Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Surg Proced. Mar 28, 2015; 5(1): 1-13
Published online Mar 28, 2015. doi: 10.5412/wjsp.v5.i1.1
Published online Mar 28, 2015. doi: 10.5412/wjsp.v5.i1.1
Category | Primary approach | Secondary or individualized approach |
Benign pathology | Low rectum: TAE or TEMS Middle to high rectum: TEMS/TAMIS/EMR or LAR Proximal to rectum: EMR or L/O CR | Very large lesion: LAR |
Borderline pathology | Carcinoid < 1 cm with favorable features: TEMS/TAMIS Scar after colonoscopic removal of cancerous polyp: TEMS/TAMIS Uncertain dignity: TEMS/TAMIS mucosal resection as excisional biopsy | Excisional biopsy with TEMS/TAMIS/TAE → LAR if malignant? |
Malignant (Rectum) | u/pT1: LAR u/pT2: LAR u/pT3: CRT + LAR Recurrence: CRT + LAR Carcinoid > 1 cm: LAR | u/pT1 + morbidity: TAE/TEMS/TAMIS u/pT2: TAE/TEMS/TAMIS + CRT |
Malignant (Colon) | pTis: EMR/polypectomy pT1: L/O CR (unless free stalk > 2 mm) > T1: L/O CR | pTis (large): L/O CR pT1 + morbidity: EMR + observation |
- Citation: Devaraj B, Kaiser AM. Impact of technology on indications and limitations for transanal surgical removal of rectal neoplasms. World J Surg Proced 2015; 5(1): 1-13
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2219-2832/full/v5/i1/1.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5412/wjsp.v5.i1.1