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
. 2024 Nov 7:14:1478467.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1478467. eCollection 2024.

Conformal proctectomy with sphincter preservation retains acceptable defecation functions in very low rectal cancer male patients

Affiliations

Conformal proctectomy with sphincter preservation retains acceptable defecation functions in very low rectal cancer male patients

Weijie Chen et al. Front Oncol. .

Abstract

Background: Conformal proctectomy with sphincter preservation (CPSP) is designed to preserve the rectal wall as much as possible in very low rectal cancer patients. Evaluations of anal function and quality of life outcomes are lacking.

Methods: This study included male patients with very low (≤ 5 cm from the anal verge) rectal adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2020, and January 1, 2022. A LARS score questionnaire survey and EORTC-QLQ-CR38 questionnaire survey were administered.

Results: A total of 21 very low rectal cancer patients were enrolled in follow-up. The average age of the patients was 56.7 years, the tumors were 1.9 ± 0.6 cm in size, and the distance from the anal verge was 4.8 ± 0.5 cm. All patients were followed up, and the mean follow-up period was 2.7 ± 0.5 years. The LARS score increased significantly from 4.1 ± 2.8 before surgery to 19.1 ± 6.0 at the 1st year after surgery (P < 0.001) and then decreased to 13.1 ± 4.2 (P < 0.001) at the 2nd year. The quality of life of patients was also lower at the 1st year after surgery (61.1 ± 9.6 vs. 74.2 ± 11.2, P < 0.001) and was restored at the 2nd year after surgery (80.6 ± 11.9 vs. 74.2 ± 11.2, P = 0.029). During standard follow-up at the outpatient department, no rectal tumor relapse was confirmed in these patients, although 2 patients were found to have suspected recurrence of local lymph node metastasis.

Conclusions: These results suggest that the CPSP technique preserves acceptable defecation function and is a safe and feasible option for male patients with very low rectal cancer.

Clinical trial registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier ChiCTR2100052094.

Keywords: anal function; clinical trial; quality of life; rectal cancer; total mesorectal excision.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Patient selection for conformal proctectomy with sphincter preservation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The sketch and operative picture of conformal proctectomy with sphincter preservation. (A), the sketch of conformal proctectomy with sphincter preservation. α, the angle between the cutting line and the dentate line. We recommend that the angle is 45°, and less than 60°. The width tumor involved should be less than 1/3 of rectal circumference. (B), the operative picture of conformal proctectomy with sphincter preservation. The rectum was mobilized according to the principle of total mesorectal excision until it reached the entrance of the intersphincteric space. Pull and stretch the rectum using laparoscopic bipolar forceps, and place endoscopic stapler at an angle (α) in the pelvic cavity to preserve more of the rectal wall.
Figure 3
Figure 3
EORTC-QLQ-C30 scores of the conformal sphincter preservation operation patients. The global health status, functional scales, symptom scales and single item measures before and after surgery were shown. An asterisk indicates significant differences. * means significant difference, P < 0.05.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Pollett WG, Nicholls RJ. The relationship between the extent of distal clearance and survival and local recurrence rates after curative anterior resection for carcinoma of the rectum. Ann Surg. (1983) 198:159–63. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198308000-00008 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sun G, Lou Z, Zhang H, Yu GY, Zheng K, Gao XH, et al. . Retrospective study of the functional and oncological outcomes of conformal sphincter preservation operation in the treatment of very low rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol. (2020) 24:1025–34. doi: 10.1007/s10151-020-02229-2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Keane C, Fearnhead NS, Bordeianou LG, Christensen P, Basany EE, Laurberg S, et al. . International consensus definition of low anterior resection syndrome. Dis Colon Rectum. (2020) 63:274–84. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001583 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Emmertsen KJ, Laurberg S. Low anterior resection syndrome score: development and validation of a symptom-based scoring system for bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Ann Surg. (2012) 255:922–8. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31824f1c21 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wan C, Meng Q, Yang Z, Tu X, Feng C, Tang X, et al. . Validation of the simplified Chinese version of EORTC QLQ-C30 from the measurements of five types of inpatients with cancer. Ann Oncol. (2008) 19:2053–60. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdn417 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources