Bernard Lelong1, Hélène Meillat2, Christophe Zemmour3, Flora Poizat4, Jacques Ewald2, Diane Mege2, Jean-Claude Lelong5, Jean Robert Delpero2, Cécile de Chaisemartin2. 1. Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France. Electronic address: lelongb@ipc.unicancer.fr. 2. Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France. 3. Department of Clinical Research and Innovation, Biostatistics and Methodology Unit, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France. 4. Department of Biopathology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France. 5. INSERM Unit U1124, Paris V-Descartes University, Paris, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transabdominal laparoscopic proctectomy (LAP) for rectal cancer was associated with postoperative recovery improvement. Early studies showed favorable short-term results of endoscopic transanal proctectomy (ETAP), with low conversion rates to open procedures. We aimed to compare efficacy, morbidity, and functional outcomes of ETAP to standard LAP for low rectal cancer. STUDY DESIGN: From 2008 to 2013, 72 consecutive patients received proctectomy and coloanal manual anastomosis for low rectal adenocarcinoma. Thirty-four patients had transanal endoscopic proctectomy, and 38 patients underwent the standard laparoscopic procedure. RESULTS: When compared with the LAP group, the ETAP group demonstrated a lower conversion rate to open procedures (23.7% vs 2.9%, respectively; p = 0.015), shorter in-hospital stays (9 vs 8 days, respectively; p = 0.04), and a lower readmission rate (13.2% vs 0%; p = 0.03). Overall postoperative morbidity rates for the LAP and the ETAP groups (36.8% vs 32.4%, respectively; p = 0.69) and functional results (Kirwan score 1/2, 73.7% vs 73.5%, respectively; p = 0.85) were comparable; additionally, we found similar oncologic quality criteria (R1 resection 10.5% vs 5.9%, respectively; p = 0.68; grade 3 mesorectal integrity 52.6% vs 55.9%, respectively; p = 0.66). Disease-free survival of 24 months (Kaplan-Meier estimation) was comparable in the 2 groups: 86% in the ETAP group vs 88% in the LAP group; p = 0.91. At the date of last follow-up, 91.2% of ETAP patients and 92.1% of LAP patients were free of stoma. CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic transanal approach could facilitate mesorectal excision and improve short-term outcomes without impairing the oncologic quality of the resection or mid-term functional and oncologic results.
BACKGROUND: Transabdominal laparoscopic proctectomy (LAP) for rectal cancer was associated with postoperative recovery improvement. Early studies showed favorable short-term results of endoscopic transanal proctectomy (ETAP), with low conversion rates to open procedures. We aimed to compare efficacy, morbidity, and functional outcomes of ETAP to standard LAP for low rectal cancer. STUDY DESIGN: From 2008 to 2013, 72 consecutive patients received proctectomy and coloanal manual anastomosis for low rectal adenocarcinoma. Thirty-four patients had transanal endoscopic proctectomy, and 38 patients underwent the standard laparoscopic procedure. RESULTS: When compared with the LAP group, the ETAP group demonstrated a lower conversion rate to open procedures (23.7% vs 2.9%, respectively; p = 0.015), shorter in-hospital stays (9 vs 8 days, respectively; p = 0.04), and a lower readmission rate (13.2% vs 0%; p = 0.03). Overall postoperative morbidity rates for the LAP and the ETAP groups (36.8% vs 32.4%, respectively; p = 0.69) and functional results (Kirwan score 1/2, 73.7% vs 73.5%, respectively; p = 0.85) were comparable; additionally, we found similar oncologic quality criteria (R1 resection 10.5% vs 5.9%, respectively; p = 0.68; grade 3 mesorectal integrity 52.6% vs 55.9%, respectively; p = 0.66). Disease-free survival of 24 months (Kaplan-Meier estimation) was comparable in the 2 groups: 86% in the ETAP group vs 88% in the LAP group; p = 0.91. At the date of last follow-up, 91.2% of ETAPpatients and 92.1% of LAP patients were free of stoma. CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic transanal approach could facilitate mesorectal excision and improve short-term outcomes without impairing the oncologic quality of the resection or mid-term functional and oncologic results.
Authors: Bernard Lelong; Cécile de Chaisemartin; Helene Meillat; Sandra Cournier; Jean Marie Boher; Dominique Genre; Mehdi Karoui; Jean Jacques Tuech; Jean Robert Delpero Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: F B de Lacy; S X Roodbeen; J Ríos; J van Laarhoven; A Otero-Piñeiro; R Bravo; T Visser; R van Poppel; S Valverde; R Hompes; C Sietses; A Castells; W A Bemelman; P J Tanis; A M Lacy Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Mateusz Rubinkiewicz; Agata Czerwińska; Piotr Zarzycki; Piotr Małczak; Michał Nowakowski; Piotr Major; Andrzej Budzyński; Michał Pędziwiatr Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 4.241