Purpose Laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer is technically challenging due to the precision required for mesorectal excision. Articulated instruments were developed to improve precision and oncological safety over conventional instruments. This study compares their perioperative outcomes.
Methods A retrospective cohort study of 432 patients with colorectal cancer who underwent low anterior resection between August 2022 and February 2024 applied propensity score matching to minimize selection bias. Primary endpoints were circumferential resection margin (CRM), distal resection margin (DRM), and harvested lymph nodes count. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications.
Results Following propensity score matching, 84 matched pairs were analyzed. Most patients achieved CRM negativity (>1 mm), with CRM ≥10 mm in 67.9% of the articulated group and 59.5% of the conventional group (P=0.613). Median (interquartile range, IQR) lymph nodes harvests were comparable (20 [14–26] vs. 18 [14–22], P=0.147). The articulated group had a significantly longer DRM (30.0 mm [IQR, 18.0–40.0 mm] vs. 24.0 mm [IQR, 12.0–34.2 mm], P=0.008) and the median operation time (111.0 minutes [IQR, 95.8–125.2 minutes] vs. 99.5 minutes [IQR, 72.0–119.8 minutes], P=0.009). Estimated blood loss, open conversion rates, and postoperative complications, including leakage (7.1% vs. 8.3%, P>0.999) and surgical site infections, (15.5% vs. 9.5%, P=0.383), showed no significant differences.
Conclusion Articulated laparoscopic instruments demonstrated comparable safety and feasibility to conventional instruments but offered no significant clinical or oncological benefits beyond a longer DRM. Larger studies are needed to evaluate their value in laparoscopic rectal surgery.
Eon Bin Kim, In Ja Park, Hwa Jung Kim, Jong Keon Jang, Seong Ho Park, Young Il Kim, Min Hyun Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu
Ann Coloproctol. 2025;41(5):473-482. Published online July 10, 2025
Purpose The decision for treatment after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in rectal cancer is intricately linked to tumor response and clinical parameters. This study was designed to elucidate determinants influencing treatment decisions for good responders to nCRT, while concurrently evaluating the ramifications of modifications in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tumor response evaluation protocols.
Methods A survey was constructed with 5 cases of good responder after nCRT based on the magnetic resonance–based tumor regression grade (mrTRG) criteria. A total of 35 colorectal surgeons in Korea participated in the survey via email, and they were introduced to 2 discrete MRI-based tumor response evaluation methodologies: the conventional mrTRG and an emergent complete response (CR)/non-CR classification system. Surgeons were directed to select between total mesorectal excision, local excision, or a watch and wait strategy.
Results Treatment decisions varied significantly (P<0.01), as gradually more clinical information was provided with mrTRG. The paradigm shift from mrTRG to CR/non-CR evaluation criterion instigated the highest alteration in decision (P<0.01). Even comparing with other sets of information, decision change with different tumor response assessment (i.e., mrTRG vs. CR/non-CR) was statistically significant (P<0.01). Three particular cases consistently displayed a declining predilection for total mesorectal excision, favoring a more pronounced inclination towards watch and wait strategy or local excision. Nonetheless, the magnitude of these decisional shifts oscillated depending on the specific endoscopic imagery present.
Conclusion Our current findings underscore the significant role of tumor response assessment methods in shaping treatment decisions for rectal cancer patients who respond well to nCRT. This highlights the need for clear and accurate tools to interpret MRI results.
Tae-Gyun Lee, Gil-Hyeon Song, Hong-min Ahn, Heung-Kwon Oh, Moonkyoung Byun, Eon Chul Han, Sohyun Kim, Chang Woo Kim, Hye Jin Kim, Samin Hong, Kee-Ho Song, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Beom Cho, on behalf of the Public Relations Committee of the Korean Society of Coloproctology (KSCP)
Ann Coloproctol. 2024;40(2):145-153. Published online April 28, 2023
Purpose The Korean Society of Coloproctology has been conducting Colorectal Cancer Awareness Campaign, also known as the Gold Ribbon Campaign, every September since 2007. The 2022 campaign was held through a metaverse platform targeting the younger age group under the slogan of raising awareness of early-onset colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to analyze the impact of the 2022 campaign on a metaverse platform.
Methods Anonymized survey data were collected from participants in the metaverse campaign from September 1 to 15, 2022. The satisfaction score of the participants was evaluated by sex, age group, and previous campaign participation status.
Results During the campaign, 2,770 people visited the metaverse. Among them, 455 people participated in the survey (response rate, 16.4%). Approximately 95% of the participants reported being satisfied with the information provided by the campaign, understood the necessity of undergoing screening for and prevention of early-onset CRC, and were familiar with the structure of the metaverse. The satisfaction score for campaign information tended to decrease as the participants’ age increased. When the participants’ overall level of satisfaction with the metaverse platform was assessed, teenagers scored particularly lower than the other age groups. The satisfaction scores for CRC information provided in the metaverse, as well as the scores for recognizing the seriousness and necessity of screening for early-onset CRC, indicated a high positive tendency (P<0.001).
Conclusion Most of the 2022 Gold Ribbon Campaign participants were satisfied with the metaverse platform. Medical society should pay attention to increasing participation in and satisfaction with future public campaigns.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Meeting report on the 8th Asian Science Editors’ Conference and Workshop 2024 Eun Jung Park Science Editing.2025; 12(1): 66. CrossRef
Toward Diagnosis of Diseases Using Emerging Technologies: A Comprehensive Survey of the State of the Art in Metaverse Nasim Aslani, Ali Garavand, Riccardo Ortale International Journal of Intelligent Systems.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Global perspectives on young-onset colorectal cancer: epidemiology, challenges, and advances Drew Goldberg, Erica Pettke Seminars in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2025; 36(3): 101118. CrossRef
#CRCandMe: results of a pre-post quasi-experimental study of a mass media campaign to increase early-onset colorectal cancer awareness in Utah and Wisconsin Ami E Sedani American Journal of Cancer Research.2024; 14(8): 3873. CrossRef
Metaverse in surgery — origins and future potential Enrico Checcucci, Alessandro Veccia, Stefano Puliatti, Pieter De Backer, Pietro Piazza, Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski, Severin Rodler, Mark Taratkin, Ines Rivero Belenchon, Loic Baekelandt, Sabrina De Cillis, Alberto Piana, Ahmed Eissa, Juan Gomez Rivas, Giov Nature Reviews Urology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Metaverso: perspectivas, possibilidades e limitações Walter Rodrigues Marques, Maria Neuraildes Gomes Viana, Anderson Boás Viana, Luís Claúdio Azevedo Gomes, Francilene Silva Cruz, Bruna Monique Cunha Rodrigues, Andréa Luísa Frazão Silva, Regeanne Santos Guaianaz, Daiane Leite Chaves Bezerra, Diêgo Jorge Lo Caderno Pedagógico.2024; 21(13): e12984. CrossRef
Purpose Although partial mesorectal excision (PME) and total mesorectal excision (TME) is primarily indicated for the upper and lower rectal cancer, respectively, few studies have evaluated whether PME or TME is more optimal for middle rectal cancer.
