BACKGROUND: Clinical complete responders after chemoradiation for rectal cancer are increasingly being managed by a watch-and-wait strategy. Nonetheless, a significant proportion will experience a local regrowth, and the long-term oncological outcomes of these patients is not totally known. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the outcomes of patients who submitted to a watch-and-wait strategy and developed a local regrowth, and to compare these results with sustained complete clinical responders. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. SETTING: Single institution, tertiary cancer center involved in alternatives to organ preservation. PATIENTS: Patients with a biopsy-proven rectal adenocarcinoma (stage II/III or low lying cT2N0M0 at risk for an abdominoperineal resection) treated with chemoradiation who were found at restage to have a clinical complete response. INTERVENTIONS: Rectal cancer patients treated with chemoradiation who underwent a watch-and-wait strategy (without a full thickness local excision) and developed a local regrowth were compared to the remaining patients of the watch-and-wait strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival between groups, incidence of regrowth‚ and results of salvage surgery. RESULTS: There were 67 patients. Local regrowth occurred in 20 (29.9%) patients treated with a watch-and-wait strategy. Mean follow-up was 62.7 months. Regrowth occurred at mean 14.2 months after chemoradiation, half of them within the first 12 months. Patients presented with comparable initial staging, lateral pelvic lymph-node metastasis, and extramural venous invasion. The regrowth group had a statistically nonsignificant higher incidence of mesorectal fascia involvement (35.0% vs 13.3%, p = 0.089). All regrowths underwent salvage surgery, mostly (75%) a sphincter-sparing procedure. 5-year overall survival was 71.1% in patients with regrowth and 91.1% in patients with a sustained complete clinical response (p = 0.027). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective evaluation of patient selection for a watch-and-wait strategy and outcomes, as well as its small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Local regrowth is a frequent event when following a watch-and-wait policy (29.9%); however, patients could undergo salvage surgical treatment with adequate pelvic control. In this series, overall survival showed a statistically significant difference from patients managed with a watch-and-wait strategy who experienced a local regrowth compared to those who did not. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B773. RESULTADOS DE LOS PACIENTES CON REBROTE LOCAL, DESPUÉS DEL MANEJO NO QUIRÚRGICO DEL CÁNCER DE RECTO, DESPUÉS DE LA QUIMIORRADIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE ANTECEDENTES: Los respondedores clínicos completos, después de la quimiorradiación para el cáncer de recto, se tratan cada vez más mediante una estrategia de observación y espera. No obstante, una proporción significativa experimentará un rebrote local y los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo de estos pacientes, no se conocen por completo. OBJETIVO: El propósito de este estudio, fue analizar los resultados de los pacientes sometidos a una estrategia de observación y espera, que desarrollaron un rebrote local, y comparar estos resultados con respondedores clínicos completos sostenidos. DISEÑO: Este fue un estudio retrospectivo. ENTORNO CLINICO. Institución única, centro oncológico terciario involucrado en alternativas a la preservación de órganos. PACIENTES: Pacientes con un adenocarcinoma de recto comprobado por biopsia (estadio II / III o posición baja cT2N0M0, en riesgo de resección abdominoperineal), tratados con quimiorradiación, y que durante un reestadiaje, presentaron una respuesta clínica completa. INTERVENCIONES: Los pacientes con cáncer de recto tratados con quimiorradiación, sometidos a una estrategia de observación y espera (sin una escisión local de espesor total) y que desarrollaron un rebrote local, se compararon con los pacientes restantes de la estrategia de observación y espera. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION: Supervivencia global entre los grupos, incidencia de rebrote y resultados de la cirugía de rescate. RESULTADOS: Fueron 67 pacientes. El rebrote local ocurrió en 20 (29,9%) pacientes tratados con una estrategia de observación y espera. El seguimiento medio fue de 62,7 meses. El rebrote se produjo a la media de 14,2 meses después de la quimiorradiación, la mitad de ellos dentro de los primeros 12 meses. Los pacientes se presentaron con una estadificación inicial comparable, metástasis en los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales e invasión venosa extramural. El grupo de rebrote tuvo una mayor incidencia estadísticamente no significativa de afectación de la fascia mesorrectal (35,0 vs 13,3%, p = 0,089). Todos los rebrotes se sometieron a cirugía de rescate, en su mayoría (75%) con procedimiento de preservación del esfínter. La supervivencia global a 5 años fue del 71,1% en pacientes con rebrote y del 91,1% en pacientes con una respuesta clínica completa sostenida (p = 0,027). LIMITACIONES: Evaluación retrospectiva de la selección de pacientes para una estrategia y resultados de observar y esperar, tamaño de muestra pequeño. CONCLUSIONES: El rebrote local es un evento frecuente después de la política de observación y espera (29,9%), sin embargo los pacientes podrían someterse a un tratamiento quirúrgico de rescate con un adecuado control pélvico. En esta serie, la supervivencia global mostró una diferencia estadísticamente significativa de los pacientes manejados con una estrategia de observación y espera que experimentaron un rebrote local, en comparación con los que no lo hicieron. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B773. (Traducción–Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy)

