Acceptance of a 5-mm distal bowel resection margin for rectal cancer: is it safe?

Abstract Background Radical resection is associated with good prognosis among patients with cT1/T2Nx rectal cancer. However, still some of the patients experienced cancer recurrence following radical resection. This study tried to identify the postoperative risk factors of local recurrence and distant metastasis separately. Methods This retrospective, single-center study comprised of 279 consecutive patients from Linkou branch of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in 2005–2016 with rectal adenocarcinoma, pT1/T2N0M0 at distance from anal verge ≤ 8cm, who received curative radical resection. Results The study included 279 patients with pT1/pT2N0 mid-low rectal cancer with median follow-up of 73.5 months. Nineteen (6.8%) patients had disease recurrence in total. Nine (3.2%) of them had local recurrence, and fourteen (5.0%) of them had distant metastasis. Distal resection margin < 0.9 (cm) (hazard ratio = 4.9, p = 0.050) was the risk factor of local recurrence. Preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) ≥ 5 ng/mL (hazard ratio = 9.3, p = 0.0003), lymph node yield (LNY) < 14 (hazard ratio = 5.0, p = 0.006), and distal resection margin < 1.4cm (hazard ratio = 4.0, p = 0.035) were the risk factors of distant metastasis. Conclusion For patients with pT1/pT2N0 mid-low rectal cancer, current multidisciplinary treatment brings acceptable survival outcome. Insufficient distal resection margin attracted the awareness of risk factors for local recurrence and distant metastasis as a foundation for future research.

Download Full-text

Multimodal Treatment of cT3 Rectal Cancer in a Prospective Multi-Center Observational Study: Can Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Be Omitted in Patients with an MRI-Assessed, Negative Circumferential Resection Margin?

Visceral Medicine ◽

10.1159/000514800 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-8

Author(s):

Henry Ptok ◽

Frank Meyer ◽

Ingo Gastinger ◽

Benjamin Garlipp

Keyword(s):

Rectal Cancer ◽

Observational Study ◽

Circumferential Resection Margin ◽

Resection Margin ◽

Anal Verge ◽

Final Analysis ◽

Radical Resection ◽

Distant Recurrence ◽

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation ◽

Recurrence Rates

Background/Aim: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) in rectal cancer is associated with significant long-term morbidity. It is unclear whether nCRT in resectable mesorectal fascia circumferential resection margin (mrCRM)-negative rectal cancer treated by adequate total mesorectal excision (TME) is beneficial. The aim was to determine if nCRT can be omitted in patients with MRI-assessed cT3 rectal cancer and a negative mrCRM undergoing good-quality TME. Methods: By means of a prospective nationwide registry (n = 43.147; prospective multi-center observational study), patients with cT3 rectal cancer <12 cm from the anal verge with a negative (>1 mm) MRI-assessed CRM undergoing radical resection from 2006 to 2008 were selected. Overall, 87 patients were available for the final analysis (TME-alone, n = 25; nCRT+TME, n = 62). Groups were balanced for age, sex, and ASA score, with a nonsignificant predominance of males in the nCRT+TME group. As main outcome measures, local and distant recurrence rates were compared between patients undergoing primary surgery (TME-alone) vs. neoadjuvant chemoradiation + surgery (nCRT+TME). Results: In the TME-alone group, tumors were located closer to the anal verge (p = 0.018) and demonstrated a smaller minimal circumferential distance from the resection margin (p = 0.036). TME quality was comparable, as was median follow-up (48.9 vs. 44.9 months; p = 0.268). Local recurrences occurred at a similar rate in the TME-alone (n = 1; 5.3%) and nCRT+TME groups (n = 3; 5.5%) (p = 0.994) and were diagnosed at 10 months (TME-alone) and at 8, 13, and 18 months (nCRT+TME). Distant recurrences occurred in 28.9 and 17.4% of the cases, respectively (p = 0.626). The analysis was limited to cT3 cancers with a negative mrCRM. In addition, caution is required when appraising these results because of the limited number of evaluable subjects (especially in the TME-alone group), which adds some uncertainty to the statistical analysis. Conclusions: In this cohort of patients with rectal cancer located <12 cm from the anal verge and a negative mrCRM undergoing adequate TME, omission of nCRT had no impact onto the local recurrence rate.

Download Full-text