Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 12/2017

01-12-2017 | Original Article

The Impact of Tumour Distance From the Anal Verge on Clinical Management and Outcomes in Patients Having a Curative Resection for Rectal Cancer

Authors: Muhammad Amir Saeed Khan, Chin W. Ang, Abdul Rahman Hakeem, Nigel Scott, Rick Nigel Saunders, Ian Botterill

Published in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery | Issue 12/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Aim

The clinico-oncological significance of the distance of rectal cancer from the anal verge is unclear and not well reported. The aim of this study is to assess the influence of the rectal cancer distance from the anal verge on clinical management and long-term outcomes after curative resection in a specialised colorectal cancer unit.

Methods

Prospectively collected data on patients who underwent primary rectal cancer treatment at our unit between January 2005 and December 2010 were analysed. Low rectal cancer (LRC) was defined as tumour < 5 cm from the anal verge on MRI scan. Recurrent cancer, palliative resections, perforated tumours and those requiring total pelvic exenteration were excluded.

Results

Three hundred fifty-nine patients underwent surgery for rectal cancer (226 male/133 female). Of these, 149 (41.5%) patients had low rectal cancer (LRC). Compared to patients with mid/upper rectal cancer (M/URC), patients with low rectal cancers were significantly more likely to receive neo-adjuvant therapy (75.2 vs 38%; p < 0.001), to be associated with lower rate of restorative surgery (15.4 vs 79%; p < 0.001) and to have higher rates of pathological positive circumferential resection margin involvement (14.1 vs 7.1%; p = 0.047). There were however no significant difference in the rates of recurrent disease or survival among the two groups.

Conclusion

Distance of rectal cancer from the anal verge does influence the use of neo-adjuvant treatment and ultimate R0 resection rate. It does not influence loco-regional or systemic recurrence rates.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wibe A, Syse A, Anderson E, Tretli S, Myrvold HE, Soreide O. Oncological outcomes after total mesorectal excision for cure for cancer of the low rectum: anterior vs. abdominoperineal resection. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47: 48–58. Wibe A, Syse A, Anderson E, Tretli S, Myrvold HE, Soreide O. Oncological outcomes after total mesorectal excision for cure for cancer of the low rectum: anterior vs. abdominoperineal resection. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47: 48–58.
2.
go back to reference Marr R, Birbeck K, Garvican J, et al. The modern abdominoperineal excision. The next challenge after total mesorectal excision. Ann Surg 2005; 242: 74–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Marr R, Birbeck K, Garvican J, et al. The modern abdominoperineal excision. The next challenge after total mesorectal excision. Ann Surg 2005; 242: 74–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Piso P, Dahlke MH, Mirena P et al. Total mesorectal excision for middle and lower rectal cancer: a single institution experience with 337 consecutive patients. J Surg Oncol 2004; 86: 115–21.CrossRefPubMed Piso P, Dahlke MH, Mirena P et al. Total mesorectal excision for middle and lower rectal cancer: a single institution experience with 337 consecutive patients. J Surg Oncol 2004; 86: 115–21.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Shihab OC, Brown G, Daniels IR, Heald RJ, Quirke P, Moran BJ. Patients with low rectal cancer treated by abdominoperineal excision have worse tumours and higher involved margin rates compared with patients treated by anterior resection. Dis Colon rectum 2010; 53: 53–6. Shihab OC, Brown G, Daniels IR, Heald RJ, Quirke P, Moran BJ. Patients with low rectal cancer treated by abdominoperineal excision have worse tumours and higher involved margin rates compared with patients treated by anterior resection. Dis Colon rectum 2010; 53: 53–6.
5.
go back to reference W. Chambers, A. Khan, R. Waters, I. Lindsey, B. George, N. Mortensen and C. Cunningham. Examination of outcome following abdominoperineal resection for adenocarcinoma in Oxford. Colorectal Disease 2010; 12: 1192–1197.CrossRefPubMed W. Chambers, A. Khan, R. Waters, I. Lindsey, B. George, N. Mortensen and C. Cunningham. Examination of outcome following abdominoperineal resection for adenocarcinoma in Oxford. Colorectal Disease 2010; 12: 1192–1197.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Sobin LH, Wittekind C (eds). International Union against Cancer TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours, 5th edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1997. Sobin LH, Wittekind C (eds). International Union against Cancer TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours, 5th edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1997.
7.
go back to reference Stephen B. AJCC Cancer staging handbook seventh edition, 2010. 177–183. Stephen B. AJCC Cancer staging handbook seventh edition, 2010. 177–183.
10.
go back to reference Chiang JM, Hsieh PS, Chen JS, et al. Rectal cancer level significantly affects rates and patterns of distant metastases among rectal cancer patients post curative-intent surgery without neoadjuvant therapy. World Journal of Surgical Oncology 2014; 12:197–204.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chiang JM, Hsieh PS, Chen JS, et al. Rectal cancer level significantly affects rates and patterns of distant metastases among rectal cancer patients post curative-intent surgery without neoadjuvant therapy. World Journal of Surgical Oncology 2014; 12:197–204.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference I J Adam, M O Mohamdee, I G Martin, N Scott, P J Finan, D Johnston and P Quirke. Role of circumferential resection margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 1994; 344: 707–11.CrossRefPubMed I J Adam, M O Mohamdee, I G Martin, N Scott, P J Finan, D Johnston and P Quirke. Role of circumferential resection margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 1994; 344: 707–11.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Bhangu A, Rasheed S, Brown G, et al. Does rectal cancer height influence the oncological outcome? Colorectal Disease 2014; 16: 801–808.CrossRefPubMed Bhangu A, Rasheed S, Brown G, et al. Does rectal cancer height influence the oncological outcome? Colorectal Disease 2014; 16: 801–808.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Keighley M, Pemberton J, Fazio V, Parc R. (1996) Atlas of Colorectal Surgery. Churchill Livingstone, New York. Keighley M, Pemberton J, Fazio V, Parc R. (1996) Atlas of Colorectal Surgery. Churchill Livingstone, New York.
14.
go back to reference Iris D Nagtegaal and Phil Quirke. What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:303–312.CrossRefPubMed Iris D Nagtegaal and Phil Quirke. What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol 2008; 26:303–312.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Hojo K, Koyama Y, Moriya Y. Lymphatic spread and its prognostic value in patients with rectal cancer. Am J Surg 1982; 144:350–4.CrossRefPubMed Hojo K, Koyama Y, Moriya Y. Lymphatic spread and its prognostic value in patients with rectal cancer. Am J Surg 1982; 144:350–4.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
The Impact of Tumour Distance From the Anal Verge on Clinical Management and Outcomes in Patients Having a Curative Resection for Rectal Cancer
Authors
Muhammad Amir Saeed Khan
Chin W. Ang
Abdul Rahman Hakeem
Nigel Scott
Rick Nigel Saunders
Ian Botterill
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery / Issue 12/2017
Print ISSN: 1091-255X
Electronic ISSN: 1873-4626
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-017-3581-0

Other articles of this Issue 12/2017

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 12/2017 Go to the issue