Transanal versus conventional total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer using the IDEAL framework for implementation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Robertson RL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8062257 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundTransanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has been proposed as an approach in patients with mid and low rectal cancer. The TaTME procedure has been introduced in the Netherlands in a structured training pathway, including proctoring. This study evaluated the local recurrence rate during the implementation phase of TaTME.MethodsOncological outcomes of the first ten TaTME procedures in each of 12 participating centres were collected as part of an external audit of procedure implementation. Data collected from a cohort of patients treated over a prolonged period in four centres were also collected to analyse learning curve effects. The primary outcome was the presence of locoregional recurrence.ResultsThe implementation cohort of 120 patients had a median follow up of 21·9 months. Short-term outcomes included a positive circumferential resection margin rate of 5·0 per cent and anastomotic leakage rate of 17 per cent. The overall local recurrence rate in the implementation cohort was 10·0 per cent (12 of 120), with a mean(s.d.) interval to recurrence of 15·2(7·0) months. Multifocal local recurrence was present in eight of 12 patients. In the prolonged cohort (266 patients), the overall recurrence rate was 5·6 per cent (4·0 per cent after excluding the first 10 procedures at each centre).ConclusionTaTME was associated with a multifocal local recurrence rate that may be related to suboptimal execution rather than the technique itself. Prolonged proctoring, optimization of the technique to avoid spillage, and quality control is recommended.
| S-EPMC7496604 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMinimally invasive total mesorectal excision (MiTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) are popular trends in mid and low rectal cancer. However, there is currently no systematic comparison between MiTME and TaTME of mid and low-rectal cancer. Therefore, we systematically study the perioperative and pathological outcomes of MiTME and TaTME in mid and low rectal cancer.MethodsWe have searched the Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science for articles on MiTME (robotic or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision) and TaTME (transanal total mesorectal excision). We calculated pooled standard mean difference (SMD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The protocol for this review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022374141).ResultsThere are 11010 patients including 39 articles. Compared with TaTME, patients who underwent MiTME had no statistical difference in operation time (SMD -0.14; CI -0.31 to 0.33; I2=84.7%, P=0.116), estimated blood loss (SMD 0.05; CI -0.05 to 0.14; I2=48%, P=0.338), postoperative hospital stay (RR 0.08; CI -0.07 to 0.22; I2=0%, P=0.308), over complications (RR 0.98; CI 0.88 to 1.08; I2=25.4%, P=0.644), intraoperative complications (RR 0.94; CI 0.69 to 1.29; I2=31.1%, P=0.712), postoperative complications (RR 0.98; CI 0.87 to 1.11; I2=16.1%, P=0.789), anastomotic stenosis (RR 0.85; CI 0.73 to 0.98; I2=7.4%, P=0.564), wound infection (RR 1.08; CI 0.65 to 1.81; I2=1.9%, P=0.755), circumferential resection margin (RR 1.10; CI 0.91 to 1.34; I2=0%, P=0.322), distal resection margin (RR 1.49; CI 0.73 to 3.05; I2=0%, P=0.272), major low anterior resection syndrome (RR 0.93; CI 0.79 to 1.10; I2=0%, P=0.386), lymph node yield (SMD 0.06; CI -0.04 to 0.17; I2=39.6%, P=0.249), 2-year DFS rate (RR 0.99; CI 0.88 to 1.11; I2=0%, P = 0.816), 2-year OS rate (RR 1.00; CI 0.90 to 1.11; I2=0%, P = 0.969), distant metastasis rate (RR 0.47; CI 0.17 to 1.29; I2=0%, P = 0.143), and local recurrence rate (RR 1.49; CI 0.75 to 2.97; I2=0%, P = 0.250). However, patients who underwent MiTME had fewer anastomotic leak rates (SMD -0.38; CI -0.59 to -0.17; I2=19.0%, P<0.0001).ConclusionThis study comprehensively and systematically evaluated the safety and efficacy of MiTME and TaTME in the treatment of mid to low-rectal cancer through meta-analysis. There is no difference between the two except for patients with MiTME who have a lower anastomotic leakage rate, which provides some evidence-based reference for clinical practice. Of course, in the future, more scientific and rigorous conclusions need to be drawn from multi-center RCT research.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022374141.
| S-EPMC10291686 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) has recently emerged as a promising novel surgical procedure for rectal cancer. It is believed to hold the potential advantage of providing better access to mobilize the distal rectum and achieving better pathologic results. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of taTME for rectal cancer and summarize the preliminary experience in 10 Chinese hospitals. Methods:A total of 211 patients were enrolled in this study. Variables for evaluation of safety, feasibility, and oncologic outcomes were retrospectively collected and analysed. Results:The median distance between the tumor and the anal verge was 5.9?cm (range, 1.5-12?cm). The median operating time was 280?min (range, 70-600?min) and the median estimated intra-operative blood loss was 50?mL (range, 10-1,500?mL). The overall rate of complication was 27.9%. Among the 211 patients, 175 (82.9%) had complete TME and 33 (15.6%) had near complete TME. The circumferential resection margin was negative in 97.7% of patients. The patients were followed for a median of 35?months (range, 2-86?months). There was 7.6% (16) mortality, 6.2% (13) had local recurrence, and 12.8% (27) had systemic recurrence. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that 1-, 2-, and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 94.8%, 89.3%, and 80.2%, respectively, and 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 97.4%, 95.7%, and 92.9%, respectively. Conclusions:Although limited by its retrospective nature, taTME was safe and feasible in selected patients. Future work with rigorous data recording is warranted.
| S-EPMC7034231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The management of rectal cancer has evolved over the years, including the recent rise of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (TaTME). TaTME addresses the limitations created by the bony confines of the pelvis, bulky tumours, and fatty mesorectum, particularly for low rectal cancers. However, guidance is required to ensure safe implementation and to avoid the pitfalls and potential major morbidity encountered by the early adopters of TaTME. We report a broad international consensus statement, which provides a basis for optimal clinical practice.Forty international experts were invited to participate based on clinical and academic achievements. The consensus statements were developed using Delphi methodology incorporating three successive rounds. Consensus was defined as agreement by 80% or more of the experts.A total of 37 colorectal surgeons from 20 countries and 5 continents (Europe, Asia, North and South America, Australasia) contributed to the consensus. Participation to the iterative Delphi rounds was 100%. An expert radiologist, pathologist, and medical oncologist provided recommendations to maximize relevance to current practice. Consensus was obtained on all seven different chapters: patient selection and surgical indication, perioperative management, patient positioning and operating room set up, surgical technique, devices and instruments, pelvic anatomy, TaTME training, and outcomes analysis.This multidisciplinary consensus statement achieved more than 80% approval and can thus be graded as strong recommendation, yet acknowledging the current lack of high level evidence. It provides the best possible guidance for safe implementation and practice of Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision.
| S-EPMC5807525 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportanceProponents 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.ObjectiveTo 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 participantsThis 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.ExposureTransanal TME.Main outcomes and measuresThe 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.ResultsOf 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 (90.9%) had a negative distal resection margin, 2 (9.1%) 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 relevanceIn 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.
| S-EPMC7859847 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough the anatomic difficulties of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer have been resolved by hybrid transanal total mesorectal excision (h-taTME), a completely incisionless surgical procedure has not yet been developed. This study was performed to explore the efficacy of pure taTME (p-taTME) without laparoscopic assistance as a completely non-invasive surgical procedure for rectal cancer.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated all patients with rectal cancer who underwent p-taTME between December 2015 and April 2018. Relevant patient characteristics and clinical information including the surgical procedure, specimens, pathological characteristics, and patients' post-operative state were analysed and the feasibility of p-taTME in patients with rectal cancer was assessed.ResultsFifty-five patients who had undergone p-taTME were included in this study. They comprised 32 (58.2%) men and 23 (41.8%) women with a mean age of 65.6 ± 10.6 years and mean body mass index of 23.4 ± 3.3 kg/m2. The median surgical time was 180.0 (range, 130-360) min and estimated blood loss was 25.0 (range, 15-80) mL. The commonest post-operative complication was varying degrees of faecal incontinence (56.4%). However, such incontinence greatly improved after pelvic-floor-function-rehabilitation exercises and did not seriously affect the patients' quality of life.Conclusionsp-taTME is a relatively safe and incisionless procedure for patients with middle and low rectal cancer, especially in those with obesity or a narrow pelvis. However, further studies of the indications and long-term efficacy are needed to verify the suitability of this procedure.
