Nigel DʼSouza1,2,3, Michael P M de Neree Tot Babberich4, Andre d'Hoore5, Emmanuel Tiret6, Evaghelos Xynos7, Regina G H Beets-Tan8, Iris D Nagtegaal9, Lennart Blomqvist10, Torbjorn Holm10, Bengt Glimelius11, Antonio Lacy12, Andres Cervantes13, Robert Glynne-Jones14, Nicholas P West15, Rodrigo O Perez16, Claudio Quadros17, Kil Yeon Lee18, Thandinkosi E Madiba19, Steven D Wexner20, Julio Garcia-Aguilar21, Dushyant Sahani22, Brendan Moran23, Paris Tekkis2,3, Harm J Rutten24,25, Pieter J Tanis4, Theo Wiggers26, Gina Brown2,3. 1. Croydon University Hospital, London, UK. 2. Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 3. Imperial College, London, UK. 4. Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 5. University Clinic Leuven, Belgium. 6. Hospital Saint Antoine, Paris, France. 7. Interclinic Hospital of Heraklion, Greece. 8. The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 9. Radboud Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 10. Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 11. Uppsala University, Sweden. 12. Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. 13. CIBERONC, Biomedical Research Institute INCLIVA, University of Valencia. 14. Mount Vernon Hospital, London, UK. 15. University of Leeds, UK. 16. University of Sao Paulo School of Medicine, Brazil. 17. Aristides Maltez Hospital, Salvador, Brazil. 18. Kyung Hee University Medical Centre, Seoul, South Korea. 19. University of Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa. 20. Cleveland Clinic Florida, FL. 21. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA. 22. Massachussets General Hospital, Boston, MA. 23. Basingstoke Hospital, UK. 24. Catherina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, the Netherlands. 25. GROW: School of Developmental Biology and Oncology, University of Maastricht, the Netherlands. 26. University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The wide global variation in the definition of the rectum has led to significant inconsistencies in trial recruitment, clinical management, and outcomes. Surgical technique and use of preoperative treatment for a cancer of the rectum and sigmoid colon are radically different and dependent on the local definitions employed by the clinical team. A consensus definition of the rectum is needed to standardise treatment. METHODS: The consensus was conducted using the Delphi technique with multidisciplinary colorectal experts from October, 2017 to April, 2018. RESULTS: Eleven different definitions for the rectum were used by participants in the consensus. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was the most frequent modality used to define the rectum (67%), and the preferred modality for 72% of participants. The most agreed consensus landmark (56%) was "the sigmoid take-off," an anatomic, image-based definition of the junction of the mesorectum and mesocolon. In the second round, 81% of participants agreed that the sigmoid take-off as seen on computed tomography or MRI achieved consensus, and that it could be implemented in their institution. Also, 87% were satisfied with the sigmoid take-off as the consensus landmark. CONCLUSION: An international consensus definition for the rectum is the point of the sigmoid take-off as visualized on imaging. The sigmoid take-off can be identified as the mesocolon elongates as the ventral and horizontal course of the sigmoid on axial and sagittal views respectively on cross-sectional imaging. Routine application of this landmark during multidisciplinary team discussion for all patients will enable greater consistency in tumour localisation.
BACKGROUND: The wide global variation in the definition of the rectum has led to significant inconsistencies in trial recruitment, clinical management, and outcomes. Surgical technique and use of preoperative treatment for a cancer of the rectum and sigmoid colon are radically different and dependent on the local definitions employed by the clinical team. A consensus definition of the rectum is needed to standardise treatment. METHODS: The consensus was conducted using the Delphi technique with multidisciplinary colorectal experts from October, 2017 to April, 2018. RESULTS: Eleven different definitions for the rectum were used by participants in the consensus. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was the most frequent modality used to define the rectum (67%), and the preferred modality for 72% of participants. The most agreed consensus landmark (56%) was "the sigmoid take-off," an anatomic, image-based definition of the junction of the mesorectum and mesocolon. In the second round, 81% of participants agreed that the sigmoid take-off as seen on computed tomography or MRI achieved consensus, and that it could be implemented in their institution. Also, 87% were satisfied with the sigmoid take-off as the consensus landmark. CONCLUSION: An international consensus definition for the rectum is the point of the sigmoid take-off as visualized on imaging. The sigmoid take-off can be identified as the mesocolon elongates as the ventral and horizontal course of the sigmoid on axial and sagittal views respectively on cross-sectional imaging. Routine application of this landmark during multidisciplinary team discussion for all patients will enable greater consistency in tumour localisation.
Authors: A A J Grüter; A S van Lieshout; S E van Oostendorp; J C F Ket; M Tenhagen; F C den Boer; R Hompes; P J Tanis; J B Tuynman Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2022-08-29 Impact factor: 3.699
Authors: Zaid Al-Difaie; Nariaki Okamoto; Max H M C Scheepers; Didier Mutter; Laurents P S Stassen; Nicole D Bouvy; Jacques Marescaux; Bernard Dallemagne; Michele Diana; Mahdi Al-Taher Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-10-18 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Paul T Heitmann; Paul F Vollebregt; Charles H Knowles; Peter J Lunniss; Phil G Dinning; S Mark Scott Journal: Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2021-08-09 Impact factor: 46.802
Authors: Frans van Workum; Kevin Talboom; Gerjon Hannink; Albert Wolthuis; Borja F de Lacy; Jeremie H Lefevre; Michael Solomon; Matteo Frasson; Nicolas Rotholtz; Quentin Denost; Rodrigo Oliva Perez; Tsuyoshi Konishi; Yves Panis; Camiel Rosman; Roel Hompes; Pieter J Tanis; Johannes H W de Wilt Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2020-12-26 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: M D Slooter; K Talboom; S Sharabiany; C P M van Helsdingen; S van Dieren; C Y Ponsioen; C Y Nio; E C J Consten; J H Wijsman; M A Boermeester; J P M Derikx; G D Musters; W A Bemelman; P J Tanis; R Hompes Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Samuel Lawday; Nicholas Flamey; George E Fowler; Matthew Leaning; Nadine Dyar; Ian R Daniels; Neil J Smart; Christopher Hyde Journal: BJS Open Date: 2021-11-09