Yusuke Yamaoka1, Tomohiro Yamaguchi2,3, Yusuke Kinugasa1,4, Akio Shiomi1, Hiroyasu Kagawa1, Yushi Yamakawa1, Akinobu Furutani1, Shoichi Manabe1, Kakeru Torii1, Kohei Koido1, Keita Mori5. 1. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan. 2. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan. tomohiro.yamaguchi@jfcr.or.jp. 3. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital of the Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan. tomohiro.yamaguchi@jfcr.or.jp. 4. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Medical Hospital, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan. 5. Clinical Trial Coordination Office, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Various predictors of the difficulty of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer have been described. Although a bulky mesorectum was considered to pose technical difficulties in total mesorectal excision, no studies have evaluated the influence of mesorectum morphology on the difficulty of total mesorectal excision. Mesorectal fat area at the level of the tip of the ischial spines on magnetic resonance imaging was described as a parameter characterizing mesorectum morphology. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of clinical and anatomical factors, including mesorectal fat area, on the difficulty of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. METHODS: This study enrolled 98 patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for primary rectal cancer, performed by a single expert surgeon, between 2010 and 2015. Magnetic resonance imaging-based pelvimetry data were collected. Linear regression was performed to determine clinical and anatomical factors significantly associated with operative time of the pelvic phase, which was defined as the time interval from the start of rectal mobilization to the division of the rectum. RESULTS: The median operative time of the pelvic phase was 68 min (range 33-178 min). On univariate analysis, the following variables were significantly associated with longer operative time of the pelvic phase: male sex, larger tumor size, larger visceral fat area, larger mesorectal fat area, shorter pelvic outlet length, longer sacral length, shorter interspinous distance, larger pelvic inlet angle, and smaller angle between the lines connecting the coccyx to S3 and to the inferior middle aspect of the pubic symphysis. On multiple linear regression analysis, only larger mesorectal fat area remained significantly associated with longer operative time of the pelvic phase (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Mesorectal fat area may serve as a useful predictor of the difficulty of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.
BACKGROUND: Various predictors of the difficulty of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer have been described. Although a bulky mesorectum was considered to pose technical difficulties in total mesorectal excision, no studies have evaluated the influence of mesorectum morphology on the difficulty of total mesorectal excision. Mesorectal fat area at the level of the tip of the ischial spines on magnetic resonance imaging was described as a parameter characterizing mesorectum morphology. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of clinical and anatomical factors, including mesorectal fat area, on the difficulty of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. METHODS: This study enrolled 98 patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for primary rectal cancer, performed by a single expert surgeon, between 2010 and 2015. Magnetic resonance imaging-based pelvimetry data were collected. Linear regression was performed to determine clinical and anatomical factors significantly associated with operative time of the pelvic phase, which was defined as the time interval from the start of rectal mobilization to the division of the rectum. RESULTS: The median operative time of the pelvic phase was 68 min (range 33-178 min). On univariate analysis, the following variables were significantly associated with longer operative time of the pelvic phase: male sex, larger tumor size, larger visceral fat area, larger mesorectal fat area, shorter pelvic outlet length, longer sacral length, shorter interspinous distance, larger pelvic inlet angle, and smaller angle between the lines connecting the coccyx to S3 and to the inferior middle aspect of the pubic symphysis. On multiple linear regression analysis, only larger mesorectal fat area remained significantly associated with longer operative time of the pelvic phase (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Mesorectal fat area may serve as a useful predictor of the difficulty of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.
Authors: Sushil Maslekar; Abhiram Sharma; Alistair Macdonald; James Gunn; John R T Monson; John E Hartley Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Eduardo M Targarona; Carmen Balague; Juan Carlos Pernas; Carmen Martinez; Rene Berindoague; Ignasi Gich; Manuel Trias Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 12.969