ELRR by TEM Versus Laparoscopic TME in iT2N0M0 SMALL LOW RECTAL CANCER (ELRRvsLTME)
Primary Purpose
Rectal Cancer
Status
Completed
Phase
Phase 3
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
ELRR BY TEM
LTME
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional treatment trial for Rectal Cancer focused on measuring Rectal cancer, Radiochemotherapy, Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery, Laparoscopic Resection
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Tumor located within 6 cm from the anal verge
- Tumor diameter not larger than 3 cm, and staged as iT2, N0, G1-2
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients classified as American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) 3 or 4
Sites / Locations
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Experimental
Active Comparator
Arm Label
Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery
Total Mesorectal Excision
Arm Description
Patients were treated by TEM as follows: mucosal incision included all the tatoo spots performed at admission staging, in order to excise a minimum of 1 cm of normal mucosa around the tumor, according to its diameter before NT (ELRR- Endo Luminal Loco Regional Resection)
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
oncological result in term of local and/or systematic recurrence
To evaluate local and/or systematic recurrence, all patients were followed up prospectively by clinical examination, measurement of tumour markers and sigmoidoscopy every 3 months for the first 3 years, and every 6 months thereafter. Whole-body CT and pelvic MRI were repeated every 6 months for the first 5 year. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 5 years.
Secondary Outcome Measures
Morbidity
No. of patients with postoperative complications
operative time
operative time (minutes)
blood loss
blood loss (ml)
analgesic use
No. of patients receiving analgesia
30 day mortality
No. of patients died within 30 days from operation
hospital stay
hospital stay (days)
cancer-related mortality
No. of patients died for cancer. To evaluate local and/or systemic recurrence, all patients were followed up prospectively. After 5 year every 12 months. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 5 years
Full Information
NCT ID
NCT01609504
First Posted
September 15, 2011
Last Updated
May 29, 2012
Sponsor
University of Roma La Sapienza
Collaborators
Università Politecnica delle Marche
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT01609504
Brief Title
ELRR by TEM Versus Laparoscopic TME in iT2N0M0 SMALL LOW RECTAL CANCER
Acronym
ELRRvsLTME
Official Title
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial: Endoluminal Loco-regional Resection (ELRR) by Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision (LTME) in it2n0m0 Small Low Rectal Cancer
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
May 2012
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
April 1997 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
April 2004 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
April 2004 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
University of Roma La Sapienza
Collaborators
Università Politecnica delle Marche
4. Oversight
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
The present prospective randomized study investigated the results of ELRR (ENDOLUMINAL LOCO-REGIONAL RESECTION BY TRANSANAL ENDOSCOPIC MICROSURGERY) versus LTME (LAPAROSCOPIC TOTAL MESORECTAL EXCISION) in the management of 100 patients with iT2N0M0 small low rectal cancer after Neoadjuvant Treatment.
Detailed Description
From April 1997 to April 2004, patients with cT2 rectal cancer and no suspicion for positive lymph-nodes or distant metastases (cN0 M0) were enrolled in this study.
History, routine laboratory tests including tumour markers, digital examination to evaluate tumour fixation and sphincter tone, clinical evaluation, were recorded for each patient in a data base.
At admission, staging included: 1) endorectal ultrasound (EUS) 2) rigid rectoscopy and tumour biopsies; 3) total colonoscopy with vital dye staining of the rectum and 6-8 standard biopsies of normal mucosa at a distance of approximately 1 cm around the tumour with India ink tattooing of biopsy sites; 4) helical Total Body Computerized Tomography (CT), and 5) pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Rigid rectoscopy was performed in order to measure the exact distance of the tumour from the anal verge and to select the most appropriate patient's position on the operative table in case of TEM surgery.
Positive lymph-node status at imaging was established according to the following criteria:
at EUS, diameter > 0.8 cm, circular or irregular shape, hypervascularization at colour Doppler and hypoechogenicity.
at CT and MRI, diameter of > 0.8 cm, circular or irregular shape. All patients with suspicious nodes or contradictory response at EUS, CT or MRI T staging were not enrolled in the present study.
Inclusion criteria were: tumour located within 6 cm from the anal verge, tumour diameter not larger than 3 cm, and staged as cT2 N0 M0, G1-2. Patients classified as American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) 3 or 4 were excluded.
All patients underwent preoperative radiotherapy. The total dose given was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions over 5 weeks. The irradiated areas were: anus, rectum, mesorectum, regional and iliac lymph-nodes. Continuous infusion of 5-FU 200 mg/m2/day was performed during radiotherapy treatment.
Forty days after the end of NT, staging as described above (except for total colonoscopy) was repeated. Downsizing was classified in two groups: patients with tumour mass reduction more than 50% (responders) and patients with tumour mass reduction less than 50% (low or non responders). According to the study protocol, patients with disease progression were excluded.
Randomization was performed the day before operation. Patients were stratified in two groups and subsequently allocated 1:1 to the two arms of the study, ELRR by TEM (arm A) or LTME (arm B) by means of sealed opaque envelopes containing computer-generated random numbers. In the end, 50 patients underwent ELRR by TEM (arm A) and 50 patients underwent laparoscopic resection (LTME) (laparoscopic low anterior resection or abdominal-perineal resection) (arm B). The recruitment was interrupted when 100 patients had undergone operation.
