Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2015 Nov 28;21(44):12686-95.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i44.12686.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: Towards standardization of technique

Albert M Wolthuis  1 , Gabriele Bislenghi  1 , Anthony de Buck van Overstraeten  1 , André D'Hoore  1
Affiliations
Review

Transanal total mesorectal excision: Towards standardization of technique

Albert M Wolthuis et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Aim: To describe the role of Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) in minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery, to examine the differences in patient selection and in reported surgical techniques and their impacts on postoperative outcomes and to discuss the future of TaTME.

Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched through the 1(st) of March 2015 using a predefined search strategy.

Results: A total of 20 studies with 323 patients were included. Most studies were single-arm prospective studies with fewer than 100 patients. Multiple transanal access platforms were used, and the laparoscopic approach was either multi- or single port. The procedure was initiated transanally or transabdominally. If a simultaneous approach with 2 operating surgeons was chosen, the operative time was significantly reduced.

Conclusion: TaTME was also associated with better TME specimens and a longer distal resection margin. TaTME is thus feasible in expert hands, but the learning curve and safety profile are not well defined. Long-term follow-up regarding anal function and oncological outcomes should be performed in the future.

Keywords: Colorectal surgery; Laparoscopy; Natural orifice specimen extraction; Rectal cancer; Reverse total mesorectal excision; Total mesorectal excision; Transanal; Transanal minimally invasive surgery; Transanal total mesorectal excision.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow diagram of the systematic literature review.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery--the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69:613–616. - PubMed
    1. Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RD, Sexton R, MacFarlane JK. Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978-1997. Arch Surg. 1998;133:894–899. - PubMed
    1. Lujan J, Valero G, Hernandez Q, Sanchez A, Frutos MD, Parrilla P. Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2009;96:982–989. - PubMed
    1. van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, Fürst A, Lacy AM, Hop WC, Bonjer HJ. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:210–218. - PubMed
    1. Vennix S, Pelzers L, Bouvy N, Beets GL, Pierie JP, Wiggers T, Breukink S. Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;4:CD005200. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources