BACKGROUND: Incontinence is not rare after rectal cancer surgery. Platelet-rich plasma may promote tissue repair and generation but has never been tested for the treatment of anal incontinence. This study evaluated the impact of platelet-rich plasma injection on the severity of incontinence and quality of life after low rectal cancer surgery.
METHODS: This is a prospective cohort proof of concept study in a colorectal cancer institution. Patients had undergone low anterior or intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer and had a Wexner score > 4. Ten milliliters of platelet-rich plasma were injected into the internal and external sphincters under endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) guidance. Primary outcome measure was > 2 point improvement in Wexner score (improved group). The patients were assessed with endo-anal ultrasound examination, manometry, the Wexner Questionnaire and SF-36 Health Surveys, and patients were asked whether they used pads and antidiarrheal medications before and 6 months after PRP injection.
RESULTS: Of 20 patients included in the study, 14 (70%) were men, and the average age was 56.8 (SD = 9.5) years. No statistically significant difference was found in Wexner scores before and after PRP injection (p = 0.66). Seven (35%) patients experienced a > 2 point improvement in Wexner score. Rectal manometry demonstrated improved squeezing pressure (p = 0.0096). Furthermore, physical functioning scoring (p = 0.023), role limitation (p = 0.016), emotional well-being (p = 0.0057) and social functioning (p = 0.043) domains on the SF-36 questionnaire improved. One (5%) and three (15%) patients stopped using pads and antidiarrheal medications.
CONCLUSIONS: Platelet-rich plasma injection does not restore Wexner scores, but more than one-third of patients may benefit from this application with an improvement of > 2 points in their scores. Platelet-rich plasma injection may improve squeezing pressure and certain life quality measures for incontinent patients after rectal cancer surgery.

This study explored postoperative outcomes for patients with lower rectal cancer who underwent low anterior resection (LAR) or intersphincteric resection (ISR). A total of 49 patients (33 LAR, 16 ISR) were followed using anorectal manometry and quality of life (QOL) questionnaires over a year, pre- and post surgery. The primary aim of this study is to clarify differences in anal manometry, sphincter function, fecal incontinence, and QOL between the two surgical arms. The secondary aim was to identify indicators suitable for assessing relationships between anorectal manometry measurements, fecal incontinence, and QOL. Anorectal manometry elements (AMEs), such as atmospheric maximum mean squeeze pressure (aMSP), maximum tolerable volume (MTV), and incremental maximum mean squeeze pressure (iMSP), showed no significant differences during the observation period. However, maximum resting pressure (MRP), high-pressure zone length (HPZ), and threshold volume (TV) were significantly worse in the ISR group. Fecal incontinence, measured by Wexner and Kirwan scores, was significantly better in the LAR group. We observed no differences in SF36 between the two groups. Multi-correlation analysis revealed positive and negative correlations among these factors, with inverse correlations between anorectal manometry measurements and incontinence assessments decreasing post-surgery. We found no correlation between SF36 and anorectal manometry at any time. The findings indicate that surgical technique affects postoperative anal function, fecal incontinence, and SF36. However, combined assessment methods should be used with caution when deriving relationships between anal function and SF36.

OBJECTIVE: Increasing importance has been attributed in recent years to the preservation of the pelvic autonomic nerves during rectal resection to achieve better functional results. In addition to improved surgical techniques, intraoperative neuromonitoring may be useful.
METHODS: This single-arm prospective study included 30 patients who underwent rectal resection performed with intraoperative neuromonitoring by recording the change in the tissue impedance of the urinary bladder and rectum after stimulation of the pelvic autonomic nerves. The International Prostate Symptom Score, the post-void residual urine volume and the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score (LARS score) were assessed during the 12-month follow-up period.
RESULTS: A stimulation-induced change in tissue impedance was observed in 28/30 patients (93.3%). In the presence of risk factors such as low anastomosis, neoadjuvant radiotherapy and a deviation stoma, an average increase of the LARS score by 9 points was observed 12 months after surgery (p = 0,04). The function of the urinary bladder remained unaffected in the first week (p = 0,7) as well as 12 months after the procedure (p = 0,93).
CONCLUSIONS: The clinical feasibility of the new method for pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring could be verified. The benefits of intraoperative pelvic neuromonitoring were particularly evident in difficult intraoperative situations with challenging visualization of the pelvic nerves.

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer ranks as the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, necessitating surgical resection as the sole treatment option. Over the years, there has been a growing adoption of minimally invasive surgical techniques such as robotic and laparoscopic approaches. Robotic surgery represents an innovative modality that effectively addresses the limitations associated with traditional laparoscopic techniques. While previous studies have reported favorable perioperative outcomes for robot-assisted radical resection in rectal cancer patients, further evidence regarding its oncological safety is still warranted.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a comparative analysis of perioperative and oncological outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted low anterior resection (LALAR) procedures.
METHODS: The clinical data of 125 patients who underwent robot-assisted low anterior resection (RALAR) and 279 patients who underwent LALAR resection at Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University from December 2019 to November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. After performing a 1:1 propensity score matching, the patients were divided into two groups: The RALAR group and the LALAR group (111 cases in each group). Subsequently, a comparison was made between the short-term outcomes within 30 d after surgery and the 3-year survival outcomes of these two groups.
RESULTS: Compared to the LALAR group, the RALAR group exhibited a significantly earlier time to first flatus [2 (2-2) d vs 3 (3-3) d, P = 0.000], as well as a shorter time to first fluid diet [4 (3-4) d vs 5 (4-6) d, P = 0.001]. Additionally, the RALAR group demonstrated reduced postoperative indwelling catheter time [2 (1-3) d vs 4 (3-5) d, P = 0.000] and decreased length of hospital stay after surgery [5 (5-7) d vs 7(6-8) d, P = 0.009]. Moreover, there was an observed increase in total cost of hospitalization for the RALAR group compared to the LALAR group [10777 (10780-11850) dollars vs 10550 (8766-11715) dollars, P = 0.012]. No significant differences were found in terms of conversion rate to laparotomy or incidence of postoperative complications between both groups. Furthermore, no significant disparities were noted regarding the 3-year overall survival rate and 3-year disease-free survival rate between both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery offers potential advantages in terms of accelerated recovery of gastrointestinal and urologic function compared to LALAR resection, while maintaining similar perioperative and 3-year oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Excessive tension at the anastomosis contributes to anastomotic leakage (AL) in low anterior resection (LAR). However, the specific tension has not been measured. We assessed whether \"Bridging,\" characterized by the proximal colon resembling a suspension bridge above the pelvic floor, is a significant risk factor for AL following LAR for rectal cancer.
METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed the medical records and laparoscopic videos of 102 patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR using the double stapling technique at Yachiyo Hospital between January 2014 and December 2023. Patients were classified based on whether they had Bridging (tight or sagging) or were in a Resting state of the proximal colon, and the association between Bridging and AL was examined.
RESULTS: AL occurred in 31.3% of the Tight Bridging group, 20% of the Sagging Bridging group, and 2.2% of the Resting group (P = 0.002). The incidence of AL was significantly higher in patients with Bridging than in those without (23.2% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.003). Multivariate analysis revealed that Bridging is an independent risk factor for AL (odds ratio = 6.97; 95% confidence interval: 1.45-33.6; P = 0.016).
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of Bridging is a significant risk factor for AL following LAR for rectal cancer, suggesting the need for implementing preventive measures in patients with this condition.

In this surgical teaching video, we demonstrate the technique of robot-assisted uterine anastomosis combined with low anterior resection in a 27-year-old patient with T2 node-positive rectal cancer. The patient had undergone uterine transposition for fertility preservation prior to upfront chemotherapy and radiation therapy for rectal cancer. In this video, we review the key steps of both surgical procedures. We emphasize robot trocar placement and docking, demonstrate optimal organ manipulation and tissue handling, and include key operative modifications and pearls for successful perioperative management.