Methods This study included 671 patients with middle and upper rectal cancer who underwent robot-assisted PME or TME. The 2 groups were optimized by propensity score matching of sex, age, clinical stage, tumor location, and neoadjuvant treatment.
Results Complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 617 of 671 patients (92.0%), without showing a difference between the PME and TME groups. Local recurrence rate (5.3% vs. 4.3%, P>0.999) and systemic recurrence rate (8.5% vs. 16.0%, P=0.181) also did not differ between the 2 groups, in patients with middle and upper rectal cancer. The 5-year disease-free survival (81.4% vs. 74.0%, P=0.537) and overall survival (88.0% vs. 81.1%, P=0.847) also did not differ between the PME and TME groups, confined to middle rectal cancer. Moreover, 5-year recurrence and survival rates were not affected by distal resection margins of 2 cm (P=0.112) to 4 cm (P>0.999), regardless of pathological stages. Postoperative complication rate was higher in the TME than in the PME group (21.4% vs. 14.5%, P=0.027). Incontinence was independently associated with TME (odds ratio [OR], 2.009; 95% confidence interval, 1.015–3.975; P=0.045), along with older age (OR, 4.366, P<0.001) and prolonged operation time (OR, 2.196; P=0.500).
Conclusion PME can be primarily recommended for patients with middle rectal cancer with lower margin of >5 cm from the anal verge.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Review of definition and treatment of upper rectal cancer Elias Karam, Fabien Fredon, Yassine Eid, Olivier Muller, Marie Besson, Nicolas Michot, Urs Giger-Pabst, Arnaud Alves, Mehdi Ouaissi Surgical Oncology.2024; 57: 102145. CrossRef
Tumour-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and functional outcomes Fabio Carbone, Wanda Petz, Simona Borin, Emilio Bertani, Stefano de Pascale, Maria Giulia Zampino, Uberto Fumagalli Romario European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2023; 49(11): 107069. CrossRef
Yoo Na Lee, Jong Lyul Lee, Chang Sik Yu, Jong Beom Kim, Seok-Byung Lim, In Ja Park, Young Sik Yoon, Chan Wook Kim, Suk-Kyun Yang, Byong Duk Ye, Sang Hyoung Park, Jin Cheon Kim
Ann Coloproctol. 2021;37(2):101-108. Published online April 30, 2021
Purpose Carcinoma arising from Crohn disease (CD) is rare, and there is no clear guidance on how to properly screen for at-risk patients and choose appropriate care. This study aimed to evaluate the clinicopathological characteristics, treatment, and oncologic outcomes of CD patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC).
Methods Using medical records, we retrospectively enrolled a single-center cohort of 823 patients who underwent abdominal surgery for CD between January 2006 and December 2015. CD-associated CRC patients included those with adenocarcinoma, lymphoma, or neuroendocrine tumors of the colon and rectum.
Results Nineteen patients (2.3%) underwent abdominal surgery to treat CD-associated CRC. The mean duration of CD in the CD-associated CRC group was significantly longer than that in the benign CD group (124.7 ± 77.7 months vs. 68.9 ± 60.2 months, P = 0.006). The CD-associated CRC group included a higher proportion of patients with a history of perianal disease (73.7% vs. 50.2%, P = 0.035) and colonic location (47.4% vs. 6.5%, P = 0.001). Among 19 CD-associated CRC patients, 17 (89.5%) were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma, and of the 17 cases, 15 (88.2%) were rectal adenocarcinoma. On multivariable analyses for developing CRC, only colonic location was a risk factor (relative risk, 7.735; 95% confidence interval, 2.862–20.903; P = 0.001).
Conclusion Colorectal malignancy is rare among CD patients, even among patients who undergo abdominal surgery. Rectal adenocarcinoma accounted for most of the CRC, and colonic location was a risk factor for developing CRC.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Perianal Fistulizing Crohn’s Disease–Associated Anorectal and Fistula Cancers: Systematic Review and Expert Consensus Serre-Yu Wong, Cathy Rowan, Elvira Diaz Brockmans, Cindy C.Y. Law, Elisabeth Giselbrecht, Celina Ang, Sergey Khaitov, David Sachar, Alexandros D. Polydorides, Leon Shin-han Winata, Bram Verstockt, Antonino Spinelli, David T. Rubin, Parakkal Deepak, Dermot Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2025; 23(6): 927. CrossRef
Reduced expression of alanyl aminopeptidase is a robust biomarker of non‐familial adenomatous polyposis and non‐hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome early‐onset colorectal cancer Ye Jin Ha, Yun Jae Shin, Ka Hee Tak, Jong Lyul Park, Jeong Hwan Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Yong Sik Yoon, Chan Wook Kim, Seon Young Kim, Jin Cheon Kim Cancer Medicine.2023; 12(8): 10091. CrossRef
Impact of Postoperative Naples Prognostic Score to Predict Survival in Patients with Stage II–III Colorectal Cancer Su Hyeong Park, Hye Seung Woo, In Kyung Hong, Eun Jung Park Cancers.2023; 15(20): 5098. CrossRef
Pretreatment inflammatory markers predicting treatment outcomes in colorectal cancer Sanghyun An, Hongjin Shim, Kwangmin Kim, Bora Kim, Hui-Jae Bang, Hyejin Do, Hyang-Rae Lee, Youngwan Kim Annals of Coloproctology.2022; 38(2): 97. CrossRef
Malignant disease, Rectal cancer,Prognosis and adjuvant therapy
Purpose Recurrence patterns in rectal cancer patients treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) are needed to evaluate for establishing tailored surveillance protocol.
Methods This study included 2,215 patients with locally-advanced mid and low rectal cancer treated with radical resection between January 2005 and December 2012. Recurrence was evaluated according to receipt of PCRT; PCRT group (n = 1,258) and no-PCRT group (n = 957). Early recurrence occurred within 1 year of surgery and late recurrence after 3 years. The median follow-up duration was 65.7 ± 29 months.
Results The overall recurrence rate was similar between the PCRT and no-PCRT group (25.8% vs. 24.9%, P = 0.622). The most common initial recurrence site was the lungs in both groups (50.6% vs. 49.6%, P = 0.864), followed by the liver, which was more common in the no-PCRT group (22.5% vs. 33.6%, P = 0.004). Most of the recurrence occurred within 3 years after surgery in both groups (85.3% vs. 85.8%, P = 0.862). Early recurrence was more common in the PCRT group than in the no-PCRT group (43.1% vs. 32.4%, P = 0.020). Recurrence within the first 6 months after surgery was significantly higher in the PCRT group than in the no-PCRT group (18.8% vs. 7.6%, P = 0.003). Lung (n = 27, 44.3%) and liver (n = 22, 36.1%) were the frequent the first relapsed site within 6 months after surgery in PCRT group.
