Transanal total mesorectal excision: pathological results of 186 patients with mid and low rectal cancer
Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) seems to be a valid alternative to the open or laparoscopic TME. Quality of the TME specimen is the most important prognostic factor in rectal cancer. This study shows the pathological results of the largest single-institution series published on TaTME in patients with mid and low rectal cancer.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients with rectal cancer, treated by TaTME between November 2011 and June 2016. Patient data were prospectively included in a standardized database. Patients with all TNM stages of mid (5–10 cm from the anal verge) and low (0–5 cm from the anal verge) rectal cancer were included.
A total of 186 patients were included. Tumor was in the mid and low rectum in, respectively, 62.9 and 37.1%. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was given in 62.4%, only radiotherapy in 3.2%, and only chemotherapy in 2.2%. Preoperative staging showed T1 in 3.2%, T2 in 20.4%, T3 in 67.7%, and T4 in 7.5%. Mesorectal resection quality was complete in 95.7% (n = 178), almost complete in 1.6% (n = 3), and incomplete in 1.1% (n = 2). Overall positive CRM (≤ 1 mm) and DRM (≤ 1 mm) were 8.1% (n = 15) and 3.2% (n = 6), respectively. The composite of complete mesorectal excision, negative CRM, and negative DRM was achieved in 88.1% (n = 155) of the patients. The median number of lymph nodes found per specimen was 14.0 (IQR 11–18).
The present study showed good rates regarding total mesorectal excision, negative circumferential, and distal resection margins. As the specimen quality is a surrogate marker for survival, TaTME can be regarded as a safe method to treat patients with rectal cancer, from an oncological point of view.
KeywordsRectal cancer Total mesorectal excision Transanal TME Circumferential resection margin Mesorectal resection quality
Compliance with ethical standards
Dr Antonio M. Lacy reports personal fees from Medtronic, Olympus, Applied Medical, and Conmed, outside the submitted work. Drs F. Borja de Lacy, Dr Jacqueline JEM van Laarhoven, Drs María Clara Arroyave, Drs Raquel Bravo, and Dr Miriam Cuatrecasas have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 2.Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Colenbrander AC, Klein Kranenbarg E, Steup WH, van Krieken JH, van Houwelingen JC, Leer JW, van de Velde CJ (1998) Local recurrence in patients with rectal cancer diagnosed between 1988 and 1992: a population-based study in the west Netherlands. Eur J Surg Oncol 24:528–535CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, Putter H, Steup WH, Wiggers T, Rutten HJ, Pahlman L, Glimelius B, van Krieken JH, Leer JW, van de Velde CJ, Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (2001) Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 345(9):638–646CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, Rödel C, Wittekind C, Fietkau R, Martus P, Tschmelitsch J, Hager E, Hess CF, Karstens JH, Liersch T, Schmidberger H, Raab R, German Rectal Cancer Study Group (2004) Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 351:1731–1740CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, Wynn G, Austin R, Warusavitarne J, Moran B, Hanna GB, Mortensen NJ, Tekkis PP, TaTME Registry Collaborative (2016) Transanal total mesorectal excision: international registry results of the first 720 cases. Ann Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001948 Google Scholar
- 8.Deijen CL, Tsai A, Koedam TWA, Veltcamp Helbach M, Sietses C, Lacy AM, Bonjer HJ, Tuynman JB (2016) Clinical outcomes and case volume effect of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review. Tech Coloproctol 20(12):811–824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-016-1545-0 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH, Cooperative Clinical Investigators of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20:1729–1734CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Kang SB, Park JW, Jeong SY, Nam BH, Choi HS, Kim DW, Lim SB, Lee TK, Kim DY, Kim JS, Chang HJ, Lee HS, Kim SY, Jung KH, Hong YS, Kim JH, Sohn DK, Kim SH, Oh JH (2010) Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 11:637–645CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, Boller AM, George V, Abbas M, Peters WR Jr, Maun D, Chang G, Herline A, Fichera A, Mutch M, Wexner S, Whiteford M, Marks J, Birnbaum E, Margolin D, Larson D, Marcello P, Posner M, Read T, Monson J, Wren SM, Pisters PWT, Nelson H (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(13):1346–1355CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 20.Stevenson ARL, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, Hewett P, Clouston AD, Gebski VJ, Davies L, Wilson K, Hague W, Simes J, ALaCaRT Investigators (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs Open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer. ALaCaRT Randomized Clin Trial JAMA. 314(13):1356–1363Google Scholar
- 22.Mezhir JJ, Smith KD, Fichera A, Hart J, Posner MC, Hurst RD. (2005) Presence of distal intramural spread after preoperative combined-modality therapy for adenocarcinoma of the rectum: what is now the appropriate distal resection margin? Surgery 138(4):658–663 (discussion 663–664)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 23.Guillem JG, Chessin DB, Shia J, Suriawinata A, Riedel E, Moore HG, Minsky BD, Wong WD (2007) A prospective pathologic analysis using whole-mount sections of rectal cancer following preoperative combined modality therapy: implications for sphincter preservation. Ann Surg 245(1):88–93CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar