OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to develop a nomogram for the personalized prediction of postoperative complication risks in patients with middle and low rectal cancer who are undergoing transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME). This tool aims to assist clinicians in early identification of high-risk patients and in addressing preoperative risk factors to enhance surgical safety.
METHODS: In this case-control study, 207 patients diagnosed with middle and low rectal cancer and undergoing taTME between February 2018 and November 2023 at The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University were included. Independent risk factors for postoperative complications were analyzed using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression and multifactorial logistic regression models. A predictive nomogram was constructed using R Studio.
RESULTS: Among the 207 patients, 57 (27.5%) experienced postoperative complications. The LASSO and multifactorial logistic regression analyses identified operation time (OR = 1.010, P = 0.007), smoking history (OR = 9.693, P < 0.001), anastomotic technique (OR = 0.260, P = 0.004), and ASA score (OR = 9.077, P = 0.051) as significant predictors. These factors were integrated into the nomogram. The model\'s accuracy was validated through receiver operating characteristic curves, calibration curves, consistency indices, and decision curve analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: The developed nomogram, incorporating operation time, smoking history, anastomotic technique, and ASA score, effectively forecasts postoperative complication risks in taTME procedures. It is a valuable tool for clinicians to identify patients at heightened risk and initiate timely interventions, ultimately improving patient outcomes.

Prognostic factors for local recurrence in patients with rectal cancer submitted to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision.
The standard curative treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer of the middle and lower thirds is long-course chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision.
To evaluate the prognostic factors associated with local recurrence in patients with rectal cancer submitted to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision.
Retrospective study including patients with rectal cancer T3-4N0M0 or T (any)N + M0 located within 10 cm from the anal border, or patients with T2N0M0 located within 5 cm, treated by long course chemoradiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision with curative intent. Clinical, demographic, radiologic, surgical, and anatomopathological data were collected. Local recurrence was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier function, and risk was estimated according to each characteristic using univariate and multivariate analyses.
270 patients were included, 57.8% male and mean age 61.7 (30‒88) years. At initial staging, 6.7% of patients were stage I, 21.5% stage II, and 71.8% stage III. Open surgery was performed in 65.2%, with sphincter preservation in 78.1%. Mortality within 30 postoperative days was 0.7%. After 49.4 (0.5‒86.1) months of median follow-up, overall and local recurrences were 26.3% and 5.9%. On multivariate analyses, local recurrence was associated with involvement of the mesorectal fascia on restaging MRI (HR = 9.11, p = 0.001) and with pathologic involvement of radial surgical margin (HR = 8.19, p < 0.001).
Local recurrence of rectal cancer treated with long-course chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision is low and is associated with pathologic involvement of the radial surgical margin and can be predicted on restaging MRI.

The treatment role of Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) in proximal rectal cancers (PRC) is still debated. Partial Mesorectal Excision (PME) can reduce morbidity in PRC patients. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term clinical and long-term oncological outcomes between the two groups. A total of 157 PRC patients were enrolled in this study (114 performed with PME and 43 with TME). The two groups were compared in terms of perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes. The overall postoperative complications rate was higher in TME group (18.4% vs. 32.5%, p < 0.05). The incidence of diverting ileostomy was also significantly higher in TME group (86.0% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001). Overall survival rates for 3, 5, and 7 years in PME and TME group accordingly were: 94.6%, 89.3%, 81.5% and 93.2%, 87.6%, 78.4% (p = 0.324). Disease-free survival rates for 3, 5, and 7 years in PME and TME group were: 90.2%, 84.5%, 78.6% and 88.7%, 81.2%, 75.3% (p = 0.297), respectively. Local recurrence rates for 3, 5, and 7 years in PME and TME group were: 2.6%, 6.1%, 8.8% and 4.6%, 9.3%, 11.2% (p = 0.061), respectively. PME is feasible and can be safely performed in PRC patients with favorable oncological outcomes. TME is associated with increasing risk of surgical complications and requires a two-step surgery for stoma takedown.

