No abstract

Background The role of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery has been questioned owing to conflicting reports on pathological outcomes from recent RCTs. However, it is unclear whether these pathological markers and the surgical approach have an impact on oncological outcomes. This study assessed oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open rectal cancer resections. Methods A meta-analysis of RCTs was performed. Primary endpoints included oncological outcomes (disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), local recurrence). Secondary endpoints included surrogate markers for the quality of surgical resection. Results Twelve RCTs including 3744 patients (2133 laparoscopic, 1611 open) were included. There was no significant difference in OS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 1.04; P = 0.12; I2 = 0 per cent) and DFS (HR 0.95, 0.81 to 1.11; P = 0.52; I2 = 0 per cent) between laparoscopic and open rectal resections. There was no significant difference in locoregional (odds ratio (OR) 1.03, 95 per cent c.i. 0.72 to 1.48; P = 0.86; I2 = 0 per cent) or distant (OR 0.87, 0.70 to 1.08; P = 0.20; I2 = 7 per cent) recurrence between the groups. Achieving a successful composite score (intact mesorectal excision, clear circumferential resection margin and distal margin) was significantly associated with improved DFS (OR 0.55, 0.33 to 0.74; P < 0.001; I2 = 0 per cent). An intact or acceptable mesorectal excision (intact mesorectal excision with or without superficial defects) had no impact on DFS. Finally, a positive CRM was associated with worse DFS. Conclusion Well performed surgery (laparoscopic or open) achieves excellent oncological outcomes with very little difference between the two modalities. The advantage and benefit of minimally invasive surgery should be assessed on an individual basis.

No abstract

No abstract

Background This study compared the advantages and disadvantages of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) strategies for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, compared with the more traditional multimodal neoadjuvant management strategies of long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT). Methods A systematic review and network meta-analysis of exclusively RCTs was undertaken, comparing survival, recurrence, pathological, radiological, and oncological outcomes. The last date of the search was 14 December 2022. Results In total, 15 RCTs involving 4602 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, conducted between 2004 and 2022, were included. TNT improved overall survival compared with LCRT (HR 0.73, 95 per cent credible interval 0.60 to 0.92) and SCRT (HR 0.67, 0.47 to 0.95). TNT also improved rates of distant metastasis compared with LCRT (HR 0.81, 0.69 to 0.97). Reduced overall recurrence was observed for TNT compared with LCRT (HR 0.87, 0.76 to 0.99). TNT showed an improved pCR compared with both LCRT (risk ratio (RR) 1.60, 1.36 to 1.90) and SCRT (RR 11.32, 5.00 to 30.73). TNT also showed an improvement in cCR compared with LCRT (RR 1.68, 1.08 to 2.64). There was no difference between treatments in disease-free survival, local recurrence, R0 resection, treatment toxicity or treatment compliance. Conclusion This study provides further evidence that TNT has improved survival and recurrence benefits compared with current standards of care, and may increase the number of patients suitable for organ preservation, without negatively influencing treatment toxicity or compliance.