Literature DB >> 25203373

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery with entrance into the peritoneal cavity: is it safe?

John H Marks1, Joseph L Frenkel, Christopher E Greenleaf, Anthony P D'Andrea.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Relative contraindications for transanal endoscopic microsurgery include high, anterior-based lesions for full-thickness excisions because of worries about entering the peritoneal cavity. Concerns exist regarding safety and oncological outcome.
OBJECTIVE: We examined the outcomes of transanal endoscopic microsurgery excisions with entry into the peritoneal cavity and compared them with those that did not to address our hypothesis that entry is safe with no ill infectious or oncological consequences.
DESIGN: This single-institution retrospective review uses a prospectively maintained database. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a tertiary colorectal surgery referral center. PATIENTS: From 1997 to 2012, we identified 303 patients who underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgery resections, with 26 patients having entrance into the peritoneal cavity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative data, postoperative morbidities, delayed morbidities, and oncological outcomes were the primary outcomes measured.
RESULTS: Of 26 patients, there were 8 women with a mean age of 67.5 years. Mean BMI was 31 kg/m, and ASA class was III or IV in 69%. Mean superior border of the lesion was 10.4 cm (4.5-16). Forty-eight percent had anterior-based lesions. Anterior location, level from anorectal ring, and diagnosis of cancer were significantly higher in the peritoneal entry group (p = 0.003, p = 0.007, and p = 0.007). Preoperative diagnoses included 16 adenocarcinomas, 8 polyps, and 2 carcinoid tumors. Thirteen patients had preoperative chemoradiation. Median estimated blood loss was 15 mL (5-400), and 3 patients underwent diversions. Median time to discharge was 3 days (2-10). There were no perioperative mortalities. Median follow-up time was 21.0 months. There was 1 local recurrence (3.8%), and there was no development of carcinomatosis. LIMITATIONS: This review was limited by its retrospective nature.
CONCLUSIONS: High anterior location rectal lesions should be considered candidates for transanal endoscopic microsurgery excision in experienced hands. After obtaining considerable transanal endoscopic microsurgery experience, our use of transanal endoscopic microsurgery in a high-risk patient population allowed us to definitively treat 88% of patients without an abdominal operation and the need for a temporary or permanent colostomy. Theoretic concerns of abscess or carcinomatosis were not experienced (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A154).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25203373     DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000208

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  18 in total

1.  Transanal endoscopic resection with peritoneal entry: a word of caution.

Authors:  George Molina; Liliana Bordeianou; Paul Shellito; Patricia Sylla
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Transanal endoscopic resection with peritoneal entry: a word of reason.

Authors:  J P Burke; S Atallah; M R Albert
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 3.  Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer: T1 and beyond? An evidence-based review.

Authors:  Marco E Allaix; Alberto Arezzo; Mario Morino
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Laparoscopy following peritoneal entry during transanal endoscopic microsurgery may increase the safety and maximize the benefits of the transanal excision.

Authors:  N Issa; Y Fenig; M Yasin; H Schmilovitz-Weiss; W Khoury; E Powsner
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 5.  [Management of complications in anal and transanal tumor surgery].

Authors:  M Sailer; S Eisoldt; C Möllmann
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM for resection of intraluminal rectal tumors.

Authors:  F Van den Eynde; J Jaekers; S Fieuws; A M D'Hoore; A M Wolthuis
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2019-03-11       Impact factor: 3.781

7.  Direct target NOTES: prospective applications for next generation robotic platforms.

Authors:  S Atallah; A Hodges; S W Larach
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 3.781

8.  First clinical experience with single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) for benign rectal neoplasms.

Authors:  J H Marks; E Kunkel; J F Salem; C Martin; B Anderson; S Agarwal
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2020-10-17       Impact factor: 3.781

9.  Transanal TATA/TME: a case-matched study of taTME versus laparoscopic TME surgery for rectal cancer.

Authors:  J H Marks; G A Montenegro; J F Salem; M V Shields; G J Marks
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2016-05-13       Impact factor: 3.781

10.  Robotic transanal surgery (RTAS) with utilization of a next-generation single-port system: a cadaveric feasibility study.

Authors:  J Marks; S Ng; T Mak
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 3.781

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.