Preoperative diagnostic uncertainty in T2-T3 rectal adenomas and T1-T2 adenocarcinomas and a therapeutic dilemma

Background: Endorectal ultrasound and rectal magnetic resonance are sometimes unable to differentiate between stages T2 and T3 in rectal adenomas that are possible adenocarcinomas, or between stages T1 and T2 in rectal adenocarcinomas. These cases of diagnostic uncertainty raise a therapeutic dilemm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Serra-Aracil, Xavier|||0000-0003-0291-1900, Montes Ortega, Noemí, Mora-López, Laura|||0000-0002-4423-7558, Serracant, Anna|||0000-0002-8633-0291, Pericay, Carles|||0000-0002-4975-7851, Rebasa, Pere|||0000-0003-0580-1985, Navarro Soto, Salvador|||0000-0003-2228-4692
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2021
País:España
Institución:Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Repositorio:Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:ddd.uab.cat:256533
Acceso en línea:https://ddd.uab.cat/record/256533
https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.3390/cancers13153685
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Early rectal adenocarcinoma
Rectal adenoma
Transanal endoscopic surgery
Total mesorectal excision
Descripción
Sumario:Background: Endorectal ultrasound and rectal magnetic resonance are sometimes unable to differentiate between stages T2 and T3 in rectal adenomas that are possible adenocarcinomas, or between stages T1 and T2 in rectal adenocarcinomas. These cases of diagnostic uncertainty raise a therapeutic dilemma: transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) or total mesorectal excision (TME)? Methods: An observational study of a cohort of 803 patients who underwent TES from 2004 to 2021. Patients operated on for adenoma (group I) and low-grade T1 adenocarcinoma (group II) were included. The variables related to uncertain diagnosis, and to the definitive pathological diagnosis of adenocarcinoma stage higher than T1, were analyzed. Results: A total of 638 patients were included. Group I comprised 529 patients, 113 (21.4%) with uncertain diagnosis. Seventeen (15%) eventually had a pathological diagnosis of adenocarcinoma higher than T1. However, the variable diagnostic uncertainty was a risk factor for adenocarcinoma above T1 (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1-4.7). Group II included 109 patients, eight with uncertain diagnosis (7.3%). Two patients presented a definitive pathological diagnosis of adenocarcinoma above T1. Conclusions: On the strength of these data, we recommend TES as the initial indication in cases of diagnostic uncertainty. Multicenter studies with larger samples for both groups should now be performed to further assess this strategy of initiating treatment with TES.