Antonio Caycedo-Marulanda1,2, Lawrence Lee3, Sami A Chadi4, Chris P Verschoor2, Jordan Crosina5, Shady Ashamalla6, Carl J Brown7. 1. Department of Surgery, Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 2. Health Sciences North Research Institute, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. 3. Department of Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 4. Division of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, University Health Network and Princess Margaret Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Surgery Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 7. Department of Surgery, St Paul's Hospital, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
Importance: Proponents of novel transanal total mesorectal excision (TME) suggest the procedure overcomes the technical and oncologic challenges of conventional approaches for treating rectal cancer. Recently, however, there has been controversy regarding the oncologic safety of the procedure. Objective: To assess the association of transanal TME with the incidence of local recurrence (LR) of cancer and the probability of remaining free of LR during follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study used data from 8 high-volume rectal cancer academic institutions from across Canada on all consecutive patients with primary rectal cancer treated by transanal TME at the participating centers. The study was conducted between January 2014 and December 2018, and data were analyzed from April 1, 2020, to September 15, 2020. Exposure: Transanal TME. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence of LR was reported as a direct measure of quality of resection. The cumulative probability of LR- and systemic recurrence (SR)-free survival at 36 months was estimated. Local recurrence and SR were defined as radiologic or endoscopic evidence of 1 or more new lesions in or outside the pelvis, respectively, documented during surveillance after the removal of the primary tumor. Results: Of 608 total patients included in the analysis, 423 (69.6%) were male; the median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-70 years). Local recurrence was identified in 22 patients (3.6%) after a median follow-up of 27 months (IQR, 18-38 months). The median time to LR was 13 months (IQR, 9-19 months). Sixteen of the 22 patients with LR (72.7%) were male, 14 (63.6%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation, and 12 (54.5%) had American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III disease. Of those with LR, 16 (72.7%) had a negative circumferential radial margin and 20 (9.1%) had a negative distal resection margin, 20 (90.9%) experienced conversion to open surgery, and 15 (68.2%) also developed SR. The probability of LR-free survival at 36 months was 96% (95% CI, 94%-98%). According to the Cox proportional hazards regression model, the hazard ratio of LR was estimated to be 4.2 (95% CI, 2.9-6.2) times higher among patients with a positive circumferential radial margin than among those with a negative circumferential radial margin. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, transanal TME performed by experienced surgeons was associated with an incidence of LR and SR that is in line with the published literature on open and laparoscopic TME, suggesting that transanal TME may be an acceptable approach for management of rectal cancer.
Importance: Proponents of novel transanal total mesorectal excision (TME) suggest the procedure overcomes the technical and oncologic challenges of conventional approaches for treating rectal cancer. Recently, however, there has been controversy regarding the oncologic safety of the procedure. Objective: To assess the association of transanal TME with the incidence of local recurrence (LR) of cancer and the probability of remaining free of LR during follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study used data from 8 high-volume rectal cancer academic institutions from across Canada on all consecutive patients with primary rectal cancer treated by transanal TME at the participating centers. The study was conducted between January 2014 and December 2018, and data were analyzed from April 1, 2020, to September 15, 2020. Exposure: Transanal TME. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence of LR was reported as a direct measure of quality of resection. The cumulative probability of LR- and systemic recurrence (SR)-free survival at 36 months was estimated. Local recurrence and SR were defined as radiologic or endoscopic evidence of 1 or more new lesions in or outside the pelvis, respectively, documented during surveillance after the removal of the primary tumor. Results: Of 608 total patients included in the analysis, 423 (69.6%) were male; the median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-70 years). Local recurrence was identified in 22 patients (3.6%) after a median follow-up of 27 months (IQR, 18-38 months). The median time to LR was 13 months (IQR, 9-19 months). Sixteen of the 22 patients with LR (72.7%) were male, 14 (63.6%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation, and 12 (54.5%) had American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III disease. Of those with LR, 16 (72.7%) had a negative circumferential radial margin and 20 (9.1%) had a negative distal resection margin, 20 (90.9%) experienced conversion to open surgery, and 15 (68.2%) also developed SR. The probability of LR-free survival at 36 months was 96% (95% CI, 94%-98%). According to the Cox proportional hazards regression model, the hazard ratio of LR was estimated to be 4.2 (95% CI, 2.9-6.2) times higher among patients with a positive circumferential radial margin than among those with a negative circumferential radial margin. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, transanal TME performed by experienced surgeons was associated with an incidence of LR and SR that is in line with the published literature on open and laparoscopic TME, suggesting that transanal TME may be an acceptable approach for management of rectal cancer.
Authors: Simon S M Ng; Janet F Y Lee; Raymond Y C Yiu; Jimmy C M Li; Sophie S F Hon; Tony W C Mak; Dennis K Y Ngo; Wing Wa Leung; Ka Lau Leung Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-09-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Christian P Probst; Adan Z Becerra; Christopher T Aquina; Mohamedtaki A Tejani; Steven D Wexner; Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Feza H Remzi; David W Dietz; John R T Monson; Fergal J Fleming Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Andrew R L Stevenson; Michael J Solomon; John W Lumley; Peter Hewett; Andrew D Clouston; Val J Gebski; Lucy Davies; Kate Wilson; Wendy Hague; John Simes Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lawrence Lee; Justin Kelly; George J Nassif; Teresa C deBeche-Adams; Matthew R Albert; John R T Monson Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-07-11 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: T W A Koedam; G H van Ramshorst; C L Deijen; A K E Elfrink; W J H J Meijerink; H J Bonjer; C Sietses; J B Tuynman Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2017-01-02 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Sapho X Roodbeen; F B de Lacy; Susan van Dieren; Marta Penna; Frédéric Ris; Brendan Moran; Paris Tekkis; Willem A Bemelman; Roel Hompes Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Sapho Xenia Roodbeen; Antonino Spinelli; Willem A Bemelman; Francesca Di Candido; Maylis Cardepont; Quentin Denost; Andre D'Hoore; Bert Houben; Joep J Knol; Beatriz Martín-Pérez; Eric Rullier; Dana Sands; Ilana Setton; Katrien Van de Steen; Pieter J Tanis; Steven D Wexner; Roel Hompes; Albert M Wolthuis Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: L J X Giesen; J W T Dekker; M Verseveld; R M P H Crolla; G P van der Schelling; C Verhoef; P B Olthof Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-08-30 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: T A Burghgraef; R M P H Crolla; M Fahim; G P van der Schelling; A B Smits; L P S Stassen; J Melenhorst; P M Verheijen; E C J Consten Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 2.796