0.180; and distant metastasis-free survival, 79.6% vs. 73.5%, p=0.490). Similar results were observed after PSM. CONCLUSION: Clinically, short-course CCRT may be a feasible alternative to long-course CCRT in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Clinical outcomes of surgical management for recurrent rectal prolapse: a multicenter retrospective study.

Purpose: There are few reports on outcomes following surgical repair of recurrent rectal prolapse. The purpose of this study was to examine surgical outcomes for recurrent rectal prolapse. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of patients who underwent surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse. This study used data collected by the Korean Anorectal Physiology and Pelvic Floor Disorder Study Group. Results: A total of 166 patients who underwent surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse were registered retrospectively between 2011 and 2016 in 8 referral hospitals. Among them, 153 patients were finally enrolled, excluding 13 patients who were not followed up postoperatively. Median follow-up duration was 40 months (range, 0.2-129.3 months). Methods of surgical repair for recurrent rectal prolapse included perineal approach (n = 96) and abdominal approach (n = 57). Postoperative complications occurred in 16 patients (10.5%). There was no significant difference in complication rate between perineal and abdominal approach groups. While patients who underwent the perineal approach were older and more fragile, patients who underwent the abdominal approach had longer operation time and admission days (P < 0.05). Overall, 29 patients (19.0%) showed re-recurrence after surgery. Among variables, none affected the re-recurrence. Conclusion: For the recurrent rectal prolapse, the perineal approach is used for the old and fragile patients. The postoperative complications and re-recurrence rate between perineal and abdominal approach were not different significantly. No factor including surgical method affected re-recurrence for recurrent rectal prolapse.

Neurofibroma of the Colon: A Diagnostic Mimicker of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor.

Gastrointestinal neurofibroma usually develops as diffuse gastrointestinal involvement in neurofibromatosis type 1 patients. Only 4 cases of sporadic colonic neurofibroma in a patient without neurofibromatosis type 1 have been reported in the English literature. A 26-year-old female patient underwent colonoscopy, and a 4-cm-sized polypoid mass was identified in the sigmoid colon. Wedge resection of the mass showed a yellowish, hard submucosal tumor. Microscopically, the tumor was composed of wavy spindle cells, fibroblasts, and strands of collagen; the stroma showed scattered myxoid areas. The differential diagnoses included gastrointestinal stromal tumor, schwannoma, and neurofibroma. Immunohistochemistry for c-Kit, DOG (discovered on gastrointestinal stromal tumors)-1, smooth muscle actin, S-100 protein, and CD34 was performed. The tumor cells were diffusely positive for CD34 and S-100 protein, while they were completely negative for c-Kit, DOG-1, and smooth muscle actin. The final diagnosis was neurofibroma. Sporadic colonic neurofibroma is very rare. Given the diffuse positivity for CD34 and its rarity, colonic neurofibroma can be easily misdiagnosed as gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Recognition of this entity would be beneficial for pathologists to avoid misdiagnosis and unnecessary treatment.

Inguinal hernia developed after radical retropubic surgery for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the clinical characteristics of inguinal hernia developed after radical retropubic surgery for prostate cancer to the hernia without previous radical prostatectomy. METHODS: Twenty-three patients (group A) who had radical retropubic surgery for prostate cancer underwent laparoscopic or open tension-free inguinal hernia repair from March 2007 to February 2011. Nine hundred and forty patients (group B) without previous radical retropubic surgery received laparoscopic or tension-free open hernia operation. RESULTS: Group A was older than group B (mean ± standard deviation, 69.6 ± 7.2 vs. 54.1 ± 16.1; P < 0.001). Right side (73.9%) and indirect type (91.3%) in group A were more prevalent than in group B (51.5% and 69.4%, respectively) with statistic significance (P = 0.020 and P = 0.023). The rate of laparoscopic surgery in group B (n = 862, 91.7%) was higher than in group A (n = 14, 64.3%, P < 0.001). In comparing perioperative variables between the two groups, operative time (49.4 ± 23.5 minutes) and hospital stay (1.9 ± 0.7 days) in group A were longer than in group B (38.9 ± 16.9, 1.1 ± 0.2; P = 0.046 and P < 0.001, respectively) and pain score at 7 days in group A was higher than in group B (3.1 ± 0.7 vs. 2.3 ± 1.0, P < 0.001). Postoperative recurrence rate was not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Inguinal hernia following radical retropubic surgery for prostate cancer was predominantly right side and indirect type with statistic significance compared to hernias without previous radical prostatectomy.

