Authors' Affiliations

Alva J. Bethurum, BS, James H. Quillen College of Medicine, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN. Alexander T. Hawkins, MD, MPH, Department of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. Glen C. Balch, MD, MBA, FACS, Division of Colorectal Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, GA. Scott E. Regenbogen, MD, MPH, Division of Colorectal Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Jennifer Holder-Murray, MD, Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA. Sherif Abdel-Misih, MD, Division of Surgical Oncology, Stony Brook University Hospital, Stony Brook, NY. Paul E. Wise, MD, Section of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO. Roberta Muldoon, MD, Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.

Location

Culp Ballroom

Start Date

4-7-2022 9:00 AM

End Date

4-7-2022 12:00 PM

Poster Number

10

Faculty Sponsor’s Department

Surgery

Name of Project's Faculty Sponsor

James Sheffey

Classification of First Author

Medical Student

Competition Type

Competitive

Type

Poster Presentation

Project's Category

Patient Care and Education

Abstract or Artist's Statement

Management of very low rectal cancer is one of the most challenging issues faced by colorectal surgeons. For tumors in the mid and upper rectum, procedures can be done to resect the cancer while maintaining continence, a major determinant of post-operative quality of life. In the low rectum, however, to optimize oncologic outcomes, many surgeons feel compelled to pursue abdominoperineal (APR) over low anterior resection (LAR), a sphincter-preserving procedure. It was hypothesized that after robust adjustment, procedure choice will not be associated with a difference in disease-free survival in the resection of tumors in the low rectum. To analyze this, the US Rectal Cancer Collaborative Database, a comprehensive, multi-center dataset obtained from six institutions between 2010 and 2016, was queried. Patients undergoing TME resection for Stage I-III very low rectal cancers (involvement) were selected for this study. Patients were categorized by procedure- LAR vs APR. Primary outcome was five-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, recurrence, length of stay, and complications. An adjusted analysis was performed to account for all known potential confounders. 431 patients with very low rectal cancer treated by either APR or LAR were identified. 154 (35.7%) underwent APR. The overall recurrence rate was 19.6%. Median follow-up time was 42.5 months. An analysis adjusted for age, gender, BMI, ASA class, and pathologic stage observed no difference in disease free survival between operative types (HR=0.90, 95% CI [0.53-1.52], p=0.70). Similarly, secondary outcomes demonstrated no significant difference between operation types, including length of stay (Beta: 0.04, Std. error = 0.25, p = 0.54), overall survival (HR=1.29, 95% CI [0.71-2.32], p=0.39), or complications (OR = 1.53, 95% CI [0.94 - 2.50], p=0.09). In this analysis, no significant difference in disease-free survival or overall survival was observed between patients undergoing APR or LAR for very low rectal cancer. This comprehensive study supports the treatment of very low rectal cancer, less than 5cm from the anorectal ring with no sphincter involvement, by either abdominal perineal or low anterior resection. Further studies may focus on patient-reported and quality of life outcomes which may influence decision-making.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 7th, 9:00 AM Apr 7th, 12:00 PM

How Low Can We Go?: Comparing Long-term Oncologic Outcomes for APR and LAR in Very Low Rectal Cancer

Culp Ballroom

Management of very low rectal cancer is one of the most challenging issues faced by colorectal surgeons. For tumors in the mid and upper rectum, procedures can be done to resect the cancer while maintaining continence, a major determinant of post-operative quality of life. In the low rectum, however, to optimize oncologic outcomes, many surgeons feel compelled to pursue abdominoperineal (APR) over low anterior resection (LAR), a sphincter-preserving procedure. It was hypothesized that after robust adjustment, procedure choice will not be associated with a difference in disease-free survival in the resection of tumors in the low rectum. To analyze this, the US Rectal Cancer Collaborative Database, a comprehensive, multi-center dataset obtained from six institutions between 2010 and 2016, was queried. Patients undergoing TME resection for Stage I-III very low rectal cancers (involvement) were selected for this study. Patients were categorized by procedure- LAR vs APR. Primary outcome was five-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, recurrence, length of stay, and complications. An adjusted analysis was performed to account for all known potential confounders. 431 patients with very low rectal cancer treated by either APR or LAR were identified. 154 (35.7%) underwent APR. The overall recurrence rate was 19.6%. Median follow-up time was 42.5 months. An analysis adjusted for age, gender, BMI, ASA class, and pathologic stage observed no difference in disease free survival between operative types (HR=0.90, 95% CI [0.53-1.52], p=0.70). Similarly, secondary outcomes demonstrated no significant difference between operation types, including length of stay (Beta: 0.04, Std. error = 0.25, p = 0.54), overall survival (HR=1.29, 95% CI [0.71-2.32], p=0.39), or complications (OR = 1.53, 95% CI [0.94 - 2.50], p=0.09). In this analysis, no significant difference in disease-free survival or overall survival was observed between patients undergoing APR or LAR for very low rectal cancer. This comprehensive study supports the treatment of very low rectal cancer, less than 5cm from the anorectal ring with no sphincter involvement, by either abdominal perineal or low anterior resection. Further studies may focus on patient-reported and quality of life outcomes which may influence decision-making.