Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 25, 2025
Robot-assisted Total Mesorectal Excision and Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Locally Advanced Middle-low Rectal Cancer
Published on: February 12, 2022
Two-team Total Mesorectal Excision and Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Using Transanal Approach for Rectal
Takuya Shiraishi1, Hiroomi Ogawa1, Arisa Yamaguchi1
1Department of General Surgical Science, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, Maebashi, Japan.
Background/Aim:
Lateral lymph node dissection is a locally advanced rectal cancer treatment option. Despite its complexities, such as prolonged operative time and increased blood loss, a transanal approach with an abdominal approach may help mitigate these drawbacks.
Patients And Methods:
Between July 2013 and June 2022, 40 patients underwent radical laparoscopic surgery with lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer. Among them, 29 and 11 patients underwent total mesorectal excision and lateral lymph node dissection without transanal approach (conventional surgery) and with transanal approach (two-team surgery), respectively. The clinical findings, surgical outcomes, pathology results, and prognoses of conventional and two-team surgeries were retrospectively compared.
Results:
Compared to conventional surgery, two-team surgery involves increased organ and nerve resections, shorter operation time (286 vs. 548 min, p<0.001), and less blood loss (20 vs. 158 ml, p<0.001). Although postoperative complications were similar between groups, the two-team surgery group had a shorter hospital stay (p=0.006). Pathologically, all patients who underwent two-team surgery had a distal resection margin of at least 20 mm, and no recurrence was observed. With conventional surgery, 63.6% of patients had a 10-19 mm margin, and 36.4% had a margin of ≥20 mm, except for abdominoperineal resection.
Conclusion:
Total mesorectal excision and lateral lymph node dissection with the transanal approach as a two-team surgery are safe and feasible. Two-team surgery resulted in better outcomes than conventional surgery regarding operative time, blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and adequate distal resection margin.