Conclusion Early recurrence within the first 1 year after surgery was more common in patients treated with PCRT. This difference would be considered for surveillance protocols and need to be evaluated in further studies.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Efficacies of radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients treated with total mesorectal excision or other types of surgery: an updated meta-analysis Wenshu Wang, Runyuan Zhao, Xi Liang, Manjun Liu, Haiyan Bai, Jianli Ge, Binxi Yao, Zheng Zhi, Jianming He Oncology Reviews.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Watch and wait strategies for rectal cancer: A systematic review In Ja Park Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(2): 91. CrossRef
Update on Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal
Cancer Chan Wook Kim The Ewha Medical Journal.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
The watch-and-wait strategy versus radical resection for rectal cancer patients with a good response (≤ycT2) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy Chungyeop Lee, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 103(6): 350. CrossRef
Optimal Postoperative Surveillance Strategies for Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study Min-Young Park, In-Ja Park, Hyo-Seon Ryu, Jay Jung, Min-Sung Kim, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang-Sik Yu, Jin-Cheon Kim Cancers.2021; 13(14): 3502. CrossRef
Comparison between Local Excision and Radical Resection for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer in ypT0-1 Patients: An Analysis of the Clinicopathological Factors and Survival Rates Soo Young Oh, In Ja Park, Young IL Kim, Jong-Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim Cancers.2021; 13(19): 4823. CrossRef
Shifting Treatment Strategies to Prevent Early Relapse of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Eun Jung Park Annals of Coloproctology.2020; 36(6): 357. CrossRef
Joon Suk Moon, Jong Lyul Lee, Chang Sik Yu, Seok-Byung Lim, In Ja Park, Yong Sik Yoon, Chan Wook Kim, Suk-Kyun Yang, Byong Duk Ye, Sang Hyoung Park, Hassan Abdullah Alsaleem, Jin Cheon Kim
Ann Coloproctol. 2020;36(4):243-248. Published online March 16, 2020
Purpose Upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract involvement in Crohn disease (CD) is rare and effectiveness of surgical treatment is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate characteristics and surgical outcomes of upper GI CD.
Methods Medical records of 811 patients who underwent intestinal surgery for CD between January 2006 and December 2015 at a single institution were reviewed. Upper GI CD was defined by involvement of the stomach to the fourth portion of duodenum, with or without concomitant small/large bowel CD involvement according to a modification of the Montreal classification.
Results We identified 24 patients (21 males, 3 females) who underwent surgery for upper GI CD. The mean age at diagnosis was 27 ± 12 years, the mean age at surgery was 33 ± 11 years, and the mean duration of CD was 73.6 ± 56.6 months. Fifteen patients (62.5%) had history of previous perianal surgery. Ten patients (41.7%) had duodenal or gastric stricture and 14 patients (58.3%) had penetrating fistula; patients with fistula were significantly more likely to develop complications (57.1% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.035). One patient with stricture had surgical recurrence. In seven patients with fistula, fistula was related to previous anastomosis. Patients with fistula had significantly longer hospital stays than those with stricture (16 days vs. 11 days, P = 0.01).
Conclusion Upper GI CD is rare among CD types (2.96%). In patients with upper GI CD, penetrating fistula was associated with longer hospital stay and more complications.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Diagnosis and Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Involvement in Adult Patients With Crohn’s Disease: A Systematic Review Nathaniel A. Cohen, Neta Sror, Maliha Naseer, Dominik Bettenworth, Cathy Lu, Raneem Khedraki, Maria T. Abreu, Raja Atreya, Badr Al-Bawardy, Susan J. Connor, Geert d’Haens, Iris Dotan, Axel Dignass, Sara El Ouali, Brian Feagan, Roger Feakins, Richard Gearr Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Update S2k-Guideline Helicobacter pylori and gastroduodenal ulcer disease of the German Society of Gastroenterology, Digestive and Metabolic Diseases (DGVS) Wolfgang Fischbach, Jan Bornschein, Jörg C. Hoffmann, Sibylle Koletzko, Alexander Link, Lukas Macke, Peter Malfertheiner, Kerstin Schütte, Dieter-Michael Selgrad, Sebastian Suerbaum, Christian Schulz Zeitschrift für Gastroenterologie.2024; 62(02): 261. CrossRef
Aktualisierte S2k-Leitlinie Helicobacter pylori und gastroduodenale Ulkuskrankheit der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gastroenterologie, Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS) – Juli 2022 – AWMF-Registernummer: 021–001
Zeitschrift für Gastroenterologie.2023; 61(05): 544. CrossRef
A systematic review and meta‐analysis of prevalence and clinical features of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract Crohn's disease in adults compared to non‐UGI types Babak Tamizifar, Peyman Adibi, Maryam Hadipour, Vahid Mohamadi JGH Open.2023; 7(5): 325. CrossRef
Upper gastrointestinal tract involvement of Crohn disease: clinical implications in children and adolescents Eun Sil Kim, Mi Jin Kim Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics.2022; 65(1): 21. CrossRef
Profiling non-coding RNA levels with clinical classifiers in pediatric Crohn’s disease Ranjit Pelia, Suresh Venkateswaran, Jason D. Matthews, Yael Haberman, David J. Cutler, Jeffrey S. Hyams, Lee A. Denson, Subra Kugathasan BMC Medical Genomics.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Surgical Treatment of Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Crohn Disease: A Long Way to Go to Identify the Optimal Method Soo Yeun Park Annals of Coloproctology.2020; 36(4): 207. CrossRef
Purpose This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of the open and laparoscopic approaches to 2-stage restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) for Korean patients with ulcerative colitis (UC).
Methods We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 73 patients with UC who underwent elective RPC between 2009 and 2016. Patient characteristics, operative details, and postoperative complications within 30 days were compared between the open and laparoscopic groups.
Results There were 26 cases (36%) in the laparoscopic group, which had a lower mean body mass index (P = 0.025), faster mean time to recovery of bowel function (P = 0.004), less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.004), and less pain on the first and seventh postoperative days (P = 0.029 and P = 0.027, respectively) compared to open group. There were no deaths, and the overall complication rate was 43.8%. There was no between-group difference in the overall complication rate; however, postoperative ileus was more frequent in the open group (27.7% vs. 7.7%, P = 0.043). Current smoking (odds ratio [OR], 44.4; P = 0.003) and open surgery (OR, 5.4; P = 0.014) were the independent risk factors for postoperative complications after RPC.
