Search

Background: Concerns persist regarding the effectiveness of robotic proctectomy when compared with open proctectomy for locally advanced rectal cancer with a high risk of circumferential resection margin involvement., Objective: Comparison of surrogate cancer outcomes following robotic versus open proctectomy in this subpopulation., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Three academic hospitals (Mayo Clinic Arizona, Florida, and Rochester) through the Mayo Data Explorer platform., Patients: Patients at high risk of circumferential resection margin involvement were selected based on the magnetic resonance imaging-based definition from Mercury I and II trials., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Rate of pathologic circumferential resection margin involvement (≤1 mm), mesorectal grading, rate of distal margin involvement., Results: Out of 413 patients, 125 (30%) underwent open and 288 (70%) robotic proctectomy. Open proctectomy was significantly associated with a greater proportion of cT4 tumors (39.3% vs. 24.8%, p = 0.021), multivisceral/concomitant resections (40.8% vs. 18.4%, p < 0.001) and less frequent total neoadjuvant therapy use (17.1% vs. 47.1%, p = 0.001). Robotic proctectomy was less commonly associated with pathologic circumferential resection margin involvement (7.3% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.002), including after adjustment for cT stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and multivisceral resection (OR 0.326, 95% CI, 0.157-0.670, p = 0.002). Propensity score-matching on 66 patients per group and related multivariable analysis no longer indicated any reduction of circumferential positive margin rate associated with robotic surgery (p = 0.86 and p = 0.18). Mesorectal grading was comparable (incomplete mesorectum in 6% RP patients vs. 11.8% OP patients, p = 0.327). All cases had negative distal resection margins., Limitation: Retrospective design., Conclusion: In patients with locally advanced rectal cancer at high risk of circumferential resection margin involvement, robotic proctectomy is an effective approach and could be pursued when technically possible as an alternative to open proctectomy. See Video Abstract., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2024.)

Background: Ulcerative colitis, total colectomy and tofacitinib have all been associated with increased risk of venous thromboembolism., Objective: To determine if preoperative tofacitinib exposure increases venous thromboembolism or other postoperative complications among patients with ulcerative colitis undergoing subtotal colectomy, total colectomy or total proctocolectomy., Design: Retrospective, case-control study at a single institution., Settings: A tertiary referral center., Patients: Adult patients with ulcerative colitis undergoing subtotal colectomy, total colectomy or total proctocolectomy after 2018 who were taking tofacitinib within 30 days of surgery (n = 56) were compared to age and sex-matched patients with ulcerative colitis undergoing the same surgeries but who were not exposed to tofacitinib (n = 56)., Main Outcome Measure: The primary outcome was differences in the incidence of venous thromboembolism within 90 days of surgery based on tofacitinib exposure. Secondary outcomes were 90-day postoperative complications., Results: Groups were well matched for age (non-tofacitinib: mean 35.2 years [SD 12.0], tofacitinib: 35.9 [SD 12.1], p = 0.36) and sex (41% female in each group, p = 1.00). Medical characteristics were similar between groups except for biologic medication exposure 30 days before surgery (non-tofacitinib: 66%, tofacitinib: 36%, p = 0.004). Surgical characteristics did not differ between groups. Most patients were discharged on extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (non-tofacitinib: 80% and tofacitinib: 77%). Adjusted for biologic exposure, there were no statistically significant differences in venous thromboembolism (non-tofacitinib exposed: 14%, tofacitinib-exposed: 4%, p = 0.09) or other postoperative outcomes., Limitation: Retrospective, single institutional study., Conclusion: Among patients with ulcerative colitis undergoing total colectomy or proctocolectomy, exposure to tofacitinib was not associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism or other postoperative complications. See Video Abstract., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosures: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.)

Background: Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has become the gold standard for treating ulcerative colitis, familial adenomatous polyposis, and selected cases of Crohn's colitis. Robotic surgery promises improved postoperative outcomes and decreased length of stay. However, few studies have evaluated the benefits of robotic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis compared to laparoscopy., Objective: To compare short-term 30-day postoperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and diverting loop ileostomy., Design: Retrospective observational study from a single, high-volume center., Settings: Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (tertiary referral center for inflammatory bowel disease)., Patients: All adult patients undergoing minimally invasive proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and DLI between January 2015 and April 2023., Main Outcome Measures: Thirty-day complications, hospital length of stay, estimated blood loss, conversion rate, 30-day readmission, and 30-day reoperation., Results: Two hundred seventeen patients were included in the study; 107 underwent robotic proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and diverting loop ileostomy, while 110 had laparoscopic proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and diverting loop ileostomy. Operating time was significantly longer in the robotic group (263 ± 38 minutes versus 228 ± 75 minutes, p < 0.0001); estimated blood loss was lower in the robotic group (81.5 ± 77.7 ml vs. 126.8 ± 111.0 ml, p = 0.0006) as well as the number of conversions (0% versus 8.2%, p = 0.003). Patients in the robotic group received more intraoperative fluids (3099 ± 1140 ml versus 2472 ± 996 ml, p = 0.0001). However, there was no difference in length of stay, 30-day morbidity, 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation, rate of diverting loop ileostomy closure at three months, and surgical ileal pouch-anal anastomosis complication rate after ileostomy closure., Limitations: Retrospective design, single-center study, potential bias due to the novelty of robotic approach, lack of long-term and quality-of-life outcomes., Conclusions: Robotic proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and diverting loop ileostomy may offer advantages in terms of estimated blood loss and conversion rate, while maintaining the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Further research is needed to evaluate long-term outcomes. See Video Abstract., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2024.)

Background: Using standard anterior approaches, consistent R0 resection of locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancer involving the deep pelvic sidewall may be unattainable. Therefore, to improve R0 resection rates, we have used a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach to resection of tumors in this location., Objective: To assess the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes of the first 10 patients operated on using this approach., Design: We conducted a retrospective case series review of our prospectively maintained surgical pathology and tumor registries., Setting: This study was conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota., Patients: Ten patients (6 female individuals, median age 53.5 years) with primary or recurrent anal or rectal cancer treated with a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach were identified., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measures were the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes., Results: An R0 resection was achieved in all 10 patients. Nine patients developed 1 or more 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade III complications. Nine patients developed gluteal wound complications ranging from superficial wound dehiscence to flap necrosis. During the follow-up period, 4 patients were found to have metastatic disease and 1 patient had local re-recurrence., Limitations: Small cohort with heterogeneous tumors and a short follow-up duration., Conclusion: A posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach has allowed us to achieve consistent R0 resection margins in locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancers involving the deep pelvic sidewall. Poor wound healing of the posterior gluteal incision is a common complication. See Video Abstract., Mejorando Las Tasas De Reseccin R Con Un Abordaje De Dos Etapas Primero Posterior Para La Reseccin En Bloque De Cnceres Anorrectales Primarios Y Recurrentes Localmente Avanzados Que Afectan La Pared Lateral Plvica Profunda: ANTECEDENTES:Utilizando abordajes anteriores estándares, la resección R0 consistente del cáncer de recto y ano primario y recurrente localmente avanzado involucrando la pared lateral pélvica profunda puede ser inalcanzable. Por lo tanto, para mejorar las tasas de resección R0, hemos empleado un abordaje de 2 etapas primero posterior y luego anterior para la resección de tumores en esta ubicación.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos de los primeros 10 pacientes operados con este abordaje.DISEÑO:Realizamos una revisión retrospectiva de series de casos de nuestros registros de patología quirúrgica y tumores mantenidos prospectivamente.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en la Clínica Mayo en Rochester, Minnesota, EE. UU.PACIENTES:Se identificaron diez pacientes (6 mujeres, mediana de edad 53.5 años) con cáncer anal o rectal primario o recurrente tratados con un abordaje de dos etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las medidas de resultado primarias fueron la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos.RESULTADOS:Se logró una resección R0 en los 10 pacientes. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron una o más complicaciones de grado III de Clavien-Dindo a los 30 días. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron complicaciones de la herida del glúteo que variaron desde dehiscencia superficial de la herida hasta necrosis del colgajo. Durante el período de seguimiento, se encontró que 4 pacientes tenían enfermedad metastásica y un paciente tuvo recurrencia local.LIMITACIONES:Cohorte pequeño con tumores heterogéneos y corta duración de seguimiento.CONCLUSIÓN:Un abordaje en 2 etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior, nos ha permitido lograr márgenes de resección R0 consistentes en cánceres de recto y anal primarios y recurrentes localmente avanzados que afectan la pared lateral pélvica profunda. La mala cicatrización de la incisión glútea posterior es una complicación común. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez)., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2023.)