Surgery was performed between 45 and 55 days after the end of radio-chemotherapy. Preoperative washout of the colon (polyethyleneglycol) and short-term antibiotic prophylaxis (metronidazole and second generation cephalosporin) were administered to all patients. Surgical procedures were performed only by two surgeons expert in open rectal surgery and skilled in both laparoscopic and TEM procedures.
TEM procedures were performed with the Wolf Company (Tuttlingen, Germany) instrumentation. The surgical technique of ELRR was as follows: mucosal incision included all the tattoo spots performed at admission staging, in order to excise a minimum of 1 cm of normal mucosa around the tumour, according to its diameter before NT. Starting from the mucosal incision the dissection was continued deeply in order to remove all the mesorectum adjacent to the tumour, following a cutting line with an angle of approximatively 120-135° with respect to the mucosal plane. For posterior and lateral lesions the bottom dissection plane was carried down to the "holy plane" and for anterior lesions to the level of the vagina septum or the prostatic capsule. In case of tumour with the distal limit at the level of the anal canal, the incision included the dentate line and the internal sphincter fibres were partially removed. For distal tumours, in order to maintain the CO2 rectum insufflation it is recommended to adjust the rectoscope axis so as to keep its inferior circumference adherent to the anal canal. In all patients the defect was closed by multiple running stitches, according to the technique described by Buess.
The surgical technique of Arm B was laparoscopic low anterior resection or abdominal perineal resection.
Primary endpoint in this study was the oncological result in terms of local recurrence, distant metastases and cancer related mortality with minimum follow-up time of 5 years. Secondary endpoints were: operative time, blood loss, analgesic use, morbidity, hospital stay and 30 day mortality. Major morbidity was defined as complications requiring surgical treatment. In order to evaluate local and/or systemic recurrence, all patients were prospectively followed-up by clinical examination, tumour markers' assay and rectoscopy every 3 months for the first 3 years, then every six months. Total body CT, and pelvic MRI were repeated every 6 months for the first 5 years. According to the study protocol, no adjuvant therapy was administered, as recommended by the consultant oncologist in T2N0 rectal cancer patients.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Rectal Cancer
Keywords
Rectal cancer, Radiochemotherapy, Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery, Laparoscopic Resection
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Phase 3
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
283 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Patients were treated by TEM as follows: mucosal incision included all the tatoo spots performed at admission staging, in order to excise a minimum of 1 cm of normal mucosa around the tumor, according to its diameter before NT (ELRR- Endo Luminal Loco Regional Resection)
Arm Title
Total Mesorectal Excision
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
ELRR BY TEM
Other Intervention Name(s)
FULL-THICKNESS + FAT EXCISION BY TEM
Intervention Description
The surgical technique of ELRR was as follows: mucosal incision included all the tatoo spots performed at admission staging, in order to excise a minimum of 1 cm of normal mucosa around the tumor, according to its diameter before NT
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
LTME
Other Intervention Name(s)
LAPAROSCOPIC LOW ANTERIOR/ABDOMINO-PERINEAL RESECTION
Intervention Description
LAPAROSCOPIC TOTAL MESORECTAL EXCISION INCLUDING MESORECTAL (ACCORDING TO HEALD CRITERIA)
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
oncological result in term of local and/or systematic recurrence
Description
To evaluate local and/or systematic recurrence, all patients were followed up prospectively by clinical examination, measurement of tumour markers and sigmoidoscopy every 3 months for the first 3 years, and every 6 months thereafter. Whole-body CT and pelvic MRI were repeated every 6 months for the first 5 year. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 5 years.
Time Frame
3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, 36, 42, 48, 54, 60 months after operation
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Morbidity
Description
No. of patients with postoperative complications
Time Frame
participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an expected average of 3 and 6 days each group
Title
operative time
Description
operative time (minutes)
Time Frame
operative time
Title
blood loss
Description
blood loss (ml)
Time Frame
during time of operation
Title
analgesic use
Description
No. of patients receiving analgesia
Time Frame
participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an expected average of 3 and 6 days each group
Title
30 day mortality
Description
No. of patients died within 30 days from operation
Time Frame
at 30 days from operation
Title
hospital stay
Description
hospital stay (days)
Time Frame
participants will be followed for the duration of hospital stay, an expected average of 3 and 6 days each group
Title
cancer-related mortality
Description
No. of patients died for cancer. To evaluate local and/or systemic recurrence, all patients were followed up prospectively. After 5 year every 12 months. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 5 years
Time Frame
3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, 36, 42, 48, 54, 60 months after operation
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Tumor located within 6 cm from the anal verge
Tumor diameter not larger than 3 cm, and staged as iT2, N0, G1-2
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients classified as American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) 3 or 4
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Emanuele Lezoche, Pr
Organizational Affiliation
university Sapienza of Rome, Italy
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
22864880
Citation
Lezoche E, Baldarelli M, Lezoche G, Paganini AM, Gesuita R, Guerrieri M. Randomized clinical trial of endoluminal locoregional resection versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for T2 rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. Br J Surg. 2012 Sep;99(9):1211-8. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8821.
Results Reference
derived
Learn more about this trial
ELRR by TEM Versus Laparoscopic TME in iT2N0M0 SMALL LOW RECTAL CANCER
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs