Published online Jul 15, 2015. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v7.i7.55
Peer-review started: February 1, 2015
First decision: March 6, 2015
Revised: March 28, 2015
Accepted: May 26, 2015
Article in press: May 27, 2015
Published online: July 15, 2015
Processing time: 166 Days and 16.6 Hours
Low rectal cancer is traditionally treated by abdominoperineal resection. In recent years, several new techniques for the treatment of very low rectal cancer patients aiming to preserve the gastrointestinal continuity and to improve both the oncological as well as the functional outcomes, have been emerged. Literature suggest that when the intersphincteric resection is applied in T1-3 tumors located within 30-35 mm from the anal verge, is technically feasible, safe, with equal oncological outcomes compared to conventional surgery and acceptable quality of life. The Anterior Perineal PlanE for Ultra-low Anterior Resection technique, is not disrupting the sphincters, but carries a high complication rate, while the reports on the oncological and functional outcomes are limited. Transanal Endoscopic MicroSurgery (TEM) and TransAnal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) should represent the treatment of choice for T1 rectal tumors, with specific criteria according to the NCCN guidelines and favorable pathologic features. Alternatively to the standard conventional surgery, neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy followed by TEM or TAMIS seems promising for tumors of a local stage T1sm2-3 or T2. Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision should be performed only when a board approved protocol is available by colorectal surgeons with extensive experience in minimally invasive and transanal endoscopic surgery.
Core tip: The present review presents the most recent advances in the field of sphincter preserving surgery for the treatment of low rectal cancer patients, providing indications, patients’ selection, surgical techniques, multimodality approaches, postoperative course and oncological and functional outcomes. In particular, the review focuses on data deriving from prospective studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The conclusion makes clear that a customized approach based on current guidelines, as well as specific pathological prognostic factors, is mandatory for obtaining the maximum favorable outcome in each patient.