Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pelvic inlet shape measured by three-dimensional pelvimetry is a predictor of the operative time in the anterior resection of rectal cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We evaluated pelvic shape as a predictor of the surgical outcome of anterior resection in patients with rectal cancer.

Methods

In total, 228 patients who had undergone anterior resection (R0 resection and double-stapling anastomosis) for rectal cancer from 2005 to 2014 were included in this study. The anteroposterior (AP) and transverse (T) diameters of the pelvic inlet and outlet and pelvic depth were analyzed on three-dimensional volume-rendered images, and the AP/T ratio was calculated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the predictive significance of the operative time and intraoperative blood loss as surgical outcomes.

Results

No difference was observed between the inlet AP/T and patient sex ratios, but the other pelvic dimensions were significantly shorter in males than in females. The univariate analysis revealed that the operative time was significantly correlated with the inlet T diameter and that it tended to be correlated with the outlet T diameter and the inlet AP/T ratio. A multivariate analysis adjusted for operation-related factors revealed that the inlet AP/T ratio was the only independent risk factor for an extended operative time (p = 0.036). None of the pelvic dimensions were independent risk factors for increased blood loss.

Conclusion

The shape of the pelvic inlet may be useful for predicting the operative time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr, et al. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg. 2007;246(4):655–62 (Discussion 62-4).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yamamoto S, Inomata M, Katayama H, Mizusawa J, Etoh T, Konishi F, et al. Short-term surgical outcomes from a randomized controlled trial to evaluate laparoscopic and open D3 dissection for stage II/III colon cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG 0404. Ann Surg. 2014;260(1):23–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, Smith AM, et al. Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(21):3061–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yamamoto S, Ito M, Okuda J, Fujii S, Yamaguchi S, Yoshimura K, et al. Laparoscopic surgery for stage 0/I rectal carcinoma: short-term outcomes of a single-arm phase II trial. Ann Surg. 2013;258(2):283–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kuroyanagi H, Oya M, Ueno M, Fujimoto Y, Yamaguchi T, Muto T. Standardized technique of laparoscopic intracorporeal rectal transection and anastomosis for low anterior resection. Surg Endosc. 2008;22(2):557–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk E S, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1324–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jeong Seung-Yong, Park Ji Won, Nam Byung Ho, Kim Sohee, Kang Sung-Bum, Lim Seok-Byung, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:767–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, Hewett P, Clouston AD, Gebski VJ, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314(13):1356–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, Boller AM, George V, Abbas M, et al. 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. 2015;314(13):1346–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Williams NS. The rectal “no man’s land” and sphincter preservation during rectal excision. Br J Surg. 2010;97(12):1749–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Narumoto K, Sugimura M, Saga K, Matsunaga Y. Changes in pelvic shape among Japanese pregnant women over the last 5 decades. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2015;41(11):1687–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Targarona EM, Balague C, Pernas JC, Martinez C, Berindoague R, Gich I, et al. Can we predict immediate outcome after laparoscopic rectal surgery? Multivariate analysis of clinical, anatomic, and pathologic features after 3-dimensional reconstruction of the pelvic anatomy. Ann Surg. 2008;247(4):642–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ogiso S, Yamaguchi T, Hata H, Fukuda M, Ikai I, Yamato T, et al. Evaluation of factors affecting the difficulty of laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer: “narrow pelvis” is not a contraindication. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(6):1907–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang C, Xiao Y, Qiu H, Yao J, Pan W. Factors affecting operating time in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 2014;12(44):1–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Salerno G, Daniels IR, Brown G, Norman AR, Moran BJ, Heald RJ. Variations in pelvic dimensions do not predict the risk of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement in rectal cancer. World J Surg. 2007;31(6):1313–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ferko A, Maly O, Orhalmi J, Dolejs J. CT/MRI pelvimetry as a useful tool when selecting patients with rectal cancer for transanal total mesorectal excision. Surg Endosc. 2015;30:1164–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Akiyoshi T, Kuroyanagi H, Oya M, Konishi T, Fukuda M, Fujimoto Y, et al. Factors affecting the difficulty of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with double stapling technique anastomosis for low rectal cancer. Surgery. 2009;146(3):483–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Buell JF, Cherqui D, Geller DA, O’Rourke N, Iannitti D, Dagher I, et al. The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):825–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Watanabe T, Itabashi M, Shimada Y, Tanaka S, Ito Y, Ajioka Y, et al. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) Guidelines 2014 for treatment of colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2015;20(2):207–39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Rosset A, Spadola L, Ratib O. OsiriX: an open-source software for navigating in multidimensional DICOM images. J Digit Imaging. 2004;17(3):205–16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Spörri S, Thoeny HC, Raio L, Lachat R, Vock P, Schneider H. MR imaging pelvimetry: A useful adjunct in the treatment of women at risk for dystocia? Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:137–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Killeen T, Banerjee S, Vijay V, Al-Dabbagh Z, Francis D, Warren S. Magnetic resonance (MR) pelvimetry as a predictor of difficulty in laparoscopic operations for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(12):2974–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Oshiro Y, Mitani J, Okada T, Ohkohchi N. A novel three-dimensional print of liver vessels and tumors in hepatectomy. Surg Today. 2017;47(4):521–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Miyamoto R, Oshiro Y, Nakayama K, Kohno K, Hashimoto S, Fukunaga K, et al. Three-dimensional simulation of pancreatic surgery showing the size and location of the main pancreatic duct. Surg Today. 2017;47(3):357–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Katayama H, Kurokawa Y, Nakamura K, Ito H, Kanemitsu Y, Masuda N, et al. Extended Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: Japan Clinical Oncology Group postoperative complications criteria. Surg Today. 2016;46(6):668–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Baek SJ, Kim CH, Cho MS, Bae SU, Hur H, Min BS, et al. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer can overcome difficulties associated with pelvic anatomy. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(6):1419–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fernandez Ananin S, Targarona EM, Martinez C, Pernas JC, Hernandez D, Gich I, et al. Predicting the pathological features of the mesorectum before the laparoscopic approach to rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(12):3458–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Veenhof AA, Engel AF, van der Peet DL, Sietses C, Meijerink WJ, de Lange-de Klerk E S, et al. Technical difficulty grade score for the laparoscopic approach of rectal cancer: a single institution pilot study. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23(5):469–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Allen SD, Gada V, Blunt DM. Variation of mesorectal volume with abdominal fat volume in patients with rectal carcinoma: assessment with MRI. Br J Radiol. 2007;80(952):242–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Takehiro Shimada and Masashi Tsuruta contributed equally to this article.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan

    Takehiro Shimada, Masashi Tsuruta, Hirotoshi Hasegawa, Koji Okabayashi, Takashi Ishida, Yusuke Asada, Hirofumi Suzumura & Yuko Kitagawa

Authors
  1. Takehiro Shimada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Masashi Tsuruta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hirotoshi Hasegawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Koji Okabayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Takashi Ishida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yusuke Asada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hirofumi Suzumura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yuko Kitagawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masashi Tsuruta.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest in association with the present study.

The English in this document has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English. For a certificate, please see: http://www.textcheck.com/certificate/FNPKb4.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shimada, T., Tsuruta, M., Hasegawa, H. et al. Pelvic inlet shape measured by three-dimensional pelvimetry is a predictor of the operative time in the anterior resection of rectal cancer. Surg Today 48, 51–57 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-017-1547-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-017-1547-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation