Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgery Today 9/2022

04-04-2022 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Original Article

Feasibility of the semi-opened method of specimen resection for a circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer surgery: a multicenter study

Authors: Ichiro Takemasa, Koichi Okuya, Kenji Okita, Masayuki Ishii, Masaaki Ito, Kay Uehara, Tsuyoshi Konishi, Shigeki Yamaguchi, Masafumi Inomata, Shintaro Sugita, Tadashi Hasegawa, Atsushi Ochiai, Yoshiharu Sakai, Masahiko Watanabe

Published in: Surgery Today | Issue 9/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

A circumferential resection margin (CRM) > 1 mm is a surrogate marker of oncologic outcomes in rectal cancer patients. In Japan, because the mesentery is removed from the rectum, the CRM cannot be measured. This multicenter prospective study evaluates the feasibility of a resected specimen processing method that allows CRM measurement.

Methods

Fifty patients with rectal cancer were enrolled. Resected specimens were processed as previously reported. The primary outcomes were CRM measurement and the rate of CRM positivity. The secondary outcomes were the quality of total mesorectal excision, the possibility to visualize and sample the tumor, the number of harvested lymph nodes, and comparison between the pathological CRM and preoperative mesorectal fascia (MRF) involvement. This study was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry under identification number UMIN000031735.

Results

The CRM was measurable in all patients and found to be positive in three (6%). We confirmed tumor localization, sampled the tumor, and measured the distal margin in all patients. A median of 20 lymph nodes were harvested. The concordance rate between preoperative MRF involvement and pathological CRM status was 90%.

