Sun Min Park1, Bong-Hyeon Kye1, Min Ki Kim1, Heba E Jalloun1, Hyeon-Min Cho2, In Kyu Lee3. 1. Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 137-701, Korea. 2. Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Suwon, Korea. 3. Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 137-701, Korea. cmcgslee@catholic.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In early rectal cancer cases, the use of local excision is increasing. The general indication for local excision is based on the preoperative stage, but there is often a discrepancy between pre and postoperative stages. We sought to determine the indications for local excision in T1 rectal adenocarcinoma patients by comparing the preoperative clinical and postoperative pathological stages. A second aim was to compare the oncologic outcomes between local excision and radical resection. METHODS: Between 2004 and 2014, 152 T1 rectal adenocarcinoma patients were enrolled. We divided the subjects into two groups, local excision and radical resection, depending on the modality of treatment the patients initially received. The group of patients who underwent radical resection was subsequently subdivided into "excisable" and "non-excisable" groups based on the postoperative pathology. RESULTS: Of 152 patients, 28 patients (18.4%) underwent local excision, while 124 patients (81.6%) underwent radical resection. Of 124 patients, in clinically suspected T2 or less and N0 (93) cases, 50 patients (53.8%) needed treatment beyond local excision, and local excision was sufficient for 43 patients (46.2%). The 3-year overall survival (p = 0.393) and 3-year disease-free survival (p = 0.076) between the local excision and radical resection groups showed no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical T stage was overestimated in more than half of the cases. Therefore, if cT1/2 tumors with cN0 are suspected preoperatively, local excision is initially recommended and will allow for determination of underlying pathology. The clinician can then decide whether to monitor or intervene with radical resection.
PURPOSE: In early rectal cancer cases, the use of local excision is increasing. The general indication for local excision is based on the preoperative stage, but there is often a discrepancy between pre and postoperative stages. We sought to determine the indications for local excision in T1 rectal adenocarcinomapatients by comparing the preoperative clinical and postoperative pathological stages. A second aim was to compare the oncologic outcomes between local excision and radical resection. METHODS: Between 2004 and 2014, 152 T1 rectal adenocarcinomapatients were enrolled. We divided the subjects into two groups, local excision and radical resection, depending on the modality of treatment the patients initially received. The group of patients who underwent radical resection was subsequently subdivided into "excisable" and "non-excisable" groups based on the postoperative pathology. RESULTS: Of 152 patients, 28 patients (18.4%) underwent local excision, while 124 patients (81.6%) underwent radical resection. Of 124 patients, in clinically suspected T2 or less and N0 (93) cases, 50 patients (53.8%) needed treatment beyond local excision, and local excision was sufficient for 43 patients (46.2%). The 3-year overall survival (p = 0.393) and 3-year disease-free survival (p = 0.076) between the local excision and radical resection groups showed no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical T stage was overestimated in more than half of the cases. Therefore, if cT1/2tumors with cN0 are suspected preoperatively, local excision is initially recommended and will allow for determination of underlying pathology. The clinician can then decide whether to monitor or intervene with radical resection.
Entities:
Keywords:
Early rectal cancer; Indication; Local excision; Preop stage; Treatment
Authors: D Blumberg; P B Paty; A I Picon; J G Guillem; D S Klimstra; B D Minsky; S H Quan; A M Cohen Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 1998-05 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Martin R Weiser; Ron G Landmann; W Douglas Wong; Jinru Shia; José G Guillem; Larissa K Temple; Bruce D Minsky; Alfred M Cohen; Philip B Paty Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: S Tanaka; K Haruma; C R Teixeira; S Tatsuta; N Ohtsu; Y Hiraga; M Yoshihara; K Sumii; G Kajiyama; F Shimamoto Journal: J Gastroenterol Date: 1995-12 Impact factor: 7.527
Authors: Dieter Hahnloser; Bruce G Wolff; David W Larson; Jennifer Ping; Santhat Nivatvongs Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: H S Cooper; L M Deppisch; W K Gourley; E I Kahn; R Lev; P N Manley; R R Pascal; A H Qizilbash; R R Rickert; J F Silverman Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 1995-06 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Nik Dekkers; Hao Dang; Jolein van der Kraan; Saskia le Cessie; Philip P Oldenburg; Jan W Schoones; Alexandra M J Langers; Monique E van Leerdam; Jeanin E van Hooft; Yara Backes; Katarina Levic; Alexander Meining; Giorgio M Saracco; Fabian A Holman; Koen C M J Peeters; Leon M G Moons; Pascal G Doornebosch; James C H Hardwick; Jurjen J Boonstra Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Caroline D M Witjes; Abhilashaben S Patel; Aniruddh Shenoy; Stephen Boyce; James E East; Christopher Cunningham Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 4.584