Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 280 - файл

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
28.08.2026
Размер:
66 Мб
Скачать
ANORECTAL 339
https://t.me/medicina_free
Antibiotic therapy typically consists of metronidazole 500 mg orally three times daily until PI clinically and radiographically resolves or for up to 3 months. It is theorized that antibiotics can alleviate symptoms by reducing the amount of gas produced by bac­teria. Alternatives to metronidazole include ampicillin, tetracycline, or rifaximin.
An elemental diet has been proposed for symptomatic PI. It is theorized that an elemental diet can decrease production of gas by colonic flora as it is totally absorbed in the small intestine. Other mechanisms of action include alteration of intestinal flora.
Inhalational oxygen and hyperbaric oxygen therapy are effective for patients with moderate symptoms. Although the mechanism of action has not been fully elucidated, it is theorized that high concen-
FIG. 2 CT scan demonstrating portal venous gas.
trations of O venous system and promote diffusion of these gases out of the bowel wall. In addition, oxygen may act as a toxin to anaerobic bacteria in the gut.
Endoscopic puncture, sclerotherapy, or surgical resection can be considered in patients who remain symptomatic with bleeding or obstruction from large blebs of intramural air.
Serial imaging should be conducted every 1 to 3 months until PI resolution is documented. Recurrence of PI is not uncommon and likely results from persistence of predisposing factors (see Table 10).
reduce the partial pressure of non-oxygen gases in the
2
catastrophe, the prognosis is extremely poor without immediate surgical intervention. Therefore, the most important step in the evaluation is determining whether there is asurgical emergency. As discussed earlier in the chapter, signs and symptoms suggestive of a surgical emergency include fever, pain out of proportion to physical examination, peritoneal signs, and hemodynamic changes such as tachycardia, hypotension, and orthostasis. Laboratory values that are red flags include leukocytosis, hemoconcentration, metabolic acidosis, and lactic acidosis. Most surgical emergencies will be read­ily evident on CT imaging of the abdomen. If PI is associated with portal venous gas, strong consideration should be given to surgical exploration.
A retrospective study by DuBose et al. on 500 patients with PI showed that a lactate level ≥2.0 mmol/L, hypotension, and/or vaso­pressor use were highly predictive of PI from mesenteric ischemia. In addition, a prospective study by Ferrada et al. on 127 patients with PI indicated that a lactate level ≥2.0 mmol/L, elevated INR, decreased hemoglobin, and peritonitis were predictive of PI from transmural ischemia. In Ferrada’s study, the presence of small bowel involvement, ascites, or adynamic ileus was also associated with PI from transmural ischemia. Recently, a five-factor score ranging from 0 to 11 (low-risk 0–4, intermediate-risk 5–6, high-risk 7–8, and very high-risk 9+) has been proposed for predicting PI from transmural ischemia. The score is based on the presence of small bowel PI, age ≥70 years, heart rate ≥110 beats per minute, lactate ≥2 mmol/L, and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio ≥10. In a validation cohort, low-risk patients for surgical causes of PI had an observed rate of 0.0% for transmural ischemia, and very-high-risk patients had an observed rate of 82.4%.
Medical Management of Benign Pneumatosis Intestinalis
intraabdominal emergencies do not require exploratory laparotomy and can be managed medically. However, there is no consensus regarding the best treatment. Expectant management with serial radiographs, abdominal examinations, empiric antibiotics, elemental diet, and oxygen therapy are commonly employed.
The underlying etiologic association of PI should be treated in all patients. This includes removal of offending medications, treatment of inflammatory bowel disease, eradication of intestinal infections, and treatment of pulmonary disease.
SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF PATHOLOGIC PNEUMATOSIS INTESTINALIS
Patients deemed to have PI from transmural ischemiarequire emer­gent exploratory laparotomy. Surgical exploration is strongly rec­ommended for these patients presenting with a lactate ≥2 mmol/L, peritonitis, or with hemodynamic changes. Careful clinical cor­relation with a low threshold for emergent exploratory laparotomy should be considered in those PI patients with small bowel involve­ment, adynamic ileus, or portal venous gas. Several key consider­ations are paramount to optimal outcome once the decision has been taken for surgical exploration, as discussed in the following sections.
Constant Communication with the Anesthesiologist
If the patient is in shock, anesthesia can result in a further insult. Ensuring that further vasodilation is kept at a minimum can help maintain adequate perfusion.
Resuscitation to Euvolemia
Hypovolemia increases the chances of further bowel necrosis and renal failure. On the other hand, hypervolemia results in further bowel swelling. Therefore, goal-directed resuscitation using meth­ods such as arterial-line waveform analysis or echocardiography are advisable to maintain strict euvolemia.
How Much to Resect
Patients with transmural ischemia are usually in a state of shock. Minimizing blood loss and operative time is imperative. Consid­eration should be given to resecting only the areas of necrosis, leaving the patient in discontinuity, if necessary, to allow for better resuscitation.
Avoiding or Delaying an Anastomosis
Unless the cause of ischemia is clearly mechanical and can be relieved in the operating room, consideration should be given that the bowel might be in continued ischemia, which is disastrous for an anastomosis. In this case, the anastomosis would likely fail and place the patient at risk for a second source of intraabdominal sepsis.
340 MANAGEMENT OF RECTAL CANCER
https://t.me/medicina_free
S u g g e S t e d R e a d i n g S
Brighi M, Vaccari S, Lauro A, etal. Cystamatic” review: is surgery mandatory
for pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis? Dig Dis Sci. 2019;64(10):2769–
2775.
DuBose JJ, Lissauer M, Maung AA, etal. EAST Pneumatosis Study Group.
Pneumatosis Intestinalis Predictive Evaluation Study (PIPES): a multi­center epidemiologic study of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;75(1):15–23.
Ferrada P, Callcut R, Bauza G, et al. Pneumatosis intestinalis predictive
evaluation study: a multicenter epidemiologic study of the American
Management of Rectal Cancer
Gregory K. Low, MD, and Matthew Mutch, MD
BACKGROUND
The rectum is the distalmost aspect of the large intestine and mea­sures 12 to 15 cm in length. From a surgical standpoint, it extends from the anus at the anorectal ring to the confluence of the taeniae coli at the rectosigmoid junction. Within the pelvis, it is bordered laterally by the pelvic sidewall, posteriorly by the sacrum, and anteri­orly by the prostate gland in men and the vagina in women. From an oncologic standpoint, rectal cancer typically refers to tumors within the rectum located at or below the peritoneal reflection.
Current data show that there are approximately 150,000 cases of colorectal cancer per year in the United States. Of these, approximately 45,000 are newly diagnosed rectal cancers. There are approximately 50,000 colorectal cancer related deaths per year, making it the third most common cause of cancer-related death in women and the second most common cause of cancer-related death in men. Overall, the incidence of colon and rectal cancer has been decreasing since the adoption of routine screening. For patients under than age of 50, however, the incidence of both colon and rectal cancer is on the rise, with a rate of 2% to 4% per year. Young-onset colon and rectal cancers are more likely to be left­sided and higher-stage cancers at the time of diagnosis. Therefore special attention should be given to this patient group when they present with symptoms.
Rectal cancer poses a unique challenge to surgeons because of the bony confines of the pelvis and its proximity to other vital structures, which influences the margins of resection. Additionally, there have been many recent changes and evolving practices within the realm of radiation oncology and medical oncology. Overall, the management of rectal cancer is a complex topic that should be approached in a multidisciplinary fashion to give patients the best opportunity for favorable outcomes.
CLINICAL EVALUATION AND CLINICAL
STAGING
The most common clinical presentation of rectal cancer is a change in bowel habits. Other presentations include bleeding, iron defi­ciency anemia, change in stool caliber, presence of a palpable mass, tenesmus, and rectal pain. Tenesmus and rectal pain are late findings and are often indicative of locally invasive lesions. Left untreated, rectal tumors may cause obstruction or perforation, which may sig­nificantly complicate management.
Association for the Surgery Of Trauma. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017;82(3):451–460.
Gemma V, Mistrot D, Row D, etal. Pneumatosis intestinalis in solid organ
transplant recipients. J Thorac Dis. 2018;10(3):1984–1997.
Khail PN, Huber-Wagner S, Ladurner R, etal. Natural history, clinical pat-
tern, and surgical consideration of pneumatosis intestinalis. Eur J Med Res. 2009;14(6):231–239.
Tahiri M, Levy J, Alzaid S, Anderson D. An approach to pneumatosis
intestinalis: Factors affecting your management. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2015;6:133–137.
The diagnosis of rectal adenocarcinoma is typically secured by biopsy during endoscopy. A complete colonoscopy is preferred if the lesion can be traversed given the 3% to 5% risk of synchronous tumors. In-office evaluation should include a thorough personal his­tory, family history, and a complete physical examination. Anorectal examination should specifically note the tumor’s location relative to the anal verge, the sphincter complex, and orientation within the rectum. Rigid proctoscopy (as opposed to flexible endoscopy) is the preferred method for assessment of distance from the anal verge when tumors are not palpable on examination. On rigid proctos­copy, tumors within 12 to 15 cm of the anal verge are considered rectal cancers; on flexible endoscopy, tumors located at or below the third fold are considered rectal cancers. Although not diagnostic, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels are useful for the purpose of prognosis and posttreatment surveillance, so they should be obtained following a rectal cancer diagnosis.
Rectal cancer staging utilizes the Tumor, Node, Metastasis (TNM) staging system from the American Joint Committee on Can­cer (AJCC)/Union for International Cancer Control (UICC), which is currently in its eighth edition. Locoregional staging was histori­cally completed using endorectal ultrasound (EUS), however its use is limited in the setting of bulky disease and posterior tumors. Addi­tionally, EUS is highly operator dependent and does not allow com­plete evaluation of lymph nodes. More recently, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become the preferred method for locoregional staging. High-resolution, T2-weighted, thin-cut images allow for accurate evaluation of depth of invasion, locoregional lymph nodes, and involvement of the circumferential resection margin.
Regional nodes for rectal cancer include those within the mesorec­tum and internal iliac drainage pathways. Nodal involvement of the inguinal, external iliac, common iliac, or aortocaval chains is consid­ered metastatic disease. On MRI, both the size and morphology of the nodes are evaluated to aid in identification of clinically positive nodes (Fig. 1). Factors associated with an increased risk of nodal involvement include short axis greater than 9 mm, round shape, irregular borders, and heterogeneous signal intensity.
A key component of locoregional staging is accurate assessment of the circumferential resection margin (CRM), which is the radial margin of the mesorectum removed during total mesorectal excision. On imaging, the presence of a threatened CRM (tumor within 1 mm) is highly predictive of positive radial margins at the time of surgical resection, which translates into poor disease-free survival and overall survival.
Up to 20% of those with colorectal cancer will present with met­astatic disease at the time of diagnosis. The most common sites of metastatic disease include the lymph nodes, liver, and lung. Distant metastatic disease should be evaluated with computed tomography (CT) of the chest and abdomen. If there is concern for potential liver metastasis, MRI of the abdomen may be obtained. Similarly, positron emission tomography (PET) is not considered part of the standard
ANORECTAL 341
https://t.me/medicina_free
A B
FIG. 1 (A) T3 tumor involving the superior margin of the internal anal sphincter on axial view. (B) T4 upper rectal tumor involving the bladder on sagittal
view.
staging workup, but it may be considered in the setting of nondiag­nostic CT or to confirm the presence of solitary metastasis before an attempt at surgical resection.
