Advertisement

Operative and Perioperative Outcomes

  • Elena A. T. Vikis
  • Anne-Marie Dufresne
  • George Melich
Chapter

Abstract

Traditionally, rectal neoplasms that were not resectable by colonoscopy required segmental oncologic resection, either via abdominoperineal or low anterior resection. These procedures come with a high risk of operative and postoperative complications that can result in significant patient morbidity as well as significant perioperative costs. Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) emerged in 2009, as there was a need for a more widely accessible (easier setup, easier to learn, less expensive) approach to transanal endoscopic excision that was safe and equivalent to transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for removal of rectal lesions. TAMIS is now a well-established technique for removal of benign lesions and select early rectal cancers (T1) not resectable by endoscopy. This chapter describes the operative and perioperative outcomes associated with TAMIS, emphasizing the technique and complications of this procedure.

Keywords

Complications Outcomes Recurrence Pain Bleeding Incontinence Stricture Fistula 

References

  1. 1.
    Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: a giant leap forward. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:2200–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atallah SB, Albert MR. Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM): is one better than the other? Surg Endosc. 2013;27(12):4750–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Saget A, Maggiori L, Petrucciani N, Ferron M, Panis Y. Is there a limit to transanal endoscopic surgery? A comparative study between standard and technically challenging indications among 168 consecutive patients. Color Dis. 2015;17(8):737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Quaresima S, Balla A, et al. Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Lesions. JSLS. 2016;20(3):e2016.00032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wedman D, Dufresne AM, Melich G, Vikis E. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for benign indications and early anorectal cancers: short-term outcomes in a large case series. In publication.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Molina G, Bordeianou L, Shellito P, Sylla P. Transanal endoscopic resection with peritoneal entry: a word of caution. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(5):1816–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Caycedo-Marulanda A, Jiang H, Kohtakangas E. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for benign large rectal polyps and early malignant rectal cancers : experience and outcomes from the first Canadian centre to adopt the technique. Can J Surg. 2017;60(6):416–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mege D, Petrucciani N, Maggiori L, Panis Y. Peritoneal perforation is less a complication than an expected event during transanal endoscopic microsurgery: experience from 194 consecutive cases. Tech Coloproctol. 2017;21:729–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dufresne AM, Ramkumar J, Mackenzie S, Melich G, Vikis E. Trans-anal minimally invasive surgery: a new technique to avoid peritoneal entry. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2018;52:11–15.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Keller DS, et al. Transanal Minimally invasive surgery: review of indications and outcomes from 75 consecutive patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222(5):814–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giordano P, Bradley BM, Peiris L. Obliteration of the rectal lumen after stapled hemorrhoidopexy: report of a case. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51(10):1574–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee L, et al. Quality of local excision for rectal neoplasms using transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus transanal minimally invasive surgery: a multi-institutional matched analysis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60(9):928–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brown C, Raval MJ, Phang T, Karimuddin A. The surgical defect after transanal endoscopic microsurgery: open versus closed management. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:1078–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Menahem B, Alves A, Morello R, Lubrano J. Should the rectal defect be closed following transanal local excision of rectal tumors? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2017;21:929–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hahnloser D, Cantero R, Salgado G, Dindo D, Rega D, Delrio P. Transanal minimal invasive surgery for rectal lesions: should the defect be closed? Colorectal Dis. 2015;17(5):397–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haugvik SP, Groven S, Bondi J, Vagan T, Brynhildsvoll SO, Olsen OC. A critical appraisal of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) in the treatment of rectal adenoma: a 4-year experience with 51 cases. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2016;51(7):855–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosen L, Sipe P, Stasik JJ, Riether RD, Trimpi HD. Outcome of delayed hemorrhage following surgical hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1993;36:743–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McLemore EC, Weston LA, Coker AM, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for benign and malignant rectal neoplasia. Am J Surg. 2014;208:372–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ClinicalTrials.gov [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US). 2000 Feb 29 - . Identifier NCT03314025, Prophylactic tamsulosin in prevention of post-operative urinary retention in men after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMPOUR); 2017 Oct 6 [cited 2018 Jun 29]; [about 4 screens]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03314025?term=tempour&rank=1.
  20. 20.
    Simkens GA, Nienhuijs SW, Luyer MD, de Hingh IH. Massive surgical emphysema following transanal endoscopic microsurgery. World J Gastroint Surg. 2014;6(8):160–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kerr K, Mills GH. Intra-operative and post-operative hypercapnia leading to delayed respiratory failure associated with transanal endoscopic microsurgery under general anaesthesia. Br J Anesth. 2001;86(4):586–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chandra A, Clarke R, Shawkat H. Intraoperative hypercarbia and massive surgical emphysema secondary to transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEMS). BMJ Case Rep. 2014;2014Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Xia W, Manning JPR, Barazanchi AWH, Su’a B, Hill AG. Metronidazole following excisional haemorrhoidectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. ANZ J Surg. 2018;88(5):408–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Solorio-Lopez S, et al. Efficacy of metronidazole versus placebo in pain control after hemorrhoidectomy. Results of a controlled clinical trial. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2015;107(11):681–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mora Lopez L, Serra Aracil X, Hermoso Bosch J, Rebasa P, Navarro Soto S. Study of anorectal function after transanal endoscopic surgery. Int J Surg. 2015;13:142–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mendes S, Ramon C. Transanal minimally-invasive surgery (TAMIS): technique and results from an initial experience. J Coloproctol (Rio de Janeiro). 2013;33(4)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schiphorst AH, Langenhoff BS, Maring J, Pronk A, Zimmerman DD. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: initial experience and short-term functional results. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57(8):927–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Clermonts SHEM, Van Loon YT, Schiphorst AHW, Wasowicz DK, Zimmerman DDE. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for rectal polyps and selected malignant tumors: caution concerning intermediate-term functional results. Int J Color Dis. 2017;32(12):1677–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gordon P, Santhat N. Principles and practice of surgery for the colon, rectum and anus: Informa Healthcare Inc; 2007. p. 1165–87.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena A. T. Vikis
    • 1
  • Anne-Marie Dufresne
    • 2
  • George Melich
    • 3
  1. 1.Royal Columbian and Eagle Ridge Hospitals, Department of SurgeryNew WestminsterCanada
  2. 2.Royal Columbian Hospital, Department of Colorectal SurgeryNew WestminsterCanada
  3. 3.Royal Columbian Hospital, Department of SurgeryNew WestminsterCanada

Personalised recommendations