No abstract

The overall AL rate was low but needs to be interpreted with caution because of incomplete registration. Further improvement might be achieved by adopting the approach of better performing centres.

Background and Objectives:Transanal endoscopic operation (TEO) is a minimally invasive technique used for local excision of benign and selected malignant rectal lesions. The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility, safety, and oncological outcomes of the procedure and to report the experience in 3 centers.Methods:Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database was performed of all patients with benign lesions or ≤cT1N0 rectal cancer who underwent TEO with curative intent at 3 Belgian centers (2012 through 2014).Results:Eighty-three patients underwent 84 TEOs for 89 rectal lesions (37 adenomas, 43 adenocarcinomas, 1 gastrointestinal stromal tumor, 1 lipoma, 2 neuroendocrine tumors, and 5 scar tissues). Operative time was associated with lesion size (P < .001). Postoperative complications occurred in 13 patients: 7 hemorrhages, 1 urinary tract infection, 1 urinary retention, 2 abscesses, 1 anastomotic stenosis, and 1 entrance into the peritoneal cavity. Median hospital stay was 3 days (range, 1–8). During a median follow-up of 13 months (range, 2–27), there was 1 recurrence.Conclusion:Although longer follow-up is still necessary, TEO appears to be an effective method of excising benign tumors and low-risk T1 carcinomas of the rectum. However, TEO should be considered as part of the diagnostic work-up. Furthermore, the resected specimen of a TEO procedure allows adequate local staging in contrast to an endoscopic piecemeal excision. Nevertheless, definitive histology must be appreciated, and in case of unfavorable histology, radical salvage resection still has to be performed.

Introduction Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has rapidly emerged as a novel approach for rectal cancer surgery. Safety profiles are still emerging and more comparative data is urgently needed. This study aimed to compare indications and short‐term outcomes of TaTME, open, laparoscopic, and robotic TME internationally. Methods A pre‐planned analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) 2017 audit was performed. Patients undergoing elective total mesorectal excision (TME) for malignancy between 1 January 2017 and 15 March 2017 by any operative approach were included. The primary outcome measure was anastomotic leak. Results Of 2579 included patients, 76.2% (1966/2579) underwent TME with restorative anastomosis of which 19.9% (312/1966) had a minimally invasive approach (laparoscopic or robotic) which included a transanal component (TaTME). Overall, 9.0% (175/1951, 15 missing outcome data) of patients suffered an anastomotic leak. On univariate analysis both laparoscopic TaTME (OR 1.61, 1.02–2.48, P = 0.04) and robotic TaTME (OR 3.05, 1.10–7.34, P = 0.02) were associated with a higher risk of anastomotic leak than non‐transanal laparoscopic TME. However this association was lost in the mixed‐effects model controlling for patient and disease factors (OR 1.23, 0.77–1.97, P = 0.39 and OR 2.11, 0.79–5.62, P = 0.14 respectively), whilst low rectal anastomosis (OR 2.72, 1.55–4.77, P < 0.001) and male gender (OR 2.29, 1.52–3.44, P < 0.001) remained strongly associated. The overall positive circumferential margin resection rate was 4.0%, which varied between operative approaches: laparoscopic 3.2%, transanal 3.8%, open 4.7%, robotic 1%. Conclusion This contemporaneous international snapshot shows that uptake of the TaTME approach is widespread and is associated with surgically and pathologically acceptable results.

Significant variation of the APE rate was observed. Adjustment for confounding factors as well as merging HR with APE rates were found to be important for the assessment of performances.