Literature DB >> 16361623

Low rectal cancer: a call for a change of approach in abdominoperineal resection.

Iris D Nagtegaal1, Cornelius J H van de Velde, Corrie A M Marijnen, Jan H J M van Krieken, Philip Quirke.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Despite the major improvements that have been made due to total mesorectal excision (TME), low rectal cancer still remains a challenge.
METHODS: By investigating a prospective randomized rectal cancer trial in which surgeons had undergone training in TME the factors responsible for the poor outcome were determined and a new method for assessing the quality of surgery was tested.
RESULTS: Survival differed greatly between abdominoperineal resection (APR) and anterior resection (AR; 38.5% v 57.6%, P = .008). Low rectal carcinomas have a higher frequency of circumferential margin involvement (26.5% v 12.6%, P < .001). More positive margins were present in the patients operated with APR (30.4%) compared to AR (10.7%, P = .002). Furthermore, more perforations were present in these specimens (13.7% v 2.5%, P < .001). The plane of resection lies within the sphincteric muscle, the submucosa or lumen in more than 1/3 of the APR cases, and in the remainder lay on the sphincteric muscles.
CONCLUSION: We systematically described and investigated the pathologic properties of low rectal cancer in general, and APR in particular, in a prospective randomized trial including surgeons who had been trained in TME. The poor prognosis of the patients with an APR is ascribed to the resection plane of the operation leading to a high frequency of margin involvement by tumor and perforation with this current surgical technique. The clinical results of this operation could be greatly improved by adopting different surgical techniques and possibly greater use of radiochemotherapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16361623     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.9231

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  141 in total

1.  Reconstruction of the irradiated extended abdominoperineal excision (APE) defect for locally advanced colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Mark A Boccola; Warren Matthew Rozen; Edmund W Ek; Damien Grinsell; Matthew A Croxford
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2011-03

2.  A prospective case-control study of extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) of the rectum versus conventional laparoscopic and open abdominoperineal excision: comparative analysis of short-term outcomes and quality of life.

Authors:  P G Vaughan-Shaw; T Cheung; J S Knight; P H Nichols; S A Pilkington; A H Mirnezami
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 3.781

3.  Adjuvant radiotherapy following total mesorectal excision for stage IIA rectal cancer: is it beneficial?

Authors:  Jin Soo Kim; Nam Kyu Kim; Byung Soh Min; Hyuk Hur; Joong Bae Ahn; Ki Chang Keum
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-06-11       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Oncological outcome after incidental perforation in radical rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Fredrik Jörgren; Robert Johansson; Lena Damber; Gudrun Lindmark
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-03-27       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Effects of change in rectal cancer management on outcomes in British Columbia.

Authors:  P Terry Phang; Colleen E McGahan; Greg McGregor; John K MacFarlane; Carl J Brown; Manoj J Raval; Rona Cheifetz; John H Hay
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  Biological mesh reconstruction of perineal wounds following enhanced abdominoperineal excision of rectum (APER).

Authors:  Oliver Peacock; H Pandya; T Sharp; N G Hurst; W J Speake; G M Tierney; J N Lund
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 7.  The total mesorectal excision specimen for rectal cancer: a review of its pathological assessment.

Authors:  Jeremy R Parfitt; David K Driman
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2006-10-17       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Extralevator Abdominal Perineal Excision Versus Standard Abdominal Perineal Excision: Impact on Quality of the Resected Specimen and Postoperative Morbidity.

Authors:  Angelita Habr-Gama; Guilherme P São Julião; Adrian Mattacheo; Luiz Felipe de Campos-Lobato; Edgar Aleman; Bruna B Vailati; Joaquim Gama-Rodrigues; Rodrigo Oliva Perez
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 9.  Advances and challenges in treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Authors:  J Joshua Smith; Julio Garcia-Aguilar
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  MRI staging of low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Oliver C Shihab; Brendan J Moran; Richard J Heald; Philip Quirke; Gina Brown
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-09-23       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.