Conclusion Laparoscopic RPC was associated with acceptable morbidity and faster recovery than the open approach. The laparoscopic approach is a feasible and safe option for surgical treatment for UC in selective cases.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Ileoanal Pouch Surgery: a Systematic Review Zakary Ismail Warsop, Carlo Alberto Manzo, Natalie Yu, Bilal Yusuf, Christos Kontovounisios, Valerio Celentano Journal of Crohn's and Colitis.2024; 18(3): 479. CrossRef
Creation of an institutional preoperative checklist to support clinical risk assessment in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) considering ileoanal pouch surgery Bruno Augusto Alves Martins, Amira Shamsiddinova, Manal Mubarak Alquaimi, Guy Worley, Phil Tozer, Kapil Sahnan, Zarah Perry-Woodford, Ailsa Hart, Naila Arebi, Manmeet Matharoo, Janindra Warusavitarne, Omar Faiz Frontline Gastroenterology.2024; 15(3): 203. CrossRef
Benefits of Elective Laparoscopic 2-Stage Restorative Proctocolectomy for Ulcerative Colitis in Korea Sun Min Park, Won-Kyung Kang Annals of Coloproctology.2020; 36(1): 3. CrossRef
PURPOSE This study aimed to identify risk factors for anastomotic leakage and to evaluate the impact of protective stoma on the rate of anastomotic leakage and subsequent management.
METHODS This retrospective study analyzed data from 4,282 patients who underwent low anterior resection between 2007 and 2014. Among these, 1,367 (31.9%) underwent surgery to create protective diverting stoma and 232 (5.4%) experienced anastomotic leakage. At 6-month timepoints, data were evaluated to identify any correlation between the presence of diverting stoma and the incidence of anastomotic leakage. In addition, clinicopathological parameters were investigated to identify risk factors for anastomotic leakage.
RESULTS Diverting stomas significantly reduced the rate of anastomotic leakage [HR 0.334, 95% CI 0.212
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Factors associated with leakage after reversal of protective stoma in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer following curative resection and anastomosis Miao-Ling Tsai, Ji-Shiang Hung, John Huang, Been-Ren Lin European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2025; 51(8): 108698. CrossRef
Risk factors influencing sphincter preservation in laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery Jia-Rui Liu, Jin Zhang, Xiang-Long Duan World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Risk prediction models for permanence of temporary stoma after radical surgery of rectal cancer: a systematic review Wenjing Tan, Shiyin Cai, Juanqin Wu, Wenke Wu, Shan Wang, Yaqiu Li, Lulu Liu, Liping Tang, Ying Cao World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Machine learning model for prediction of permanent stoma after anterior resection of rectal cancer: A multicenter study Yang Su, Yanqi Li, Heng Zhang, Wangshuo Yang, Mengdie Liu, Xuelai Luo, Lu Liu European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2024; 50(7): 108386. CrossRef
A nomogram of anastomotic stricture after rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort analysis Yifan Cheng, Zhen Tian, Shuyang Gao, Shuai Zhao, Ruiqi Li, Jiajie Zhou, Qiannan Sun, Daorong Wang Surgical Endoscopy.2024; 38(7): 3661. CrossRef
Impact of diversion ileostomy on postoperative complications and recovery in the treatment of locally advanced upper-half rectal cancer Yangyang Wang, Xiaojie Wang, Shenghui Huang, Heyuan Zhu, Ying Huang Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The role of transanal drainage tube in preventing the anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery without a defunctioning stoma: A meta-analysis Yue-Xin Zhang, Tao Jin, Kun Yang The Surgeon.2023; 21(4): e164. CrossRef
Sarcopenic Obesity Is a Risk Factor for Worse Oncological Long-Term Outcome in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study Peter Tschann, Markus P. Weigl, Patrick Clemens, Philipp Szeverinski, Christian Attenberger, Matthias Kowatsch, Tarkan Jäger, Klaus Emmanuel, Thomas Brock, Ingmar Königsrainer Nutrients.2023; 15(11): 2632. CrossRef
One Decade of Declining Use of Defunctioning Stomas After Rectal Cancer Surgery in the Netherlands: Are We on the Right Track? Erik W. Ingwersen, Paulien J.K. van der Beek, Jan Willem T. Dekker, Susan van Dieren, Freek Daams Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2023; 66(7): 1003. CrossRef
Effects of Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy on Postoperative Complications in Rectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Jianguo Yang, Yajun Luo, Tingting Tian, Peng Dong, Zhongxue Fu, Irena Ilic Journal of Oncology.2022; 2022: 1. CrossRef
Tailored Management with Highly-Selective Diversion for Low Colorectal Anastomosis: Biochemical Postoperative Follow-Up and Long-Term Results from a Single-Institution Cohort Philippe Rouanet, Marie Selvy, Marta Jarlier, Caroline Bugnon, Guillaume Carrier, Anne Mourregot, Pierre-Emmanuel Colombo, Christophe Taoum Annals of Surgical Oncology.2022; 29(4): 2514. CrossRef
Are risk factors for anastomotic leakage influencing long-term oncological outcomes after low anterior resection of locally advanced rectal cancer with neoadjuvant therapy? A single-centre cohort study Peter Tschann, Markus P. Weigl, Philipp Szeverinski, Daniel Lechner, Thomas Brock, Stephanie Rauch, Jana Rossner, Helmut Eiter, Paolo N. C. Girotti, Tarkan Jäger, Jaroslav Presl, Klaus Emmanuel, Alexander De Vries, Ingmar Königsrainer, Patrick Clemens Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.2022; 407(7): 2945. CrossRef
Analysis of Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Anterior Resection of Rectal Cancer and Construction of a Nomogram Prediction Model Keli Wang, Meijiao Li, Rui Liu, Yang Ji, Jin Yan Cancer Management and Research.2022; Volume 14: 2243. CrossRef
Preoperative risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage after colectomy for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis VINÍCIUS EVANGELISTA DIAS, PEDRO ALVES SOARES VAZ DE CASTRO, HOMERO TERRA PADILHA, LARA VICENTE PILLAR, LAURA BOTELHO RAMOS GODINHO, AUGUSTO CLAUDIO DE ALMEIDA TINOCO, RODRIGO DA COSTA AMIL, ALEIDA NAZARETH SOARES, GERALDO MAGELA GOMES DA CRUZ, JULIANA MA Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Fatores de risco pré-operatórios associados à fístula anastomótica após colectomia para câncer colorretal: revisão sistemática e metanálise VINÍCIUS EVANGELISTA DIAS, PEDRO ALVES SOARES VAZ DE CASTRO, HOMERO TERRA PADILHA, LARA VICENTE PILLAR, LAURA BOTELHO RAMOS GODINHO, AUGUSTO CLAUDIO DE ALMEIDA TINOCO, RODRIGO DA COSTA AMIL, ALEIDA NAZARETH SOARES, GERALDO MAGELA GOMES DA CRUZ, JULIANA MA Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Risk Factors of Anastomotic Leakage After Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer Patients Xiang-nan Yu, Lu-ming Xu, Ya-wen Bin, Ye Yuan, Shao-bo Tian, Bo Cai, Kai-xiong Tao, Lin Wang, Guo-bin Wang, Zheng Wang Current Medical Science.2022; 42(6): 1256. CrossRef
Effect of pelvic drain displacement on anastomotic leakage-related morbidity after rectal cancer surgery Ho Yung Lee, Sung Il Kang, So Hyun Kim, Jae-Hwang Kim Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery.2021; 24(3): 158. CrossRef
Preoperative chemoradiotherapy versus surgery alone for advanced low rectal cancer: a large multicenter cohort study in Japan Tomonori Akagi, Masafumi Inomata, Hajime Fujishima, Meiki Fukuda, Tsuyoshi Konishi, Shunsuke Tsukamoto, Fuminori Teraishi, Heita Ozawa, Keitaro Tanaka, Koya Hida, Yoshiharu Sakai, Masahiko Watanabe Surgery Today.2020; 50(11): 1507. CrossRef
Sungwoo Jung, Anuj Parajuli, Chang Sik Yu, Seong Ho Park, Jong Seok Lee, Ah Young Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Jin Cheon Kim
Ann Coloproctol. 2019;35(5):275-281. Published online October 31, 2019
Purpose We investigated the sensitivity of various evaluating modalities in predicting a pathologic complete response (pCR) after preoperative chemoradiation therapy (PCRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC).
