Shared Decision-Making, Sphincter Preservation, and Rectal Cancer Treatment: Identifying and Executing What Matters Most to Patients.

Rectal cancer treatment often encompasses multiple steps and options, with benefits and risks that vary based on the individual. Additionally, patients facing rectal cancer often have preferences regarding overall quality of life, which includes bowel function, sphincter preservation, and ostomies. This article reviews these data in the context of shared decision-making approaches in an effort to better inform patients deliberating treatment options for rectal cancer.

Short-term and long-term outcomes after robotic radical surgery for rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumor.

BACKGROUND: The optimal approach for ensuring both complete resection and preservation of anal function in rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to clarify short-term and long-term outcomes after robotic radical surgery for rectal GIST. METHODS: A total of 13 patients who underwent robotic radical surgery for rectal GIST between December 2011 and April 2022 were included. All robotic procedures were performed using a systematic approach. A supplemental video of robotic radical surgery for rectal GIST is attached. The short-term outcome was the incidence of postoperative complications during the first 30 days after surgery. Surgical outcomes were retrieved from a prospective database. Long-term outcomes, including overall survival and recurrence-free survival, were determined in all patients. RESULTS: Median distance from the tumor to the anal verge was 4.0 cm. Surgical margins were negative in all patients. Two patients underwent neoadjuvant imatinib therapy. All patients underwent sphincter-preserving surgery. None underwent conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery. The incidence of postoperative Clavien-Dindo grade II and grade ≥ III complications was 7.7% and 0%, respectively. The median postoperative hospital stay was 7 days. Twelve patients (92.3%) underwent stoma closure within 5 months of the initial surgery. Median follow-up time was 76 months. The 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival rates were both 100%. None of the patients had recurrence. CONCLUSION: Short-term and long-term outcomes after radical robotic surgery for rectal GIST were favorable. Robotic surgery might be a useful surgical approach for rectal GIST.

Patient management after primary rectal cancer diagnosis. Special focus on surgical treatment for non-metastatic disease.

Background: Rectal cancer is a public health priority. Primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality of care for non-metastatic rectal cancer using process and outcome indicators. Delay of management, length of stay and readmission rate, sphincter preservation, morbidity, number of examined lymph nodes, mortality, overall and disease-free survivals were evaluated. Secondary objectives were to estimate the relationship between possible predictive parameters for (1) anastomotic leakage (logistic regression), (2) overall or disease-free survivals (cox regression).Methods: We performed a retrospective study on 312 consecutive patients diagnosed with primary rectal cancer between 2016 and 2019. We focused on the 163 patients treated by surgery for non-metastatic cancer.Results: The treatment began within 33 days (range 0-264) after incidence, resection rate was 67%. Digestive continuity rate in lower, middle and upper rectum was 30%, 87% and 96%. Median of 14 lymph nodes (range 1-46) was analyzed. Length of stay and readmission rate were 11 days (range 3-56) and 4%, respectively. Within 90 postoperative days, clinical anastomotic leakage occurred in 9.2% of cases, major morbidity rate was 17%, mortality 1.2%. Multivariate analysis revealed that stoma decreased the risk of anastomotic leakage [hazard ratio: 0.16; 95% confidence intervals: 0.04-0.63; p = 0.008]. The 5-year overall survival after surgery was 85 ± 4%, disease-free survival 83 ± 4%. Patients with major complications, male gender and R1/R2 resection margin had a poorer prognosis.Conclusion: This work showed encouraging results in rectal cancer treatment in our institution, our results were in line with recommendations at the time.

Efficiency of the Robotic Platform in Improving the Rate of Sphincter Preservation in Patients With Mid and Low Rectal Cancer.

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the robotic platform can have a positive impact on the rate of sphincter preservation in patients with rectal tumors, undergoing robotic total mesorectal excision (TME), in comparison with laparoscopic or open TME. We also analyzed and compared short-term outcomes. Methods: A prospectively collected robotic database was reviewed and compared with the trust and national data. Three groups were designed according to the surgical technique: open, laparoscopic and robotic. This includes all resections for mid and low rectal cancer which were performed with the robotic platform, over a period of 4 years, versus the trust data for the same period. Results: Two hundred ninety-seven patients with mid and low rectal cancers were analyzed. Demographics for the groups (gender, age, and body mass index) were similar but distance from anal verge was shorter in the robotic group (7 vs. 8.5 cm, P < 0.001). The percentage of abdominoperineal resection (APR) rate was significantly lower in the robotic group (13.5% vs. 39.6% vs. 52.4% for the open group, P < 0.001). Median length of stay, complication rate, and positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) rate for the robotic group were also statistically significantly lower than those for both laparoscopic and open groups. Conclusion: Robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer is safe and feasible, and could help surgeons perform ultra-low anterior resections, rather than APRs and save patients' sphincters. Positive CRM is low, which could lead to improved oncological outcomes.

Postchemoradiation magnetic resonance imaging circumferential resection margin predicts treatment failure after multidisciplinary directed sphincter preservation in low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to review the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features of patients with low rectal cancer (LRC) undergoing preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and investigate the risk factors for treatment failure after sphincter preserving surgery following preoperative CRT based on multidisciplinary approach. OBJECTIVES: Patients who underwent standard CRT and sphincter preserving radical surgery for LRC between January 2000 and December 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. Sphincter preservation failure (SPF) was defined as any one of the following: positive pathologic circumferential resection margin, local recurrence, failure to repair ileostomy, or permanent stoma formation due to anastomotic complications. RESULTS: Among the 191 patients, there were no overall significant differences between sphincter preservation success (n = 161) and SPF (n = 30) groups. SPF group showed a higher MRI circumferential resection margins (mrCRM) positive rate before and after CRT (before CRT: 33.3% vs. 16.1%, p = 0.027; after CRT: 23.3% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis showed that only mrCRM after CRT was associated with SPF (hazard ratio = 4.596, p = 0.005). SPF group showed worse 5-year cancer-specific survival (51% vs. 92.7%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MRI-based assessment of the tumor after CRT plays a crucial role in predicting the success and feasibility of sphincter preservation as well as oncological outcomes in patients with LRC.

Comparison of functional and oncological outcome of conformal sphincter preservation operation, low anterior resection, and abdominoperineal resection in very low rectal cancer: a retrospective comparative cohort study with propensity score matching.

PURPOSE: Conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) procedure is a sphincter preservation procedure for preserving the anal canal function for very low rectal cancers. This study investigated the functional and oncological outcome of conformal sphincter preservation operation by comparing with low anterior resection (LAR) and abdominoperineal resection (APR). METHODS: This is a retrospective comparative study. Patients who received conformal sphincter preservation operation (n = 52), low anterior resection (n = 54), or abdominoperineal resection (n = 69) were included between 2011 and 2016 in a tertiary referral hospital. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust the baseline characteristics which may influence the choice of the surgical procedure. RESULTS: Twenty-one pairs of conformal sphincter preservation operation vs. low anterior resection and 29 pairs of conformal sphincter preservation operation vs. abdominoperineal resection were selected. The first group had a higher tumor location than the second group. Compared with the low anterior resection group, the conformal sphincter preservation operation group had shorter distal resection margins; however, no significant differences were identified in daily stool frequency, Wexner incontinence score, local recurrence, distant metastasis, overall survival, and disease-free survival between both groups. Compared with the abdominoperineal resection group, the conformal sphincter preservation operation group had shorter operative time and shorter postoperative hospital stay. No significant differences were identified in local recurrence, distant metastasis, overall survival, and disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: Conformal sphincter preservation operation is oncologically safe compared to APR and LAR, and has similar functional findings to LAR. Studies comparing CSPO with intersphincteric resection should be performed.

Effects of neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy for anorectal function in locally advanced rectal cancer patients: a study protocol for a prospective, observational, controlled, multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) and total mesorectal excision are standard treatment regimen for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). This sphincter-saving treatment strategy may be accompanied by a series of anorectal functional disorders. Yet, prospective studies that dynamically evaluating the respective roles of radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery on anorectal function are lacking. PATIENTS/DESIGN: The study is a prospective, observational, controlled, multicentre study. After screening for eligibility and obtaining informed consent, a total of 402 LARC patients undergoing NCRT followed by surgery, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery, or surgery only would be included in the trial. The primary outcome measure is the average resting pressure of anal sphincter. The secondary outcome measures are maximum anal sphincter contraction pressure, Wexner continence score and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. Evaluations will be carried out at the following stages: baseline (T1), after radiotherapy or chemotherapy (before surgery, T2), after surgery (before closing the temporary stoma, T3), and at follow-up visits (every 3 to 6 months, T4, T5……). Follow-up for each patient will be at least 2 years. DISCUSSION: We expect the program to provide more information of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy on anorectal function, and to optimize the treatment strategy to reduce anorectal dysfunction for LARC patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05671809). Registered on 26 December 2022.

Comparison of anal function and quality of life after conformal sphincter preservation operation and intersphincteric resection of very low rectal cancer: a multicenter, retrospective, case-control analysis.

PURPOSE: Conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) is a sphincter preservation operation for very low rectal cancers. Compared to intersphincteric resection (ISR), CSPO retains more dentate line and distal rectal wall, and also avoids damaging the nerves in the intersphincteric space. This study aimed to compare the postoperative anal function and quality of life between the CSPO and ISR. METHOD: Patients with low rectal cancer undergoing CSPO (n = 117) and ISR (n = 66) were included from Changhai and Huashan Hospital, respectively, between 2011 and 2020. A visual analog scale (range 0-10) was utilized to evaluate satisfaction with anal function and quality of life. The anal function was evaluated with Wexner scores and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. Quality of life was evaluated with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38. RESULTS: The CSPO group had more male patients (65.8% vs. 50%, p = 0.042), more preoperative chemoradiotherapy (33.3% vs. 10.6%, p < 0.001), lower tumor position (3.45 ± 1.13 vs. 4.24 ± 0.86 cm, p < 0.001), and more postoperative chemotherapy (65% vs. 13.6%, p < 0.001) compared to the ISR group. In addition, CSPO patients had shorter postoperative stay (6.63 ± 2.53 vs. 7.85 ± 4.73 days, p = 0.003) and comparable stoma reversal rates within 1 year after surgery (92.16% vs. 96.97%, p = 0.318). Multivariable analysis showed that CSPO significantly contributed to higher satisfaction with anal function (beta = 1.752, 95% CI 0.776-2.728) and with quality of life (beta = 1.219, 95% CI 0.374-2.064), but not to Wexner, LARS score, or EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR38. CONCLUSION: CSPO improved the satisfaction with anal function and quality of life but utilized more preoperative chemoradiotherapy. CSPO may be an alternative choice for patients with very low rectal cancers in better physical health and with higher requirements for anal function and quality of life.

Sphincter preservation operation and comprehensive treatment for ultra-low rectal cancer / 中华消化外科杂志

In the past 20 years, the multidisciplinary treatment model based on evidence-based medicine has significantly increased the rate of sphincter-preservation operation for rectal cancer. How to preserve rectum and anal function, avoid permanent colostomy, and improve post-operative quality of life of patients while ensuring radical resection of tumor, remains to be a key and hot topic in surgical treatment of rectal cancer. Based on literatures and clinical experiences, the authors summarize issues of sphincter preservation operation and comprehensive treatment, including intersphincteric resection, conformal sphincter preservation operation, total neoadjuvant therapy and radioimmunotherapy, for ultra-low rectal cancer, in order to provide reference for the colleagues.

Trends of sphincter-preserving surgeries for low lying rectal cancer: A 20-year experience in China.

Background: Over the last 2 decades, patients with low rectal cancer have had better outcomes from improvements in surgical techniques in sphincter preservation. We aimed to quantify the trends in sphincter-preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer over 20 years in a top tertiary hospital in China. Methods: Between 1999 and 2021, a cohort of patients with primary malignant rectal tumor ≤5cm from the anal verge and who received elective surgeries at Changhai Hospital, Shanghai, China, was identified. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. A Joinpoint Regression Model was used to analyze trends in surgical procedures by average annual percentage change (AAPC). Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess overall survival. Results: Among a total of 4,172 patients during the study period, 3,111 (74.6%) underwent a sphincter-preserving surgery and 1,061 (25.4%) received APR. Sphincter-preserving surgery increased 3.6% per year (95%CI, 2.3-4.9). Low anterior resection was the most performed procedure (86.3%) and maintained a steady trend, while intersphincteric resection increased 49.4% annually (95%CI, 19.5-86.7) after initiation. Laparoscopic techniques increased 15.1% per year (95%CI, 8.4-43.4) after initiation. Sphincter-preserving surgery increased annually for tumors ≤2cm, 2-≤3cm and 3-≤4cm from the anal verge (AAPC 7.1, 4.5-9.8; 4.7, 3.1-6.3; 2.7, 1.7-3.6, respectively). Furthermore, patients with sphincter-preserving surgery had a better overall survival than abdominoperineal resection (APR) patients (adjusted HR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.65-0.93, p=.01). Conclusions: Utilization of sphincter-preserving surgeries increased significantly over the last 20 years. Patients with low rectal cancer who underwent sphincter preservation had better survival than similar patients who underwent APR.

[Reassessment of intersphincteric resection in the sphincter-preserving operation for ultra-low rectal cancer].

Intersphincteric resection (ISR), as an ultra-low sphincter-preserving operation, is widely used in clinical practice at present. ISR can allow some patients with very low rectal cancer to avoid the pain of anal resection while ensuring oncological efficacy. However, the procedure of ISR requires wider intersphincteric dissection which may cause nerve damage, and the removal of partial or total internal anal sphincter as an "inherent defect" of ISR can result in poor anal function postoperatively. Based on the in-depth understanding of regional anatomy and physiological function, the author proposed a new functional sphincter preservation operation for very low rectal cancer-conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) which has achieved good outcome in clinical practice. This article will revisit the brief history of rectal cancer surgery and discuss the main mechanisms underlining the poor anal function after ISR. Based on the anatomical study of the pelvic floor and anal canal, CSPO can improve the postoperative anal function of very low rectal cancer patients by reducing the damage of the autonomic nerves, receptor corpuscles and muscle fibers in the intersphincteric space, retaining more dentate line and internal sphincter with the design of resection line of tumor lower border under direct vision, and elevating the anastomosis height. At the same time, the future treatment prospect of low rectal cancer is envisioned.

Evaluation of the learning curve for conformal sphincter preservation operation in the treatment of ultralow rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the learning curve of conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) in the treatment of ultralow rectal cancer and to further explore the influencing factors of operation time. METHODS: From August 2011 to April 2020, 108 consecutive patients with ultralow rectal cancer underwent CSPO by the same surgeon in the Department of Colorectal Surgery of Changhai Hospital. The moving average and cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) curve were used to analyze the learning curve. The preoperative clinical baseline data, postoperative pathological data, postoperative complications, and survival data were compared before and after the completion of learning curve. The influencing factors of CSPO operation time were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: According to the results of moving average and CUSUM method, CSPO learning curve was divided into learning period (1-45 cases) and learning completion period (46-108 cases). There was no significant difference in preoperative clinical baseline data, postoperative pathological data, postoperative complications, and survival data between the two stages. Compared with the learning period, the operation time (P < 0.05), blood loss (P < 0.05), postoperative flatus and defecation time (P < 0.05), liquid diet time (P < 0.05), and postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05) in the learning completion period were significantly reduced, and the difference was statistically significant. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that distance of tumor from anal verge (≥ 4cm vs. < 4cm, P = 0.039) and T stage (T3 vs. T1-2, P = 0.022) was independent risk factors for prolonging the operation time of CSPO. CONCLUSIONS: For surgeons with laparoscopic surgery experience, about 45 cases of CSPO are needed to cross the learning curve. At the initial stage of CSPO, beginners are recommended to select patients with ultralow rectal cancer whose distance of tumor from anal verge is less than 4 cm and tumor stage is less than T3 for practice, which can enable beginners to reduce the operation time, accumulate experience, build self-confidence, and shorten the learning curve on the premise of safety.

