» Articles » PMID: 35966978

Mesentery in Transanal TME

Overview
Date 2022 Aug 15
PMID 35966978
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Oncological adequacy in rectal cancer surgery mandates not only a clear distal and circumferential resection margin but also resection of the entire ontogenetic mesorectal package. Incomplete removal of the mesentery is one of the commonest causes of local recurrences. The completeness of the resection is not only determined by tumor and patient related factors but also by the patient-tailored treatment selected by the multidisciplinary team. This is performed in the context of the technical ability and experience of the surgeon to ensure an optimal total mesorectal excision (TME). In TME, popularized by Professor Heald in the early 1980s as a sharp dissection through the avascular embryologic plane, the midline pedicle of tumor and mesorectum is separated from the surrounding, mostly paired structures of the retroperitoneum. Although TME significantly improved the oncological and functional results of rectal cancer surgery, the difficulty of the procedure is still mainly dependent on and determined by the dissection of the most distal part of the rectum and mesorectum. To overcome some of the limitations of working in the narrowest part of the pelvis, robotic and transanal surgery have been shown to improve the access and quality of resection in minimally invasive techniques. Whatever technique is chosen to perform a TME, embryologically derived planes and anatomical points of reference should be identified to guide the surgery. Standardization of the chosen technique, widespread education, and training of surgeons, as well as caseloads per surgeon, are important factors to optimize outcomes. In this article, we discuss the introduction of transanal TME, with emphasis on the mesentery, relevant anatomy, standard procedural steps, and importance of a training pathway.

References
1.
Martling A, Holm T, Rutqvist L, Johansson H, Moran B, Heald R . Impact of a surgical training programme on rectal cancer outcomes in Stockholm. Br J Surg. 2004; 92(2):225-9. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4834. View

2.
Kapiteijn E, Putter H, van de Velde C . Impact of the introduction and training of total mesorectal excision on recurrence and survival in rectal cancer in The Netherlands. Br J Surg. 2002; 89(9):1142-9. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2002.02196.x. View

3.
Thum-umnuaysuk S, Boonyapibal A, Geng Y, Pattana-Arun J . Lengthening of the colon for low rectal anastomosis in a cadaveric study: how much can we gain?. Tech Coloproctol. 2012; 17(4):377-81. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-012-0930-6. View

4.
Bondeven P, Hagemann-Madsen R, Laurberg S, Ginnerup Pedersen B . Extent and completeness of mesorectal excision evaluated by postoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Surg. 2013; 100(10):1357-67. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9225. View

5.
Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J, Grieve R, Khanna S, Couture J . Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2009; 373(9666):821-8. PMC: 2668948. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60485-2. View