Methods From a population of 2,247 LARC patients who underwent PCRT followed by surgery at Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea from January 2007 to June 2016, we retrospectively analyzed 313 patients (14.1%) who showed a pCR after surgery. Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), abdominopelvic computed tomography (AP-CT), and endoscopy were performed within 2 weeks prior to surgery.
Results Of the 313 patients analyzed, 256 (81.8%) had a pCR after radical surgery and 57 (18.2%) showed total regression after local excision. Preoperative TRUS, MRI, and AP-CT were performed in 283, 305, and 139 patients, respectively. Among these 3 groups, a prediction of a pCR of the primary tumor was made in 41 (14.5%), 51 (16.7%), and 27 patients (19.4%), respectively, before surgery. A prediction of a clinical N0 stage was made in 204 patients (88.3%) using TRUS, 130 (52.2%) using MRI, and 78 (65.5%) using AP-CT. Of the 211 patients who underwent endoscopy, 87 (41.2%) had a mention of clinical CR in their records. A prediction of a pathologic CR was made for 124 patients (39.6%) through at least one diagnostic modality.
Conclusion The various evaluation methods for predicting a pCR after PCRT show a predictive sensitivity of 0.15–0.41 for primary tumors and 0.52–0.88 for lymph nodes. Endoscopy is a relatively superior modality for predicting the pCR of the primary tumor of LARC patients.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Comparison between Local Excision and Radical Resection for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer in ypT0-1 Patients: An Analysis of the Clinicopathological Factors and Survival Rates Soo Young Oh, In Ja Park, Young IL Kim, Jong-Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim Cancers.2021; 13(19): 4823. CrossRef
Predicting Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Response in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Using Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes Density Yao Xu, Xiaoying Lou, Yanting Liang, Shenyan Zhang, Shangqing Yang, Qicong Chen, Zeyan Xu, Minning Zhao, Zhenhui Li, Ke Zhao, Zaiyi Liu Journal of Inflammation Research.2021; Volume 14: 5891. CrossRef
A Nine-Gene Signature for Predicting the Response to Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer In Ja Park, Yun Suk Yu, Bilal Mustafa, Jin Young Park, Yong Bae Seo, Gun-Do Kim, Jinpyo Kim, Chang Min Kim, Hyun Deok Noh, Seung-Mo Hong, Yeon Wook Kim, Mi-Ju Kim, Adnan Ahmad Ansari, Luigi Buonaguro, Sung-Min Ahn, Chang-Sik Yu Cancers.2020; 12(4): 800. CrossRef
Yunghuyn Hwang, Yong Sik Yoon, Jun Woo Bong, Hye Yun Choi, In Ho Song, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim
Ann Coloproctol. 2019;35(4):194-201. Published online August 31, 2019
Purpose Transanal excision (TAE) is an alternative surgical procedure for early rectal cancer. This study compared long-term TAE outcomes, in terms of survival and local recurrence (LR), with total mesorectal excision (TME) in patients with pathologically confirmed T1 rectal cancer.
Methods T1 rectal adenocarcinoma patients who underwent surgery from 1990 to 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients that were suspected to have preoperative lymph node metastasis were excluded. Demographics, recurrence, and survival were analyzed based on TAE and TME surgery.
Results Of 268 individuals, 61 patients (26%) underwent TAE, which was characterized by proximity to the anus, submucosal invasion depth, and lesion infiltration, compared with TME patients (P < 0.001–0.033). During a median follow-up of 10.4 years, 12 patients had systemic and/or LR. Ten-year cancer-specific survival in the TAE and TME groups was not significantly different (98% vs. 100%). However, the 10-year LR rate in the TAE group was greater than that of TME group (10% vs. 0%, P < 0.001). Although 5 of the 6 TAE patients with LR underwent salvage surgery, one of the patients eventually died. The TAE surgical procedure (hazard ratio, 19.066; P = 0.007) was the only independent risk factor for LR.
