Annals of Surgical Oncology Cite Track
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leo, E.
Right arrow Articles by Bufalino, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Leo, E.
Right arrow Articles by Bufalino, R.

Annals of Surgical Oncology, Vol 3, Issue 4 336-343, Copyright © 1996 by Society of Surgical Oncology

ARTICLES

Total rectal resection, mesorectum excision, and coloendoanal anastomosis: a therapeutic option for the treatment of low rectal cancer

E. Leo, F. Belli, S. Andreola, M. T. Baldini, G. F. Gallino, R. Giovanazzi, L. Mascheroni, R. Patuzzo, M. Vitellaro, C. Lavarino and R. Bufalino
Division of General Surgery B, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.

BACKGROUND: There is recent and sporadic evidence indicating that patients with very low rectal cancer may be treated via a sphincter-saving procedure, obviating the need for abdominoperineal resection and definitive colostomy. This study confirms these findings. METHODS: From March 1990 to October 1994, 79 patients affected with primary low rectal cancers were submitted for total rectal resection, mesorectum excision, and coloendoanal anastomosis. All lesions were located within 8 cm of the anal verge (within 6 cm in 64 cases). RESULTS: Eight patients relapsed at the pelvic level, and one patient only at the paraanastomotic site. Postoperative morbidity attributable to the procedure was low. A perfect continence was documented in 66% of cases after colostomy closure, and many patients (63%) had one or two bowel movements a day. Sixty-two patients of this series are alive, 49 without actual evidence of disease. Follow-up ranged from 2 to 56 months (median 23). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical and pathological data derived from this study suggest that radical mesorectum excision more than a large clearance margin of resection remains the most important factor in reducing the incidence of local relapse after low rectal cancer surgery and that total rectal resection and coloendoanal anastomosis is a suitable and safe option to traditional, demolitive surgical techniques.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Arch SurgHome page
A. Tocchi, G. Mazzoni, L. Lepre, G. Liotta, G. Costa, N. Agostini, M. Miccini, L. Scucchi, G. Frati, and S. Tagliacozzo
Total Mesorectal Excision and Low Rectal Anastomosis for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer and Prevention of Pelvic Recurrences
Arch Surg, February 1, 2001; 136(2): 216 - 220.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch SurgHome page
S. D. Wexner
Invited Critique: Whole-Body PET Imaging With [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose in Management of Recurrent Colorectal Cancer
Arch Surg, May 1, 1999; 134(5): 511 - 513.
[Full Text]

Home page
 Arch SurgHome page
R. J. Heald, B. J. Moran, R. D. H. Ryall, R. Sexton, and J. K. MacFarlane
Rectal Cancer: The Basingstoke Experience of Total Mesorectal Excision, 1978-1997
Arch Surg, August 1, 1998; 133(8): 894 - 898.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the Society of Surgical Oncology.