Comparison of Long-term Clinical Outcomes according to the Change in the Rectocele Depth between Transanal and Transvaginal Repairs for a Symptomatic Rectocele.

PURPOSE: This study was aimed to compare the results of a transanal repair with those of a transvaginal levatorplasty and to determine the long-term clinical outcomes according to the change in the depth of the rectocele after the procedure. METHODS: Of 50 women who underwent a rectocele repair from March 2005 to February 2007, 26 women (group A) received a transanal repair, and 24 (group B) received a transvaginal repair with or without levatorplasty. At 12 months after the procedures, 45 (group A/B, 22/23 women) among the 50 women completed physiologic studies, including anal manometry and defecography, and clinical-outcome measurements. The variations of the clinical outcomes with changes in the depth of the rectocele were also evaluated in 42 women (group A/B, 20/22) at the median follow-up of 50 months. RESULTS: On the defecographic findings, the postoperative depth of the rectocele decreased significantly in both groups (group A vs. B, 1.91 ± 0.20 vs. 2.25 ± 0.46, P = 0.040). At 12 months after surgery, 17 women in each group (group A/B, 77/75%) reported improvement of their symptoms. However, only 11 and 13 women (group A/B, 55/59%) of groups A and B, respectively, maintained their improvement at the median follow-up of 50 months. Better results were reported in patients with a greater change in the depth of their rectocele (≥4 cm) after the procedure (P = 0.001) CONCLUSION: In both procedures, clinical outcomes might become progressively worse as the length of the follow-up is increased.

Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: The long-term results of a laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer have been reported in several studies, but reports on the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer are limited. We investigated the long-term outcomes, including the five-year overall survival, disease-free survival and recurrence rate, after a laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Using prospectively collected data on 303 patients with colorectal cancer who underwent a laparoscopic resection between January 2001, and December 2003, we analyzed sex, age, stage, complications, hospital stay, mean operation time and blood loss. The overall survival rate, disease-free survival rate and recurrence rate were investigated for 271 patients who could be followed for more than three years. RESULTS: Tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage I cancer was present in 55 patients (18.1%), stage II in 116 patients (38.3%), stage III in 110 patients (36.3%), and stage IV in 22 patients (7.3%). The mean operative time was 200 minutes (range, 100 to 535 minutes), and the mean blood loss was 97 mL (range, 20 to 1,200 mL). The mean hospital stay was 11 days and the mean follow-up period was 54 months. The mean numbers of resected lymph nodes were 26 and 21 in the colon and the rectum, respectively, and the mean distal margins were 10 and 3 cm. The overall morbidity rate was 26.1%. The local recurrence rates were 2.2% and 4.4% in the colon and the rectum, respectively, and the distant recurrence rates were 7.8% and 22.5%. The five-year overall survival rates were 86.1% in the colon (stage I, 100%; stage II, 97.6%; stage III, 77.5%; stage IV, 16.7%) and 68.8% in the rectum (stage I, 90.2%; stage II, 84.0%; stage III, 57.6; stage IV, 13.3%). The five-year disease-free survival rates were 89.8% in the colon (stage I, 100%; stage II, 97.7%; stage III, 74.2%) and 74.5% in the rectum (stage I, 90.0%; stage II, 83.9%; stage III, 59.2%). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is a good alternative method to open surgery with tolerable oncologic long-term results.

Anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic protectomy can be managed by a minimally invasive approach.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to identify the clinical features of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer and to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic management for this problem. METHODS: Prospectively collected data were obtained from 307 patients with rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic proctectomy and primary anastomosis. Age, sex, tumor location, tumor stage, body mass index, comorbidities, ileostomy, conversion, intraoperative blood loss, operative time, previous abdominal operation, and hospital stay were analyzed for patients with or without anastomotic leakage. Management and outcome of anastomotic leakage also were analyzed. RESULTS: Anastomotic leakage occurred in 29 patients (9.4 percent). Diverting ileostomy was initially fashioned in 65 patients (21.2 percent). Leakage was related to young age, male sex, lower tumor location, and longer operation time. Ten patients (34.5 percent) were successfully managed with conservative treatment. Seventeen patients (58.6 percent) were managed via a laparoscopic approach. Open surgery was performed in two patients who showed diffuse fecal soiling or had previous conversion, respectively. There was no mortality. CONCLUSIONS: When leakage occurs, laparotomy or colostomy is not needed routinely. For surgical intervention, the abdominal cavity should be explored first by laparoscopic visualization because the majority of patients can be successfully managed with laparoscopy and ileostomy.