Conclusion Although long-term survival after TAE was comparable to that after TME, TAE had a greater recurrence risk than TME. Thus, TAE should only be considered as an alternative surgical option for early rectal cancer in selected patients.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Local resection in rectal cancer: When, who and how? Jesus Badia-Closa, Juan Pablo Campana, Gustavo Leandro Rossi, Xavier Serra-Aracil Cirugía Española (English Edition).2025; 103(4): 244. CrossRef
Resección local en cáncer de recto: ¿cuándo, a quién y cómo? Jesus Badia-Closa, Juan Pablo Campana, Gustavo Leandro Rossi, Xavier Serra-Aracil Cirugía Española.2025; 103(4): 244. CrossRef
Transanal excision in early rectal cancer Marija Nikolić, Nemanja Trifunović, Damir Jašarović, Tanja Abazović, Milica Radivojević, Nebojša Mitrović Medicinski glasnik Specijalne bolnice za bolesti štitaste žlezde i bolesti metabolizma.2025; 30(97): 28. CrossRef
Short- and long-term outcomes of local excision with adjuvant radiotherapy in high-risk T1 rectal cancer patients Abdullah Al-Sawat, Jung Hoon Bae, Hyun Ho Kim, Chul Seung Lee, Seung Rim Han, Yoon Suk Lee, Hyeon-Min Cho, Hong Seok Jang, In Kyu Lee Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 102(1): 36. CrossRef
The Role of Transanal Endoscopic Surgery for Early Rectal Cancer Natalie F. Berger, Patricia Sylla Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2022; 35(02): 113. CrossRef
Multidisciplinary treatment strategy for early rectal cancer Gyung Mo Son, In Young Lee, Sung Hwan Cho, Byung-Soo Park, Hyun Sung Kim, Su Bum Park, Hyung Wook Kim, Sang Bo Oh, Tae Un Kim, Dong Hoon Shin Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(1): 32. CrossRef
Watch and wait strategies for rectal cancer: A systematic review In Ja Park Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(2): 91. CrossRef
Early-rectal Cancer Treatment: A Decision-tree Making Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Ignacio Aguirre-Allende, Jose Maria Enriquez-Navascues, Garazi Elorza-Echaniz, Ane Etxart-Lopetegui, Nerea Borda-Arrizabalaga, Yolanda Saralegui Ansorena, Carlos Placer-Galan Cirugía Española.2021; 99(2): 89. CrossRef
Oncological Outcomes of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery Plus Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Patients with High-Risk T1 and T2 Rectal Cancer Kang Xu, Yulin Liu, Peng Yu, Wei Shang, Yongbo Zhang, Mingwen Jiao, Zhonghui Cui, Lijian Xia, Jingbo Chen Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques.2021; 31(9): 1006. CrossRef
Early-rectal Cancer Treatment: A Decision-tree Making Based on Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Ignacio Aguirre-Allende, Jose Maria Enriquez-Navascues, Garazi Elorza-Echaniz, Ane Etxart-Lopetegui, Nerea Borda-Arrizabalaga, Yolanda Saralegui Ansorena, Carlos Placer-Galan Cirugía Española (English Edition).2021; 99(2): 89. CrossRef
The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Surveillance and Survivorship Care of Patients After Curative Treatment of Colon and Rectal Cancer Karin M. Hardiman, Seth I. Felder, Garrett Friedman, John Migaly, Ian M. Paquette, Daniel L. Feingold Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2021; 64(5): 517. CrossRef
The risk factors of local recurrence and distant metastasis on pT1/T2N0 mid-low rectal cancer after total mesorectal excision I-Li Lai, Jeng-Fu You, Yih-Jong Chern, Wen-Sy Tsai, Jy-Ming Chiang, Pao-Shiu Hsieh, Hsin-Yuan Hung, Yu-Jen Hsu World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Prognostic Factors and Treatment of Recurrence after Local Excision of Rectal Cancer Moon Suk Choi, Jung Wook Huh, Jung Kyong Shin, Yoon Ah Park, Yong Beom Cho, Hee Cheol Kim, Seong Hyeon Yun, Woo Yong Lee Yonsei Medical Journal.2021; 62(12): 1107. CrossRef
New morphological risk factors for metastasis to regional lymph nodes in rectal cancer with invasion into the submucosa O. A. Maynovskaya, E. G. Rybakov, S. V. Chernyshov, Yu. A. Shelygin, S. I. Achkasov Koloproktologia.2021; 20(4): 22. CrossRef
Surgical Treatment of Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: Updates Cristopher Varela, Nam Kyu Kim Annals of Coloproctology.2021; 37(6): 395. CrossRef
Comparison of the transanal surgical techniques for local excision of rectal tumors: a network meta-analysis Konstantinos Perivoliotis, Ioannis Baloyiannis, Chamaidi Sarakatsianou, George Tzovaras International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2020; 35(7): 1173. CrossRef
What Should Be Considered for Local Excision in Early Rectal Cancer? Taesung Ahn Annals of Coloproctology.2019; 35(4): 155. CrossRef
Survival analysis of local excision vs total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer in pT1/pT2 stage and intermediate pathological risk I-Li Lai, Jeng-Fu You, Yih-Jong Chern, Wen-Sy Tsai, Jy-Ming Chiang, Pao-Shiu Hsieh, Hsin-Yuan Hung, Chien-Yuh Yeh, Sum-Fu Chiang, Cheng-Chou Lai, Rei-Ping Tang, Jinn-Shiun Chen, Yu-Jen Hsu World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
Purpose We evaluated the oncologic outcomes of organ-preserving strategies in patients with rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT).
Methods Between January 2008 and January 2013, 74 patients who underwent wait-and-watch (WW) (n = 42) and local excision (LE) (n = 32) were enrolled. Organ-preserving strategies were determined based on a combination of magnetic resonance imaging, sigmoidoscopy, and physical examination 4–6 weeks after completion of PCRT. The rectum sparing rate, 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.
Results The rectum was more frequently spared in the LE (100% vs. 87.5%, P = 0.018) at last follow-up. Recurrence occurred in 9 (28.1%) WW and 7 (16.7%) LE (P = 0.169). In the WW, 7 patients had only luminal regrowth and 2 had combined lung metastasis. In the LE, 2 (4.8%) had local recurrence only, 4 patients had distant metastasis, and 1 patient had local and distant metastasis. Among 13 patients who indicated salvage surgery (WW, n = 7; LE, n = 11), all in the WW received but all of LE refused salvage surgery (P = 0.048). The 5-year OS and 5-year RFS in overall patients was 92.7% and 76.9%, respectively, and were not different between WW and LE (P = 0.725, P = 0.129).
