Exfoliate cancer cell analysis in rectal cancer surgery: comparison of laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision, a pilot study.

IF 3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Annals of Coloproctology Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-26 DOI:10.3393/ac.2023.00479.0068
Kiho You, Jung-Ah Hwang, Dae Kyung Sohn, Dong Woon Lee, Sung Sil Park, Kyung Su Han, Chang Won Hong, Bun Kim, Byung Chang Kim, Sung Chan Park, Jae Hwan Oh
{"title":"Exfoliate cancer cell analysis in rectal cancer surgery: comparison of laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision, a pilot study.","authors":"Kiho You, Jung-Ah Hwang, Dae Kyung Sohn, Dong Woon Lee, Sung Sil Park, Kyung Su Han, Chang Won Hong, Bun Kim, Byung Chang Kim, Sung Chan Park, Jae Hwan Oh","doi":"10.3393/ac.2023.00479.0068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is currently the standard treatment for rectal cancer. However, its limitations include complications and incomplete total mesorectal resection (TME) due to anatomical features and technical difficulties. Transanal TME (TaTME) has been practiced since 2010 to improve this, but there is a risk of local recurrence and intra-abdominal contamination. We aimed to analyze samples obtained through lavage to compare laparoscopic TME (LapTME) and TaTME.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From June 2020 to January 2021, 20 patients with rectal cancer undergoing MIS were consecutively and prospectively recruited. Samples were collected at the start of surgery, immediately after TME, and after irrigation. The samples were analyzed for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytokeratin 20 (CK20) through a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was to compare the detected amounts of CEA and CK20 immediately after TME between the surgical methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 20 patients, 13 underwent LapTME and 7 underwent TaTME. Tumor location was lower in TaTME (7.3 cm vs. 4.6 cm, P=0.012), and negative mesorectal fascia (MRF) was more in LapTME (76.9% vs. 28.6%, P=0.044). CEA and CK20 levels were high in 3 patients (42.9%) only in TaTME. There was 1 case of T4 with incomplete purse-string suture and 1 case of positive MRF with dissection failure. All patients were followed up for an average of 32.5 months without local recurrence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CEA and CK20 levels were high only in TaTME and were related to tumor factors or intraoperative events. However, whether the detection amount is clinically related to local recurrence remains unclear.</p>","PeriodicalId":8267,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Coloproctology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10781597/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2023.00479.0068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is currently the standard treatment for rectal cancer. However, its limitations include complications and incomplete total mesorectal resection (TME) due to anatomical features and technical difficulties. Transanal TME (TaTME) has been practiced since 2010 to improve this, but there is a risk of local recurrence and intra-abdominal contamination. We aimed to analyze samples obtained through lavage to compare laparoscopic TME (LapTME) and TaTME.

Methods: From June 2020 to January 2021, 20 patients with rectal cancer undergoing MIS were consecutively and prospectively recruited. Samples were collected at the start of surgery, immediately after TME, and after irrigation. The samples were analyzed for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytokeratin 20 (CK20) through a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was to compare the detected amounts of CEA and CK20 immediately after TME between the surgical methods.

Results: Among the 20 patients, 13 underwent LapTME and 7 underwent TaTME. Tumor location was lower in TaTME (7.3 cm vs. 4.6 cm, P=0.012), and negative mesorectal fascia (MRF) was more in LapTME (76.9% vs. 28.6%, P=0.044). CEA and CK20 levels were high in 3 patients (42.9%) only in TaTME. There was 1 case of T4 with incomplete purse-string suture and 1 case of positive MRF with dissection failure. All patients were followed up for an average of 32.5 months without local recurrence.

Conclusion: CEA and CK20 levels were high only in TaTME and were related to tumor factors or intraoperative events. However, whether the detection amount is clinically related to local recurrence remains unclear.

直肠癌手术中的脱落癌细胞分析:腹腔镜和经肛门全直肠系膜切除术的比较,一项试点研究。
目的:微创手术(MIS)是目前治疗直肠癌的标准方法。然而,由于解剖特点和技术难度,其局限性包括并发症和不完全的全直肠系膜切除术(TME)。自2010年以来,经肛门直肠癌全切除术(TaTME)的应用改善了这一问题,但也存在局部复发和腹腔内污染的风险。我们旨在分析通过灌洗获得的样本,以比较腹腔镜 TME(LapTME)和经肛门 TME:方法:2020 年 6 月至 2021 年 1 月,我们连续、前瞻性地招募了 20 名接受 MIS 手术的直肠癌患者。在手术开始时、TME 术后立即和灌洗后采集样本。样本通过定量实时聚合酶链反应分析癌胚抗原(CEA)和细胞角蛋白 20(CK20)。主要结果是比较两种手术方法在 TME 术后立即检测到的癌胚抗原和细胞角蛋白 20 的数量:在20名患者中,13人接受了LapTME,7人接受了TaTME。TaTME的肿瘤位置较低(7.3厘米对4.6厘米,P=0.012),LapTME的直肠系膜筋膜(MRF)阴性率较高(76.9%对28.6%,P=0.044)。仅在 TaTME 中有 3 例患者(42.9%)的 CEA 和 CK20 水平较高。1例T4患者的荷包缝合不完全,1例MRF阳性患者的剥离失败。所有患者平均随访 32.5 个月,未出现局部复发:结论:CEA和CK20水平仅在TaTME中偏高,且与肿瘤因素或术中事件有关。结论:CEA和CK20水平仅在TaTME中偏高,且与肿瘤因素或术中事件有关,但其检测量是否与局部复发有关仍不清楚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
73
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信