Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Review
  • Published:
Techniques in Coloproctology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to compare long-term oncological, functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for rectal cancer.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were conducted on PubMed and Cochrane database. Non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) which compared TaTME with LaTME were included.

Results

Ten non-randomized studies were identified, including a total of 638 patients (323 TaTME and 315 LaTME). Age, sex, body mass index, neoadjuvant treatment and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) staging of patients in the two groups were comparable in all included studies. The follow-up period was significantly shorter in the TaTME group than in the LaTME group. No significant differences in local (p = 0.71) and distant (p = 0.23) recurrence rate, 2-year disease-free (p = 0.86) and overall (p = 0.25) survival was found. Also, no significant differences in function outcomes and QoL, including the Wexner score (p = 0.48) or the International Prostate Syndrome Score (IPSS) (p = 0.64) were found. However, the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score was significantly higher in the TaTME group (p = 0.04).

Conclusions

TaTME and LaTME have similar long-term oncological and functional outcomes as well as QoL. The only exception is higher LARS scores after TaTME. The current data are based mainly on observational studies and further randomized controlled trials are required.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sylla P, Rattner DW, Delgado S, Lacy AM (2010) NOTES transanal rectal cancer resection using transanal endoscopic microsurgery and laparoscopic assistance. Surg Endosc 24:1205–1210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Deijen CL, Velthuis S, Tsai A, Mavroveli S, de Lange-de Klerk ESM, Sietses C, Tuynman JB, Lacy AM, Hanna GB, Bonjer HJ (2016) COLOR III: a multicentre randomised clinical trial comparing transanal TME versus laparoscopic TME for mid and low rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 30:3210–3215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lelong B, de Chaisemartin C, Meillat H, Cournier S, Boher JM, Genre D, Karoui M, Tuech JJ, Delpero JR (2017) A multicenter randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy, morbidity and functional outcome of endoscopic transanal proctectomy versus laparoscopic proctectomy for low-lying rectal cancer (ETAP-GRECCAR 11 TRIAL): rationale and design. BMC Cancer 17:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Zeng Z, Luo S, Chen J, Cai Y, Zhang X, Kang L (2019) Comparison of pathological outcomes after transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a prospective study using data from randomized control trial. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07167-1,October4

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 62:1006–1012

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wells GA, Shea BJ, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, Tugwell P (2005) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomised studies in meta-analyses. Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa. Available from http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp

  7. Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T (2014) Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol 14:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Clarke M, Oxman AD (1999) Cochrane reviewers’ handbook 4.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chen YT, Kiu KT, Yen MH, Chang TC (2019) Comparison of the shortterm outcomes in lower rectal cancer using three different surgical techniques: transanal total mesorectal excision (TME), laparoscopic TME, and open TME. Asian J Surg 42:674–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mege D, Hain E, Lakkis Z, Maggiori L, Prost a la Denise J, Panis Y, (2018) Is trans-anal total mesorectal excision really safe and better than laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with a perineal approach first in patients with low rectal cancer? A learning curve with case-matched study in 68 patients. Colorectal Dis 20:O143–O151

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Veltcamp Helbach M, Koedam TWA, Knol JJ, Diederik A, Spaargaren GJ, Bonjer HJ, Tuynman JB, Sietses C (2019) Residual mesorectum on postoperative magnetic resonance imaging following transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LapTME) in rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 33:94–102

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Marks JH, Montenegro GA, Salem JF, Shields MV, Marks GJ (2016) Transanal TATA/TME: a case-matched study of taTME versus laparoscopic TME surgery for rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol 20:467–473

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lelong B, Meillat H, Zemmour C, Poizat F, Ewald J, Mege D, Lelong JC, Delpero JR, de Chaisemartin C (2017) Short- and mid-term outcomes after endoscopic transanal or laparoscopictransabdominal total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a single institutional case-control study. J Am Coll Surg 224:917–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. De’Angelis N, Portigliotti L, Azoulay D, Brunetti F (2015) Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a single center experience and systematic review of the literature. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 400:945–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rubinkiewicz M, Zarzycki P, Witowski J, Pisarska M, Gajewska N, Torbicz G, Nowakowski M, Major P, Budzyński A, Pedziwiatr M (2019) Functional outcomes after resections for low rectal tumors: comparison of transanal with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. BMC Surg 19:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bjoern MX, Perdawood SK (2020) Manometric assessment of anorectal function after transanal total mesorectal excision. Tech Coloproctol 24:231–236

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bjoern MX, Nielsen S, Perdawood SK (2019) Quality of life after surgery for rectal cancer: a comparison of functional outcomes after transanal and laparoscopic approaches. J Gastrointest Surg 23:1623–1630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Veltcamp Helbach M, Koedam TWA, Knol JJ, Velthuis S, Bonjer HJ, Tuynman JB, Sietses C (2018) Quality of life after rectal cancer surgery: differences between laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision. Surg Endosc 33:79–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Stevenson ARL, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, Hewett P, Clouston AD, Gebski VJ, Davies L, Wilson K, Hague W, Simes J (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314:1356–1363

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. 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 314:1346–1355

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MHGM, de Lange-de Klerk ESM, Lacy AM, Bemelman WA, Andersson J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J, Fuerst A, Haglind E (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hompes R, Arnold S, Warusavitarne J (2014) Towards the safe introduction of transanal total mesorectal excision: the role of a clinical registry. Colorectal Dis 16:498–501

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sylla P, Bordeianou LG, Berger D, Han KS, Lauwers GY, Sahani DV, Sbeih MA, Lacy AM, Rattner DW (2013) A pilot study of natural orifice transanal endoscopic total mesorectal excision with laparoscopic assistance for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27:3396–3405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Heald RJ (2013) A new solution to some old problems: transanal TME. Tech Coloproctol 17:257–258

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CA, Kranenbarg EK, Van de Velde CJ, van Krieken JH, Committee PR, Investigators CC (2002) Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit. Am J Surg Pathol 26:350–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG, Scott N, Finan PJ, Johnston D, Dixon MF, Quirke P (1994) Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 344:707–711

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Rasulov AO, Dzhumabaev KE, Kozlov SYE, Mamedli ZZ, Kulushev VM, Gordeev SS, Kuzmichev DV, Polynovsky AV (2018) Transanal mesorectumectomy for rectal cancer—is it optimal surgery for ‘difficult’ patients? Khirurgiia (Mosk) 6:4–21

    Google Scholar 

  28. Aubert M, Mege D, Panis Y (2019) Total mesorectal excision for low and middle rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus transanal approach-a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-07160-8,October15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Lin D, Yu Z, Chen W, Hu J, Huang X, He Z, Zou YF, Yu X, Guo X, Wu XJ (2019) Transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of short-term outcomes. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne 14:353–365

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang X, Gao Y, Dai X, Zhang H, Shang Z, Cai X, Shen T, Cheng X, Yu K, Li Y (2019) Short- and long-term outcomes of transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid-to-low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 33:972–985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Simillis C, Lal N, Thoukididou SN, Kontovounisios C, Smith JJ, Hompes R, Adamina M, Tekkis PP (2019) Open versus laparoscopic versus robotic versus transanal mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Ann Surg 270:59–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kanso F, Maggiori L, Debove C, Chau A, Ferron M, Panis Y (2015) Perineal or abdominal approach first during intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: which is the best strategy? Dis Colon Rectum 58:637–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Denost Q, Loughlin P, Chevalier R, Celerier B, Didailler R, Rullier E (2018) Transanal versus abdominal low rectal dissection for rectal cancer: long-term results of the Bordeaux’ randomized trial. Surg Endosc 32:1486–1494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pontallier A, Denost Q, Van Geluwe B, Adam JP, Celerier B, Rullier E (2016) Potential sexual function improvement by using transanal mesorectal approach for laparoscopic low rectal cancer excision. Surg Endosc 30:4924–4933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Trenti L, Galvez A, Biondo S, Solis A, Vallribera-Valls F, Espin-Basany E, Garcia-Granero A, Kreisler E (2018) Quality of life and anterior resection syndrome after surgery for mid to low rectal cancer: a cross-sectional study. Eur J Surg Oncol 44:1031–1039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Chouillard E, Regnier A, Vitte RL, Bonnet BV, Greco V, Chahine E, Daher R, Biagini J (2016) Transanal NOTES total mesorectal excision (TME) in patients with rectal cancer: is anatomy better preserved? Tech Coloproctol 20:537–544

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Foo CC, Kin Ng K, Tsang JS, Siu-Hung Lo O, Wei R, Yip J, Lun Law W (2020) Low anterior resection syndrome after transanal total mesorectal excision: a comparison with the conventional top-to-bottom approach. Dis Colon Rectum 63:497–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Allaix ME, Rebecchi F, Giaccone C, MistrangeloMorino M (2011) Long-term functional results and quality of life after transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Br J Surg 98:1635–1643

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ryzhikh National Medical Research Center of Coloproctology, Saliama Adila street, 2, Moscow, 123423, Russian Federation

    I. Alimova, S. Chernyshov, M. Nagudov & E. Rybakov

Authors
  1. I. Alimova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Chernyshov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Nagudov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Rybakov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. Alimova.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Drs. Iuliia Alimova, Stanislav Chernyshov, Marat Nagudov and Evgeniy Rybakov have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Ethical approval

Ethics approval was not required for this systematic review and meta-analysis.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was not required for this systematic review and meta-analysis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alimova, I., Chernyshov, S., Nagudov, M. et al. Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol 25, 901–913 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02420-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02420-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation