Indications and Outcomes From 32 Consecutive Patients for the Treatment of Rectal Lesions by Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 336-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis J. García-Flórez ◽  
Jorge L. Otero-Díez ◽  
Ana I. Encinas-Muñiz ◽  
Luis Sánchez-Domínguez

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, perioperative morbidity, and short-term outcomes of the transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) technique. Methods: This is a descriptive review of prospectively collected data from 32 consecutive patients who underwent TAMIS procedures in our colorectal unit over a 40-month period. GelPOINT Path port was used in all cases. Demographic data, indications, tumor characteristics, morbidity, and follow-up data were collected. Primary endpoints included feasibility, safety, perioperative morbidity, and resection quality. Results: Fifteen adenomas, 12 carcinomas, 1 gastrointestinal stromal tumor, and 1 neuroendocrine tumor were locally excised. Additionally, 3 pelvic abscesses were drained transanally using the TAMIS port. Mean distance from the anal verge was 5.6 ± 1.5 cm. Early postoperative complications occurred in 22%, with only one case of major complication (3.1%) requiring reoperation, and no postoperative mortality. Four carcinomas were understaged (33.3%) and 1 adenoma overstaged (6.7%) preoperatively. Three carcinomas were not suspected preoperatively (25%). Microscopic positive lateral margin was found in one case, and no affected deep margin was found. Fragmentation rate was 6.9%, 2 cases, both lesions over 20 cm2. In cases of fit patients with high-risk carcinomas, 2 underwent immediate salvage surgery and another 2 refused and were treated with adjuvant radiotherapy. With a median follow-up of 26 months, the overall recurrence rate was 10.3%, 1 adenoma and 2 carcinomas. Conclusion: TAMIS seems to be a safe and reproducible procedure for local excision of well-selected rectal lesions with low morbidity and good functional outcomes.

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 1681-1687 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lino Polese ◽  
Roberto Rizzato ◽  
Andrea Porzionato ◽  
Gianfranco Da Dalt ◽  
Alice Bressan ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose The study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new trans-anal rectoscopic-assisted minimally invasive surgery (ARAMIS) platform to treat rectal lesions. Methods ARAMIS was first compared with two transanal minimally invasive surgery platforms (SILS Port and GelPOINT Path) on human cadavers. Surgeons with different experience performed running sutures at different distances, at four quadrants, using the three platforms and gave a score to visibility, safety, and maneuverability. ARAMIS was then utilized on patients affected with rectal neoplasia who met the inclusion criteria. Patients and tumor characteristic and results were prospectively collected. The follow-up examinations included proctoscopy at 3, 6, and 12 months. Results According to surgeons’ scores, ARAMIS improves visibility and safety with respect to other platforms for distances beyond 10 cm. The procedure, which lasted an average of 59 min, was successfully carried out in 14 patients. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were reported. The mean tumor size was 3 cm; they were located a mean of 11 cm from the anal verge. Complete removal of the lesion was possible in 13/14 patients. There was one case of adenoma recurrence at follow-up. Conclusion Study results showed that ARAMIS, which is equipped with an adjustable rectoscope, can be considered a safe, effective platform for transanal surgery. The rectoscope protects the rectum during the procedure, a particularly important consideration when proximal rectal lesions are being treated. Further clinical studies are warranted to confirm these encouraging results.


2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (11) ◽  
pp. 3127-3132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seok-Byung Lim ◽  
Seok-In Seo ◽  
Jong Lyul Lee ◽  
Jae Young Kwak ◽  
Tae Young Jang ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 1184-1187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Verseveld ◽  
Renée M. Barendse ◽  
Martijn P. Gosselink ◽  
Cornelis Verhoef ◽  
Eelco J. R. de Graaf ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos ◽  
Constantinos Nastos ◽  
Maria Gavriatopoulou ◽  
Antonios Vezakis ◽  
Dionysios Dellaportas ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document