BACKGROUND:Recently, positive circumferential resection margin has been found to be an indicator of advanced disease with a high risk of distant recurrence rather than local recurrence. OBJECTIVE:The study aimed to analyze the prognostic impact of the circumferential resection margin on longterm oncological outcomes in patients with rectal cancer.DESIGN: This was a multicenter, propensity scorematched (2:1) analysis comparing the positive and negative circumferential resection margins. SETTINGS:The study was conducted at 5 high-volume centers in Spain. PATIENTS:Patients who underwent total mesorectal excision with curative intent for middle-low rectal cancer between 2006 and 2014 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The main outcomes were local recurrence, distant recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival. RESULTS:The unmatched initial cohort consisted of 1599 patients, of whom 4.9% had a positive circumferential resection margin. After matching, 234 patients were included (156 with a negative circumferential margin and 78 with a positive circumferential margin). The median follow-up period was 52.5 (22.0-69.5) months. Local recurrence was significantly higher in patients with a positive circumferential margin (33.3% vs 11.5%; p < 0.001). Distant recurrence was similar in both groups (46.2% vs 42.3%; p = 0.651). There were no statistically significant differences in 5-year overall survival (48.6% vs 43.6%; p = 0.14). Disease-free survival was lower in patients with a positive circumferential margin (36.1% vs 52.3%; p = 0.026). LIMITATIONS:This study was limited by its retrospective design. The different neoadjuvant treatment options were not included in the propensity score. CONCLUSIONS:The positive circumferential resection margin was associated with a higher local recurrence rate and worse disease-free survival in comparison with the negative circumferential resection margin. However, the positive circumferential resection margin was not a prognostic indicator of distant recurrence and overall survival. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/ B950.

Background There is still controversy over the usefulness of seton placement prior to the ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) surgery in the management of anal fistula. Objective To evaluate the impact of preoperative seton placement on the outcomes of LIFT surgery for the management of fistula-in-ano. Design systematic review and meta-analysis. Data Sources A search was performed on the MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases. Study Selection Original studies without language restriction reporting the primary healing rates with and without seton placement as a bridge to definitive LIFT surgery were included. Intervention The intervention assessed was the LIFT with and without prior seton placement. Main Outcome Measures The main outcome was defined as the primary healing rate with and without the use of seton as a bridge to definitive LIFT surgery. Results Ten studies met the criteria for systematic review, all retrospective, with a pooled study population of 772 patients. There were no significant differences in the percentages of recurrence between patients with and without seton placement (odds ratio [OR] 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73–1.43: p = 0.35). The I2 value was 9%, which shows the homogeneity of the results among the analyzed studies. The 10 included studies demonstrated a weighted average overall recurrence of 38% (interquartile range [IQR] 27–42.7%), recurrence with the use of seton was 40% (IQR 26.6–51.2%), and without its use, the recurrence rate was 51.3% (IQR 31.3–51.3%) Limitations The levels of evidence found in the available literature were relatively fair, as indicated after qualitative evaluation using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Attitude Heading Reference System (AHRS) evidence levels. Conclusions Our meta-analysis suggests that the placement of seton as a bridge treatment prior to LIFT surgery does not significantly improve long-term anal fistula healing outcomes. Ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract surgery can be performed safely and effectively with no previous seton placement.International prospective register of systematic reviews—PROSPERO registration number: CDR42020149173.