English Kevan
Department of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Medicine, Omaha, NE 68198, United States.
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025 Apr 27;17(4):102487. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i4.102487.
In this article, we provide an important commentary on the original study Lu , which offers insight into the surgical efficacy of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LapTME) in the management of low-lying locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We focus specifically on the rate of postoperative complications between the two using existing data from the literature. We additionally introduce robotic total mesorectal excision (RTME) and look at its postoperative complications relative to the TaTME and LapTME. LARC has been conventionally approached by open surgery. However, minimally invasive techniques have emerged over the past two decades as alternatives to open total mesorectal excision, namely robotic, laparoscopic, and transanal. Each approach has its supporters, but conflicting data on resection outcomes and complications has fueled ongoing debate over the optimal minimally invasive technique for low/mid-LARC. This article aims to extend on the data regarding the use of TaTME and RTME in the treatment of low/mid-LARC and further elaborate on their comparative efficacy relative to LapTME.
在本文中,我们对原研究Lu进行了重要评论,该研究深入探讨了经肛门全直肠系膜切除术(TaTME)和腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术(LapTME)在低位局部晚期直肠癌(LARC)治疗中的手术疗效。我们特别利用文献中的现有数据,关注两者术后并发症的发生率。此外,我们引入了机器人全直肠系膜切除术(RTME),并研究其相对于TaTME和LapTME的术后并发症情况。传统上,LARC采用开放手术治疗。然而,在过去二十年中,微创技术已成为开放全直肠系膜切除术的替代方法,即机器人手术、腹腔镜手术和经肛门手术。每种方法都有其支持者,但关于切除结果和并发症的相互矛盾的数据引发了关于低/中低位LARC最佳微创技术的持续争论。本文旨在扩展关于TaTME和RTME在低/中低位LARC治疗中应用的数据,并进一步阐述它们相对于LapTME的比较疗效。