NEOADJUVANT THERAPY
Historically, proctectomy alone in the setting of rectal cancer was associated with 5-year local recurrence rates as high as 30%. Several sentinel clinical trials have transformed the management of locally advanced rectal cancer. The Swedish rectal cancer trial was one of the first studies to demonstrate the benefit of neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy. However, this trial was criticized because of the lack of standardization of the surgical technique. The Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group addressed this issue by focusing on the concept of the total mesorectal excision. With the standardization of surgical resec­tion, they demonstrated a significant decrease in the local recurrence rate associated with neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy. Finally, the German Rectal Cancer Group demonstrated that chemora­diotherapy was best in the neoadjuvant setting given issues with significant toxicity and patient tolerance when given after surgery. Until recently, short-course radiotherapy was not widely accepted in the United States. The Polish trial and Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group trial evaluated short-course radiation therapy versus conventional chemoradiotherapy and found no significant differences in local recurrence, disease-free survival, overall survival, or late grade 3 or 4 toxicity.
Current indications for neoadjuvant therapy include clinical T3, T4, or node-positive disease. Although it is occasionally discussed that neoadjuvant treatment can be considered in the setting of distal T2 disease in hopes of converting a planned abdominoperineal resec­tion (APR) to a low anterior resection (LAR), this concept is not well supported and not currently recommended by clinical guidelines.
Traditionally, neoadjuvant therapy is given as long-course chemo­radiotherapy consisting of 1.8 to 2 Gy/day for 25 fractions and a fluoro­pyrimidine for radiosensitization. Following long-course radiotherapy, proctectomy is typically delayed for 6 to 10 weeks (8 weeks preferred) to allow for ongoing tumor response. Longer wait times have been associated with increased pathologic complete response rates.
Short-course radiotherapy is typically given as 5 Gy/day over 5 consecutive days. Short-course radiotherapy is not a new concept and is commonly utilized in Europe. In recent years, it has garnered more attention and use in the United States given its reduced toxicity, shorter treatment time, and lower cost with no difference in pelvic control, overall survival, or disease-free survival. As opposed to long­course radiotherapy, surgery can be performed within 7 to 10 days after completion of short-course radiotherapy. Although immediate
surgery does have certain benefits, recent trials have demonstrated a lower risk of complications for those undergoing delayed proc­tectomy (5–12 weeks) versus immediate proctectomy (less than 10 days).
Neoadjuvant therapy has greatly improved our ability to provide local control of rectal cancers, but it has not improved survival. Current local recurrent rates for stage II and III rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery can be as low as 4%, but the risk of distant recurrence remains 25% or greater. In attempts to improve survival and decrease the risk of distant failure, the concept of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) was developed. TNT involves administration of radiotherapy and all scheduled systemic chemotherapy in the preoperative period, with the goal of treating micrometastatic disease as soon as possible rather than up to 4 months after initiation of therapy. Radiotherapy may be given in short- or long-course format, and chemotherapy (typically the oxal­iplatin-based FOLFOX regimen) can be given as induction (before radiation) or consolidation (after radiation). Current National Com­prehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend TNT for T4 lesions, T3 lesions with threatened margins, and those patients that are medically inoperable. Additionally, TNT may also be considered in T3 lesions, even in the absence of threatened margins and for T1–T2 lesions with positive nodes. TNT has been shown to result in higher pathologic complete response rates compared with chemora­diotherapy alone, and patients are more likely to complete planned treatment without dose reductions compared with postoperative chemotherapy. Whether these benefits translate into improved sur­vival is a topic of ongoing investigation, but there are early data to suggest that TNT followed by surgery may result in improved survival compared with conventional chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. In addition, a pathologic complete response after completion of TNT opens the door for an organ preservation/watch-and-wait strategy.
MANAGEMENT OF TUMOR-RELATED
COMPLICATIONS
Some patients, especially those with locally advanced tumors, may present with complications related to tumor growth before or during neoadjuvant treatment. Tumor-related complications may include large bowel obstruction, bleeding, and perforation, all of which have serious consequences for patients’ overall outcomes.
For patients presenting with large bowel obstruction, preoper­ative fecal diversion should be performed followed by neoadjuvant therapy. Diverting colostomy creation is often preferred as opposed to ileostomy as it avoids problems with dehydration and the risk of a
342 MANAGEMENT OF RECTAL CANCER
https://t.me/medicina_free
closed-loop obstruction in the setting of a competent ileocecal valve. Ideally, the stoma should be created distal to the eventual proximal resection margin to minimize complications to the proximal colon, which will be used to make an eventual colorectal anastomosis. Endoscopic stent placement is generally not recommended within the rectum as it results in pain and tenesmus. Partial or near obstruc­tions may resolve with rapid initiation of radiotherapy, but patients should be closely observed for an initial worsening in their symp­toms, which would require operative intervention.
Perforation of rectal tumors may result in abscess and/or fistula formation within the pelvis, perineum, or perianal regions. For contained perforations, fecal diversion and drainage of any abscess is necessary before initiating neoadjuvant therapy. Patients with free perforations or who are unstable present significant challenges. Ide­ally, the patient can be managed with drainage, either abdominally or transperineally, and fecal diversion. Rarely is resection required or recommended as obtaining an R0 resection will be difficult. At the time of radical resection, the perforation cavity and fistula track should be excised given the high likelihood of tumor spillage. Often this will require an abdominal perineal resection, and there may be need for tissue transfer to reconstruct the pelvic floor.
Hemorrhage from a rectal tumor is ideally managed with rapid initiation of radiotherapy as this is effective in over 90% of cases. When this is not feasible, endoscopic management, angiography, and topical treatments should be considered in an attempt to avoid emergency resection.
RADICAL RESECTION
Despite many recent advances in the realm of rectal cancer, radical resection remains the cornerstone of treatment. Radical resection includes resection of the rectum and the associated mesorectum, which contains the blood supply and lymphatics supplying the rectum. The goal of radical resection is to achieve negative distal and radial margins and restore gastrointestinal continuity with preservation of sphincter complex when possible. The gold standard technique for proctectomy was defined by Bill Heald in 1982 and is
known as total mesorectal excision (TME). TME involves sharp dis­section within the avascular plane between the visceral and parietal layers of the endopelvic fascia, resulting in a complete excision of the involved mesorectum and lessening the likelihood of autonomic nerve injury. As part of standard pathologic assessment, the qual­ity of the mesorectal excision should be graded and reported. The quality of TME is graded as complete (intact mesorectal fascia), near complete (small, <5-mm defects in mesorectal fascia), and incom­plete defects (>1 cm or exposure of muscularis propria).
Preoperatively, patients should receive mechanical bowel prepa­ration in additional to oral antibiotics. This combination eliminates the stool burden from the colon and has been shown to reduce the risk of surgical wound infection compared with mechanical bowel preparation alone. If a stoma is planned, preoperative site marking should be performed to ensure a satisfactory location away from large skin folds, scars, or hernias. On the day of surgery, all patients should receive deep vein prophylaxis and intravenous antibiotics for surgical site prophylaxis.
The choice among an open, laparoscopic, or robotic approach is largely up to surgeon and patient preference as there have been no definitive studies that demonstrate significant differences in onco­logic outcomes. Compared with open proctectomy, the laparoscopic technique is associated with improved short-term outcomes includ­ing less pain, lower rates of ileus, shorter length of stay, and less blood loss. Robotic proctectomy has rapidly increased in utilization in recent years, caused in part by the benefits of three-dimensional visu­alization and instrument articulation within the pelvis compared with a straight laparoscopic approach. Robotic proctectomy is associated with a lower conversion rate compared with laparoscopic proctec­tomy, but it is associated with longer operative times and higher costs.
The extent of resection during proctectomy for rectal cancer depends on its location within the rectum, relation to the sphincter complex, and involvement of additional pelvic structures (Fig. 2). For upper rectal cancers undergoing LAR, a distal margin of 5 cm is preferred. For low rectal tumors in which sphincter preservation is being attempted, a margin of 1 cm is acceptable provided that the entire mesorectum has been resected (Figs. 3 to 6).
Mesorectum
Tumor-specific
bowel and
mesorectum
transection
To tal
mesorectal
excision
Tumor
5-cm margin
Rectum
FIG. 2 For upper rectal tumors, tumor-specif-
ic mesorectal excision is appropriate. For mid to low rectal cancers, complete mesorectal excision is required. (From Fleshman, etal. Atlas of Surgical Techniques for Colon, Rectum and Anus. Philadelphia:
Saunders; 2013)
ANORECTAL 343
Sigmoid colon
https://t.me/medicina_free
Rectosigmoid
Mesorectum
Sacral promontory
Sacrum
FIG. 3 Total mesorectal excision is initiated at the sacral promontory. The
plane between the presacral fascia and fascia propria is identified with gen­tle traction. (Courtesy Corinne Sandone. From Cameron J, Sandone C. Atlas of Gastrointestinal Surgery, vol 2. 2nd ed. Shelton, CT: People’s Medical Publishing;
2014.)
Mesorectum
L. ureter
FIG. 4 Dissect posteriorly along the areolar tissue to identify the correct
total mesorectal plane. (Courtesy Corinne Sandone. From Cameron J, Sandone C. Atlas of Gastrointestinal Surgery, vol 2. 2nd ed. Shelton, CT: People’s Medical Publishing; 2014.)
R. ureter
FIG. 5 Extend the dissection laterally along the pelvic sidewall. Avoid inju-
ry to side wall structures and inferior hypogastric plexus. (Courtesy Corinne Sandone. From Cameron J, Sandone C. Atlas of Gastrointestinal Surgery, vol 2. 2nd ed. Shelton, CT: People’s Medical Publishing; 2014.)
FIG. 6 Use traction and countertraction to facilitate division of the anteri-
or peritoneal reflection. (Courtesy Corinne Sandone. From Cameron J, Sandone C. Atlas of Gastrointestinal Surgery, vol 2. 2nd ed. Shelton, CT: People’s Medical Publishing; 2014.)
