3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Extralevator abdominoperineal excision for advanced low rectal cancer: Where to go

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Since its introduction, extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) in the prone position has gained significant attention and recognition as an important surgical procedure for the treatment of advanced low rectal cancer. Most studies suggest that because of adequate resection and precise anatomy, ELAPE could decrease the rate of positive circumferential resection margins, intraoperative perforation, and may further decrease local recurrence rate and improve survival. Some studies show that extensive resection of pelvic floor tissue may increase the incidence of wound complications and urogenital dysfunction. Laparoscopic/robotic ELAPE and trans-perineal minimally invasive approach allow patients to be operated in the lithotomy position, which has advantages of excellent operative view, precise dissection and reduced postoperative complications. Pelvic floor reconstruction with biological mesh could significantly reduce wound complications and the duration of hospitalization. The proposal of individualized ELAPE could further reduce the occurrence of postoperative urogenital dysfunction and chronic perianal pain. The ELAPE procedure emphasizes precise anatomy and conforms to the principle of radical resection of tumors, which is a milestone operation for the treatment of advanced low rectal cancer.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Multicentre experience with extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer.

          Abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal cancer is associated with higher rates of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement and intraoperative perforation (IOPs) than anterior resection for higher tumours. This multicentre observational study was designed to confirm that extralevator APE can improve outcomes and investigated the morbidity associated with such extensive surgery. Some 176 extralevator APE procedures from 11 European colorectal surgeons were compared with 124 standard excisions from one UK centre. Clinical and pathological data were collected along with specimen photographs. Tissue morphometry was performed on the distal ten slices of the excision. Extralevator APE removed more tissue from outside the smooth muscle layer per slice (median area 2120 versus 1259 mm(2); P < 0.001) leading to a reduction in CRM involvement (from 49.6 to 20.3 per cent; P < 0.001) and IOP (from 28.2 to 8.2 per cent; P < 0.001) compared with standard surgery. However, extralevator surgery was associated with an increase in perineal wound complications (from 20 to 38.0 per cent; P = 0.019). Extralevator APE is associated with less CRM involvement and IOP than standard surgery. Copyright (c) 2010 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Perineal wound healing after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

            Impaired perineal wound healing has become a significant clinical problem after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. The increased use of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and wider excisions might have contributed to this problem.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Oncological outcomes after total mesorectal excision for cure for cancer of the lower rectum: anterior vs. abdominoperineal resection.

              This study was designed to examine the outcome of cancer of the lower rectum, particularly the rates of local recurrence and survival for tumors located in this area that have been treated by anterior or abdominoperineal resections. A prospective, observational, national, cohort study which is part of the Norwegian Rectal Cancer Project. The present cohort includes all patients undergoing total mesorectal excision in 47 hospitals during the period November 1993 to December 1999. A total of 2,136 patients with rectal cancer within 12 cm of the anal verge were analyzed; there were 1,315 (62 percent) anterior resections and 821 (38 percent) abdominoperineal resections. The lower edge of the tumor was located 0 to 5 cm from the anal verge in 791 patients, 6 to 8 cm in 558 patients, and 9 to 12 cm in 787 patients. According to the TNM classification, there were 33 percent Stage I, 35 percent Stage II, and 32 percent Stage III. Univariate analyses: The five-year local recurrence rate was 15 percent in the lower level, 13 percent in the intermediate level, and 9 percent in the upper level (P=0.014). It was 10 percent local recurrence after anterior resection and 15 percent after abdominoperineal resection (P=0.008). The five-year survival rate was 59 percent in the lower level, 62 percent in the intermediate level, and 69 percent in the upper level (P<0.001), respectively, and it was 68 percent in the anterior-resection group and 55 percent in the abdominoperineal-resection group (P<0.001). Multivariate analyses: The level of the tumor influenced the risk of local recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1-2.3), but the operative procedure, anterior resection vs. abdominoperineal resection, did not (hazard ratio, 1.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.7-1.8). On the contrary, operative procedure influenced survival (hazard ratio, 1.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 1-1.6), but tumor level did not (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.9-1.5). In addition to patient and tumor characteristics (T4 tumors), intraoperative bowel perforation and tumor involvement of the circumferential margin were identified as significant prognostic factors, which were more common in the lower rectum, explaining the inferior prognosis for tumors in this region. T4 tumors, R1 resections, and/or intraoperative perforation of the tumor or bowel wall are main features of low rectal cancers, causing inferior oncologic outcomes for tumors in this area. If surgery is optimized, preventing intraoperative perforation and involvement of the circumferential resection margin, the prognosis for cancers of the lower rectum seems not to be inherently different from that for tumors at higher levels. In that case, the level of the tumor or the type of resection will not be indicators for selecting patients for radiotherapy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                World J Gastroenterol
                World J. Gastroenterol
                WJG
                World Journal of Gastroenterology
                Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
                1007-9327
                2219-2840
                14 June 2020
                14 June 2020
                : 26
                : 22
                : 3012-3023
                Affiliations
                Department of General Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China
                Department of General Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China. hjg211@ 123456163.com
                Department of General Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China
                Author notes

                Author contributions: Tao Y, Han JG, and Wang ZJ conceived and designed the research; Tao Y, Han JG and Wang ZJ performed the research; Tao Y, Han JG and Wang ZJ wrote the paper.

                Corresponding author: Jia-Gang Han, MD, Professor, Department of General Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 8 Gongtinan Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100020, China. hjg211@ 123456163.com

                Article
                jWJG.v26.i22.pg3012
                10.3748/wjg.v26.i22.3012
                7304102
                acec8d80-8eef-4ec4-9593-253dd26628e0
                ©The Author(s) 2020. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

                This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.

                History
                : 31 December 2019
                : 27 March 2020
                : 26 May 2020
                Categories
                Minireviews

                extralevator abdominoperineal excision,advanced rectal cancer,advantages,complications,pelvic reconstruction,intraoperative position,trans-perineal approach,laparoscopic/robotic-extralevator abdominoperineal excision,individual-extralevator abdominoperineal excision

                Comments

                Comment on this article