Stoma Rate and Oncological Outcomes of Primary TaTME Vs Completion TaTME in Patients With Early-Stage Rectal Cancer.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Annabel S van Lieshout, Laura R Moolenaar, Floor F A C Tobben, Stefan E van Oostendorp, Lisanne J H Smits, Jeroen C Hol, Eric H J Belgers, Eric J T H Belt, Steven J Oosterling, Colin Sietses, Pascal G Doornebosch, Roel Hompes, Jurriaan B Tuynman
{"title":"Stoma Rate and Oncological Outcomes of Primary TaTME Vs Completion TaTME in Patients With Early-Stage Rectal Cancer.","authors":"Annabel S van Lieshout, Laura R Moolenaar, Floor F A C Tobben, Stefan E van Oostendorp, Lisanne J H Smits, Jeroen C Hol, Eric H J Belgers, Eric J T H Belt, Steven J Oosterling, Colin Sietses, Pascal G Doornebosch, Roel Hompes, Jurriaan B Tuynman","doi":"10.1097/DCR.0000000000003794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Local excision as a first step in the treatment of early rectal cancer has gained interest. However, in the presence of histopathological risk factors, (inter)national guidelines recommend completion total mesorectal excision. Although oncologically safe, completion total mesorectal excision is associated with an increased end-colostomy rate compared to primary total mesorectal excision, especially in distal lesions. Transanal total mesorectal excision may facilitate lower anastomoses, potentially reducing end-colostomy rates.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the end-colostomy rate and oncological outcomes of primary transanal total mesorectal excision with local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision in patients with cT1-2N0M0 rectal cancer.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Data were prospectively collected from 6 Dutch high-volume centers experienced in transanal total mesorectal excision and retrospectively analyzed.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>All patients with cT1-2N0M0 rectal cancer who underwent primary transanal total mesorectal excision or local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision between 2012 and 2022.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was end-colostomy rate. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leakage, involvement of the circumferential resection margin, specimen quality, local recurrence, distant metastases, overall survival and disease-free survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 150 patients were included with a median follow-up of 32 and 23 months for primary transanal total mesorectal excision and local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision, respectively. The end-colostomy rate was significantly lower in the local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision group (21%) compared to the primary transanal total mesorectal excision group (42%, p = 0.022). More anastomotic leakages occurred in the local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision group (33% vs 18%, p = 0.064). No differences were observed in circumferential resection margin involvement and specimen quality. Two-year local recurrence rates were 4% for primary transanal total mesorectal excision and 3% for local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision ( p = 0.343), while distant metastases occurred in 8% and 10% ( p = 0.424), respectively. There were no significant differences in 2-year overall survival (88% vs 97%, p = 0.101) and 2-year disease free survival (82% vs 90%, p = 0.463) between groups.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The small sample size, which precluded correction for group differences, and selection bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrated that local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision for cT1-2N0 rectal cancer did not increase the end-colostomy rate, nor compromise oncological outcomes compared to primary transanal total mesorectal excision in experienced centers. See Video Abstract .</p>","PeriodicalId":11299,"journal":{"name":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diseases of the Colon & Rectum","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000003794","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Local excision as a first step in the treatment of early rectal cancer has gained interest. However, in the presence of histopathological risk factors, (inter)national guidelines recommend completion total mesorectal excision. Although oncologically safe, completion total mesorectal excision is associated with an increased end-colostomy rate compared to primary total mesorectal excision, especially in distal lesions. Transanal total mesorectal excision may facilitate lower anastomoses, potentially reducing end-colostomy rates.

Objective: To compare the end-colostomy rate and oncological outcomes of primary transanal total mesorectal excision with local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision in patients with cT1-2N0M0 rectal cancer.

Design: Data were prospectively collected from 6 Dutch high-volume centers experienced in transanal total mesorectal excision and retrospectively analyzed.