OBJECTIVE: Recent evidence has questioned the usefulness of anastomotic drain (AD) after low anterior resection (LAR). However, the implementation and adoption of a no-drain policy are still poor. This study aims to assess the clinical outcomes of the implementation of a no-drain policy for rectal cancer surgery into a real-life setting and the adherence of the surgeons to such policy.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent elective minimally invasive LAR between January 2015 and December 2019 at two tertiary referral centers. In 2017, both centers implemented a policy aimed at reducing the use of AD. Patients were retrospectively categorized into two groups: the drain policy (DP) group, comprising patients treated before 2017, and the no-drain policy (NDP) group, consisting of patients treated from 2017 onwards. The endpoints were the rate of anastomotic leak (AL) and of related interventions.
RESULTS: Among the 272 patients included, 188 (69.1%) were in the NDP group, and 84 (30.9%) were in the DP group. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. AL rate was 11.2% in the NDP group compared to 10.7% in the DP group (p = 1.000), and the AL grade distribution (grade A, 19.1% (4/21) vs 28.6% (2/9); grade B, 28.6% (6/21) vs 11.1% (1/9); grade C, 52.4% (11/21) vs 66.7% (6/9), p = 0.759) did not significantly differ between the groups. All patients with symptomatic AL and AD underwent surgical treatment for the leak, while those with symptomatic AL in the NPD group were managed with surgery (66.7%), endoscopic (19.0%), or percutaneous (14.3%) interventions. Postoperative outcomes were similar between the groups. Three years after implementing the no-drain policy, AD was utilized in only 16.5% of cases, compared to 76.2% at the study\'s outset.
CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a no-drain policy received a good adoption rate and did not affect negatively the surgical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Surgical intervention for rectal cancer is widely recognized for its potential to significantly impact quality of life, chiefly due to the high probability of permanent colostomy and the associated postoperative complications.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes and morbidity associated with total mesorectal excision for middle and lower rectal cancer within an Iraqi cohort, in a prospective setting.
METHODS: This study prospectively collected and analyzed data from 89 patients who underwent a standardized radical rectal resection, with a follow-up period extending to one month post-surgery.
RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 54.4 ± 12.9 years, with a gender distribution of 46 males and 43 females. A total of 33 patients presented with preoperative comorbidities, which heightened the risk of adverse short-term outcomes by a factor of 7.51. The most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension and diabetes mellitus, affecting 22 and 20 patients, respectively. Patients aged 60 years and above were at a 3.97 times greater risk of developing complications. The overall complication rate was 21.35%, with wound infections (9.0%) and cardiovascular events (3.4%) being the most common. Mortality during the follow-up was 1.1%.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that increased age and the presence of comorbidities are significant risk factors for morbidity and mortality post-surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy was shown to reduce morbidity and mortality rates while improving survival. The morbidity and mortality rates observed in this study concur with existing literature.

The recently introduced Hugo RAS robotic platform has mostly been used for well standardized urologic and gynaecologic procedures. Experience with this new system in general surgery and especially in major colorectal surgery is very limited. This is a retrospective series of the first 25 consecutive non-selected colorectal surgeries performed at a single German center. The lessons learned from our initial experience are presented along with a systematic review of the currently available literature on this topic. Ten sigmoid and seven rectal resections, four right and one left hemicolectomies, two Hartmann\'s reversals and an abdominoperineal resection were performed in 14 women and 11 men at the median age of 66 years for 12 benign findings and 13 malignancies. All procedures were performed using four robotic ports and a single 12 mm assistant port. Median docking, console and total operative times were 12, 170 and 270 min. Median blood loss was < 100 ml, and median stay was 8 days. The literature review identified five case series with a total of 23 colorectal procedures: 9 right and 1 left hemicolectomies, 5 ileocaecal, and 4 rectal and 4 sigmoid resections. Results corresponded to ours despite variations in setup used by different authors. A wide spectrum of major colorectal surgery can be safely and effectively performed with the Hugo RAS, even in a cohort of non-selected patients. Ongoing software and hardware upgrade, introduction of robotic energy devices and increasing surgical experience are expected to facilitate procedures and reduce duration of surgery.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) for rectal cancer by comparing the local control in patients with and without pathological lateral lymph node metastasis (LLNM).
UNASSIGNED: We included 189 patients with rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision and LLND at 13 institutions between 2017 and 2019. Patients with and without pathological LLNM were defined as the pLLNM (+) and (-) groups, respectively. Propensity score-matching helped to balance the basic characteristics of both groups. The incidences of local recurrence (LR) and lateral lymph node recurrence (LLNR) were compared between the groups.
UNASSIGNED: In the entire cohort, 39 of the 189 patients had pathological LLNM. The 3-year LR and LLNR rates were 18.3% and 4.0% (p = 0.01) and 7.7% and 3.3% (p = 0.22) in the pLLNM (+) and (-) groups, respectively. After propensity score matching, the data from 62 patients were analyzed. No significant differences in LR or LLNR were observed between both groups. The 3-year LR and LLNR rates were 16.4% and 9.8% (p = 0.46) and 9.7% and 9.8% (p = 0.99) in the pLLNM (+) and (-) groups, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: LLND would lead to comparable local control in the pLLNM (+) and (-) groups if the clinicopathological characteristics except for LLNM are similar.

UNASSIGNED: To compare long-term outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic total mesorectal excisions (TMEs) for rectal cancer in a tertiary center.
UNASSIGNED: Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery has comparable long-term outcomes to the open approach, with several advantages in short-term outcomes. However, it has significant technical limitations, which the robotic approach aims to overcome.
UNASSIGNED: We included patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic TME surgery between 2013 and 2021. The groups were compared after propensity-score matching. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were local recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR), disease-free survival (DFS), and short-term surgical and patient-related outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 594 patients were included, and after propensity-score matching 215 patients remained in each group. There was a significant difference in 5-year OS (72.4% for laparoscopy vs 81.7% for robotic, P = 0.029), but no difference in 5-year LR (4.7% vs 5.2%, P = 0.850), DR (16.9% vs 13.5%, P = 0.390), or DFS (63.9% vs 74.4%, P = 0.086). The robotic group had significantly less conversion (3.7% vs 0.5%, P = 0.046), shorter length of stay [7.0 (6.0-13.0) vs 6.0 (4.0-8.0), P < 0.001), and less postoperative complications (63.5% vs 50.7%, P = 0.010).
UNASSIGNED: This study shows a correlation between higher 5-year OS and comparable long-term oncological outcomes for robotic TME surgery compared to the laparoscopic approach. Furthermore, lower conversion rates, a shorter length of stay, and a less minor postoperative complications were observed. Robotic rectal cancer surgery is a safe and favorable alternative to the traditional approaches.

