Does transanal endomicrosurgery affects the results of “salvage mesorectumectomy” for patients with early rectal cancer? Systematic review and meta-analysis
https://doi.org/10.17650/2949-5857-2024-14-1-11-20
Abstract
Aim. Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare studies with primary mesorectumectomy (pME) and “salvage mesorectumectomy” (sME) after transanal endomicrosurgery for patients with early rectal cancer.
Materials and methods. We selected publications from 1 January 1999 to 1 April 2023. A total of 7 studies were included after screening. Following indicators were compared: quality of mesorectum, frequency of abdominoperineal resection, frequency of local recurrence and distant metastases, mortality, morbidity, time of surgery, post-operative stay, frequency of involvement of circular resection margin. Statistical data was processed using ReviewManager 5.3.
Results. Statistically significant differences were observed in probability of intraoperative damaging of mesorectal fascia (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.42; 95 % Confidence Interval (CI) 0.24–0.72, р = 0.002). There were also a trend towards decreasing of number of sphincter-preserving operations after transanal endomicrosurgery (TEM) (OR 1.84; 95 % CI 0.96–3.52, р = 0,06). Other indicators didn’t reach statistical significance when compared.
Conclusion. sTME is a safe procedure and comparable with pME. However, previous TEM is considered a risk factor for damaging of mesorectum, intraoperative perforation and abdominoperineal resection.
About the Authors
Ph. I. Kirgizov
A.N. Ryzhikh National Medical Research Center of Coloproctology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Philipp Igorevich Kirgizov
2 Salyama Adilya St., Moscow 123423
S. V. Chernyshov
A.N. Ryzhikh National Medical Research Center of Coloproctology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2 Salyama Adilya St., Moscow 123423
M. A. Nagudov
A.N. Ryzhikh National Medical Research Center of Coloproctology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2 Salyama Adilya St., Moscow 123423
E. G. Rybakov
A.N. Ryzhikh National Medical Research Center of Coloproctology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
2 Salyama Adilya St., Moscow 123423
References
1. Heald R.J. A new approach to rectal cancer. Br J Hosp Med 1979;22(3):277–81.
2. Heald R.J. The ‘Holy Plane’ of rectal surgery. J R Soc Med 1988;81(9):503–8. DOI: 10.1177/014107688808100904
3. Shelygin Y.A., Nagudov M.A., Ponomarenko A.A. et al. Meta-analysis of management of colorectal anastomotic leakage. Khirurgiya. Zurnal im. N.I. Pirogova = N.I. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery 2018;8(2):30–41. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17116/hirurgia201808230
4. Gomila A., Carratalà J., Camprubí D. et al.; VINCat colon surgery group. Risk factors and outcomes of organ-space surgical site infections after elective colon and rectal surgery. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2017;6:40. DOI: 10.1186/s13756-017-0198-8
5. Shelygin Y.A., Chernyshov S.V., Mainovskaya O.A. et al. Early rectal cancer: can transanal endoscopic microsurgery become the standard treatment? Vestnik RAMN = Annals of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences. 2016;71(4):323–31. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.15690/vramn719
6. Sajid M.S., Farag S., Leung P. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials comparing the effectiveness of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical resection in the management of early rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 2014;6(1):2–14. DOI: 10.1111/codi.12474
7. Morino M., Allaix M.E., Caldart M. et al. Risk factors for recurrence after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal malignant neoplasm. Surg Endosc 2011;25(11):3683–90. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-1777-z
8. Dulskas A., Atkociunas A., Kilius A. et al. Is previous transanal endoscopic microsurgery for early rectal cancer a risk factor of worse outcome following salvage surgery a case-matched analysis. Visc Med 2019;35(3):151–5. DOI: 10.1159/000493281
9. Letarte F., Raval M., Karimuddin A. et al. Salvage TME following TEM: a possible indication for TaTME. Tech Coloproctol 2018;22(5):355–61. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-018-1784-3
10. Levic Souzani K., Bulut O., Hesselfeldt P., Bülow S. The outcome of rectal cancer after early salvage TME following TEM compared with primary TME: a case-matched study. Tech Coloproctol 2013;17(4):397–403. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-012-0950-2
11. Morino M., Allaix M.E., Arolfo S., Arezzo A. Previous transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer represents a risk factor for an increased abdominoperineal resection rate. Surg Endosc 2013;27(9):3315–21. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-2911-x
12. van Gijn W., Brehm V., de Graaf E. et al. Unexpected rectal cancer after TEM: outcome of completion surgery compared with primary TME. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013;39(11):1225–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.08.003
13. Clermonts S.H.E.M., Köeter T., Pottel H. et al. Outcomes of completion total mesorectal excision are not compromised by prior transanal minimally invasive surgery. Colorectal Dis 2020;22(7):790–8. DOI: 10.1111/codi.14962
14. Levic Souzani K., Bulut O., Kuhlmann T.P. et al. Completion total mesorectal excision following transanal endoscopic microsurgery does not compromise outcomes in patients with rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 2022;36(2):1181–90. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08385-2
15. Alekseev M.V., Shelygin Yu.A., Rybakov E.G. Can fluorescent angiography reduce the leak rate of colonic anastomoses? (a meta-analysis). Koloproktologia = Coloproctology 2019;18(4):139–50. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.33878/2073-7556-2019-18-4-139-150
16. Chaouch M.A., Kellil T., Jeddi C. et al. How to prevent anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery? A systematic review. Ann Coloproctol 2020;36(4):213–22. DOI: 10.3393/ac.2020.05.14.2
17. Bipat S., Glas A.S., Slors F.J. et al. Rectal cancer: local staging and assessment of lymph node involvement with endoluminal US, CT, and MR imaging – a meta-analysis. Radiology 2004;232(3):773–83. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2323031368
Review
Views:
226
Email this article 