Comparison of the short-term outcomes in lower rectal cancer using three different surgical techniques: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TME), laparoscopic TME, and open TME

Transanal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of short-term outcomes.

“…One thousand two hundred and forty-seven citations were retrieved from the search strategy. Finally, twelve studies [24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] were included in the analysis, with a total of 899 patients (411 patients in TaTME group, 488 patients in LaTME group) ( Figure 1). The characteristics of eligible studies are shown in Table I.…”

“…Four studies [25,28,31,33] reported local recurrence; no difference was found in this outcome ( Figure 7).…”

“…There were six studies [24-27, 31, 34] that reported CRM, eleven studies [24][25][26][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] that reported positive CRM, eight studies [24-27, 30, 32-34] that reported DRM and five studies [25,28,31,34,35] that reported positive DRM. No differences were found in these pathological outcomes ( Figure 5).…”

TaTME and the worse oncological outcome – new data demonstrates a difficult method

“…Misinterpretation is possible when the reader's focus is on verifying the learning curve as the reason for worse oncological outcome. The method itself has probably too many objective pitfalls and technical difficulties to have a safe learning curve, albeit some report good results without learning curves 3,4 . And if long learning curves had been responsible for the bad results, this cannot longer be accepted in modern oncologic surgery.…”

Robotic transabdominal intersphinteric resection with lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for patients with distal rectal cancer – a video vignette

“…ISR generally involves mobilization of the colorectum abdominally, then a perineal phase for resection of the internal anal sphincter ensuring an adequate tumour margin, followed by a hand‐sewn coloanal anastomosis. With the increased manoeuvrability of current robotic systems, some surgeons consider transabdominal ISR with stapled coloanal anastomosis as another alternative surgical approach . As the perineal phase is not required in transabdominal ISR with stapled anastomosis, some operation time can be saved.…”