BACKGROUND: This report describes the oncologic outcomes for patients with advanced ovarian cancer who had bowel surgery performed by gynecologic oncologists (GOs) and compares the outcomes with those for bowel surgery performed by general surgeons (GSs) during maximal cytoreductive surgery.
METHODS: Patients from six academic institutions who had FIGO stage III or IV ovarian cancer and underwent any bowel surgeries during maximal cytoreductive surgery were eligible for the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether bowel surgery was performed by a GO or a GS. In both groups, the GOs were mainly involved in extra bowel debulking procedures. Perioperative and survival outcomes were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The 761 patients in this study included 113 patients who underwent bowel surgery by a GO and 648 who had bowel surgery by a GS. No discernible differences were observed in age, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, FIGO stage, histologic type, timing of cytoreductive surgery (primary or interval debulking surgery), or complications between the two groups. The GO group exhibited a shorter operation time than the GS group. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no survival differences between the two groups. In the Cox analysis, non-serous cell types and gross residual diseases were associated with adverse effects on overall survival. However, performance of bowel surgery by a GO did not have an impact on survival.
CONCLUSIONS: Performance of bowel surgery by a GO during maximal cytoreductive surgery is both feasible and safe. These results should be reflected in the training system for GOs regarding bowel surgery, and further research is needed to confirm that GOs can play a more leading role in performing extra-uterine procedures.

Radical cystectomy after low anterior resection is rare, and no cases of robotic surgery have been reported. Cystectomy in patients who have undergone a previous pelvic surgery, whether open or endoscopic, requires caution to avoid damaging other organs due to anatomical changes caused by adhesions in a limited space. Additionally, the curative nature of the treatment must be maintained. We describe a 69-year-old man with a history of open low anterior resection for rectal cancer who underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy with extracorporeal ileal conduit construction. Although this procedure is challenging, it was performed safely with the collaboration of colorectal surgeons. The patient was discharged without perioperative complications and remained recurrence-free for 5 years.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of early stoma closure on bowel function after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer.
METHODS: Patients participating in the FORCE trial who underwent LAR with protective stoma were included in this study. Patients were subdivided into an early closure group (< 3 months) and late closure group (> 3 months). Endpoints of this study were the Wexner Incontinence, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), EORTC QLQ-CR29, and fecal incontinence quality of life (FIQL) scores at 1 year.
RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2020, 38 patients had received a diverting stoma after LAR for rectal cancer and could be included. There was no significant difference in LARS (31 vs. 30, p = 0.63) and Wexner score (6.2 vs. 5.8, p = 0.77) between the early and late closure groups. Time to stoma closure in days was not a predictor for LARS (R2 = 0.001, F (1,36) = 0.049, p = 0.83) or Wexner score (R2 = 0.008, F (1,36) = 0.287, p = 0.60) after restored continuity. There was no significant difference between any of the FIQL domains of lifestyle, coping, depression, and embarrassment. In the EORTC QLQ-29, body image scored higher in the late closure group (21.3 vs. 1.6, p = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Timing of stoma closure does not appear to affect long-term bowel function and quality of life, except for body image. To improve functional outcome, attention should be focused on other contributing factors.

BACKGROUND: The management of very-low rectal cancer is one of the most challenging issues faced by general and colorectal surgeons. Many feel compelled to pursue abdominoperineal resection (APR) over low anterior resection (LAR) to optimize oncologic outcomes. This study aimed to determine differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between patients undergoing APR or LAR for very-low rectal cancer.
METHODS: The United States Rectal Cancer Consortium (2010-2016) was queried for adults who underwent either APR or LAR for stage I-III rectal cancers < 5 cm from anorectal junction and met inclusion criteria. The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, length of stay, complications, recurrence location, and perioperative factors.
RESULTS: A total of 431 patients with very-low rectal cancer who underwent APR or LAR were identified; 154 (35.7%) underwent APR. The overall recurrence rate was 19.6%. The median follow-up was 42.5 months. An analysis adjusted for demographics and pathologic stage observed no difference in disease-free survival between operative types (APR-hazard ratio [HR] = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.53-1.52, P = .70). Secondary outcomes demonstrated no significant difference between operation types, including overall survival (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.71-2.32, P = .39), complications (OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.94-2.50, P = .12), or length of stay (estimate: 0.04, SE = 0.25, P = .54).
CONCLUSIONS: We observed no significant difference in disease-free survival or overall survival between patients undergoing APR or LAR for very-low rectal cancer. This analysis supports the treatment of very-low rectal cancer, without sphincter involvement, by either APR or LAR.