| S-EPMC7034235 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10875406 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTransabdominal robotic surgery and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) are newly introduced strategies for rectal cancer. These procedures might have many advantages in rectal cancer treatment in terms of improving oncological and functional outcomes, especially in cases involving advanced cancer or technical difficulty. In the present study, we aimed to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of transabdominal robotic surgery and laparoscopic TaTME as a hybrid surgery for rectal cancer.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively evaluated six patients who underwent hybrid surgery for rectal cancer from August 2018 to April 2020. Both clinical and pathological outcomes were assessed.ResultsTwo patients showed circumferential margin involvement both before and after neoadjuvant therapy. Three patients were planned to undergo hybrid surgery with intersphincteric resection because of a narrow pelvis. One patient was planned to undergo hybrid surgery for a giant tumor of >10 cm. The median length of hospitalization was 17 days. No patients required conversion to an open procedure. All patients underwent formation of defunctioning ileostomies. Two patients had a stapled anastomosis and four had a hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis. Complications included one case of anastomotic leakage, which was managed conservatively with ultrasound- and computed tomography-guided drainage and antibiotics. Histological analysis revealed that all specimens had a negative radial margin and distal margin. The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 17.5. Two patients showed extensive lymph node metastases, including lateral node metastasis.ConclusionHybrid surgery was performed safely and may improve oncological outcomes for rectal cancer. This technique has many potential benefits and would be alternative option in multimodal strategies for rectal cancer.
| S-EPMC8519803 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTransanal TME (taTME) combines abdominal and transanal dissection to facilitate sphincter preservation in patients with low rectal tumors. Few phase II/III trials report long-term oncologic and functional results. We report early results from a North American prospective multicenter phase II trial of taTME (NCT03144765).Methods100 patients with stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma located ≤ 10 cm from the anal verge (AV) were enrolled across 11 centers. Primary and secondary endpoints were TME quality, pathologic outcomes, 30-day and 90-day outcomes, and stoma closure rate. Univariable regression analysis was performed to assess risk factors for incomplete TME and anastomotic complications.ResultsBetween September 2017 and April 2022, 70 males and 30 females with median age of 58 (IQR 49-62) years and BMI 27.8 (IQR 23.9-31.8) kg/m2 underwent 2-team taTME for tumors located a median 5.8 (IQR 4.5-7.0) cm from the AV. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was completed in 69%. Intersphincteric resection was performed in 36% and all patients were diverted. Intraoperative complications occurred in 8% including 3 organ injuries, 2 abdominal and 1 transanal conversion. The 30-day and 90-day morbidity rates were 49% (Clavien-Dindo (CD) ≥ 3 in 28.6%) and 56% (CD ≥ 3 in 30.4% including 1 mortality), respectively. Anastomotic complications were reported in 18% including 10% diagnosed within 30 days. Higher anastomotic risk was noted among males (p = 0.05). At a median follow-up of 5 (IQR 3.1-7.4) months, 98% of stomas were closed. TME grade was complete or near complete in 90%, with positive margins in 2 cases (3%). Risk factors for incomplete TME were ASA ≥ 3 (p = 0.01), increased time between NRT and surgery (p = 0.03), and higher operative blood loss (p = 0.003).ConclusionWhen performed at expert centers, 2-team taTME in patients with low rectal tumors is safe with low conversion rates and high stoma closure rate. Mid-term results will further evaluate oncologic and functional outcomes.
| S-EPMC10709232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the feasibility of transanal total mesorectal excision (TME) in patients with rectal cancer.MethodsThis study enrolled 12 patients with clinically node negative rectal cancer located 4-12 cm from the anal verge who underwent transanal endoscopic TME with the assistance of single port laparoscopic surgery between September 2013 and August 2014. The primary endpoint was TME quality; secondary endpoints included number of harvested lymph nodes and postoperative complications within 30 days (NCT01938027).ResultsThe 12 patients included 7 males and 5 females, of median age 59 years and median body mass index 24.2 kg/m2. Tumors were located on average 6.7 cm from the anal verge. Four patients (33.3%) received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Median operating time was 195 minutes and median blood loss was 50 mL. There were no intraoperative complications and no conversions to open surgery. TME was complete or nearly complete in 11 patients (91.7%). Median distal resection and circumferential resection margins were 18.5 mm and 10 mm, respectively. Median number of harvested lymph nodes was 15. Median length of hospital stay was 9 days. There were no postoperative deaths. Six patients experienced minor postoperative complications, including urinary dysfunction in 2, transient ileus in 3, and wound abscess in 1.ConclusionThis pilot study showed that high-quality TME was possible in most patients without serious complications. Transanal TME for patients with rectal cancer may be feasible and safe, but further investigations are necessary to evaluate its long-term functional and oncologic outcomes and to clarify its indications.
| S-EPMC5064229 | biostudies-literature