BACKGROUND: The standard surgical treatment for rectal cancer is total mesorectal excision (TME), which may negatively affect patients\' functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL). However, it is unclear how different TME techniques may impact patients\' functional outcomes and QoL. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated functional outcomes of urinary, sexual, and fecal functioning as well as QoL after open, laparoscopic (L-TME), robot-assisted (R-TME), and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME).
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis, based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis statement, were conducted (PROSPERO: CRD42021240851). A literature review was performed (sources: PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases; end-of-search date: September 1, 2023), and a quality assessment was performed using the Methodological index for non-randomized studies. A random-effects model was used to pool the data for the meta-analyses.
RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included, reporting on 2495 patients (88 open, 1171 L-TME, 995 R-TME, and 241 TaTME). Quantitative analyses comparing L-TME vs. R-TME showed no significant differences regarding urinary and sexual functioning, except for urinary function at three months post-surgery, which favoured R-TME (SMD [CI] -0 .15 [- 0.24 to - 0.06], p = 0.02; n = 401). Qualitative analyses identified most studies did not find significant differences in urinary, sexual, and fecal functioning and QoL between different techniques.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis highlight a significant gap in the literature concerning the evaluation of functional outcomes and QoL after TME for rectal cancer treatment. This study emphasizes the need for high-quality, randomized-controlled, and prospective cohort studies evaluating these outcomes. Based on the limited available evidence, this systematic review and meta-analysis suggests no significant differences in patients\' urinary, sexual, and fecal functioning and their QoL across various TME techniques.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a key metric with a significant correlation with the outcomes of patients with rectal cancer, the optimal surgical approach for total mesorectal excision (TME) has not yet been identified. The aim of this study was to assess the association of the surgical approach on the quality of TME and surgical margins and to characterize the surgical and long-term oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, and open TME for rectal cancer.
METHODS: Patients with primary, nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent either lower anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection via robotic (Rob), laparoscopic (Lap), or open approaches were selected from the US Rectal Cancer Consortium database (2007-2017). Quasi-Poisson regression analysis with backward selection was used to investigate the relationship between the surgical approach and outcomes of interest.
RESULTS: Among the 664 patients included in the study, the distribution of surgical approaches was as follows: 351 (52.9%) underwent TME via the open approach, 159 (23.9%) via the robotic approach, and 154 (23.2%) via the laparoscopic approach. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics among the three cohorts. The laparoscopic cohort had fewer patients with low rectal cancer (<6 cm from the anal verge) than the robotic and open cohorts (Lap 28.6% versus Rob 59.1% versus Open 45.6%, P = 0.015). Patients who underwent Rob and Lap TME had lower intraoperative blood loss compared with the Open approach (Rob 200 mL [Q1, Q3: 100.0, 300.0] versus Lap 150 mL [Q1, Q3: 75.0, 250.0] versus Open 300 mL [Q1, Q3: 150.0, 600.0], P < 0.001). There was no difference in the operative time (Rob 243 min [Q1, Q3: 203.8, 300.2] versus Lap 241 min [Q1, Q3: 186, 336] versus Open 226 min [Q1, Q3: 178, 315.8], P = 0.309) between the three approaches. Postoperative length of stay was shorter with robotic and laparoscopic approach compared to open approach (Rob 5.0 d [Q1, Q3: 4, 8.2] versus Lap 5 d [Q1, Q3: 4, 8] versus Open 7.0 d [Q1, Q3: 5, 9], P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the quality of TME between the robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches (79.2%, 64.9%, and 64.7%, respectively; P = 0.46). The margin positivity rate, a composite of circumferential margin and distal margin, was higher with the robotic and open approaches than with the laparoscopic approach (Rob 8.2% versus Open 6.6% versus Lap 1.9%, P = 0.17), Rob versus Lap (odds ratio 0.21; 95% confidence interval 0.05, 0.83) and Rob versus Open (odds ratio 0.5; 95% confidence interval 0.22, 1.12). There was no difference in long-term survival, including overall survival and recurrence-free survival, between patients who underwent robotic, laparoscopic, or open TME (Figure 1).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing surgery with curative intent for rectal cancer, we did not observe a difference in the quality of TME between the robotic, laparoscopic, or open approaches. Robotic and open TME compared to laparoscopic TME were associated with higher margin positivity rates in our study. This was likely due to the higher percentage of low rectal cancers in the robotic and open cohorts. We also reported no significant differences in overall survival and recurrence-free survival between the aforementioned surgical techniques.