Conclusion

A semi-opened rectal specimen with transverse slicing is a feasible method for measuring the CRM.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery–the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69:613–6.CrossRef Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery–the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69:613–6.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Heald RJ, Moran BJ. Embryology and anatomy of the rectum. Semin Surg Oncol. 1998;15:66–71.CrossRef Heald RJ, Moran BJ. Embryology and anatomy of the rectum. Semin Surg Oncol. 1998;15:66–71.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Glynne-Jones R, Wyrwicz L, Tiret E, Brown G, Rödel C, Cervantes A, et al. Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:iv22–40.CrossRef Glynne-Jones R, Wyrwicz L, Tiret E, Brown G, Rödel C, Cervantes A, et al. Rectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:iv22–40.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J, Grieve R, Khanna S, Couture 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;373:821–8.CrossRef Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J, Grieve R, Khanna S, Couture 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;373:821–8.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Shirouzu K, Isomoto H, Kakegawa T. Distal spread of rectal cancer and optimal distal margin of resection for sphincter-preserving surgery. Cancer. 1995;76:388–92.CrossRef Shirouzu K, Isomoto H, Kakegawa T. Distal spread of rectal cancer and optimal distal margin of resection for sphincter-preserving surgery. Cancer. 1995;76:388–92.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG, Scott N, Finan PJ, Johnston D, et al. Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet. 1994;344:707–11.CrossRef Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG, Scott N, Finan PJ, Johnston D, et al. Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet. 1994;344:707–11.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH, Kim S, Kang SB, Lim SB, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:767–74.CrossRef Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH, Kim S, Kang SB, Lim SB, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:767–74.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk ES, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1324–32.CrossRef Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk ES, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1324–32.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, Boller AM, George V, Abbas M, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of Stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1346–55.CrossRef Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, Boller AM, George V, Abbas M, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of Stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1346–55.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, Hewett P, Clouston AD, Gebski VJ, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1356–63.CrossRef Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, Hewett P, Clouston AD, Gebski VJ, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1356–63.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, et al. Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318:1569–80.CrossRef Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, et al. Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318:1569–80.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Roodbeen SX, de Lacy FB, van Dieren S, Penna M, Ris F, Moran B, et al. Predictive factors and risk model for positive circumferential resection margin rate after transanal total mesorectal excision in 2653 patients with rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2019;270:884–91.CrossRef Roodbeen SX, de Lacy FB, van Dieren S, Penna M, Ris F, Moran B, et al. Predictive factors and risk model for positive circumferential resection margin rate after transanal total mesorectal excision in 2653 patients with rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2019;270:884–91.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Taylor FG, Quirke P, Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Blomqvist L, Swift IR, et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging assessment of circumferential resection margin predicts disease-free survival and local recurrence: 5-year follow-up results of the mercury study. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:34–43.CrossRef Taylor FG, Quirke P, Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Blomqvist L, Swift IR, et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging assessment of circumferential resection margin predicts disease-free survival and local recurrence: 5-year follow-up results of the mercury study. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:34–43.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Japanese society for cancer of the colon and rectum. Japanese classification of colorectal, appendiceal, and anal carcinoma: the 3d english edition [secondary publication]. J Anus Rectum Colon English. 2019;3:175–95.CrossRef Japanese society for cancer of the colon and rectum. Japanese classification of colorectal, appendiceal, and anal carcinoma: the 3d english edition [secondary publication]. J Anus Rectum Colon English. 2019;3:175–95.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Kurisu Y, Shimoda T, Ochiai A, Nakanishi Y, Hirata I, Katsu KI. Histologic and immunohistochemical analysis of early submucosal invasive carcinoma of the colon and rectum. Pathol Int. 1999;49:608–16.CrossRef Kurisu Y, Shimoda T, Ochiai A, Nakanishi Y, Hirata I, Katsu KI. Histologic and immunohistochemical analysis of early submucosal invasive carcinoma of the colon and rectum. Pathol Int. 1999;49:608–16.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, Wynn G, Austin R, Warusavitarne J, et al. Incidence and risk factors for anastomotic failure in 1594 patients treated by transanal total mesorectal excision: results from the international TaTME registry. Ann Surg. 2019;269:700–11.CrossRef Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, Wynn G, Austin R, Warusavitarne J, et al. Incidence and risk factors for anastomotic failure in 1594 patients treated by transanal total mesorectal excision: results from the international TaTME registry. Ann Surg. 2019;269:700–11.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CA, Kranenbarg EK, van de Velde CJ, van Krieken JH. Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26:350–7.CrossRef Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CA, Kranenbarg EK, van de Velde CJ, van Krieken JH. Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26:350–7.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Hida K, Okamura R, Sakai Y, Konishi T, Akagi T, Yamaguchi T, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for advanced low rectal cancer: a large, multicenter, propensity score matched cohort study in Japan. Ann Surg. 2018;268:318–24.CrossRef Hida K, Okamura R, Sakai Y, Konishi T, Akagi T, Yamaguchi T, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for advanced low rectal cancer: a large, multicenter, propensity score matched cohort study in Japan. Ann Surg. 2018;268:318–24.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Patel A, Green N, Sarmah P, Langman G, Chandrakumaran K, Youssef H. The clinical significance of a pathologically positive lymph node at the circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol. 2019;23:151–9.CrossRef Patel A, Green N, Sarmah P, Langman G, Chandrakumaran K, Youssef H. The clinical significance of a pathologically positive lymph node at the circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol. 2019;23:151–9.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference MERCURY study group. Diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in predicting curative resection of rectal cancer: prospective observational study. BMJ. 2006;333:779.CrossRef MERCURY study group. Diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in predicting curative resection of rectal cancer: prospective observational study. BMJ. 2006;333:779.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Feasibility of the semi-opened method of specimen resection for a circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer surgery: a multicenter study
Authors
Ichiro Takemasa
Koichi Okuya
Kenji Okita
Masayuki Ishii
Masaaki Ito
Kay Uehara
Tsuyoshi Konishi
Shigeki Yamaguchi
Masafumi Inomata
Shintaro Sugita
Tadashi Hasegawa
Atsushi Ochiai
Yoshiharu Sakai
Masahiko Watanabe
Publication date
04-04-2022
Publisher
Springer Nature Singapore
Published in
Surgery Today / Issue 9/2022
Print ISSN: 0941-1291
Electronic ISSN: 1436-2813
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-022-02481-z

Other articles of this Issue 9/2022

Surgery Today 9/2022 Go to the issue

Letter to the Editor

Response to the letter