Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026
Robot-assisted Total Mesorectal Excision and Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Locally Advanced Middle-low Rectal Cancer
Published on: February 12, 2022
Long Term Functional Outcomes After Transabdominal Versus Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: A Matched Comparative
Jayson Moloney1,2, Steven Lau3, Fraser Jeffery4
1Department of Surgery, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Background:
Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) offers advantages for resection of low rectal tumours in patients with challenging access to the pelvis, but the functional outcomes relative to the conventional transabdominal approach are poorly understood.
Methods:
Patients undergoing TaTME for cancer between 2009 and 2018 at nine sites across Australia and New Zealand were eligible. Patients with a stoma or recurrent disease were excluded. Outcomes were compared to a matched cohort of patients who underwent transabdominal (laparoscopic or open) total mesorectal excision as part of the ALaCaRT trial. Patients were surveyed regarding bowel, urinary and overall function using the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) CR29 validated scoring tools.
Results:
In the TaTME group, 200 eligible patients were invited to participate, with 100 patients enrolled (survey response rate 50%). Major LARS was reported in 69.3% of patients. Mahalanobis distance matching was used to compare functional outcomes in interventional and control groups (83 patients in each group), showing poorer outcomes in the TaTME group regarding faecal incontinence (median EORTC CR29 score 28.5 vs. 18.8, p = 0.005), blood and mucus in stool (8.03 vs. 4.02, p = 0.04) and flatulence (42.6 vs. 32.5, p = 0.01). There were no significant differences in other domains. No difference was observed in urinary function (median IPSS score 6.38 vs. 6.22, p = 0.87).
Conclusions:
While it affords advantages when pelvic access is challenging, TaTME may compromise functional outcomes relative to the transabdominal approach, particularly regarding faecal incontinence.