Conclusion WW and LE were comparable in terms of 5-year OS and RFS. In the LE group, salvage treatment was performed much less among indicated patients. Therefore, methods to improve the oncologic outcomes of patients indicated for salvage treatment should be considered before local excision.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Effectiveness of Organ Preservation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer With Complete Clinical Response After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy: Bayesian Network Meta-analysis Kaibo Ouyang, Zifeng Yang, Yuesheng Yang, Zejian Lyu, Junjiang Wang, Yong Li Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2025; 68(3): 287. CrossRef
Rectal cancer approach strategies after neoadjuvant treatment – a systematic review and network meta-analysis Cong Meng, Wenlong Shu, Liting Sun, Si Wu, Pengyu Wei, Jiale Gao, Jinyao Shi, Yang Li, Zhengyang Yang, Hongwei Yao, Zhongtao Zhang International Journal of Surgery.2025; 111(4): 3078. CrossRef
Rectal Sparing Approaches after Neoadjuvant Treatment for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Local Excision and Watch and Wait Quoc Riccardo Bao, Stefania Ferrari, Giulia Capelli, Cesare Ruffolo, Marco Scarpa, Amedea Agnes, Giuditta Chiloiro, Elisa Palazzari, Emanuele Damiano Luca Urso, Salvatore Pucciarelli, Gaya Spolverato Cancers.2023; 15(2): 465. CrossRef
Organ preservation for early rectal cancer using preoperative chemoradiotherapy Gyung Mo Son Annals of Coloproctology.2023; 39(3): 191. CrossRef
Can pretreatment platelet-to-lymphocyte and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios predict long-term oncologic outcomes after preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer? Sang Hyun An, Ik Yong Kim Annals of Coloproctology.2022; 38(3): 253. CrossRef
Multidisciplinary treatment strategy for early rectal cancer Gyung Mo Son, In Young Lee, Sung Hwan Cho, Byung-Soo Park, Hyun Sung Kim, Su Bum Park, Hyung Wook Kim, Sang Bo Oh, Tae Un Kim, Dong Hoon Shin Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(1): 32. CrossRef
Pretreatment inflammatory markers predicting treatment outcomes in colorectal cancer Sanghyun An, Hongjin Shim, Kwangmin Kim, Bora Kim, Hui-Jae Bang, Hyejin Do, Hyang-Rae Lee, Youngwan Kim Annals of Coloproctology.2022; 38(2): 97. CrossRef
Watch and wait strategies for rectal cancer: A systematic review In Ja Park Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(2): 91. CrossRef
The watch-and-wait strategy versus radical resection for rectal cancer patients with a good response (≤ycT2) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy Chungyeop Lee, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 103(6): 350. CrossRef
Improvement in the Assessment of Response to Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging and a Multigene Biomarker Eunhae Cho, Sung Woo Jung, In Ja Park, Jong Keon Jang, Seong Ho Park, Seung-Mo Hong, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim Cancers.2021; 13(14): 3480. CrossRef
Comparison between Local Excision and Radical Resection for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer in ypT0-1 Patients: An Analysis of the Clinicopathological Factors and Survival Rates Soo Young Oh, In Ja Park, Young IL Kim, Jong-Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim Cancers.2021; 13(19): 4823. CrossRef
Functional outcomes after sphincter-preserving surgeries for low-lying rectal cancer: A review Eun Jung Park, Seung Hyuk Baik Precision and Future Medicine.2021; 5(4): 164. CrossRef
The risk of distant metastases in rectal cancer managed by a watch-and-wait strategy – A systematic review and meta-analysis Joanna Socha, Lucyna Kępka, Wojciech Michalski, Karol Paciorek, Krzysztof Bujko Radiotherapy and Oncology.2020; 144: 1. CrossRef
From Total Mesorectal Excision to Organ Preservation for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer Seong Kyu Baek Annals of Coloproctology.2019; 35(2): 51. CrossRef
Seung-Seop Yeom, In Ja Park, Dong-Hoon Yang, Jong Lyul Lee, Yong Sik Yoon, Chan Wook Kim, Seok-Byung Lim, Sung Ho Park, Hwa Jung Kim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim
Ann Coloproctol. 2019;35(1):24-29. Published online February 28, 2019
Purpose Although the height of a rectal tumor above the anal verge (tumor height) partly determines the treatment strategy, no practical standard exists for reporting this. We aimed to demonstrate the differences in tumor height according to the diagnostic modality used for its measurement.
Methods We identified 100 patients with rectal cancers located within 15 cm of the anal verge who had recorded tumor heights measured by using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), colonoscopy, and digital rectal examination (DRE). Tumor height measured by using MRI was compared with those measured by using DRE and colonoscopy to assess reporting inconsistencies. Factors associated with differences in tumor height among the modalities were also evaluated.
Results The mean tumor heights were 77.8 ± 3.3, 52.9 ± 2.3, and 68.9 ± 3.1 mm when measured by using MRI, DRE, and colonoscopy, respectively (P < 0.001). Agreement among the 3 modalities in terms of tumor sublocation within the rectum was found in only 39% of the patients. In the univariate and the multivariate analyses, clinical stage showed a possible association with concordance among modalities, but age, sex, and luminal location of the tumor were not associated with differences among modalities.
Conclusion The heights of rectal cancer differed according to the diagnostic modality. Tumor height has implications for rectal cancer’s surgical planning and for interpreting comparative studies. Hence, a consensus is needed for measuring and reporting tumor height.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
The efficacy of open transanal drainage tube against anastomotic leakage in left-sided colorectal cancer surgery: a propensity score matching study Gen Tsujio, Tatsunari Fukuoka, Atsushi Sugimoto, Ken Yonemitsu, Yuki Seki, Hiroaki Kasashima, Yuichiro Miki, Mami Yoshii, Tatsuro Tamura, Masatsune Shibutani, Takahiro Toyokawa, Shigeru Lee, Kiyoshi Maeda BMC Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Defining the tumor location in rectal cancer – Practice variations and impact on treatment decision making Elisabeth P. Goedegebuure, Francesco M. Arico, Max J. Lahaye, Monique Maas, Geerard L. Beets, Femke P. Peters, Monique E. van Leerdam, Regina G.H. Beets-Tan, Doenja M.J. Lambregts European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2025; 51(6): 109700. CrossRef
Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy vs Up-Front Surgery for Resectable Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Po-Chuan Chen, Avery Shuei-He Yang, Alessandro Fichera, Mu-Hung Tsai, Yuan-Hua Wu, Yu-Min Yeh, Yu Shyr, Edward Chia-Cheng Lai, Chao-Han Lai JAMA Network Open.2025; 8(5): e259049. CrossRef
Standard of practice imaging vs. PET/MR: a comparative prospective study in rectal cancer staging Rafał Maksim, Angelika Buczyńska, Iwona Sidorkiewicz, Małgorzata Mojsak, Justyna Śliwowska-Burzyńska, Konrad Zuzda, Patryk Gugnacki, Adam Krętowski, Ewa Sierko International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Effects of Adjuvant Chemotherapy on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients With Stage ⅡA Rectal Cancer Above the Peritoneal Reflection Who Did Not Undergo Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Hyo Seon Ryu, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Yong Sang Hong, Tae Won Kim, Chang Sik Yu Clinical Colorectal Cancer.2024; 23(4): 392. CrossRef
Interrater Agreement of Height Assessment by Rigid Proctoscopy/Rectoscopy for Rectal Carcinoma Matthias Kraemer, Sarkhan Nabiyev, Silvia Kraemer, Stephanie Schipmann Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2024; 67(8): 1018. CrossRef
Chinese national clinical practice guidelines on prevention, diagnosis and treatment of early colorectal cancer Jingnan Li, Hongwei Yao, Yun Lu, Shutian Zhang, Zhongtao Zhang Chinese Medical Journal.2024; 137(17): 2017. CrossRef
Review of definition and treatment of upper rectal cancer Elias Karam, Fabien Fredon, Yassine Eid, Olivier Muller, Marie Besson, Nicolas Michot, Urs Giger-Pabst, Arnaud Alves, Mehdi Ouaissi Surgical Oncology.2024; 57: 102145. CrossRef
Comparison of flexible endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging in determining the tumor height in rectal cancer Mohammed H. Basendowah, Mohammed A. Ezzat, Aseel H. Khayyat, Eyad Saleh A. Alamri, Turki A. Madani, Anas H. Alzahrani, Rana Y. Bokhary, Arwa O. Badeeb, Hussam A. Hijazi Cancer Reports.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Measuring Rectal Cancer Tumor Height: Concordance Between Clinical Examination and MRI Shannon M. Navarro, Shuai Chen, Linda M. Farkas Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2022; 65(4): 497. CrossRef
How do they measure up: Assessing the height of rectal cancer with digital rectal exam, endoscopy, and MRI,, Jordan Wlodarczyk, Kshitij Gaur, Nicholas Serniak, Kevin Mertz, Jason Muri, Sarah Koller, Sang W. Lee, Kyle G. Cologne Surgery in Practice and Science.2022; 10: 100096. CrossRef
Measurement of rectal tumor height from the anal verge on MRI: a comparison of internal versus external anal sphincter David D. B. Bates, James L. Fuqua, Junting Zheng, Marinela Capanu, Jennifer S. Golia Pernicka, Sidra Javed-Tayyab, Viktoriya Paroder, Iva Petkovska, Marc J. Gollub Abdominal Radiology.2021; 46(3): 867. CrossRef
Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Seon Hahn Kim Annals of Coloproctology.2021; 37(6): 351. CrossRef
Purpose We evaluate the prognostic value of primary tumor location for oncologic outcomes in patients with colon cancer (CC).
