George Molina1, Liliana Bordeianou1, Paul Shellito1, Patricia Sylla2. 1. Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, 5 East 98th Street Box 1249, New York, NY, 10029, USA. patricia.sylla@mountsinai.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Peritoneal entry during transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) can usually be managed transanally with full-thickness suture closure by experienced operators. The preliminary safety of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) has been demonstrated, but the reported experience with upper rectal tumors is limited. The incidence and management of peritoneal entry during transanal endoscopic surgery across various platforms have not been previously evaluated. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of all transanal endoscopic resections performed at a single institution between January 2008 and December 2014 was conducted. Cases with and without peritoneal entry were evaluated with respect to transanal platform used, surgical indication, size, location and distance from the anal verge, and incidence of postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 78 transanal endoscopic procedures were performed on 76 patients using the rigid transanal endoscopic operation (TEO, 65.4 %), TEM (26.9 %), and TAMIS platform (7.7 %). The most common surgical indication included endoscopically unresectable adenomas (50 %). The average distance of lesions from the anal verge (AV) was 9.6 cm (range 4-20 cm). Peritoneal entry occurred in 22 cases (28.2 %). Platform used (TAMIS vs. rigid, p < 0.05), mean distance from the AV (p < 0.0001), location along the rectum (p = 0.01), and mean specimen size (p = 0.01) were associated with a higher likelihood of peritoneal entry. All rectal defects associated with peritoneal entry were successfully closed transanally except for two (TEM and TEO) cases that required conversion to laparoscopic low anterior resection and laparoscopic Hartmann's, respectively. There were four TAMIS cases that required conversion to TEO platforms. CONCLUSION: In this high-risk TEM, TEO, and TAMIS series (one-third of rectal lesions located in the upper rectum), 91 % of all peritoneal entries were managed transanally without increased morbidity. TAMIS for upper rectal lesions was associated with a high risk of complicated peritoneal entry requiring conversion to a rigid platform.
BACKGROUND: Peritoneal entry during transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) can usually be managed transanally with full-thickness suture closure by experienced operators. The preliminary safety of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) has been demonstrated, but the reported experience with upper rectal tumors is limited. The incidence and management of peritoneal entry during transanal endoscopic surgery across various platforms have not been previously evaluated. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of all transanal endoscopic resections performed at a single institution between January 2008 and December 2014 was conducted. Cases with and without peritoneal entry were evaluated with respect to transanal platform used, surgical indication, size, location and distance from the anal verge, and incidence of postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 78 transanal endoscopic procedures were performed on 76 patients using the rigid transanal endoscopic operation (TEO, 65.4 %), TEM (26.9 %), and TAMIS platform (7.7 %). The most common surgical indication included endoscopically unresectable adenomas (50 %). The average distance of lesions from the anal verge (AV) was 9.6 cm (range 4-20 cm). Peritoneal entry occurred in 22 cases (28.2 %). Platform used (TAMIS vs. rigid, p < 0.05), mean distance from the AV (p < 0.0001), location along the rectum (p = 0.01), and mean specimen size (p = 0.01) were associated with a higher likelihood of peritoneal entry. All rectal defects associated with peritoneal entry were successfully closed transanally except for two (TEM and TEO) cases that required conversion to laparoscopic low anterior resection and laparoscopic Hartmann's, respectively. There were four TAMIS cases that required conversion to TEO platforms. CONCLUSION: In this high-risk TEM, TEO, and TAMIS series (one-third of rectal lesions located in the upper rectum), 91 % of all peritoneal entries were managed transanally without increased morbidity. TAMIS for upper rectal lesions was associated with a high risk of complicated peritoneal entry requiring conversion to a rigid platform.
Authors: Eelco J R de Graaf; Pascal G Doornebosch; Geert W M Tetteroo; Han Geldof; Wim C J Hop Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: I E Gorgun; I Emre Gorgun; Erman Aytac; Meagan M Costedio; Hasan H Erem; Michael A Valente; Luca Stocchi Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-11-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: E J R de Graaf; J W A Burger; A L A van Ijsseldijk; G W M Tetteroo; I Dawson; W C J Hop Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2010-03-23 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Daniel J Eyvazzadeh; Janet T Lee; Robert D Madoff; Anders F Mellgren; Charles O Finne Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Anjali S Kumar; Jasna Coralic; Deirdre C Kelleher; Shafik Sidani; Kirthi Kolli; Lee E Smith Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Renée M Barendse; Marcel G Dijkgraaf; Ursula R Rolf; Arnold B Bijnen; Esther C J Consten; Christiaan Hoff; Evelien Dekker; Paul Fockens; Willem A Bemelman; Eelco J R de Graaf Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-04-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: X Serra-Aracil; R Flores-Clotet; L Mora-López; A Pallisera-Lloveras; S Serra-Pla; S Navarro-Soto Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2019-08-28 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Jonas D Senft; Philip Gath; Tilman Dröscher; Philip C Müller; Benedict Carstensen; Felix Nickel; Beat P Müller-Stich; Georg R Linke Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-04-08 Impact factor: 4.584