P (patients)
I (intervention)
C (comparator)
O (outcomes)
Patients undergoing transanal endoscopic surgery (TES)
TES
Patients undergoing conventional transanal excision, posterior approach, or endoscopic submucosal or mucosal resection (alternative methods)
Negative margins, tumor fragmentation, recurrence rates, perioperative outcomes
Results
Table 45.2 summarizes the literature. The table is organized to reflect those factors for which TEM/TES (collectively referred to as TES) has advantages to, is equal to, or is disadvantageous compared to the alternative techniques. Overall there is a paucity of manuscripts comparing these techniques with the other methods of local excision. As stated above, a randomized prospective study is not likely to appear because once the technique is mastered, some form of TES will become the preferred approach for surgeons. There is only one prospective, randomized study and excision of only adenomas is considered. [2] Of the remaining studies, there are 3 meta-analyses, [3–5] one systematic review, [6] and several retrospective series [7–14] where the control groups are within the same institution, other institutions, or literature based. Study designs are generally flawed.
Table 45.2
Analyzed studies
Author (year) | Study type | Level of evidence | Patients | Results | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TES > alternativea | TES=alternative | Alternative > TESb | ||||
Clancy (2015) [4] | Systematic review | 492 TES, 435 conventional transanal excision | Negative margins Less tissue fragmentation Recurrence rate | Complication rate | ||
Moore (2008) [9] | Retrospective | 82 TES, 89 conventional | Negative margins Less fragmentation Recurrence rate | Complications | ||
Winde (1996) [2] | Prospective randomized | 90 TEX, 98 conventional; adenomas only | Local recurrence | |||
Sgourakis (2011) [3] | Meta-analysis | TES vs conventional for T1 and T2 cancers | Negative margins Disease free survival | |||
Han (2012) [8] | Case controlled | 53 TES, 76 conventional | Local recurrence Distance from anus | Operative time | ||
de Graaf (2010) [7] | Case controlled | 216 TES, 43 conventional; all adenomas | Operative time complications Negative margins Less fragmentation Local recurrence | |||
Lebedyev (2009) [10] | Retrospective | 24 TES, 18 conventional; all T1 cancer | Negative margins complications recurrence | |||
Christoforidis (2009) [1] | Retrospective | 42 TES, 129 conventional; postoperative adjuvant therapy | Negative margins fragmentation | Disease free survival for tumors ≥ 5 cm | ||
Langer (2003) [11] | Retrospective | 79 TES, 76 conventional; T1 and T2 cancers and adenomas | Local recurrence | 2 year survival | ||
Nakagoe (2003) [12] | Case controlled | 45 TES, 26 posterior approach; adenomas and cancer | Operative time, blood loss, length of stay analgesic need complications
Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channelFull access? Get Clinical TreeGet Clinical Tree app for offline access |