Background: Surgical treatment for transverse colon cancer involves either extended colectomy or segmental resection, depending on the location of the tumor and surgeon perspective. However, the oncological safety of segmental resection has not yet been established in large cohort studies., Objective: This study aims to compare segmental resection versus extended colectomy for transverse colon cancer in terms of oncological outcomes., Design: This was a retrospective cohort study., Settings: This study was conducted using a nationwide cohort., Patients: A total of 66,062 patients who underwent colectomy with curative intent for transverse stage I to III adenocarcinoma were identified in the National Cancer Database (2004-2015)., Main Outcome Measures: Patients were divided in 2 groups based on the type of surgery received (extended versus segmental resection). The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were 30- and 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate within 30 days of surgical discharge., Results: Extended colectomy was performed in 44,417 (67.2%) patients, whereas 21,645 (32.8%) patients underwent segmental resection. Extended colectomy was associated with lower survival at multivariate analysis (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10; p < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed that extended resection was independently associated with poorer survival in mid transverse colon cancers (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.12; p < 0.001) and in stage III tumors (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.18; p < 0.001). The number of at least 12 harvested lymph nodes was an independent predictor of improved survival in both overall and subgroup analyses., Limitations: This study was limited by its retrospective design., Conclusion: Extended colectomy was not associated with a survival advantage compared with segmental resection. On the contrary, extended colectomy was associated with slightly poorer survival in mid transverse cancers and locally advanced tumors. Segmental resection was found to be safe when appropriate margins and adequate lymph node harvest were achieved. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B454., Abordaje Quirrgico Del Cncer De Colon Transverso Anlisis De La Prctica Actual Y Los Resultados Oncolgicos Utilizando La Base De Datos Nacional De Cncer: ANTECEDENTES:El tratamiento quirúrgico para el cáncer de colon transverso implica colectomía extendida o resección segmentaria, según la ubicación del tumor y la perspectiva del cirujano. Sin embargo, la seguridad oncológica de la resección segmentaria aún no se ha establecido en estudios de cohortes grandes.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo comparar la resección segmentaria versus la colectomía extendida para el cáncer de colon transverso en términos de resultados oncológicos.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se realizó utilizando una cohorte a nivel nacional.PACIENTES:Un total de 66,062 pacientes que se sometieron a colectomía con intención curativa por adenocarcinoma de colon transverso en estadio I-III fueron identificados en la Base de Datos Nacional del Cáncer (2004-2015).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los pacientes se dividieron en dos grupos según el tipo de cirugía recibida (resección extendida versus resección segmentaria). El resultado primario fue la supervivencia global. Los resultados secundarios fueron la mortalidad a los 30 y 90 días, la duración de la estancia hospitalaria y la tasa de reingreso dentro de los 30 días posteriores al alta quirúrgica.RESULTADOS:Se realizó colectomía extendida en 44,417 (67.2%) casos, mientras que 21,645 (32.8%) pacientes fueron sometidos a resección segmentaria. La colectomía extendida se asoció con una menor supervivencia en el análisis multivariado (HR 1.07 IC 95% 1.04-1.10; p <0.001). El análisis de subgrupos mostró que la resección extendida se asoció de forma independiente con una menor supervivencia en los cánceres de colon transverso medio (HR 1.08 IC 95% 1.04-1.12; p <0.001) y en tumores en estadio III (HR 1.11 IC 95% 1.04-1.18; p <0.001). Un número de al menos 12 ganglios linfáticos cosechados fue un predictor independiente de una mejor supervivencia en los análisis general y de subgrupos.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:La colectomía extendida no se asoció con una ventaja de supervivencia en comparación con la resección segmentaria. Por el contrario, la colectomía extendida se asoció con una supervivencia levemente menor en cánceres de colon transverso medio y tumores localmente avanzados. Se encontró que la resección segmentaria es segura cuando se logran los márgenes apropiados y la cosecha adecuada de ganglios linfáticos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B454., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2021.)

Purpose: This study was designed to compare short-term outcomes after laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis with those of open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in patients with both sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis., Methods: Sixteen patients with sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis undergoing laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis were matched with 16 open ileal pouch control subjects by sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists' score, age, and body mass index., Results: Operative mortality was zero. Operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (500 +/- 125.8 vs. 381.8 +/- 60.9 minutes, P = 0.03). Thirty-day complications were not significantly different between groups (laparoscopic 25 percent vs. open 43.7 percent, P = 0.26). Length of stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (5.3 +/- 1.3 days vs. 9.9 +/- 3.3 days open, P < 0.001). Average return of gastrointestinal function was 2.5 days in the laparoscopic group and 4.8 days in the open group (P = 0.001). Time to soft diet was three days in the laparoscopic group and six days in the open group (P < 0.001). All patients were alive and all pouches were intact at last follow-up., Conclusions: Laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is feasible with apparent safety in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis, resulting in shorter duration of hospital stay and quicker return of gastrointestinal function compared with the open procedure with no difference in perioperative complications, reoperations, and readmissions.

Purpose: This study was designed to compare self-reported sexual function, body image, and quality of life outcomes among ulcerative colitis patients undergoing laparoscopic or open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis., Methods: Between 1978 and 2004, 100 laparoscopic and 189 open operations were performed in patients who were identified from a previously published cohort. Patients were surveyed one year after operation to evaluate sexual function, body image, and quality of life., Results: A total of 125 of 289 patients (43 percent) returned completed surveys. There were no significant differences in terms of demographics, complications, or long-term functional outcomes between those who completed the surveys and those who did not. There were no clinical differences in results between laparoscopic and open patients using the three survey instruments. Orgasmic function scores were lower in men who underwent laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (P < 0.05) compared with open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Overall, sexual function scores were equal to or better than normal values for men but were lower in women. Finally, overall body image and quality of life scores were above the means published for the United States., Conclusions: After ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, men and women reported excellent body image and high cosmetic and quality of life scores regardless of operative approach. Female sexual function was more adversely affected after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis than was male sexual function.

Purpose: This study was designed to assess the impact of pelvic radiotherapy on the incidence of complications and colostomy-free survival of patients after a coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer., Methods: A total of 192 patients underwent a coloanal anastomosis between 1982 and 2001: 87 patients did not receive pelvic radiotherapy; 105 patients received pelvic radiotherapy (39 preoperative and 66 postoperative). Early and late complications requiring surgical intervention and the colostomy-free survival rate were assessed by retrospective review of patient records., Results: After a median follow-up of 62 months, 151 patients were alive. The most frequent complication was development of an anastomotic stricture (5-year rate of a stricture, 16 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 10-21). Patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy had a higher rate of complications other than anastomotic strictures, including fecal incontinence, fistulas, abscesses, and bowel obstructions compared with patients not receiving pelvic radiotherapy (5-year rate: 20 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 10-29) vs. 5 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 0-10); P = 0.001). Patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy had a lower colostomy-free survival than did patients not receiving pelvic radiotherapy (5-year colostomy-free rate: 72 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 62-84) vs. 92 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 86-98); P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the colostomy-free survival of patients receiving preoperative and postoperative pelvic radiotherapy., Conclusions: After coloanal anastomosis, a significant number of patients will have complications requiring surgical intervention, and some will require a permanent colostomy. Pelvic radiotherapy, whether it is administered preoperatively or postoperatively, significantly increases the need for a permanent colostomy.

Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the long-term functional and quality-of-life outcomes of patients after coloanal anastomosis for distal rectal cancer., Methods: A total of 192 patients underwent coloanal anastomosis between 1982 and 2001 at two tertiary referral institutions. Standardized and validated questionnaires to assess functional and quality-of-life outcomes were mailed to 151 patients, of which 121 patients responded (median follow-up, 65 months)., Results: Patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy had more bowel function problems than patients who did not receive pelvic radiotherapy. No significant differences in relevant functional and quality-of-life outcomes were seen among patients who received preoperative or postoperative pelvic radiotherapy. Patients requiring permanent diversion as a result of complications of the surgery had decreased quality of life., Conclusions: Coloanal anastomosis for distal rectal cancer has favorable long-term outcomes. Pelvic radiotherapy has an adverse effect on subsequent bowel function (whether given preoperatively or postoperatively) in patients who maintain intestinal continuity. Loss of intestinal continuity after a coloanal anastomosis is associated with diminished quality of life.

Purpose: Functional outcomes in laparoscopic-assisted ileal pouch-anal anastomosis have been incompletely studied. More than one-year follow-up has rarely been reported in these patients. This study was designed to assess operative, functional, and quality of life outcomes in patients with ulcerative colitis or familial adenomatous polyposis a minimum of one year after., Methods: Thirty-three laparoscopic-assisted ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and 33 open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis patients, with a median of 13 months and minimum of 12 months follow-up, were identified from a prospective, laparoscopic database. Functional outcome was prospectively assessed by using a standardized survey. These cohorts were matched by individual patient for year of surgery, age, gender, body mass index, and indication., Results: Median age was 27 years (open) and 28 years (laparoscopic). There were 27 females and 6 males in each group. All operations occurred between 1999 and 2001. Median body mass index was 22.3 (open) and 21.7 (laparoscopic) groups. There were no significant differences in diagnosis, use of diversion, and anastomotic technique. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 6 percent of the laparoscopic cases and 12 percent of the open cases. Functional outcome after a minimum of one year revealed equivalent median day and median nocturnal number of stools of six to seven and one to two respectively. Consistency of stool, medication usage, and continence were no different between groups. Daytime and nocturnal incontinence was similar. Quality of life in regard to social, home life, family, travel, sports, recreation, and sex life were equivalent., Conclusions: The function and quality of life outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted ileal pouch-anal anastomosis seem to be equivalent to our open experience. Laparoscopic-assisted ileal pouch-anal anastomosis offers selected patients a safe, feasible, and durable alternative.

Purpose: Local excision for early-staged rectal cancers is controversial. Preoperative understaging is not uncommon and radical resection after local resection may be needed for a curative treatment. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and outcome of radical resection (within 30 days) after local excision for rectal adenocarcinoma., Methods: All locally excised rectal cancers (curative intent) that required radical surgery within 30 days were reviewed (1980-2000). T2-3N0-1 stage cancers were each matched to three primary radical surgery controls for stage, age (+/- 5 years), gender, date (+/- 1 years), and type (abdominoperineal resection or low anterior resection) of operation. T1N0-1 cancers were compared with stage-matched rectal cancers treated by either primary radical surgery (n = 78) or local excision alone (n = 77)., Results: Fifty-two locally excised rectal adenocarcinomas (29 transanal and 23 polypectomies) were followed by radical surgery (24 abdominoperineal resection and 28 low anterior resection) within 7 (range, 1-29) days. Radical surgery was performed because of a cancerous polyp (n = 42), positive margins (5), lymphovascular invasion (3), and T3-staged cancer (2). Twelve of 52 cancers (23 percent) were found to have nodal involvement and 15 of 52 (29 percent) showed residual cancer in the resected specimen. The T2-3N0-1 stage controls were well matched. No significant difference in tumor location, size, adjuvant therapy, or length of follow-up was noted. Local and distant recurrence occurred in 2 of 4 T2-3N1 tumors and in 2 of 11 T2-3N0 cancers and were comparable to the matched controls, as was survival, with the exception of shorter survival in T3N1 cases, but numbers were too small for a definitive conclusion. Length of follow-up was not different. For T1 cancers, the controls were also comparable regarding patient and tumor demographics and adjuvant therapy. Nodal involvement was 21 percent in T1 study cases and 15 percent in T1 primary radical-surgery controls, with a trend toward location in the lower third of the rectum in both groups (58 percent and 50 percent, respectively). Local recurrence rates were 3 percent in the study group, 5 percent for patients undergoing primary radical surgery, and 8 percent for local excision alone. Distant metastasis (11 percent, 12 percent, and 13 percent, respectively) and overall five-year survival were also not significantly different (78 percent, 89 percent, and 73 percent, respectively)., Conclusions: Nodal involvement in attempted locally excised rectal cancers is not uncommon. Local excision of rectal tumors followed by radical surgery within 30 days in cancer patients does not compromise outcome compared with primary radical surgery. Even after radical surgery for superficial T1 rectal cancers, recurrence rates are not insignificant. Future improvements in preoperative staging may be helpful in selecting tumors for local excision only.