mesorectal excision
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

1670
(FIVE YEARS 542)

H-INDEX

91
(FIVE YEARS 14)

Surgery Today ◽  
2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hidetoshi Katsuno ◽  
Tsunekazu Hanai ◽  
Tomoyoshi Endo ◽  
Zenichi Morise ◽  
Ichiro Uyama

Author(s):  
Alen Antoun ◽  
Faisal Al Rashid ◽  
Noura Alhassan ◽  
Carlos Gomez-Garibello ◽  
Julio F. Fiore ◽  
...  

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zichao Guo ◽  
Xiaopin Ji ◽  
Shaodong Wang ◽  
Yaqi Zhang ◽  
Kun Liu ◽  
...  

Low rectal cancer has always posed surgical challenges to gastrointestinal surgeons. Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a novel approach to radical resection for low rectal cancer. Compared with conventional laparoscopic TME (laTME), taTME is relevant to the benefits of better vision of the mesorectal plane, feasibility of operating in a narrow pelvis, and exact definition of distal resection margin, which may lead to a higher possibility of free circumferential resection margin, better quality of TME specimen, and lower conversion rate. Although there are concerns about its long-term oncological outcomes and complex learning curve, taTME is a promising alternative for rectal cancer. In this review, we discuss the application status and prospects of taTME.


2022 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. e246356
Author(s):  
Joanna Pauline A Baltazar ◽  
Marc Paul J Lopez ◽  
Mark Augustine S Onglao

A 61-year-old woman developed neorectal prolapse after laparoscopic low anterior resection, total mesorectal excision with partial intersphincteric resection and handsewn coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer. She presented with a 3 cm full thickness reducible prolapse, with associated anal pain and bleeding. A perineal stapled prolapse resection was performed to address the rectal prolapse, with satisfactory results.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-89
Author(s):  
Keehyun Park ◽  
Sohyun Kim ◽  
Hye Won Lee ◽  
Sung Uk Bae ◽  
Seong Kyu Baek ◽  
...  

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) and disease-free and overall survival rates between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for rectal cancer.Methods: From January 2015 to December 2018, 234 patients underwent curative robotic or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer at two centers. Ultimately, 201 patients were enrolled. To control for different demographic factors in the two groups, propensity score matching was used at a 1:1 ratio. Propensity scores were generated with the baseline characteristics, including age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, previous abdominal surgery, tumor location, preoperative chemotherapy, and preoperative radiation. Finally, 134 patients were matched with 67 patients in the robotic surgery group and 67 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group.Results: There was no significant difference in the pathologic stages between the robotic and laparoscopic surgery groups. Distal margin involvement was only observed in the robotic surgery group (1/67, 1.5%). Circumferential resection margin involvement was not different between the robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery groups (3/67 [4.5%] and 4/67 [6.0%], respectively, P = 1.000). The quality of TME (complete, nearly complete, and incomplete) was similar between the robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery groups (88.0%, 6.0%, 6.0% and 79.1%, 9.0%, 11.9%, respectively, P = 0.358). The disease-free and overall survival rates were not significantly different between the groups.Conclusion: The quality of TME and disease-free and overall survival rates between the two surgeries were similar. There was no oncologic advantage of robotic surgery for rectal cancer compared to laparoscopic surgery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document