Application of Transumbilical Laparoscopic Surgery on Low/Ultralow Rectal Cancer for Anal Sphincter Preservation.

Background: Rectal cancer is a common malignant tumor in the gastrointestinal tract. This work compares the effects of transumbilical laparoscopic surgery (TULS) and laparoscopic-assisted surgery on the anus-preserving effect of low/ultralow rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: Eighty patients with rectal cancer admitted to our hospital from February 2011 to July 2016 were randomly selected and divided into the laparoscopic group and TULS group, 40 cases in each group, all underwent radical anorectal cancer radical surgery. Statistical analysis was performed on surgical-related indicators in the two groups. Results: Two patients converted to open surgery were excluded. Five patients were excluded because of radical abdomen perineal resection for rectal cancer. Six patients were converted to TULS from laparoscopic surgery. Sixty-seven patients in the experimental group successfully completed anus-sparing surgery, and none died during the operation. The compliance rate of the distance between the lower edge of the tumor and the incision edge of the specimen in the TULS group was better than that in the laparoscopic group (P < .05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of surgical time, blood loss, number of lymph node dissections, functional time of voluntary defecation and postoperative complications, tumor-free recurrence rate at 3 years, and 3-year survival rate after surgery (P > .05). Conclusions: The TULS method is safe and feasible in low and ultralow rectal cancer surgery. It has more advantages than laparoscopic-assisted surgery for anus preservation.

Clinical application of terminal ileum suspension in laparoscopic radical resection for low rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: This paper introduces the surgical procedure of "terminal ileum suspension" in the radical resection for low rectal cancer patients and evaluates the possibility of its clinical application. METHODS: This paper retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with low rectal cancer who underwent "terminal ileum suspension" during radical resection of rectal cancer (Dixon) in our hospital, and introduces the specific surgical procedures and key points of "terminal ileum suspension". Observe the relevant conditions of patients during the operation, postoperative recovery and postoperative complications, and analyze the safety and feasibility of this operation ("terminal ileum suspension"). RESULTS: The operation of all 8 patients went smoothly, and no anastomotic leakage, intestinal obstruction, and open diversion of suspended terminal ileum were found. The application of "terminal ileum suspension" in the operation of low rectal cancer has achieved ideal clinical effect, without increasing the rate of anastomotic leakage and rehospitalization, reducing the proportion of the secondary return operation, and reducing the pain of the patients. CONCLUSION: "Terminal ileum suspension" is a safe, effective and feasible surgical method for laparoscopic radical resection of low rectal cancer, which can be applied in clinical practice.

Real-world comparison of curative open, laparoscopic and robotic resections for sigmoid and rectal cancer-single center experience.

There has been an increase in the utilization of robotic surgery in addition to traditional open or laparoscopic approaches. Aim of this study is to compare the short-term outcomes for open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery for rectal and sigmoid cancer. One hundred and forty-seven patients (open n = 48, laparoscopic n = 49, robotic n = 50) undergoing curative resections by two surgeons between 2013 and 2020 were included. Data analyzed included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, length of stay, post-operative outcomes, and pathologic surrogates of oncologic results, including total mesorectal excision (TME) quality, circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement and lymph node (LN) yield. Median age of population was 68 years (IQR 59-73), majority (68%) were males. Median distance from anal verge in the robotic surgery group was 8 cm, compared to 15 and 14.5 cm in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively, p = 0.029, (laparoscopic vs robotic, p = 0.005 and open vs robotic, p = 0.027). Proportion of patients who received neoadjuvant radiotherapy in robotic surgery group was higher, p = 0.04. In sub-group of tumors between 3 and 7 cm from anal verge more patients in the robotic surgery group had sphincter preservation, p = 0.006. Length of stay, maximum C-reactive protein, and white blood cell rise favored minimally invasive approaches compared to open surgery. There were no differences in post-operative complications, lymph node yield or CRM positivity rate between the three groups. Robotic surgery approach is safe and allows sphincter preservation without compromising TME quality in rectal cancer surgery.

