Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pelvimetric and Nutritional Factors Predicting Surgical Difficulty in Laparoscopic Resection for Rectal Cancer Following Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy

  • Original Scientific Report
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) following preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is technically demanding. The present study is intended to evaluate predictive factors of surgical difficulty of LaTME following PCRT by using pelvimetric and nutritional factors.

Method

Consecutive LARC patients receiving LaTME after PCRT were included. Surgical difficulty was classified based upon intraoperative (operation time, blood loss, and conversion) and postoperative outcomes (postoperative hospital stay and morbidities). Pelvimetry was performed using preoperative T2-weighted MRI. Nutritional factors such as albumin-to-globulin ratio (AGR) and prognostic nutritional index (PNI) were calculated. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to identify predictors of high surgical difficulty. A predictive nomogram was developed and validated internally.

Results

Among 294 patients included, 36 (12.4%) patients were graded as high surgical difficulty. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that previous abdominal surgery (OR = 6.080, P = 0.001), tumor diameter (OR = 1.732, P = 0.003), intersphincteric resection (vs. low anterior resection, OR = 13.241, P < 0.001), interspinous distance (OR = 0.505, P = 0.009), and preoperative AGR (OR = 0.041, P = 0.024) were independently predictive of high surgical difficulty of LaTME after PCRT. Then, a predictive nomogram was built (C-index = 0.867).

Conclusion

Besides previous abdominal surgery, type of surgery (intersphincteric resection), tumor diameter, and interspinous distance, we found that preoperative AGR could be useful for the prediction of surgical difficulty of LaTME after PCRT. A predictive nomogram for surgical difficulty may aid in planning an appropriate approach for rectal cancer surgery after PCRT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Green BL, Marshall HC, Collinson F et al (2013) Long-term follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of conventional versus laparoscopically assisted resection in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 100:75–82

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA et al (2013) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14:210–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fleshman J, Branda ME, Sargent DJ et al (2019) Disease-free survival and local recurrence for laparoscopic resection compared with open resection of stage II to III rectal cancer: follow-up results of the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 269:589–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Stevenson A, Solomon MJ, Brown C et al (2019) Disease-free survival and local recurrence after laparoscopic-assisted resection or open resection for rectal cancer: the Australasian laparoscopic cancer of the rectum randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 269:596–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dayal S, Battersby N, Cecil T (2017) Evolution of surgical treatment for rectal cancer: a review. J Gastrointest Surg 21:1166–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. van Gijn W, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID et al (2011) Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer: 12-year follow-up of the multicentre, randomised controlled TME trial. Lancet Oncol 12:575–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bosset JF, Calais G, Mineur L et al (2014) Fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer: long-term results of the EORTC 22921 randomised study. Lancet Oncol 15:184–190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Veenhof AA, Engel AF, van der Peet DL et al (2008) Technical difficulty grade score for the laparoscopic approach of rectal cancer: a single institution pilot study. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:469–475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Akiyoshi T, Kuroyanagi H, Oya M et al (2009) Factors affecting the difficulty of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with double stapling technique anastomosis for low rectal cancer. Surgery 146:483–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Escal L, Nougaret S, Guiu B et al (2018) MRI-based score to predict surgical difficulty in patients with rectal cancer. Br J Surg 105:140–146

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. De’Angelis N, Pigneur F, Martinez-Perez A et al (2019) Assessing surgical difficulty in locally advanced mid-low rectal cancer: the accuracy of two MRI-based predictive scores. Colorectal Dis 21:277–286

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hong JS, Brown K, Waller J et al (2020) The role of MRI pelvimetry in predicting technical difficulty and outcomes of open and minimally invasive total mesorectal excision: a systematic review. Tech Coloproctol 24:991–1000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ishihara S, Watanabe T, Fukushima Y et al (2014) Safety and factors contributing to the difficulty of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Tech Coloproctol 18:247–255

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. De’Angelis N, Pigneur F, Martinez-Perez A et al (2018) Predictors of surgical outcomes and survival in rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: the interest of pelvimetry and restaging magnetic resonance imaging studies. Oncotarget 9:25315–25331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mosquera C, Koutlas NJ, Edwards KC et al (2016) Impact of malnutrition on gastrointestinal surgical patients. J Surg Res 205:95–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee H, Cho YS, Jung S et al (2013) Effect of nutritional risk at admission on the length of hospital stay and mortality in gastrointestinal cancer patients. Clin Nutr Res 2:12–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jiang N, Deng JY, Ding XW et al (2014) Prognostic nutritional index predicts postoperative complications and long-term outcomes of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 20:10537–10544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tokunaga R, Sakamoto Y, Nakagawa S et al (2015) Prognostic nutritional index predicts severe complications, recurrence, and poor prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing primary tumor resection. Dis Colon Rectum 58:1048–1057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee YJ, Kim WR, Han J et al (2016) Prognostic impact of immunonutritional status changes during preoperative chemoradiation in patients with rectal cancer. Ann Coloproctol 32:208–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Li S, Chi P, Lin H et al (2011) Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery versus open resection for middle and lower rectal cancer: an NTCLES study. Surg Endosc 25:3175–3182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Chi P, Huang SH, Lin HM et al (2015) Laparoscopic transabdominal approach partial intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: surgical feasibility and intermediate-term outcome. Ann Surg Oncol 22:944–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 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 240:205–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Yamaoka Y, Yamaguchi T, Kinugasa Y et al (2019) Mesorectal fat area as a useful predictor of the difficulty of robotic-assisted laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 33:557–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Atasoy G, Arslan NC, Elibol FD et al (2018) Magnetic resonance-based pelvimetry and tumor volumetry can predict surgical difficulty and oncologic outcome in locally advanced mid-low rectal cancer. Surg Today 48:1040–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Killeen T, Banerjee S, Vijay V et al (2010) Magnetic resonance (MR) pelvimetry as a predictor of difficulty in laparoscopic operations for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 24:2974–2979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chen W, Li Q, Fan Y et al (2016) Factors predicting difficulty of laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision and double stapling technique. PLoS ONE 11:e151773

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sprenger T, Beissbarth T, Sauer R et al (2018) Long-term prognostic impact of surgical complications in the German Rectal Cancer Trial CAO/ARO/AIO-94. Br J Surg 105:1510–1518

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhou XC, Su M, Hu KQ et al (2016) CT pelvimetry and clinicopathological parameters in evaluation of the technical difficulties in performing open rectal surgery for mid-low rectal cancer. Oncol Lett 11:31–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Akagi T, Inomata M, Etoh T et al (2012) Multivariate evaluation of the technical difficulties in performing laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 22:52–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Huang S, Huang Y, Chi P et al (2019) Completely abdominal approach laparoscopic partial intersphincteric resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for initial cT3 juxta-anal rectal cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 29:809–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. De’Angelis N, Pigneur F, Martínez-Pérez A et al (2018) Predictors of surgical outcomes and survival in rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision after preoperative chemoradiation therapy: the interest of pelvimetry and restaging magnetic resonance imaging studies. Oncotarget 9:25315–25331

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all the staff in Department of colorectal surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, People’s Republic of China.

Funding

This study was supported by Construction Project of Fujian Province Minimally Invasive Medical Center (Grant Number: [2017]171), Startup Fund for Scientific Research, Fujian Medical University (Grant Number: 2017XQ1028), Joint Funds for the Innovation of Science and Technology, Fujian province (Grant Number: 2018Y9030), and Young and Middle-aged Backbone Training Project in the Health System of Fujian province (Grant Number: 2019-ZQN-45).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Yanwu Sun, Jianhua Chen, and Chengwei Ye contributed equally to this study.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Colorectal Surgery Department, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, 29 Xinquan Road, Fuzhou, PR China

    Yanwu Sun, Chengwei Ye, Huiming Lin, Xingrong Lu, Ying Huang & Pan Chi

  2. Radiology Department, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, PR China

    Jianhua Chen

Authors
  1. Yanwu Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jianhua Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chengwei Ye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Huiming Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xingrong Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ying Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Pan Chi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ying Huang or Pan Chi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOC 29 kb)

Supplementary file2 (DOC 34 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sun, Y., Chen, J., Ye, C. et al. Pelvimetric and Nutritional Factors Predicting Surgical Difficulty in Laparoscopic Resection for Rectal Cancer Following Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy. World J Surg 45, 2261–2269 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-021-06080-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-021-06080-w

Search

Navigation