Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The treatment of all MRI-defined low rectal cancers in a single expert centre over a 5-year period: is there room for improvement?

  • M. Kusters*
  • , A. Slater
  • , M. Betts
  • , R. Hompes
  • , R. J. Guy
  • , O. M. Jones
  • , B. D. George
  • , I. Lindsey
  • , N. J. Mortensen
  • , D. R. James
  • , C. Cunningham
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Catharina Hospital
  • Leiden University
  • Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

9 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Aim: Outcomes following treatment for low rectal cancer still remain inferior to those for upper rectal cancer. A clear definition of ‘low’ rectal cancer is lacking and consensus is more likely using a definition based on MRI criteria. This study aimed to determine disease presentation and treatment outcome of low rectal cancer based on a strict anatomical definition. Method: A low rectal cancer was defined as one with a lower border below the pelvic attachment of the levator muscles on sagittal MRI. One hundred and eighty consecutive patients with tumours defined by this criterion between 2006 and 2011 were identified from a prospectively managed departmental database. Results: One hundred and eighteen patients (66%) underwent curative resection and 12 (7%) palliative resection. Eleven patients (6%) were entered into a ‘watch and wait’ (W&W) protocol; 10 others (5%) were not fit to undergo any operation. Some 26 patients (14%) had nonresectable local or metastatic disease. An R0 resection was the most important factor influencing survival after curative surgery. R+ resections occurred in 12% of non-abdominoperineal excisions, 11% of abdominoperineal excisions and 47% of extended resections. Overall survival was similar in the curative resections compared with the W&W patients. In 23 of the 96 (24%) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy there was a persistent clinical or a pathological complete response. Conclusion: In curative resections, a clear margin is the most important determinant of survival. In 24% of the patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, surgery could potentially have been avoided. There is scope for improvement in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancers.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)O397-O404
JournalColorectal disease
Volume18
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2016

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • abdominoperineal excision
  • circumferential resection margin
  • low anterior resection
  • Low rectal cancer
  • magnetic resonance imaging
  • total mesorectal excision

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The treatment of all MRI-defined low rectal cancers in a single expert centre over a 5-year period: is there room for improvement?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this