Current status of total neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus total mesorectal excision (TME) has been the standard regimen for treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), because it significantly reduces the rate of local recurrence and enables sphincter preservation. However, distant metastasis remains the major reason for treatment failure, and the value of postoperative chemotherapy is still controversial. Recent studies have examined the use of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), defined as induction and/or consolidation chemotherapy (CONCT) with radiotherapy (RT) or nCRT prior to surgery. The results indicated that TNT may increase the rates of chemotherapy compliance and pathological complete response (pCR), and probably improve the success rate of sphincter preservation surgery. TNT may also improve disease-free survival and overall survival, and even reduce the rate of relapse. Here, we critically appraise the existing literature on three different TNT schemes used for LARC patients.

Reassessment of intersphincteric resection in the sphincter-preserving operation for ultra-low rectal cancer / 中华胃肠外科杂志

Intersphincteric resection (ISR), as an ultra-low sphincter-preserving operation, is widely used in clinical practice at present. ISR can allow some patients with very low rectal cancer to avoid the pain of anal resection while ensuring oncological efficacy. However, the procedure of ISR requires wider intersphincteric dissection which may cause nerve damage, and the removal of partial or total internal anal sphincter as an "inherent defect" of ISR can result in poor anal function postoperatively. Based on the in-depth understanding of regional anatomy and physiological function, the author proposed a new functional sphincter preservation operation for very low rectal cancer-conformal sphincter preservation operation (CSPO) which has achieved good outcome in clinical practice. This article will revisit the brief history of rectal cancer surgery and discuss the main mechanisms underlining the poor anal function after ISR. Based on the anatomical study of the pelvic floor and anal canal, CSPO can improve the postoperative anal function of very low rectal cancer patients by reducing the damage of the autonomic nerves, receptor corpuscles and muscle fibers in the intersphincteric space, retaining more dentate line and internal sphincter with the design of resection line of tumor lower border under direct vision, and elevating the anastomosis height. At the same time, the future treatment prospect of low rectal cancer is envisioned.

The Evolving Strategy of Californium-252 Neutron Intracavitary Brachytherapy in Treating Patients With Low-Lying T2 or T3 Rectal Adenocarcinoma: From Fixed to Individualized Regime With Intrarectal Peritumoral Injection of Amifostine.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively and comparatively evaluate the improvement of the efficacy and safety on the addition of 252Cf neutron intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT), individualized or individualized with intrarectal peritumoral injection of amifostine (IPIA) to external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or concurrent chemo-EBRT in 314 patients with T2N0-1 or T3N0-1 low-lying rectal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Phase I: from 2009 to 2011, 157 patients were treated with additional 252Cf neutron ICBT for four fixed fractions with a total dose of 40-45 Gy-eq during the EBRT. Phase II: from 2011 to 2013, 75 patients were treated with individualized neutron ICBT delivered for two to five fractions with a total dose of 26-45 Gy-eq according to the response of tumor after concurrent chemo-EBRT. Phase III: from 2013 to 2014, 82 patients were treated with individualized ICBT protected by pretreatment IPIA. RESULTS: The 4-year local control rates for the entire T2 and T3 patients were 69.4, 72.0, and 79.3%, while the 4-year overall survival rates were 63.1, 54.7, and 72.0% (P=0.08), and the 4-year disease-free survival rates were 55.4, 52.0, and 69.5% (P=0.053) in Phases I, II, and III, respectively. The late complication (LAC, ≥G2) rates were 33.8, 26.7, and 15.9%, respectively (P=0.012), and the serious LAC (≥G3) rates were 4.5, 4.2, and 0%, respectively, in Phases I, II, and III. CONCLUSION: Concurrent chemo-EBRT combined with individualized 252Cf neutron ICBT protected by IPIA shows promising efficacy and safety in treating low-lying T2 and T3 rectal adenocarcinoma patients without surgery opportunity or willing.

External sphincter-sparing anal fistulotomy (ESSAF): a simplified technique for the treatment of fistula-in-ano.

