Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 32, Issue 5, pp 2312–2321 | Cite as

Effect of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: comparison of short-term outcomes with laparoscopic and open surgeries

  • Sharaf Karim Perdawood
  • Benjamin Sejr Thinggaard
  • Maya Xania Bjoern
Article

Abstract

Objective

To compare short-term results of total mesorectal excision (TME) for mid and low rectal cancer, achieved by transanal (TaTME), laparoscopic (LaTME), and open (OpTME) approaches.

Background

The impact of TaTME on the surgical treatment of mid and low rectal cancer has yet to be clarified.

Methods

This is a case-matched study, based on data from a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent TaTME from May 2015 to March 2017, and a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent LaTME and OpTME in the previous period. Each patient in the TaTME group was matched to one LaTME and one OpTME based on sex, BMI, tumor status, and the height of the tumor from the anal verge. Primary end-points were rates of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM), distal resection margin, and the macroscopic quality of the surgical specimen. Composite of these outcomes was compared as an indication for successful surgery. Secondary end-points included intraoperative data and postoperative course and complications.

Results

Three hundred patients were included (TaTME = 100, LaTME = 100, OpTME = 100). The three groups were comparable in the baseline characteristics. TaTME resulted in lower rates of incomplete TME specimens than LaTME, but not OpTME (P = 0.016, P = 0.750, respectively). The rates of CRM involvement, mean CRM distance, and the percentages of successful surgery were comparable among the three groups (P = 0.368). The conversion to open surgery occurred only in the LaTME group. TaTME resulted in shorter operation time and less blood loss than the other two groups (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001). Hospital stay was shorter in the TaTME group (P = 0.002); complication rate and mortality were comparable among the groups.

Conclusions

TaTME had, in our hands, some obvious benefits over other approaches. The pathological results were not significantly superior to LaTME and OpTME. The procedure is however feasible and safe. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term oncological and quality of life outcomes.

Keywords

Rectal cancer surgery Total mesorectal excision Laparoscopy TaTME 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

Drs. Sharaf Karim Perdawood, Benjamin Sejr Thinggaard, and Maya Xania Bjoern have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Heald RJ (1979) A new approach to rectal cancer. Br J Hosp Med 22:277–281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD (1982) The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg 69:613–616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RD et al (1998) Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978–1997. Arch Surg 133:894–899CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA et al (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ et al (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314:1346–1355CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW et al (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314:1356–1363CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH et al (2014) Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 15:767–774CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rickles AS, Dietz DW, Chang GJ et al (2015) High rate of positive circumferential resection margins following rectal cancer surgery: a call to action. Ann Surg 262:891–898CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365:1718–1726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heald RJ (2013) A new solution to some old problems: transanal TME. Tech Coloproctol 17:257–258CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    D’Hoore A, Wolthuis AM, Sands DR, Wexner S (2016) Transanal total mesorectal excision: the work is progressing well. Dis Colon Rectum 59:247–250CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simillis C, Hompes R, Penna M et al (2016) A systematic review of transanal total mesorectal excision: is this the future of rectal cancer surgery? Colorectal Dis 18:19–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Perdawood SK, Al Khefagie GA (2016) Transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: initial experience from Denmark. Colorectal Dis 18:51–58CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bulow S, Harling H, Iversen LH, Ladelund S (2010) Improved survival after rectal cancer in Denmark. Colorectal Dis 12:e37-42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70:41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    DCCG (2013) Recommendations of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group: neoadjuvant treatment of advanced resectable rectal cancer. http://dccg.dk/retningslinjer/20140418/2014_NeoAdjRectum.pdf. Accessed April 2017
  17. 17.
    Quirke P, Durdey P, Dixon MF, Williams NS (1986) Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision. Lancet 2:996–999CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J et al (2009) Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet 373(9666):821–828CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ng SS, Lee JF, Yiu RY et al (2014) Laparoscopic-assisted versus open total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation for mid and low rectal cancer: a prospective, randomized trial. Surg Endosc 28:297–306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bulow S, Christensen IJ, Iversen LH, Harling H (2011) Intra-operative perforation is an important predictor of local recurrence and impaired survival after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 13:1256–1264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Arteaga Gonzalez I, Diaz Luis H, Martin Malagon A et al (2006) A comparative clinical study of short-term results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer during the learning curve. Int J Colorectal Dis 21:590–595CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Braga M, Frasson M, Vignali A et al (2007) Laparoscopic resection in rectal cancer patients: outcome and cost-benefit analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 50:464–471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen CC, Lai YL, Jiang JK et al (2015) Transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation: a matched case-control study. Ann Surg Oncol. doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4997-y Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fernandez-Hevia M, Delgado S, Castells A et al (2015) Transanal total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer: short-term outcomes in comparison with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 261:221–227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rasulov AO, Mamedli ZZ, Gordeyev SS et al (2016) Short-term outcomes after transanal and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol. doi: 10.1007/s10151-015-1421-3 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Velthuis S, Nieuwenhuis DH, Ruijter TE et al (2014) Transanal versus traditional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal carcinoma. Surg Endosc 28:3494–3499CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Deijen CL, Tsai A, Koedam TW et al (2016) Clinical outcomes and case volume effect of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review. Tech Coloproctol 20:811–824CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rouanet P, Mourregot A, Azar CC et al (2013) Transanal endoscopic proctectomy: an innovative procedure for difficult resection of rectal tumors in men with narrow pelvis. Dis Colon Rectum 56:408–415CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bülow S CI, Iversen LH et al (2011) Intra-operative perforation is an important predictor of local recurrence and impaired survival after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. In Colorectal Dis 13(11):1256–1264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
  32. 32.
    Buunen M, Bonjer HJ, Hop WC et al (2009) COLOR II. A randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal cancer. Dan Med Bull 56:89–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Staderini F, Foppa C, Minuzzo A et al (2016) Robotic rectal surgery: state of the art. World J Gastrointest Oncol 8:757–771CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Speicher PJ, Englum BR, Ganapathi AM et al (2015) Robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a national perspective on short-term oncologic outcomes. Ann Surg 262:1040–1045CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27:233–241CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S et al (2016) Transanal total mesorectal excision: international registry results of the first 720 cases. Ann Surg. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001948 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Xu W, Xu Z, Cheng H et al (2016) Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between transanal and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for the treatment of mid and low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 42:1841–1850CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Deijen CL, Velthuis S, Tsai A et al (2015) COLOR III: a multicentre randomised clinical trial comparing transanal TME versus laparoscopic TME for mid and low rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4615-x PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgerySlagelse HospitalSlagelseDenmark
  2. 2.University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations