Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 442–451 | Cite as

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Treatment of Carcinoma in the Middle or Lower Third Rectum: the Technical Feasibility of the Procedure, Pathological Results, and Clinical Outcome

  • Ashraf M. AbdelkaderEmail author
  • Ahmed M. Zidan
  • Mohamed T. Younis
  • Shaimaa K. Dawa
Original Article


We are trying to illustrate operative, short-term, and pathological outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) as a surgical procedure for patients who are suffering cancer in the lower or middle rectum. This study included 25 consecutive patients who underwent TaTME for the mid and low cancer rectum. The primary outcome measures included frequency of postoperative (PO) bleeding, leakage, ileus, days to regain bowel function, days for Foley’s removal, and erectile function. The secondary outcome measures included operation time, status of resection margins, number, the quality of TME, and duration PO hospital stay. No recorded intraoperative complications. The mean hospital stay was 6.9 ± 2.6 days. The mean duration need for urinary catheter removal and flatus passage were 2.4 ± 2.1 and 1.5 + 0.9 days, respectively. The mean IPSS was returned to normal 12 months after surgery. The mean distal margin distance was 1.9 ± 1.1. Circumferential margin distance was > 1 mm in 23 (92%) patients. The mesorectum was complete in 22 (88%) patients. The survival rate was 88% over 3 years. TaTME could be considered as a safe, feasible, and effective surgical modality for patients who had mid and lower rectal tumors with an excellent pathological outcome.


CA rectum Transanal TME Pathological outcome 


Authors’ Contributions

Concept and design: Ashraf MA, Ahmed MZ, Mohamed T, Shaimaa KD

Manuscript preparation: Ashraf MA, Ahmed MZ, Mohamed T, Shaimaa KD

Data and statistical analysis: Ashraf MA, Ahmed MZ, Mohamed T, Shaimaa KD

Manuscript editing: Ashraf MA, Ahmed MZ, Mohamed T, Shaimaa KD

Literature search: Ashraf MA, Ahmed MZ, Mohamed T, Shaimaa KD

Manuscript review: Ashraf MA, Ahmed MZ, Mohamed T, Shaimaa KD

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Patient Consent

Patient informed consents were obtained before the operation, as with all procedures.

Ethics Approval

This data collection was approved by the Ethical Committee of our hospital.


  1. 1.
    Shanna A, Harvey J, Charles S, Leona A, Sree H, Nikhil H, Michael H (2015) Anorectal cancer: critical anatomic and staging distinctions that affect use of radiation. Ther Radio 35(7):2090–2107Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Siegel R, Miller K, Jemal A (2016) Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 66:7–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heald R, Husband E, Ryall R (1982) The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg 69(10):613–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heald RJ (1988) The “holy plane” of rectal surgery. J R Soc Med 81:503–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Joseph M, Pierre A, Matthew R (2017) Recent advances in the management of rectal cancer: no surgery, minimal surgery or minimally invasive surgery. World J Gastrointest Surg 9(6):139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jayne D, Thorpe H, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown J, Guillou P (2010) Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:1638–1645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jayne D, Brown J, Walker J, Quirke P, Guillou P (2005) Bladder and sexual function following resection for rectal cancer in a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open technique. Br J Surg 92:1124–1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lanfranco A, Castellanos A, Desai J, Meyers W (2004) Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg 239:14–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Daniel L, Freddy P, Steffen F, Anne J, Christine S, Constant J, Elizabeth V (2010) Factors predicting the quality of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg 252(6)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bjorn M, Perdawood S (2015) Transanal total mesorectal excision: a systematic review. Dan Med J 62:A5105PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Autschbach F (2005) The pathological assessment of total mesorectal excision: what are the relevant resection margins? Inst Path Heid Univ Im Neu Feld 220/221:69120Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harmeet K, Haesun C, Nancy Y, Gaiane M, Corey T, Ping H et al (2012) MR imaging for preoperative evaluation of primary rectal cancer: practical considerations. RadiogGraph 32(2)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hacking C, Yang N (2018) Rectal cancer (staging). RadiopaediaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Quirke P, Morris E (2007) Reporting colorectal cancer. Histopathology 50(1):103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stevenson A, Solomon M, Lumley J, Hewett P, Clouston A, Gebski V, Davies L, Wilson K, Hague W, Simes J, ALaCaRT Investigators (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314(13):1356–1363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent D, Boller A, George V, Abbas M et al (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314(13):1346–1355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Serra A, Mora L, Alcantara M, Caro T, Gomez D, Navarro S (2014) Transanal endoscopic surgery in rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 20(33):11538–11545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Keller D, Haas E (2016) Transanal minimally invasive surgery: state of the art. J Gastrointest Surg 20(2):463–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wolthuis A, de Buck van A, D’Hoore A (2014) Laparoscopic natural orifice specimen extraction-colectomy: a systematic review. World J Gastroenterol 20(36):12981–12992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Motson R, Lacy A (2015) The rationale for transanal total mesorectal excision. Dis Colon Rectum 58(9):911–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Denost Q, Adam J, Pontallier A, Celerier B, Laurent C, Rullier E (2015) Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer. Ann Surg 261(1):138–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bin M, Peng G, Yongxi S, Cong Z, Changwang Z, Longyi W, Hongpeng L, Zhenning W (2016) Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and perioperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. BMC Cancer J 7.
  23. 23.
    Chen C, Lai Y, Jiang J, Chu C, Huang I, Chen W et al (2015) Transanal total mesorectal excision versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiation: a matched case-control study. Ann Surg OncolGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fernandez H, Delgado S, Castells A, Tasende M, Momblan D, Díaz del Gobbo G et al (2015) Transanal total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer: short-term outcomes in comparison with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Sur 261(2):221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Annibale D, Graziano P, Igor M, Vito P, Giorgio L, Paolo M, Giovanni A (2013) Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27:1887–1895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Simillis C, Hompes R, Penna M, Rasheed S, Tekkis P (2016) A systematic review of transanal total mesorectal excision. Is this the future of rectal cancer surgery? Color Dis 18(1):19–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nagtegaal I, van de Velde C, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH et al (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20(7):1729–1734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wasserberg N, Gutman H (2008) Resection margins in modern rectal cancer surgery. J Surg Oncol 98:611–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P (2008) What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol 26(2):303–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Association of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.General Surgery DepartmentFaculty of Medicine, Benha UniversityBenhaEgypt
  2. 2.Banha University HospitalBenhaEgypt
  3. 3.Pathology DepartmentFaculty of Medicine, Benha UniversityBenhaEgypt

Personalised recommendations