Recent advances in the management of rectal cancer: No surgery, minimal surgery or minimally invasive surgery
- PMID: 28690773
- PMCID: PMC5483413
- DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v9.i6.139
Recent advances in the management of rectal cancer: No surgery, minimal surgery or minimally invasive surgery
Abstract
Over the last decade, with the acceptance of the need for improvements in the outcome of patients affected with rectal cancer, there has been a significant increase in the literature regarding treatment options available to patients affected by this disease. That treatment related decisions should be made at a high volume multidisciplinary tumor board, after pre-operative rectal magnetic resonance imaging and the importance of total mesorectal excision (TME) are accepted standard of care. More controversial is the emerging role for watchful waiting rather than radical surgery in complete pathologic responders, which may be appropriate in 20% of patients. Patients with early T1 rectal cancers and favorable pathologic features can be cured with local excision only, with transanal minimal invasive surgery (TAMIS) because of its versatility and almost universal availability of the necessary equipment and skillset in the average laparoscopic surgeon, emerging as the leading option. Recent trials have raised concerns about the oncologic outcomes of the standard "top-down" TME hence transanal TME (TaTME "bottom-up") approach has gained popularity as an alternative. The challenges are many, with a dearth of evidence of the oncologic superiority in the long-term for any given option. However, this review highlights recent advances in the role of chemoradiation only for complete pathologic responders, TAMIS for highly selected early rectal cancer patients and TaTME as options to improve cure rates whilst maintaining quality of life in these patients, while we await the results of further definitive trials being currently conducted.
Keywords: Rectal cancer; Transanal minimal invasive surgery; Transanal total mesorectal excision; Watchful waiting.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict-of-interest statement: Plummer JM and Leake PA have no relevant disclosures. Albert MR’s disclosures are: Applied Medical - Consultant; ConMed - Consultant and Surgiquest - Consultant.
References
-
- Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66:7–30. - PubMed
-
- Renouf DJ, Woods R, Speers C, Hay J, Phang PT, Fitzgerald C, Kennecke H. Improvements in 5-year outcomes of stage II/III rectal cancer relative to colon cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 2013;36:558–564. - PubMed
-
- Ricciardi R, Roberts PL, Read TE, Marcello PW, Schoetz DJ, Baxter NN. Variability in reconstructive procedures following rectal cancer surgery in the United States. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53:874–880. - PubMed
-
- 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
-
- Cedermark B, Johansson H, Rutqvist LE, Wilking N. The Stockholm I trial of preoperative short term radiotherapy in operable rectal carcinoma. A prospective randomized trial. Stockholm Colorectal Cancer Study Group. Cancer. 1995;75:2269–2275. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources