Transanal endoscopic microsurgery: local recurrence rate following resection of rectal cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 070630062439004-??? ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A. Whitehouse ◽  
J. N. Armitage ◽  
H. S. Tilney ◽  
J. N. L. Simson
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery ◽  
Endoscopic Microsurgery

scholarly journals ISR for T1-2 Low Rectal Cancer: A Japanese Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (06) ◽  
pp. 361-365
Author(s):  
Masaaki Ito
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Anal Verge ◽  
Low Rectal Cancer ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery ◽  
Rectal Cancers ◽  
Anal Preservation

AbstractThe evolution over the past 20 years of anal preservation in rectal cancer surgery has been truly remarkable. Intersphincteric resection (ISR) reported by Schiessel in 1994 in Australia has been shown to enable anal preservation even for cancers quite close to the anus. In Japan, ISR via the detachment of the anal canal between the internal and external sphincters and excision of the internal sphincter first began to be practiced in the latter half of 1990. A multicenter Phase II trial of ISR in Japan suggested that 70% of the cases had relatively good function with less than 10 points of Wexner score but around 10% had severe incontinence that would not be improved for long term. The primary end point of the clinical study, 3-year local recurrence rate, was 13.2% across the overall cohort (T1, 0%; T2, 6.9%; and T3, 21.6%). When ISR is performed on T1/T2 rectal cancers, sufficient circumferential resection margin can be obtained even without preoperative chemoradiotherapy, and local recurrence rate was acceptably low. Based on these evidences, ISR is a currently important, standard treatment option among anal-preserving surgeries for T1/T2 low-lying rectal cancers. In Japan, a feasibility study (LapRC trial) of laparoscopic ISR on Stage 0 and Stage 1 low rectal cancer showed excellent outcomes. A prospective Phase II clinical trial targeting low rectal cancers within 5 cm from the anal verge (ultimate trial) is being performed and awaiting the results in near future.

scholarly journals MRI surveillance for the detection of local recurrence in rectal cancer after transanal endoscopic microsurgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (12) ◽  
pp. 4960-4969 ◽  
Author(s):  
Britt J. P. Hupkens ◽  
Monique Maas ◽  
Milou H. Martens ◽  
Willem M. L. L. G. Deserno ◽  
Jeroen W. A. Leijtens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery ◽  
Endoscopic Microsurgery ◽  
Mri Surveillance

scholarly journals Local recurrence rate in a national Danish patient cohort after curative treatment for rectal cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (12) ◽  
pp. 1639-1645 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Ø. Poulsen ◽  
M. K. Yilmaz ◽  
K. Ljungmann ◽  
N. Jespersen ◽  
P. Wille-Jørgensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Curative Treatment ◽  
Patient Cohort ◽  
Danish Patient

21. Positive CRM is associated with acceptable local recurrence rate but reduced survival in elective rectal cancer surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (11) ◽  
pp. S267
Author(s):  
Philipos Sagias ◽  
Nathan Curtis ◽  
Sam Stefan ◽  
Jamil Ahmed ◽  
Amjad Parviaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Cancer Surgery ◽  
Rectal Cancer Surgery

Local recurrence rate in rectal cancer patients with distal resection margin less than 9 mm

2001 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. S305
Author(s):  
E. Leo ◽  
S. Andreola ◽  
F. Belli ◽  
G. Bonfanti ◽  
G. Gallino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Resection Margin ◽  
Distal Resection Margin

scholarly journals A meta-analysis of the watch-and-wait strategy versus total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer exhibiting complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guilin Yu ◽  
Wenqing Lu ◽  
Zhouguang Jiao ◽  
Jun Qiao ◽  
Shiyang Ma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Total Mesorectal Excision ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy ◽  
Watch And Wait ◽  
Mesorectal Excision

Abstract Background Some clinical researchers have reported that patients with cCR (clinical complete response) status after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) could adopt the watch-and-wait (W&W) strategy. Compared with total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery, the W&W strategy could achieve a similar overall survival. Could the W&W strategy replace TME surgery as the main treatment option for the cCR patients? By using the meta-analysis method, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of the W&W strategy and TME surgery for rectal cancer exhibiting cCR after nCRT. Methods We evaluated two treatment strategies for rectal cancer with cCR after nCRT up to July 2021 by searching the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases. Clinical data for primary outcomes (local recurrence, cancer-related death and distant metastasis), and secondary outcomes (disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS)) were collected to evaluate the efficacy and safety in the two groups. Results We included nine studies with 818 patients in the meta-analysis, and there were five moderate-quality studies and four high-quality studies. A total of 339 patients were in the W&W group and 479 patients were in the TME group. The local recurrence rate in the W&W group was greater than that in the TME group in the fixed-effects model (OR 8.54, 95% CI 3.52 to 20.71, P < 0.001). The results of other outcomes were similar in the two groups. Conclusion The local recurrence rate of the W&W group was greater than that in the TME group, but other results were similar in the two groups. With the help of physical examination and salvage therapy, the W&W strategy could achieve similar treatment effects with the TME approach. Trial registration Protocol registration number: CRD42021244032.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of wait and see strategy versus surgery for rectal cancer with cCR/near-cCR response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guo-hua Zhao ◽  
Li Deng ◽  
Dong-man Ye ◽  
Wen-hui Wang ◽  
Yan Yan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Local Recurrence ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Distant Metastasis ◽  
Local Recurrence Rate ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Surgery Group ◽  
Wait And See

Abstract Background To evaluate the efficacy and safety between wait and see strategy (WS) and surgery of rectal cancer patients with cCR/near-cCR response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI(China National Knowledge Infrastructure) and Wanfang databases to compare wait and see strategy with surgery for rectal cancer with cCR/near-cCR response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy up to January 2020. We collected the data of local recurrence, distant metastasis, cancer related death, overall survival and diseasr-free survival and compared the advantages and disadvantages of the two groups. Results 14 English studies with 3932 patients were included. There were 700 patients in WS group and 3232 patients in surgical group. WS group had higher local recurrence rate than surgery group(OR:3.55, 95% CI:2.35 to 5.36, P <0.001). WS group had better 2-year DFS(OR:0.74, 95% CI:0.56 to 0.96, P =0.03) and 2-year OS (OR:0.38, 95% CI:0.28 to 0.52, P <0.001) than surgery group. Subgroup analysis of WS group and radical surgery group also obtained the similar results. Eastern studies also supported the conclusion. There was no significant difference of other data between the two groups. Conclusion Compared with surgery group, WS group would increase the risk of local recurrence rate, but WS group had better 2-year DFS and OS than surgery group. However, WS group did not increase the possibility of distant metastasis and cancer related death of the patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document