BACKGROUND

Transabdominal laparoscopic proctectomy (LAP) for rectal cancer was associated with postoperative recovery improvement. Early studies showed favorable short-term results of endoscopic transanal proctectomy (ETAP), with low conversion rates to open procedures. We aimed to compare efficacy, morbidity, and functional outcomes of ETAP to standard LAP for low rectal cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

From 2008 to 2013, 72 consecutive patients received proctectomy and coloanal manual anastomosis for low rectal adenocarcinoma. Thirty-four patients had transanal endoscopic proctectomy, and 38 patients underwent the standard laparoscopic procedure.

RESULTS

When compared with the LAP group, the ETAP group demonstrated a lower conversion rate to open procedures (23.7% vs 2.9%, respectively; p = 0.015), shorter in-hospital stays (9 vs 8 days, respectively; p = 0.04), and a lower readmission rate (13.2% vs 0%; p = 0.03). Overall postoperative morbidity rates for the LAP and the ETAP groups (36.8% vs 32.4%, respectively; p = 0.69) and functional results (Kirwan score 1/2, 73.7% vs 73.5%, respectively; p = 0.85) were comparable; additionally, we found similar oncologic quality criteria (R1 resection 10.5% vs 5.9%, respectively; p = 0.68; grade 3 mesorectal integrity 52.6% vs 55.9%, respectively; p = 0.66). Disease-free survival of 24 months (Kaplan-Meier estimation) was comparable in the 2 groups: 86% in the ETAP group vs 88% in the LAP group; p = 0.91. At the date of last follow-up, 91.2% of ETAP patients and 92.1% of LAP patients were free of stoma.

CONCLUSIONS

The endoscopic transanal approach could facilitate mesorectal excision and improve short-term outcomes without impairing the oncologic quality of the resection or mid-term functional and oncologic results.