Methods CC patients treated with curative surgery between 2009 and 2012 were classified into 2 groups: right-sided colon cancer (RCC) and left-sided colon cancer (LCC). Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were examined based on tumor stage. Propensity scores were created using eight variables (age, sex, T stage, N stage, histologic grade, presence of lymphovascular invasion/perineural invasion, and microsatellite instability status).
Results Overall, 2,329 patients were identified. The 5-year RFSs for RCC and LCC patients were 89.7% and 88.4% (P = 0.328), respectively, and their 5-year OSs were 90.9% and 93.4% (P = 0.062). Multivariate survival analyses were carried out by using the Cox regression proportional hazard model. In the unadjusted analysis, a marginal increase in overall mortality was seen in RCC patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.297; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.987–1.704, P = 0.062); however, after multivariable adjustment, similar OSs were observed in those patients (HR, 1.219; 95% CI, 0.91–1.633; P = 0.183). After propensity-score matching with a total of 1,560 patients, no significant difference was identified (P = 0.183). A slightly worse OS was seen for stage III RCC patients (HR, 1.561; 95% CI, 0.967–2.522; P = 0.068) than for stage III LCC patients. The 5-year OSs for patients with stage III RCC and stage III LCC were 85.5% and 90.5%, respectively (P = 0.133).
Conclusion Although the results are inconclusive, tumor location tended to be associated with OS in CC patients with lymph node metastasis, but it was not related to oncologic outcome.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Prognostic value of primary tumor location in colorectal cancer: an updated meta-analysis Hanieh Gholamalizadeh, Nima Zafari, Mahla Velayati, Hamid Fiuji, Mina Maftooh, Elnaz Ghorbani, Seyed Mahdi Hassanian, Majid Khazaei, Gordon A. Ferns, Elham Nazari, Amir Avan Clinical and Experimental Medicine.2023; 23(8): 4369. CrossRef
Inhibition of CXCR4 and CXCR7 Is Protective in Acute Peritoneal Inflammation Kristian-Christos Ngamsri, Christoph Jans, Rizki A. Putri, Katharina Schindler, Jutta Gamper-Tsigaras, Claudia Eggstein, David Köhler, Franziska M. Konrad Frontiers in Immunology.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Left colon as a novel high-risk factor for postoperative recurrence of stage II colon cancer Liming Wang, Yasumitsu Hirano, Toshimasa Ishii, Hiroka Kondo, Kiyoka Hara, Nao Obara, Shigeki Yamaguchi World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Purpose Colostomy creation is an essential procedure for colorectal surgeons, but the preferred method of colostomy varies by surgeon. We compared the outcomes of trephine colostomy creation with open those for the (laparotomy) and laparoscopic methods and evaluated appropriate indications for a trephine colostomy and the advantages of the technique.
Methods We retrospectively evaluated 263 patients who had undergone colostomy creation by trephine, open and laparoscopic approaches between April 2006 and March 2016. We compared the clinical features and the operative and postoperative outcomes according to the approach used for stoma creation.
Results One hundred sixty-three patients (62%) underwent colostomy surgery for obstructive causes and 100 (38%) for fistulous problems. The mean operative time was significantly shorter with the trephine approach (trephine, 46.0 ± 1.9 minutes; open, 78.7 ± 3.9 minutes; laparoscopic, 63.5 ± 5.0 minutes; P < 0.001), as was the time to flatus (1.8 ± 0.1 days, 2.1 ± 0.1 days, 2.2 ± 0.3 days, P = 0.025). Postoperative complications (<30 days) were not different among the 3 approaches (trephine, 4.3%; open, 1.2%; laparoscopic, 0%; P = 0.828). In patients who underwent rectal surgery, a trephine colostomy was feasible for a diversion colostomy (P < 0.001).
Conclusion The trephine colostomy is safe and can be implemented quickly in various situations, and compared to other colostomy procedures, the patient’s recovery is faster. Previous laparotomy history was not a contraindication for a trephine colostomy, and a trephine transverse colostomy is feasible for patients who have undergone previous rectal surgery.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Non-operative management of gallstone sigmoid ileus in a patient with a prostatic cancer Ahmed M AlMuhsin, Abdulaziz Bazuhair, Omar AlKhlaiwy, Rami O Abu Hajar, Thabit Alotaibi Journal of Surgical Case Reports.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of blowhole colostomy and loop ostomy for palliation of acute malignant colonic obstruction Yongjun Park, Dong Uk Choi, Hyung Ook Kim, Yong Bog Kim, Chungki Min, Jung Tack Son, Sung Ryol Lee, Kyung Uk Jung, Hungdai Kim Annals of Coloproctology.2022; 38(4): 319. CrossRef
Minimally invasive colostomy with endoscopy as a novel technique for creation of a trephine stoma Teppei Kamada, Hironori Ohdaira, Junji Takahashi, Wataru Kai, Keigo Nakashima, Yuichi Nakaseko, Norihiko Suzuki, Masashi Yoshida, Yutaka Suzuki Scientific Reports.2021;[Epub] CrossRef