BACKGROUND: Fistula-in-ano due to cryptoglandular disease is a common condition. While a simple anal fistula can be treated successfully by a fistulotomy, the risk of potential damage to the anal sphincters and subsequent poor functional outcomes persist in a large portion of patients with complex fistulae. Several sphincter-preserving treatment procedures have been described for complex fistulae over the past 3 decades, with variable results and complication rates, and no procedure is proven to be superior to the others. We developed external sphincter-sparing anal fistulotomy (ESSAF), a reproducible simple modification of the ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) technique for the treatment of complex fistula-in-ano.. The aim of the present study was to describe the technique and our outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of all patients who underwent ESSAF for a complex anal fistula at our institution from January 2014 to December 2019. The primary outcome measure of this study was the primary fistula healing rate. Secondary outcome measures included fecal and/or gas incontinence and postoperative complications. During the ESSAF procedure, the mucosa and skin overlying the fistula tract are incised to allow complete exposure of the sphincter complex. Then the internal sphincter muscle fibers overlying the tract are divided and the tract is meticulously curetted and debrided. Next, the internal opening of the tract traversing the external sphincter muscle is suture-ligated with absorbable sutures. Then, a minimal amount of mucosa is advanced and the incision is partially closed with absorbable sutures, while its external portion is left open for drainage. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients [43 males, median age was 50 years (range 36-63 years)] underwent ESSAF for complex anal fistula during the study period. Mean follow-up was 12 ± 14.7 months. Of the 59 patients, 42 (71.2%) experienced fistula closure, with a median healing time of 8 weeks (IQR 4-16 weeks). None of the patients developed significant anal incontinence following the procedure. One patient (1.7%) suffered from soiling and another patient (1.7%) developed postoperative bleeding. There were no infectious complications. Of the 17 patients (28.8%) who failed to heal successfully, 9 (15.2%) did not heal primarily and 8 (16%) experienced recurrence after complete healing. Thirteen (76%) of these patients underwent reoperation with complete recovery after ESSAF (n = 4), fistulotomy (n = 8) or endorectal advancement flap (ERAF) (n = 1). Overall ESSAF initiated recovery in 93.2% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: ESSAF is a feasible, safe, reproducible and effective sphincter-sparing procedure for the treatment of complex anal fistulae.

Impact of body-mass index on treatment and outcome in locally advanced rectal cancer: A secondary, post-hoc analysis of the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: A better understanding of the impact of body-mass index (BMI) on the course of multimodal therapy and oncologic outcome in locally advanced rectal cancer could provide new insights for optimization of treatment and supportive strategies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Correlations of BMI with pretreatment clinical, surgical, and pathological characteristics, toxicity and treatment adherence using the Pearson's Chi-squared test or logistic regression were analyzed in the CAO/ARO/AIO-04 III trial cohort (n = 1236). One-way ANOVA or Welch test were used to analyze correlations of baseline blood-parameters and BMI. The prognostic role of BMI was examined with log-rank test and multivariate cox regression. RESULTS: Obese had a better ECOG performance status (P = 0.027) but were less likely to undergo sphincter preserving surgery (P = 0.01). Post-surgical complications did not differ significantly between BMI classes, whereas underweight was associated with increased neutrophil (P = 0.025) and platelet counts (P < 0.001), poorer TME quality (P = 0.007) and increased incidence of acute organ toxicity (P < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 50 months, underweight [HR 1.896, P = 0.014] and overweight [HR 1.392, P = 0.042] were associated with worse DFS. Obese patients had an increased risk of death [HR 1.653, P = 0.032]. Normalweight men showed superior OS compared to underweight [HR 4.070, P = 0.002], overweight [HR 2.077, P = 0.010], severe overweight [HR 1.886, P = 0.026] and obese [HR 2.046, P = 0.015] men. Adding oxaliplatin to standard CRT significantly improved DFS in obese patients (P = 0.034). CONCLUSION: In our study, underweight and overweight correlated with inferior DFS, underweight experienced more organ toxicity and obesity was associated with an increased risk of abdominoperineal resection and poorer overall survival.