BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer has led to improved tumor downstaging and higher complete pathologic response rates. At the same time, the introduction of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) technique has renewed interest in local excision of rectal cancer. There has been concern that radiation may make the more radical local excision with TEM unsuitable. Our study compared morbidity rates and wound complication rates for patients undergoing TEM and local excision with and without neoadjuvant radiation to determine whether this could be accomplished safely. METHODS: Data for all patients undergoing TEM are prospectively entered into a database. This database was queried for patients with rectal cancer undergoing TEM from November 1997 to June 2007. Of 64 patients identified, 2 were excluded because of previous radiation to the pelvis. RESULTS: The study enrolled 62 patients with a final pathologic diagnosis of rectal cancer: 43 treated using neoadjuvant therapy with radiation (XRT) and 19 patients treated with TEM alone. The patients in the XRT group were 67 years of age (range, 29-86 years) and included 13 women. The patients in the non-XRT group were 66 years of age (range, 40-89 years) and included 8 women. Neither group had any mortalities. The overall morbidity rate was 33% for the XRT group and 5.3% for the non-XRT group, and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The wound complication rates were 25.6% for the XRT group (11 patients) and 0% for the non-XRT group (p = 0.015). Nine patients in the XRT group (82%) had minor wound separations, and two patients (18%) had major wound separation. Ten patients with wound separations were treated as outpatients and administered long-term oral antibiotics. One patient required additional surgery (diverting stoma). CONCLUSIONS: Not unexpectedly, the wound complication rate was higher in the XRT group. However, 82% of those wounds were minor, and 91% were treated without any additional surgery or intervention. Although a significant concern, wound complications do not prohibit TEM treatment after neoadjuvant treatment.
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer has led to improved tumor downstaging and higher complete pathologic response rates. At the same time, the introduction of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) technique has renewed interest in local excision of rectal cancer. There has been concern that radiation may make the more radical local excision with TEM unsuitable. Our study compared morbidity rates and wound complication rates for patients undergoing TEM and local excision with and without neoadjuvant radiation to determine whether this could be accomplished safely. METHODS: Data for all patients undergoing TEM are prospectively entered into a database. This database was queried for patients with rectal cancer undergoing TEM from November 1997 to June 2007. Of 64 patients identified, 2 were excluded because of previous radiation to the pelvis. RESULTS: The study enrolled 62 patients with a final pathologic diagnosis of rectal cancer: 43 treated using neoadjuvant therapy with radiation (XRT) and 19 patients treated with TEM alone. The patients in the XRT group were 67 years of age (range, 29-86 years) and included 13 women. The patients in the non-XRT group were 66 years of age (range, 40-89 years) and included 8 women. Neither group had any mortalities. The overall morbidity rate was 33% for the XRT group and 5.3% for the non-XRT group, and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The wound complication rates were 25.6% for the XRT group (11 patients) and 0% for the non-XRT group (p = 0.015). Nine patients in the XRT group (82%) had minor wound separations, and two patients (18%) had major wound separation. Ten patients with wound separations were treated as outpatients and administered long-term oral antibiotics. One patient required additional surgery (diverting stoma). CONCLUSIONS: Not unexpectedly, the wound complication rate was higher in the XRT group. However, 82% of those wounds were minor, and 91% were treated without any additional surgery or intervention. Although a significant concern, wound complications do not prohibit TEM treatment after neoadjuvant treatment.
Authors: N A Janjan; V S Khoo; J Abbruzzese; R Pazdur; R Dubrow; K R Cleary; P K Allen; P M Lynch; G Glober; R Wolff; T A Rich; J Skibber Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: C J Kim; T J Yeatman; D Coppola; A Trotti; B Williams; J S Barthel; W Dinwoodie; R C Karl; J Marcet Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: M Caricato; D Borzomati; F Ausania; G Tonini; C Rabitti; S Valeri; L Trodella; V Ripetti; R Coppola Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2006-05-15 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: M Guerrieri; F Feliciotti; M Baldarelli; P Zenobi; A De Sanctis; G Lezoche; E Lezoche Journal: Dig Liver Dis Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 4.088
Authors: G Rizzo; D P Pafundi; F Sionne; L D'Agostino; G Pietricola; M A Gambacorta; V Valentini; C Coco Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2021-01-18 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Qian Shi; Charles R Thomas; Emily Chan; Peter Cataldo; Jorge Marcet; David Medich; Alessio Pigazzi; Samuel Oommen; Mitchell C Posner Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-07-14 Impact factor: 5.344