Original Article

A Strict Patient Selection Protocol Could Be the Key to Success for Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS)

Authors: George E. Theodoropoulos, MD, PhD, Maximos Frountzas, MD, PhD, Panagiotis Karathanasis, MD, MSc, Georgia Doulami, MD, Victoria Michalopoulou, MD, MSc, Despina Kimpizi, MD, MSc, Dimitrios Schizas, MD, PhD, George C. Zografos, MD, PhD

Abstract

Objectives: In recent years, the local excision of benign rectal lesions or early-stage rectal cancers using minimally invasive surgical techniques has replaced radical interventions that caused impairment in patients’ quality of life. The aim of the present study was to investigate the feasibility of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS), as well as its excision quality, its oncologic outcomes, and its impact on anorectal function.

Methods: Patients who underwent TAMIS at a single colorectal unit of a tertiary university hospital from 2015 until 2020 for benign rectal lesions or early-stage malignant rectal lesions, along with unsuitable patients for radical interventions, were included in the present study.

Results: Twenty-five patients underwent TAMIS for rectal lesions. Their median distance from the anal verge was 7 cm (range 4–12 cm) and their median size was 3.8 cm (range 2–6 cm). The median operative duration was 75 minutes (range 30–150 minutes) and the median hospitalization interval was 2 days (range 1–6 days). In addition, the negative resection rate was 100% and the recurrence rate was 4% during an average follow-up period of 30 months (range 3–36 months). Two patients (8%) presented short-term complications, and in 1 patient (4%) a hybrid technique was required. Seventeen patients (68%) reported moderate incontinence symptoms 6 weeks postoperatively that subsided in all patients 3 months postoperatively.

Conclusions: TAMIS seemed to be a feasible technique with adequate oncologic outcomes and high excision quality, which preserved patients’ quality of life. The impact of TAMIS on anorectal function after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer should be further investigated, however.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Knol J, Keller DS. Total mesorectal excision technique—past, present, and future. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2020;33:134–143.
 
2. van der Heijden JAG, Koëter T, Smits LJH, et al. Functional complaints and quality of life after transanal total mesorectal excision: a meta-analysis. Br J Surg 2020;107:489–498.
 
3. Hitzler MH, Heintz A. Single centre study: results of transanal endoscopic microsurgery of rectal tumors since 2003 vs. results of endoscopic submucosal dissection reported in the literature [article in German]. Zentralbl Chir 2015;140:645–650.
 
4. Buess G, Theiss R, Hutterer F, et al. Transanal endoscopic surgery of the rectum—testing a new method in animal experiments. Leber Magen Darm 1983;13:73–77.
 
5. Arezzo A, Passera R, Saito Y, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery for large noninvasive rectal lesions. Surg Endosc 2014;28:427–438.
 
6. Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: a giant leap forward. Surg Endosc 2010;24:2200–2205.
 
7. Koebrugge B, Bosscha K, Ernst M. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for local excision of rectal lesions: is there a learning curve. Dig Surg 2009; 26:372–377.
 
8. Maslekar S, Pillinger S, Sharma A, et al. Cost analysis of transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal tumours. Colorectal Dis 2007;9:229–234.
 
9. Network. NCC. Rectal Cancer (Version 3.2018). Available at: https://www.nccn.org/login?ReturnURL=https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/rectal.pdf. Accessed December 1, 2018.
 
10. deBeche-Adams T, Nassif G. Transanal minimally invasive surgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2015;28:176–180.
 
11. Bazzell A, Madsen LT, Dains J. Clinical management of bowel dysfunction after low anterior resection for rectal cancer. J Adv Pract Oncol 2016;7: 618–629.
 
12. Caycedo-Marulanda A, Jiang HY, Kohtakangas EL. 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;60:416–423.
 
13. Lee L, Burke JP, deBeche-Adams T, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for local excision of benign and malignant rectal neoplasia: outcomes from 200 consecutive cases with midterm follow up. Ann Surg 2018;267:910–916.
 
14. Quaresima S, Balla A, Franceschilli L, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for rectal lesions. JSLS 2016;20:e2016.00032.
 
15. Westrich G, Venturero M, Schtrechman G, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery for benign and malignant rectal lesions: operative and oncological outcomes of a single center experience. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2019;29:1122–1127.
 
16. Serra-Aracil X, Badia-Closa J, Pallisera-Lloveras A, et al. Management of intra- and post-operative complications during TEM/TAMIS procedures. A systematic review. Minerva Surg 2021;76:343–349.
 
17. Marinello FG, Curell A, Tapiolas I, et al. Systematic review of functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal endoscopic microsurgery and transanal minimally invasive surgery: a word of caution. Int J Colorectal Dis 2020;35:51–67.
 
18. Goldenshluger M, Gutman Y, Katz A, et al. Long-term bowel function after transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS). Isr Med Assoc J 2020;22: 426–430.
 
19. Clermonts SH, van Loon Y-T, Wasowicz DK, et al. Comparative quality of life in patients following transanal minimally invasive surgery and healthy control subjects. J Gastrointest Surg 2018;22:1089–1097.
.
20. Verseveld M, Barendse RM, Gosselink MP, et al. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: impact on quality of life and functional outcome. Surg Endosc 2016; 30:1184–1187.
 
21. Veereman G, Vlayen J, Robays J, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of local resection or transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus radical resection in stage 1 rectal cancer: a real standard? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2017;114:43–52.
 
22. Van den Eynde F, Jaekers J, Fieuws S, et al. TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM for resection of intraluminal rectal tumors. Tech Coloproctol 2019; 23:161–166.
 
23. Lee SG, Russ AJ, Casillas MA Jr. Laparoscopic transanal minimally invasive surgery (L-TAMIS) versus robotic TAMIS (R-TAMIS): short-term outcomes and costs of a comparative study. Surg Endosc 2019;33:1981–1987.