Introduction:The resection of the primary colorectal tumor and liver metastases is the only potentially curative strategy. In such cases, there is no consensus on whether the resection of the primary tumor and metastases should be performed simultaneously or whether a staged approach should be performed (resection of the primary tumor and after, hepatectomy, or the "liver first" approach). The aim of this study is to evaluate the results of hepatectomy associated with colectomy in colorectal neoplasms, comparing simultaneous and staged resection.Methods: A systematic literature review was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Lilacs, and manual reference search. The last search was in July/2021. Inclusion criteria were: studies that compared simultaneous and staged hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis; studies that analyze short and/or long-term outcomes. Exclusion criteria were reviews, letters, editorials, congress abstract, and full-text unavailability. Perioperative outcomes and overall survival were evaluated and, for staged resections, the outcomes associated with each procedure were added. The ROBINS-I and GRADE tools were used to assess the risk of bias and quality of evidence. Synthesis was performed using Forest plots. The PRISMA criteria (PROSPERO: CRD42021243762) were followed. Results:The initial search collected 5655 articles and, after selection, 33 were included, covering 6417 patients. Simultaneous resection was associated with shorter length of stay (DR: −3.48 days [95% confidence interval {CI}: −5.64, −1.32]), but with a higher risk of postoperative mortality (DR: 0.02 [95% CI: 0.01, 0.02]).There was no difference between groups for blood loss (risk difference [RD]: −141.38 ml [95% CI: −348.84, 66.09]), blood transfusion (RD: −0.06 [95% CI: −0.14, 0.03]) and general complications (RD: 0.01 [95% CI: −0.06, 0.04]). The longest operating time in staged surgery was not statistically significant (RD: -50.44 min [95% CI: −102.38, 1.49]). Regarding overall survival, there is no difference between groups (hazard ratio: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.71-1.04).

No abstract

This study aimed to review the outcomes of redo procedures for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomoses. Methods: A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS databases (PROSPERO: CRD42021267715). The inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing colectomy with primary colorectal or coloanal anastomosis and studies that assessed the postoperative results. Results: Eleven articles met the eligibility criteria and were selected. The studied population size ranged from 7 to 78 patients. The overall mortality rate was 0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-0.01%). The postoperative complication rate was 40% (95% CI, 40%-50%). The length of hospital stay was 13.68 days (95% CI, 11.3-16.06 days). After redo surgery, 82% of the patients were free of stoma (95% CI, 75%-90%), and 24% of patients (95% CI, 0%-39%) had fecal incontinence. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (P = 0.002) was associated with a lower probability of being free of stoma in metaregression. Conclusion: Redo colorectal and coloanal anastomoses are strategies to restore colonic continuity. The decision to perform a redo operation should be based on a proper evaluation of the morbidity and mortality risks, the probability of remaining free of stoma, the quality of life, and a functional assessment.

No abstract