344 MANAGEMENT OF RECTAL CANCER
Ischial tuberosity
sphincter muscle
https://t.me/medicina_free
those with a locally advanced low rectal tumor that is prohibitive of achieving an adequate distal margin (Fig. 7). For patients with poor preoperative bowel function, fecal incontinence, or chronic diar­rhea, an end colostomy/Hartmann resection should be considered. Multivisceral resection refers to removal of the rectum in addition to other pelvic organs including the bladder, prostate, vagina, pelvic floor, and/or sacrum. Soft tissue coverage in the form of rotational or free flaps are often necessary following APR and pelvic exenteration given the large tissue defects in a radiated field.
be divided either near its origin (high ligation) or just distal to the left colic artery at the origin of the superior rectal artery (low tie). High ligation is necessary in the setting of bulky adenopathy in the IMA chain and to help improve reach for a low anastomosis. The inferior mesenteric vein should be ligated at the ligament of Treitz to allow complete splenic flexure mobilization and improve reach into the pelvis.
accomplished using an end-to-end, stapled anastomosis. In appro­priately selected patients with an ultra-low rectal cancer, a handsewn coloanal anastomosis may be performed to achieve sphincter pres­ervation. Other options for anastomotic construction include the colonic J-pouch or an end-to-side colorectal anastomosis. In theory, these configurations improve the capacity of the residual rectum and improve function, however most studies demonstrated early improvement in function, but after 2 years there appeared to be no significant differences in long-term outcomes.
resection. In general, it should be performed in patients with a low anastomosis (less than 5 cm), those who received neoadjuvant radio­therapy, those who are immunosuppressed, and in the presence of a positive intraoperative leak test. Diverting stoma creation reduces the rate of clinical anastomotic leak, reduces the rate of reoperation, and increases the rate of salvage of the colorectal anastomosis if a leak does occur. Loop ileostomy is the most common type of divert­ing stoma created following radical resection given the simplicity of the subsequent reversal operation compared with reversal of an end colostomy. Diverting stoma reversal is typically performed 8
Anococcygeal
ligament
Ischiorectal
fossa
External anal
Levator ani muscle
External anal
sphincter muscle
Ischiorectal fossa
APR is required when tumors involve the sphincter complex or in
Regardless of approach, the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) may
Restoration of gastrointestinal continuity is most commonly
Temporary fecal diversion is frequently required during radical
Coccyx
Lines of dissection Anus
Levator ani muscle Perineal body
Vagina
FIG. 7 Pelvic floor anatomy
AB
CD
encountered during abdominoper­ineal resection. The anus, sphincter complex, and portion of the levator ani muscle are divided. The tip of the coccyx can be used as a guide to access the posterior pelvic space and guide the dissection. (From Fleshman, etal. Atlas of Surgical Techniques for Colon, Rectum, and Anus. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2013).
to 12 weeks following radical resection, but this timeline should be modified for patient-specific factors such as the need for adjuvant treatment. Before reversal, patients should undergo a water-soluble contrast enema to evaluate the integrity of the anastomosis.
Complications of proctectomy may range from minor to major, and they potentially have devastating consequences. Anastomotic leak is one of the most feared complications and, after low anterior resection, occurs in 5% to 25% of cases. For stable patients with a contained leak, simple percutaneous drainage may be feasible, but for unstable patients or those with an uncontained leak, reoperation is typically required. Suture repair, drainage, and fecal diversion may be adequate for small anterior defects in stable patients. For larger defects, those with poor tissue quality, or in the face of hemodynamic instability, takedown of the anastomosis and creation of an end stoma may be required.
During TME, pelvic bleeding can arise from the presacral plexus or the pelvic side wall. Presacral bleeding occurs as a result of injury to the presacral venous plexus, while pelvic side wall bleeding often originates from branches of the internal iliac vessels. Depending on the severity, presacral bleeding may by managed with electrocautery or direct pressure, but in the face of massive bleeding, pelvic packing is the most appropriate next step. Muscle fragment welding with a 2-cm area of rectus abdominus muscle or metallic thumbtacks may also be utilized. There are also several commercially available hemostatic agents that can be used such as Floseal or a Denver patch. Ureteral injury can also occur, especially in the setting of locally advanced tumors, and this typically requires reconstruction or reimplantation into the bladder depending on the character and location of the injury. Inadvertent injury to the superior hypogastric plexus during inferior mesenteric artery ligation may result in retro­grade ejaculation, while injury to the hypogastric nerves or inferior hypogastric plexus during TME may result in erectile dysfunction and urinary dysfunction.
LOCAL EXCISION
Local excision for rectal cancer avoids the morbidity of proctectomy and may be considered in favorable lesions (Box 1). To be consid­ered for local excision, lesions should be T0 or T1, be less than 3 cm
ANORECTAL 345
https://t.me/medicina_free
BOX 1 Criteria for Local Excision of Rectal
Neoplasia
Tumor Characteristics
• T0orT1
• <3cmindiameter
• <30%lumencircumference
• Mobileonexamination
• cN0onstagingimaging
Histopathologic Criteria
• Welltomoderatelydifferentiated
• Nolymphovascularinvasion
• Noperineuralinvasion
• Negativemarginsafterexcision
FIG. 8 Full-thickness local excision of rectal neoplasia. (Courtesy Andrew
Russ, MD, and Mark Casillas, MD.)
in diameter, involve less than 30% of the lumen circumference, be mobile, be amenable to resection with negative margins (3 mm), have no evidence of lymph node disease on cross-sectional imaging, and have favorable histologic features (well-differentiated, no peri­neural or lymphovascular invasion).
There are various techniques available for local excision depend­ing on the tumor characteristics, location, and surgeon experience. Transanal excision is the simplest of these techniques and may be considered for easily accessible distal lesions. Transanal endo­scopic microsurgery (TEM) and transanal minimal invasive surgery (TAMIS) are newer techniques that offer improved visualization and the ability to reach more proximal lesions (Fig. 8). Data show that TEM and TAMIS result in less specimen fragmentation, a lower risk of positive margins, and lower local recurrence compared with transanal excision.
Following local excision, the specimen should be thoroughly reviewed by an experienced pathologist to confirm the margin status and depth of invasion. If there is evidence of deep T1 or T2 disease, high-risk features, or positive margins after local excision, patients should be offered radical resection given the risk of nodal disease.
involves intensive surveillance with MRI, endoscopy, and digital rectal examination. At 2 years, up to 30% of patients will experience local regrowth, and they should be offered radical resection. To date, data demonstrate that regrowth tends to occur luminally as opposed to within regional nodes or as distant metastatic disease. Although national guidelines have slowly started to include watch and wait as an acceptable management strategy in select patients, additional random­ized studies are ongoing, and generally it should only be performed in select centers where adequate support and experience are available.
MANAGEMENT OF METASTATIC DISEASE
For the 10% to 20% of patients who present with metastatic disease, multidisciplinary input is essential. Systemic chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment and should be initiated without delay. For those with isolated liver or lung metastases, resection with curative intent is feasible and is associated with a 5-year disease-specific survival up to 20%. The order of resection or decision to perform a simultaneous resection should be individualized based on the patient’s symptoms, overall health, and complexity of planned operations. Outside of an attempt at surgery with curative intent, radical resection should not be performed on asymptomatic primary tumors. However, in the setting of highly symptomatic lesions, radi­cal resection may be required.
POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT/ SURVEILLANCE
For stage II and III patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradio­therapy but not systemic chemotherapy, an oxaliplatin-based regi­men should be initiated within 8 weeks of radical resection. In the event a patient underwent upfront surgery for what was thought to be a stage I tumor, postoperative radiation may be administered for high-risk stage II or III disease. Following total neoadjuvant therapy; additional systemic chemotherapy is not generally required.
Following successful surgical management of rectal cancer and completion of all adjuvant treatment, patients undergo surveillance, which is based on the final pathologic stage. Rectal cancer may reoc­cur luminally at an anastomosis, within the pelvis, in lymph nodes, or as metastatic disease, typically to the liver or lungs. Overall, recur­rence rates are higher for rectal cancer than for colon cancer, with local recurrence occurring in 4% to 22% of cases. Early detection is key as it allows for potential salvage or curative surgical procedures.
Most surveillance guidelines focus on the first 5 years after sur­gical resection as 80% of all recurrences will occur within 3 years of surgery, and 95% will occur within 5 years. Those with stage I disease should receive a colonoscopy at 1 year postoperatively, with no need
NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
Following administration of neoadjuvant therapy, some patients will have a complete pathologic response. Following neoadjuvant long­course chemoradiotherapy, this occurs in 10% to 20% of patients. With the increasing usage of TNT has come the realization that up to 50% of patients will have an initial complete clinical response. These patients are candidates for an organ preservation strategy that
FIG. 9 T2-weighted MRI demonstrating local recurrence after low anteri-
or resection with tumor involvement of the vagina and bladder, which was managed with pelvic exenteration.
346 MANAGEMENT OF TUMORS OF THE ANAL REGION
Anal verge
External sphincter
Anoderm
https://t.me/medicina_free
for CEA or additional surveillance imaging. For stage II, III, and IV, patients should have a history and physical examination and CEA level every 3 to 6 months for 2 years, then every 6 months for a total of 5 years. CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should be obtained yearly for 5 years, except in the setting of stage IV disease, which war­rants imaging every 6 months for the first 2 years and then yearly, for a total of 5 years. All stages should have a surveillance colonoscopy per­formed at 1 year. For the select patients who undergo local excision, proctoscopy and MRI of the pelvis should be performed every 3 to 6 months for 2 years, followed by every 6 months for a total of 5 years.
Should local recurrence be identified, management is a complex topic that necessitates a multidisciplinary approach (Fig. 9). Treatment options may include additional chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and/or surgical resection depending on the site, extent of disease, and prior treatments. It is imperative to exclude additional distant metastatic disease, so repeat staging with PET/CT should be considered. Upfront treatment with additional chemotherapy is common, especially in the setting of extensive disease. If no prior radiotherapy was given, it should be administered preoperatively, and re-irradiation may be considered in select circumstances. Metastatic disease to the lung or liver may be resected with curative intent when feasible. Surgical resection of local recurrence often requires multivisceral resection, so careful assessment of the patient’s expected postoperative function is imperative.
S u g g e S t e d R e a d i n g S
Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, etal. COLOR II Study Group. A randomized
trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1324–1332.
Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, 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(16):1569.
Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, et al. Dutch Colorectal Cancer
Group. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal exci­sion for resectable rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(9):638.
MERCURY Study Group. Diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic
resonance imaging in predicting curative resection of rectal cancer: pro­spective observational study. BMJ. 2006;333(7572):779.
Petrelli F, Trevisan F, Cabiddu M, etal. Total neoadjuvant therapy in rectal can-
cer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Ann Surg. 2020;271(3):440.
Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, et al. German Rectal Cancer Study
Group. Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(17):1731–1740 21.
van der Valk MJM, Hilling DE, Bastiaannet E, etal. IWWD Consortium. Long-
term outcomes of clinical complete responders after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer in the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD): an international muticentre registry study. Lancet. 2018;291:2537–2545.
Management of Tumors of the Anal Region
Emilie C. Barnes, MD, and Jose G. Guillem, MD
OVERVIEW AND ANATOMY
The surgical anal canal extends from the anal verge proximally to the upper part of the anorectal ring and typically measures about 4 cm in length (Fig. 1). Histologically, the canal can be divided into three different zones. The zone proximal to the dentate line is com­posed of columnar and cuboidal cells that are similar to those in the nearby rectal mucosa. The area around the level of the dentate line and valves of Morgagni is known as the anal transition zone (ATZ) and is composed of transitional epithelium. The most distal zone is
Squamocolumnar
Surgical anal
junction
canal
Anatomical
anal canal
Sweat glands and
hairs in perianal skin
made up of squamous epithelium. The anal margin, located at the intersphincteric groove, is a mucocutaneous junction with non-kera­tinized squamous epithelium proximally and keratinized squamous epithelium distally that contains hair follicles, apocrine glands, and sweat glands.