Patients: All patients with cT1-2N0M0 rectal cancer who underwent primary transanal total mesorectal excision or local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision between 2012 and 2022.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was end-colostomy rate. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leakage, involvement of the circumferential resection margin, specimen quality, local recurrence, distant metastases, overall survival and disease-free survival.

Results: A total of 150 patients were included with a median follow-up of 32 and 23 months for primary transanal total mesorectal excision and local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision, respectively. The end-colostomy rate was significantly lower in the local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision group (21%) compared to the primary transanal total mesorectal excision group (42%, p = 0.022). More anastomotic leakages occurred in the local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision group (33% vs 18%, p = 0.064). No differences were observed in circumferential resection margin involvement and specimen quality. Two-year local recurrence rates were 4% for primary transanal total mesorectal excision and 3% for local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision ( p = 0.343), while distant metastases occurred in 8% and 10% ( p = 0.424), respectively. There were no significant differences in 2-year overall survival (88% vs 97%, p = 0.101) and 2-year disease free survival (82% vs 90%, p = 0.463) between groups.

Limitations: The small sample size, which precluded correction for group differences, and selection bias.

Conclusion: This study demonstrated that local excision followed by completion transanal total mesorectal excision for cT1-2N0 rectal cancer did not increase the end-colostomy rate, nor compromise oncological outcomes compared to primary transanal total mesorectal excision in experienced centers. See Video Abstract .

早期直肠癌患者原发性TaTME与完全性TaTME的造口率和肿瘤预后
背景:局部切除作为早期直肠癌治疗的第一步已引起人们的关注。然而,在存在组织病理学危险因素的情况下,(国际)国家指南建议完成全肠系膜切除术。尽管肿瘤学上是安全的,但与初次全肠系膜切除术相比,完全全肠系膜切除术与结肠末端造口率增加有关,特别是在远端病变中。经肛门全肠系膜切除可促进低位吻合,潜在地降低结肠末端造口率。目的:比较cT1-2N0M0直肠癌患者经肛门全肠系膜切除术与局部切除术后再经肛门全肠系膜切除术的结肠末造口率和肿瘤预后。设计:前瞻性地收集6个荷兰大容量中心的经肛直肠系膜全切除术的数据,并进行回顾性分析。患者:所有在2012年至2022年间接受原发性经肛门全肠系膜切除术或局部切除术后完成经肛门全肠系膜切除术的cT1-2N0M0型直肠癌患者。主要观察指标:主要观察指标为结肠末造口率。次要结局包括吻合口漏、环切缘受累、标本质量、局部复发、远处转移、总生存和无病生存。结果:共纳入150例患者,中位随访时间分别为32个月和23个月,分别为原发性经肛门全肠系膜切除术和局部切除后完成经肛门全肠系膜切除术。局部切除后经肛门全肠系膜切除术组结肠末造口率(21%)明显低于首次经肛门全肠系膜切除术组(42%,p = 0.022)。局部切除组吻合口漏发生率高于完全经肛直肠系膜全切除术组(33% vs 18%, p = 0.064)。在环切缘受累和标本质量方面没有观察到差异。原发性经肛门全肠系膜切除术的2年局部复发率为4%,局部切除后完成经肛门全肠系膜切除术的2年局部复发率为3% (p = 0.343),远处转移的发生率分别为8%和10% (p = 0.424)。两组患者的2年总生存率(88% vs 97%, p = 0.101)和2年无病生存率(82% vs 90%, p = 0.463)无显著差异。局限性:样本量小,无法校正组间差异和选择偏倚。结论:本研究表明,与经验丰富的中心的原发性经肛门直肠全肠系膜切除术相比,局部切除后完全性经肛门直肠全肠系膜切除术治疗c1 - 2n0直肠癌不会增加结肠末造口率,也不会影响肿瘤预后。参见视频摘要。
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
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
572
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum (DCR) is the official journal of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) dedicated to advancing the knowledge of intestinal disorders by providing a forum for communication amongst their members. The journal features timely editorials, original contributions and technical notes.
×
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