Back to Journals » Cancer Management and Research » Volume 10

Transanal total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a case-matched study comparing TaTME versus standard laparoscopic TME

Authors Rubinkiewicz M, Nowakowski M, Wierdak M, Mizera M, Dembiński M, Pisarska M, Major P, Małczak P, Budzyński A, Pędziwiatr M

Received 24 July 2018

Accepted for publication 17 September 2018

Published 1 November 2018 Volume 2018:10 Pages 5239—5245

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S181214

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Cristina Weinberg

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Professor Nakshatri


Mateusz Rubinkiewicz,1 Michał Nowakowski,2 Mateusz Wierdak,1,3 Magdalena Mizera,1 Marcin Dembiński,1 Magdalena Pisarska,1,3 Piotr Major,1,3 Piotr Małczak,1,3 Andrzej Budzyński,1,3 Michał Pędziwiatr1,3

12nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland; 2Department of Medical Education, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland; 3Centre for Research, Training and Innovation in Surgery (CERTAIN Surgery), Krakow, Poland

Background: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is emerging as a novel alternative to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME). The aim of this study was to compare clinical and pathological results from these two techniques in patients undergoing rectal resections because of low rectal cancer.
Materials and methods: Thirty-five patients undergoing TaTME were matched with 35 patients operated on using LaTME. Composite primary endpoint (complete TME, negative circumferential resection margin [pCRM], and distal resection margin [pDRM]) was used to assess pathological quality specimens. Secondary outcomes included operative and postoperative parameters (operative time, total blood loss, postoperative morbidity, length of stay, 30-day mortality).
Results: Composite primary endpoint was achieved by 85% of subjects in the TaTME group and 82% of subjects in the LaTME group (P=0.66). Mean pCRM was 1.1±1.29 vs 0.99±0.78 mm (P=0.25). Distal pDRM was 1.57±0.92 and 1.98±1.22 cm (P=0.15). In the TaTME and LaTME groups, respectively, complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 89% and 83% of subjects, while excision was nearly complete for the remaining 11% and 17% (P=0.23).
Conclusion:
TaTME appears to be a noninferior alternative to laparoscopic surgery. TaTME allows for quality retrieval of surgical specimens with comparable clinical outcomes with LaTME.

Keywords: transanal TME, laparoscopic TME, rectal cancer, low rectal cancer, minimally invasive surgery

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]