The blood supply and lymphatic drainage vary depending on the location within the anal canal. The proximal anal canal is sup­plied by the superior rectal artery. Venous drainage occurs via the superior and middle rectal veins, and lymphatic drainage occurs via the mesorectal, internal iliac, and inferior mesenteric lymph nodes. In contrast, the distal anal canal (below the dentate line) is supplied by the inferior rectal branch of the pudendal artery, and venous drainage occurs via the inferior hemorrhoidal vessels that drain to the internal iliac veins. Lymphatic drainage occurs via the inguinal lymph nodes. This distinction between the proximal and distal anal canal is important when considering locoregional spread of anal neoplasms.
Rectum Anal columns
of Morgagni Pectinate or
dentate Iine Internal sphincter muscle Anal crypt
Anal gland
muscle
FIG. 1 Anatomy of the anal canal.
(From Steele SR, etal. The ASCRS Textbook of Colon and Rectal Surgery. 3rd ed. Springer; 2016.)
ANORECTAL 347
https://t.me/medicina_free
Although the diagnosis of anal cancer remains rare, the incidence is on the rise and now accounts for about 0.5% of all cancer diagnoses in the United States and roughly 3% of all gastrointestinal malignan­cies. The vast majority (85%) are of squamous cell histology, followed by adenocarcinoma (5%–10%) in addition to rare lesions such as melanoma, mesenchymal tumors, neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), and lymphoma. Patients often present with rectal bleeding and pain, which can sometimes be confused for benign anal conditions, such as hemorrhoids. Others have no symptoms, and the diagnosis is made incidentally. HPV infection is highly associated with the devel­opment of anal cancer, and up to 90% of anal cancers are attributed to this infection. Other major risk factors include older age, smoking, and immunocompromised states, particularly patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syn­drome (AIDS) or transplant patients.
SQUAMOUS NEOPLASMS
Human Papilloma Virus and Anal Squamous Neoplasia
Human papilloma virus (HPV) is the most common sexually trans­mitted infection in the United States. Although there are over 100 subtypes, subtypes 16 and 18 have a strong relationship with the development of anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that these two subtypes of HPV account for up to 79% of all anal cancers. The quadrivalent HPV vaccine, which targets subtypes 6, 11, 16, and 18, has been shown to be efficacious in reducing rates of anal intraep­ithelial neoplasia and the subsequent development of cancer. How­ever, uptake of the vaccine in the United States has been suboptimal. Currently, the CDC recommends routine vaccination for children beginning at age 11 and for all patients up to the age of 26 who have not been previously vaccinated.
Condyloma Acuminatum (Anal Warts)
Condyloma acuminatum, also known as anal warts, occurs second- ary to HPV infection, most commonly subtypes 6 and 11 (Fig. 2). Other factors that increase the risk of development, larger size, and recurrence after treatment include smoking and immunocompro­mised states such as HIV. Lesions can present in a variety of ways, including single, multiple, flat, dome-shaped, cauliflower-shaped,
skin-colored, erythematous, hypopigmented, or hyperpigmented. Location can also be within the anal canal or on the perianal skin. Evaluation of these lesions should include a complete anogenital examination, including anoscopy and referral to gynecology for vag­inal examination with a Papanicolaou (Pap) smear in females.
Although it is estimated that up to one-third of anogenital warts will regress on their own within 4 months of detection, recurrence rates are high, therefore treatment should be offered to all patients. Options include topical therapies such as imiquimod cream, podo­phyllotoxin, and sinecatechins, with clearance rates ranging from 35% to 75%. Other treatment options include application of tri­chloroacetic acid (TCA) to cryotherapy and surgical fulguration/ excision. Recurrence rates for all of the aforementioned treatments remain high at about 20% to 40% and are likely attributed to per­sistent HPV infection.
Buschke-Lowenstein Tumor (Verrucous Carcinoma)
The Buschke-Lowenstein tumor, also known as verrucous carcinoma or giant condyloma acuminatum, is a rare, slow-growing SCC that lacks basement membrane invasion (Fig. 3). As a result, it tends to spread laterally and rarely metastasizes. This tumor presents as an exophytic, fungating, cauliflower-type mass that is strongly associ­ated with HPV (particularly subtypes 6 and 11). The standard of care involves wide local excision and potentially abdominoperineal resec­tion (APR) for more extensive disease. Even with aggressive surgical management, recurrence rates are high (up to 70%), and malignant transformation occurs in up to 50% of cases.
Anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN) is a premalignant lesion for anal SCC characterized by cellular and nuclear abnormalities of the squamous epithelial cells without extension into the basement membrane. In more recent years, the terminology surrounding AIN has evolved to a two-tier system of low-grade squamous intraepithe- lial lesions (LSILs) and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs). AIN I, which involves replacement of the lower third of the epithelium with abnormal cells, is now considered LSIL. What was formerly described as AIN II/III and involved replacement of greater than one third of the epithelium now corresponds to HSIL. The use of the term Bowen disease, which is synonymous with AIN III or SCC in situ, is no longer encouraged. In addition to HPV infection, major
FIG. 2 Condyloma acuminatum. (From Fazio V, Church J, etal. Current
Therapy in Colon and Rectal Surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier).
FIG. 3 Buschke-Lowenstein tumor. (From Fazio V, Church J, etal. Current
Therapy in Colon and Rectal Surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier).
348 MANAGEMENT OF TUMORS OF THE ANAL REGION
https://t.me/medicina_free
risk factors for the development of LSIL/HSIL, and eventually SCC, include HIV-positive status, men who have sex with men (MSM), women with a history of cervical dysplasia, and cigarette smoking.
Although the prevention of cervical cancer with screening for precancerous lesions has proven to be effective, it is less clear if the same principles apply to anal carcinoma. There is currently no data to support screening in the general population, however, screening with anal Pap tests may be beneficial in high-risk patients, such as those that are HIV positive, MSM, and females with a history of cervical dysplasia. Unfortunately, there is no current conclusive data to support the use of anal cytology to identify patients at risk for dysplasia, resulting in a reduction in rates of anal cancer, therefore the decision to perform screening anal Pap tests should be a shared decision between patients and providers.
Diagnosis
Most patients with anal squamous intraepithelial lesions are asymp­tomatic, and diagnosis is made either incidentally or as part of a surveillance program. If symptomatic, the most common symptoms include rectal bleeding, perianal pruritis or irritation, and tenesmus. Diagnosis typically is initially based on cytology and is obtained via anal Pap smear. The Bethesda classification system classifies cells as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ACUS), LSIL, HSIL or atypical squamous cells cannot exclude HSIL. Immunohis­tochemical stains, such a p16, can be used to help differentiate HSIL from other mimics. Abnormal anal cytology should be followed by direct anal examination and tissue biopsy. This can be accomplished with either traditional anoscopy or high-resolution anoscopy (HRA).
Although in some patients LSIL or HSIL regresses without treat­ment, in others it progresses to malignancy. Patients with HIV are at the highest risk of progressing from LSIL to HSIL. In fact, in patients with HIV, the rate of progression from HSIL to SCC ranges from
8.6% to 19.6%.
Management
All patients with evidence of anal dysplasia should be followed clin­ically at regular intervals with a history and physical examination. The frequency of these examinations and the addition of HRA is debated and is also dependent on patient risk factors, most impor­tantly HIV status, and provider training with HRA. For patients with LSILs who are HIV negative, examinations can be performed every 6 to 12 months. However, HIV-positive patients with LSILs should be examined more frequently, on the order of every 3 to 6 months.
Local therapy, which includes topical or ablative treatments, is indicated for HSILs and can also be considered in patients with LSILs, given the small but real risk of progression to invasive cancer. Topical options include imiquimod, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and tri­chloroacetic acid (TCA). Imiquimod is an immune modulator that can be directly applied to the anal canal by the patient or provider. One randomized trial in HIV-positive MSM who received either placebo or imiquimod demonstrated 43% resolution or downgrading of their dysplasia with a 61% sustained response at 36 months. Use of this medication is somewhat limited by side effects that include
have been difficult to estimate because of the number of patients lost to follow-up. Finally, electrocautery ablation has been shown to have initial clearance rates as high as 80%, but recurrence was also extremely common (up to 61%). Surgical excision remains an option for recalcitrant lesions but is challenging with larger lesions and resultant large defects that may require local flaps that may lead to stenosis and/or seepage.
In patients with HSIL who are treated with local topical or abla­tive therapy, surveillance involves regular follow-up with a complete history and physical examination with the addition of HRA being provider-dependent. Patients with persistent dysplasia or who are HIV-positive should be examined every 3 to 6 months, and those with­out evidence of persistent dysplasia and who are HIV negative can be seen annually. The ANCHOR study is a randomized controlled clini­cal trial comparing topical or ablative treatment with active monitor­ing in preventing anal cancer in HIV-positive patients with evidence of HSIL. As of October 2021, the study was halted after researchers found that treating HSIL lesions significantly reduced chances of progression to anal cancer. Although official results have yet to be published, this randomized controlled trial will hopefully provide the information needed to establish definitive treatment and surveillance strategies for HIV-positive patients with anal intraepithelial lesions.
Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Diagnosis
SCC accounts for the vast majority of anal neoplasms (up to 85%) (Fig. 4). Although many patients are asymptomatic, about 45% pres- ent with anorectal bleeding. Unfortunately, this is often attributed to hemorrhoids, which leads to a delay in diagnosis. Other symptoms include anorectal pain, inguinal pain, tenesmus, and change in bowel habits, particularly narrowing of stool caliber. About one-half of patients are found to have localized, node-negative disease at the time of diagnosis, while another one-third of patients are found to be node positive. The remaining 10% to 15% present with evidence of distant metastases.
Initial evaluation should involve a thorough history including evaluation of baseline anal sphincter continence, prior radiation, and assessment of risk factors such as MSM, anal receptive intercourse, and immunosuppression. If HIV status is unknown, this should be included in addition to basic laboratory studies. Physical examina­tion should include a thorough examination of the perianal skin, examination of the inguinofemoral region for adenopathy, digital rectal examination, and anoscopy. Specific attention should be paid to the sphincter tone, size of the mass, and any evidence of fixation to
with topical 5-FU, with response rates up to 57% (39% with com­plete response). However, recurrence rates remain high at around 50%. Finally, although it is well tolerated by patients, TCA has been reported to have response rates up to 72%, but with recurrence occurring in about 20% of cases.
Options for local ablative therapy include radiofrequency abla­tion (RFA), infrared coagulation, and electrocautery. Studies on RFA and infrared coagulation are limited to a small number of ret­rospective studies that have shown response rates up to 64% (either complete resolution or downgrading of dysplasia) but dramatic recurrence rates, up to 91% in HIV-positive MSM at 17 months. Data on the outcomes regarding infrared coagulation are also lim­ited, but one single-center retrospective study reported an up to 82% treatment response in HIV-positive patients. Recurrence rates
FIG. 4 Anal squamous cell carcinoma: fungating mass at the anal verge.