Giant adenomas of the rectum: Complete resection by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM)

Department of Visceral and Vascular Surgery, University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann Str. 9, 50924 Cologne, Germany.
International Journal of Colorectal Disease (Impact Factor: 2.45). 10/2006; 21(6):533-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-005-0025-1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Large sessile adenomas of the rectum, with a diameter greater than 5 cm, have a high risk to undergo malignant transformation. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) offers an alternative operation method to low-anterior rectum resection in this potentially benign tumor situation.
We retrospectively investigated patients with giant adenomas of the rectum (>5 cm) who were treated by TEM over the last 10 years. A total of 33 patients met the criteria and were analyzed for postoperative complications, histology, and incidence of occult adenocarcinoma; residual tumor status; and tumor recurrence.
Partial suture-line insufficiency (n=5, 15%) was the major postoperative complication, but could be managed conservatively in four cases. The residual adenoma status was 18% (n=6), especially in patients with tumors sizes more than 30 cm2. In case of adenoma recurrence (n=4, 12%), a conventional transanal excision (Parks) was applicable, as these tumors were mostly located within the suture-line region of the lower rectum. Incidentally, five carcinomas were found in the specimens. In case of advanced tumors (1xpT2, 1xpT3), anterior rectum resection was carried out, whereas for the early tumors (2xpT1 low risk, 1x1 pTis), no further therapy was added. All patients (adenomas and carcinomas, n=33) were without recurrence during follow-up.
TEM is an alternative method for the resection of large benign rectal tumors located in the mid- and upper third of the rectum. The main postoperative complication is suture-line insufficiency, which generally heals by conservative treatment.

6 Reads
  • Source
    • "In recent years endoscopic therapies have further evolved, as a result of which large rectal adenomas more often are treated endoscopically, at the expense of TEM[9]. In case series, endoscopic resection of large colorectal adenomas has led to recurrence rates that were comparable to TEM (2.0% vs. 3.6% respectively), and complication rates that appeared lower (4.4% vs. 10.7%)[9,22,23,26,27,29-31,34-37,41,45,48,49,52,53,72-74]. Furthermore, EMR can safely be performed without sedation, or with conscious sedation only, and generally no hospital admission is required as opposed to TEM. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent non-randomized studies suggest that extended endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is equally effective in removing large rectal adenomas as transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). If equally effective, EMR might be a more cost-effective approach as this strategy does not require expensive equipment, general anesthesia and hospital admission. Furthermore, EMR appears to be associated with fewer complications.The aim of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of TEM and EMR for the resection of large rectal adenomas. Multicenter randomized trial among 15 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients with a rectal adenoma > or = 3 cm, located between 1-15 cm ab ano, will be randomized to a TEM- or EMR-treatment strategy. For TEM, patients will be treated under general anesthesia, adenomas will be dissected en-bloc by a full-thickness excision, and patients will be admitted to the hospital. For EMR, no or conscious sedation is used, lesions will be resected through the submucosal plane in a piecemeal fashion, and patients will be discharged from the hospital. Residual adenoma that is visible during the first surveillance endoscopy at 3 months will be removed endoscopically in both treatment strategies and is considered as part of the primary treatment. Primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients with recurrence after 3 months. Secondary outcome measures are: 2) number of days not spent in hospital from initial treatment until 2 years afterwards; 3) major and minor morbidity; 4) disease specific and general quality of life; 5) anorectal function; 6) health care utilization and costs. A cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of EMR against TEM for large rectal adenomas will be performed from a societal perspective with respectively the costs per recurrence free patient and the cost per quality adjusted life year as outcome measures. Based on comparable recurrence rates for TEM and EMR of 3.3% and considering an upper-limit of 10% for EMR to be non-inferior (beta-error 0.2 and one-sided alpha-error 0.05), 89 patients are needed per group. The TREND study is the first randomized trial evaluating whether TEM or EMR is more cost-effective for the treatment of large rectal adenomas. ( NTR1422.
    BMC Surgery 02/2009; 9(1):4. DOI:10.1186/1471-2482-9-4 · 1.40 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In all series the incidence of complications during TEMS is lower than that of major rectal surgery [19-25]. More importantly there does not seem to be yet any reported mortality from TEMS, although this may change with the expansion of the indications to include more elderly and unfit patients. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this review article the surgical technique of Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEMS) is examined. A number of techniques have been used to treat adenomas of the rectum. The treatment of large adenomas which occupy a large surface of the rectal lumen or adenomas which are flat and grow in a "carpet-like" fashion is particularly challenging. Major rectal surgery carries a risk of morbidity and mortality, particularly in elderly and unfit patients. Although local excision with transanal resection (TAR) and the Kraske sacral operation have been used in the past, during the last twenty years TEMS has become the method of choice for those lesions. TEMS is efficient and minimally invasive. The technique allows the patient to recover rapidly and the incidence of complications is much lower than that of major surgery. In case of recurrence the option of repeat TEMS or major surgery remain available. TEMS has been slow to gain popularity mainly for reasons of cost and steep learning curve but it is now an established procedure and a valuable therapeutic option which is particularly useful for elderly and unfit patients. Gastroenterologists should be aware of the nature and indications of TEMS in order to advise and refer selected patients with rectal adenomas accordingly.
    International Seminars in Surgical Oncology 02/2006; 3(1):13. DOI:10.1186/1477-7800-3-13
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) uses specific equipment that allows resection of large rectal adenomas and incipient malignancies in the rectal ampulla. TEM aims to provide an alternative to conventional abdominal surgery (low anterior resection or abdominoperineal amputations), which carries not inconsiderable morbidity and mortality. Application of the technique of endoanal excision is limited by the height and extension of the lesions. In this review, the authors present their own experience with this technique and that described in the literature. The protocol for selecting candidates for TEM, their preoperative preparation, equipment, characteristics of the surgical technique, postoperative complications, and follow-up are described. The collaboration of a multidisciplinary team is essential when developing this technique. TEM-associated morbidity is low and mortality is practically nil. TEM is the technique of choice in large rectal adenomas and malignant rectal tumors in stages pT1 localized in the rectal ampulla. The frequency of recurrence is similar to that in abdominal surgery. The technique does not cause complications of urinary or sexual dysfunction and fecal incontinence is minimal. In more advances stages of rectal cancer, the results of better patient selection and future studies on the possible application of neoadjuvant therapy associated with TEM are required.
    Cirugía Española 09/2006; 80(3):123-132. DOI:10.1016/S0009-739X(06)70940-X · 0.74 Impact Factor
Show more