Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A Kleiman ◽  
Martin R. Weiser

Locally advanced rectal cancer is a complex disease that requires a multidisciplinary treatment team to carefully evaluate each patient before prescribing a treatment plan. The current standard of care in the United States is multimodal therapy, consisting of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. Commonly, this involves neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation, followed by total mesorectal excision and then adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. However, alternative regimens using chemotherapy first, followed by chemoradiation and then surgery (total neoadjuvant therapy), may allow for better tolerance of therapy. Short-course radiation is also acceptable but is rarely used in the United States. Minimally invasive surgical techniques such as laparoscopy, robotic surgery, and transanal total mesorectal excision offer several potential advantages over conventional open surgery, but their oncologic equivalence has not been determined. The role of nonoperative management for locally advanced rectal cancer is still evolving, and additional studies are needed to improve patient selection and evaluate long-term outcomes of a watch-and-wait approach.  This review contains 1 figure, 2 table and 58 references Key words: colorectal cancer, locally advanced rectal cancer, minimally invasive surgery, nonoperative management, radical proctectomy, robotic surgery, total mesorectal excision, total neoadjuvant therapy, transanal total mesorectal excision, watch and wait

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A Kleiman ◽  
Martin R. Weiser

Locally advanced rectal cancer is a complex disease that requires a multidisciplinary treatment team to carefully evaluate each patient before prescribing a treatment plan. The current standard of care in the United States is multimodal therapy, consisting of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. Commonly, this involves neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation, followed by total mesorectal excision and then adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. However, alternative regimens using chemotherapy first, followed by chemoradiation and then surgery (total neoadjuvant therapy), may allow for better tolerance of therapy. Short-course radiation is also acceptable but is rarely used in the United States. Minimally invasive surgical techniques such as laparoscopy, robotic surgery, and transanal total mesorectal excision offer several potential advantages over conventional open surgery, but their oncologic equivalence has not been determined. The role of nonoperative management for locally advanced rectal cancer is still evolving, and additional studies are needed to improve patient selection and evaluate long-term outcomes of a watch-and-wait approach.  This review contains 1 figure, 2 table and 58 references Key words: colorectal cancer, locally advanced rectal cancer, minimally invasive surgery, nonoperative management, radical proctectomy, robotic surgery, total mesorectal excision, total neoadjuvant therapy, transanal total mesorectal excision, watch and wait


Author(s):  
Narendra Pandit ◽  
Kunal Bikram Deo ◽  
Sujan Gautam ◽  
Tek Narayan Yadav ◽  
Awaj Kafle ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Yanwu Sun ◽  
Pan Chi

Aims.To evaluate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the surgical outcome of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC, clinically staged as UICC stage II/III) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).Methods.312 LARC patients undergoing laTME after nCRT were divided into nonobese (BMI < 25.0 kg/m2,n=249) and obese (BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2,n=63) groups. Preoperative radiotherapy was delivered in 45–50.4 Gy/25f, 5 days/week, and concurrent chemotherapy using FOLFOX or CapeOX. Technical feasibility, postoperative and oncological outcome were compared between groups.Results.Obese patients had significantly longer operative time (P=0.004). There was no significant difference regarding estimated blood loss, conversion, postoperative recovery, and morbidities. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that higher ASA score and abdominoperineal resection were risk factors for postoperative complications and diverting stoma was a protective factor. The length of resection margin, circumferential resection margin involvement, and number of lymph node retrieved were comparable. With a median follow-up time of 55 months (ranging 20–102 months), oncological outcome was comparable in terms of overall survival, local recurrence, and distant metastasis.Conclusions.Obesity does not affect surgical or oncological outcome of laTME after nCRT. LaTME may be feasible and safe to obese LARC patients after nCRT in a specialized center.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document