Microscopic spread of low rectal cancer in regions of mesorectum: pathologic assessment with whole-mount sections.

Department of Gastroenterology Surgery and Institute of Digestive Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China.
World Journal of Gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 2.55). 11/2004; 10(20):2949-53.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess the microscopic spread of low rectal cancer in mesorectum regions to provide pathological evidence for the necessity of total mesorectal excision (TME).
A total of 62 patients with low rectal cancer underwent low anterior resection and TME, surgical specimens were sliced transversely on the serial embedded blocks at 2.5 mm interval, and stained with hematoxylin and eosin (HE). The mesorectum on whole-mount sections was divided into three regions: outer region of mesorectum (ORM), middle region of mesorectum (MRM) and inner region of mesorectum (IRM). Microscopic metastatic foci were investigated microscopically on the sections for the metastatic mesorectal regions, frequency, types, involvement of lymphatic vessels and correlation with the original rectal cancer.
Microscopic spread of the tumor in mesorectum and ORM was observed in 38.7% (24/62) and 25.8% (16/62) of the patients, respectively. Circumferential resection margin (CRM) with involvement of microscopic metastatic foci occurred in 6.5% (4/62) of the patients, and distal mesorectum (DMR) involved was 6.5% (4/62) with the spread extent within 3 cm of low board of the main lesions. Most (20/24) of the patients with microscopic metastasis in mesorectum were in Dukes C stage.
Results of the present study support that complete excision of the mesorectum without destruction of the ORM is essential for surgical management of low rectal cancer, an optimal DMR clearance resection margin should be no less than 4 cm, further pathologic assessment of the regions in extramesorectum in the pelvis is needed.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In patients from the Dutch TME trial patterns of local recurrence (LR) in rectal cancer were studied. The purpose was to reconstruct the most likely mechanisms of LR and the effect of preoperative radiotherapy. 1417 patients were analyzed; 713 were randomized into preoperative radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (RT + TME), 704 into TME alone. Of the 114 patients with LR, the subsites of LR were determined and related to tumor and treatment factors. Overall 5-year LR-rate was 4.6% in the RT + TME group and 11.0% in the TME group. Presacral local recurrences occurred most in both groups. Radiotherapy reduced anastomotic LR significantly, except when after low anterior resection (LAR) distal margins were less than 5 mm. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) mainly resulted in presacral LR. Even after resection with a negative circumferential resection margin, LR-rates were high. Thirty percent of the patients had advanced tumors, which resulted in 58% of all LRs. Lateral LR comprised 20% of all LR. Presacral and lateral LR resulted in a poor prognosis, in contrast to anterior or anastomotic LRs with a relatively good prognosis. RT reduces LR in all subsites and is especially effective in preventing anastomotic LR after LAR. APR-surgery mainly results in presacral LR, which may be prevented by a wider resection. In the TME trial many advanced tumors were included, rather requiring chemoradiotherapy instead of RT. Currently, with good imaging techniques, better selection can take place. Especially lateral LR might be a problem in the future.
    European journal of surgical oncology: the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology 05/2010; 36(5):470-6. · 2.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although tumor deposits have been associated with poor prognosis in colorectal carcinoma, the prevalence and clinical significance of tumor deposits in rectal adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiation are relatively unexplored. The aims of this study are to assess the clinical significance of tumor deposits in rectal adenocarcinoma patients, including those receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Pathology slides and medical records from 205 consecutive patients who underwent resection for rectal adenocarcinoma between 1990 and 2010 at a single tertiary care center were reviewed. Patients with tumor deposits had higher tumor grade (P=0.006) and worse tumor stage (P<0.001) at presentation than patients without tumor deposits. Among 110 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation, tumor deposits were associated with higher rates of lymph node involvement (P=0.035) and distant metastases (P=0.006), and decreased survival (P=0.027). These patients had a trend toward lower treatment response scores (P=0.285) and higher local recurrence (P=0.092). Of 52 patients with tumor deposits, those who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation had significantly worse pretreatment stage by endoscopic ultrasound (P<0.001) but interestingly had significantly lower rates of lymphovascular invasion on resection (P<0.001) compared with those who had not received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Despite treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation, tumor deposits were present in over one-fifth of rectal adenocarcinoma patients. Overall, the outcome of patients with tumor deposits in treated and untreated patients were similar, however the association of tumor deposits with deeply invasive tumors and less tumor regression when comparing with treated patients without tumor deposits raises the possibility that these tumors could have a more aggressive biology, possibly explaining the association of tumor deposits with higher rates of recurrence and lower survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Overall, tumor deposits appear to be a poor prognostic marker among rectal adenocarcinoma patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiation and may identify a subset of patients who require aggressive adjuvant therapy to prevent recurrence.Modern Pathology advance online publication, 17 January 2014; doi:10.1038/modpathol.2013.239.
    Modern Pathology 01/2014; · 5.25 Impact Factor
  • Journal of The Korean Surgical Society - J KOREAN SURG SOC. 01/2010; 78(5).


Available from