Literature DB >> 28924962

The Impact of Tumour Distance From the Anal Verge on Clinical Management and Outcomes in Patients Having a Curative Resection for Rectal Cancer.

Muhammad Amir Saeed Khan1, Chin W Ang2, Abdul Rahman Hakeem2, Nigel Scott3, Rick Nigel Saunders2, Ian Botterill2.   

Abstract

AIM: The clinico-oncological significance of the distance of rectal cancer from the anal verge is unclear and not well reported. The aim of this study is to assess the influence of the rectal cancer distance from the anal verge on clinical management and long-term outcomes after curative resection in a specialised colorectal cancer unit.
METHODS: Prospectively collected data on patients who underwent primary rectal cancer treatment at our unit between January 2005 and December 2010 were analysed. Low rectal cancer (LRC) was defined as tumour < 5 cm from the anal verge on MRI scan. Recurrent cancer, palliative resections, perforated tumours and those requiring total pelvic exenteration were excluded.
RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-nine patients underwent surgery for rectal cancer (226 male/133 female). Of these, 149 (41.5%) patients had low rectal cancer (LRC). Compared to patients with mid/upper rectal cancer (M/URC), patients with low rectal cancers were significantly more likely to receive neo-adjuvant therapy (75.2 vs 38%; p < 0.001), to be associated with lower rate of restorative surgery (15.4 vs 79%; p < 0.001) and to have higher rates of pathological positive circumferential resection margin involvement (14.1 vs 7.1%; p = 0.047). There were however no significant difference in the rates of recurrent disease or survival among the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Distance of rectal cancer from the anal verge does influence the use of neo-adjuvant treatment and ultimate R0 resection rate. It does not influence loco-regional or systemic recurrence rates.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER); Anterior resection; Circumferential resection margin; Laparoscopic surgery; Rectal cancer; Rectal tumour distance from anal verge; Restorative surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28924962     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-017-3581-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  12 in total

Review 1.  Total mesorectal excision for middle and lower rectal cancer: a single institution experience with 337 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Pompiliu Piso; Marc-Hendrik Dahlke; Petrit Mirena; Ursula Schmidt; Heiko Aselmann; Hans Juergen Schlitt; Rudolf Raab; Juergen Klempnauer
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 3.454

2.  Relation of surgeon and hospital volume to processes and outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Selwyn O Rogers; Robert E Wolf; Alan M Zaslavsky; William E Wright; John Z Ayanian
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 3.  What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer?

Authors:  Iris D Nagtegaal; Phil Quirke
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Defining the volume-quality debate: is it the surgeon, the center, or the training?

Authors:  James Merlino
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

5.  Does rectal cancer height influence the oncological outcome?

Authors:  A Bhangu; S Rasheed; G Brown; D Tait; D Cunningham; P Tekkis
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 3.788

6.  The modern abdominoperineal excision: the next challenge after total mesorectal excision.

Authors:  Roger Marr; Kevin Birbeck; James Garvican; Christopher P Macklin; Nicholas J Tiffin; Wendy J Parsons; Michael F Dixon; Nicholas P Mapstone; David Sebag-Montefiore; Nigel Scott; David Johnston; Peter Sagar; Paul Finan; Philip Quirke
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Patients with low rectal cancer treated by abdominoperineal excision have worse tumors and higher involved margin rates compared with patients treated by anterior resection.

Authors:  Oliver C Shihab; Gina Brown; Ian R Daniels; Richard J Heald; Philip Quirke; Brendan J Moran
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.585

8.  Examination of outcome following abdominoperineal resection for adenocarcinoma in Oxford.

Authors:  W Chambers; A Khan; R Waters; I Lindsey; B George; N Mortensen; C Cunningham
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.788

9.  Lymphatic spread and its prognostic value in patients with rectal cancer.

Authors:  K Hojo; Y Koyama; Y Moriya
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer.

Authors:  I J Adam; M O Mohamdee; I G Martin; N Scott; P J Finan; D Johnston; M F Dixon; P Quirke
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1994-09-10       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  8 in total

1.  Neoadjuvant chemoradiation improves oncologic outcomes in low and mid clinical T3N0 rectal cancers.

Authors:  Olga A Lavryk; Elena Manilich; Michael A Valente; Arshiya Miriam; Emre Gorgun; Matthew F Kalady; Sherief Shawki; Conor P Delaney; Scott R Steele
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2019-11-27       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Can Post-Treatment MRI Features Predict Pathological Circumferential Resection Margin (pCRM) Involvement in Low Rectal Tumors.

Authors:  A Patra; A D Baheti; S K Ankathi; A Desouza; R Engineer; V Ostwal; A Ramaswamy; A Saklani
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-09-22

3.  Measurement of rectal tumor height from the anal verge on MRI: a comparison of internal versus external anal sphincter.

Authors:  David D B Bates; James L Fuqua; Junting Zheng; Marinela Capanu; Jennifer S Golia Pernicka; Sidra Javed-Tayyab; Viktoriya Paroder; Iva Petkovska; Marc J Gollub
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-09-17

4.  The risk factors of local recurrence and distant metastasis on pT1/T2N0 mid-low rectal cancer after total mesorectal excision.

Authors:  I-Li Lai; Jeng-Fu You; Yih-Jong Chern; Wen-Sy Tsai; Jy-Ming Chiang; Pao-Shiu Hsieh; Hsin-Yuan Hung; Yu-Jen Hsu
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 2.754

5.  Epidural analgesia does not impact recurrence or mortality in patients after rectal cancer resection.

Authors:  Hsiang-Ling Wu; Ying-Hsuan Tai; Shih-Pin Lin; Shung-Haur Yang; Mei-Yung Tsou; Kuang-Yi Chang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-13       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  An MRI-based pelvimetry nomogram for predicting surgical difficulty of transabdominal resection in patients with middle and low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Yuan Yuan; Dafeng Tong; Minglu Liu; Haidi Lu; Fu Shen; Xiaohui Shi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-25       Impact factor: 5.738

7.  A nomogram for predicting good response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: a retrospective, double-center, cohort study.

Authors:  Guancong Wang; Zhifang Zheng; Jinhua Chen; Jiahong Ye; Zihan Tang; Yicong Fang; Kaiyuan Yao; Qunzhang Zeng; Yugang Yang; Haiwen Tang; Bijuan Lin; Yincong Guo; Ying Huang
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2022-09-01       Impact factor: 2.796

8.  Influence of tumor location on short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a propensity score matched cohort study.

Authors:  Hong Yang; Zhendan Yao; Ming Cui; Jiadi Xing; Chenghai Zhang; Nan Zhang; Maoxing Liu; Kai Xu; Fei Tan; Xiangqian Su
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 4.430

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.