Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-06-2012 | Therapeutic Approaches to Localized Rectal Cancer (R Glynne-Jones, Section Editor)

The Importance of the Pathologist’s Role in Assessment of the Quality of the Mesorectum

Authors: Steven L. Bosch, Iris D. Nagtegaal

Published in: Current Colorectal Cancer Reports | Issue 2/2012

Abstract

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is considered standard of care for rectal cancer treatment. Failure to remove the mesorectal fat envelope entirely may explain part of observed local and distant recurrences. Several studies suggest quality of the mesorectum after TME surgery as determined by pathological evaluation may influence prognosis. We aimed to determine the prognostic value of the plane of surgery as well as factors influencing the likelihood of a high-quality specimen by reviewing the literature. A pooled meta-analysis of relevant outcome data was performed where appropriate. A muscularis propria resection plane was found to increase the risk of local recurrence (RR 2.72 [95 % CI 1.36 to 5.44]) and overall recurrence (RR 2.00 [95 % CI 1.17 to 3.42]) compared to an (intra)mesorectal plane. Plane of surgery is an important factor in rectal cancer treatment and the documentation by pathologists is essential for the improvement of TME quality and patient outcome.

Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery–the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69(10):613–6.PubMedCrossRef

Heald RJ, Ryall RD. Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet. 1986;1(8496):1479–82.PubMedCrossRef

MacFarlane JK, Ryall RD, Heald RJ. Mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet. 1993;341(8843):457–60.PubMedCrossRef

Peeters KC, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, et al. The TME trial after a median follow-up of 6 years: increased local control but no survival benefit in irradiated patients with resectable rectal carcinoma. Ann Surg. 2007;246(5):693–701.PubMedCrossRef

Martling AL, Holm T, Rutqvist LE, et al. Effect of a surgical training programme on outcome of rectal cancer in the County of Stockholm. Stockholm Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Basingstoke Bowel Cancer Research Project. Lancet. 2000;356(9224):93–6.PubMedCrossRef

Sebag-Montefiore D, Stephens RJ, Steele R, et al. Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multicentre, randomised trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9666):811–20.PubMedCrossRef

Parfitt JR, Driman DK. The total mesorectal excision specimen for rectal cancer: a review of its pathological assessment. J Clin Pathol. 2007;60(8):849–55.PubMedCrossRef

Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P. What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(2):303–12.PubMedCrossRef

Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, et al. Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(7):1729–34.PubMedCrossRef

10.

•• Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J, et al. Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9666):821–8. This is the study with the largest number of patients investigating the influence of plane of resection on outcome. The combination of preoperative radiotherapy and a mesorectal plane of resection resulted in a local recurrence rate as low as 1 %.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Nagtegaal ID, van Krieken JH. The multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer: pathology. Ann Oncol. 2007;18 Suppl 9:ix122–6.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Bretagnol F, Lelong B, Laurent C, et al. The oncological safety of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation for rectal carcinoma. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(7):892–6.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Baik SH, Kim NK, Lee KY, et al. Factors influencing pathologic results after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: analysis of consecutive 100 cases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(3):721–8.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJH, Marijnen CA, et al. Low rectal cancer: a call for a change of approach in abdominoperineal resection. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(36):9257–64.PubMedCrossRef

15.

• Baik SH, Kwon HY, Kim JS, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(6):1480–7. This is the only study comparing quality of surgery between patients who underwent laparoscopic compared to robot-assisted TME surgery. The robot-assisted procedure resulted in a mesorectal plane of surgery significantly more often in this population.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Jeyarajah S, Sutton CD, Miller AS, Hemingway D. Factors that influence the adequacy of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9(9):808–15.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Maslekar S, Sharma A, Macdonald A, et al. Mesorectal grades predict recurrences after curative resection for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50(2):168–75.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Leite JS, Martins SC, Oliveira J, et al. Clinical significance of macroscopic completeness of mesorectal resection in rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13(4):381–6.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Garcia-Granero E, Faiz O, Munoz E, et al. Macroscopic assessment of mesorectal excision in rectal cancer: a useful tool for improving quality control in a multidisciplinary team. Cancer. 2009;115(15):3400–11.PubMedCrossRef

20.

• Leonard D, Penninckx F, Fieuws S, et al. Factors predicting the quality of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2010;252(6):982–8. This is the only study reporting results of a multicenter audit with central revision of the photographic images of resection specimens to confirm plane of resection objectively. Results from this study identify several factors influencing the likelihood of achieving a mesorectal resection plane.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Breukink SO, Grond AJ, Pierie JP, et al. Laparoscopic vs open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an evaluation of the mesorectum's macroscopic quality. Surg Endosc. 2005;19(3):307–10.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Biondo S, Ortiz H, Lujan J, et al. Quality of mesorectum after laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer - results of an audited teaching programme in Spain. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12(1):24–31.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Gouvas N, Tsiaoussis J, Pechlivanides G, et al. Quality of surgery for rectal carcinoma: comparison between open and laparoscopic approaches. Am J Surg. 2009;198(5):702–8.PubMedCrossRef

24.

• Kang SB, Park JW, Jeong SY, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(7):637–45. This is the only randomized controlled trial comparing the quality of surgery after open TME to a laparoscopic procedure. There was no difference between the two treatment arms regarding the achieved resection planes.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Birbeck KF, Macklin CP, Tiffin NJ, et al. Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2002;235(4):449–57.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Tekkis PP, Heriot AG, Smith J, et al. Comparison of circumferential margin involvement between restorative and nonrestorative resections for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2005;7(4):369–74.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Lujan J, Valero G, Hernandez Q, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2009;96(9):982–9.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, et al. Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97(11):1638–45.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Ng SS, Leung KL, Lee JF, et al. Laparoscopic-assisted versus open abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(9):2418–25.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Rullier E, Sa CA, Couderc P, et al. Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection with coloplasty and coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2003;90(4):445–51.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Baek JH, McKenzie S, Garcia-Aguilar J, Pigazzi A. Oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2010;251(5):882–6. This is the only study comparing.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Marr R, Birbeck K, Garvican J, et al. The modern abdominoperineal excision: the next challenge after total mesorectal excision. Ann Surg. 2005;242(1):74–82.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Wibe A, Syse A, Andersen E, et al. Oncological outcomes after total mesorectal excision for cure for cancer of the lower rectum: anterior vs. abdominoperineal resection. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;47(1):48–58.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, et al. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(17):1731–40.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Martling A, Holm T, Johansson H, et al. The Stockholm II trial on preoperative radiotherapy in rectal carcinoma: long-term follow-up of a population-based study. Cancer. 2001;92(4):896–902.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Boyle KM, Petty D, Chalmers AG, et al. MRI assessment of the bony pelvis may help predict resectability of rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2005;7(3):232–40.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Chambers W, Collins G, Warren B, et al. Benchmarking circumferential resection margin (R1) resection rate for rectal cancer in the neoadjuvant era. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12(9):909–13.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Youssef H, Collantes EC, Rashid SH, et al. Rectal cancer: involved circumferential resection margin - a root cause analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2009;11(5):470–4.PubMedCrossRef

Title: The Importance of the Pathologist’s Role in Assessment of the Quality of the Mesorectum
Authors: Steven L. Bosch
Iris D. Nagtegaal
Publication date: 01-06-2012
Publisher: Current Science Inc.
Published in: Current Colorectal Cancer Reports / Issue 2/2012
Print ISSN: 1556-3790
Electronic ISSN: 1556-3804
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-012-0124-7

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2012

Expanding the Role of Surgical Therapy for Colorectal Liver Metastases

Does Radiofrequency Ablation Add to Chemotherapy for Unresectable Liver Metastases?

Potential Novel Drugs to Combine with Radiation in Rectal Cancer

Biomarker-Driven Therapy in the Neoadjuvant Treatment of Colorectal Liver Metastases

Unresectable Colorectal Cancer Synchronous Metastases: How to Manage the Primary Tumor

Do We Need Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) Routinely in the Preoperative Setting for Rectal Cancer?

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer