Study of Unsutured Versus Sutured Closure of Rectal Defects After Rectal Lesion Excisions Using Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery

Summary

Background Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) is an advanced minimally invasive endoluminal technique used to remove rectal tumours. In the open transanal excision era, there is evidence that outcomes in unsutured rectal defects are similar to those in patients whose defect is closed. However, the evidence for this approach is minimal and technical differences in TEM (e.g. rectal insufflation) may mean that leaving defects unsutured is not a safe approach. Further, there is anecdotal evidence that unsutured defects lead to more postoperative pain and delay recovery.

Objective The purpose of this study is to determine if postoperative pain (primary) and early postoperative complications (secondary) are worse in patients undergoing TEM and do not have the defect closed when compare to similar patients who have endoluminal suture closure of the defect.

Methods This is a multicentre, double blind randomized controlled trial of suture closure versus no closure in patients treated by TEM for rectal lesions. The study will include patients 18 years and older with rectal lesions within 12cm of the anal verge treated with TEM. The primary outcome is postoperative pain as measured by validated visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include analgesic use and early (<30 day) complications. Based on anticipated VAS scores, a sample size of 38 patients will be enrolled (power 0.80, α=0.05). Statistical analysis will be performed using student's T test for continuous data and Fischer's exact test for dichotomous variables.

Impact Currently, only 3 centres in Canada have experience with TEM: Vancouver, Winnipeg and Ottawa. This study represents the first trial of a Canadian TEM Collaborative and will determine if there is an advantage to suture closure of the rectal defect in TEM surgery. This is important, as suture technique is challenging and if there are important advantages to this approach, there would be a mandate to perfect suturing technique before employing the TEM approach to rectal tumours. Conversely, if there is an advantage to leaving the defect unsutured, this may reduce operative time and facilitate better use of OR time. Further, it will inform all TEM surgeons of the best approach to the rectal defect and optimize patient care. Finally, this study will serve as a starting point for further trials by the Canadian TEM Collaborative that will expand to include new sites and become a world leader in TEM clinical trials.

Inclusion criteria

• The patients must be over 18 years old with a rectal lesion < 12cm from the anal verge (as measured by rigid sigmoidoscopy) and less than half the circumference of the rectal lumen. The patient must provide informed consent for TEM and inclusion in the trial.

Exclusion criteria

• The surgeon decides to convert to laparotomy or conventional TAE for any reason during tumor excision.
• The surgeon judges that the rectal defect is not appropriate for suturing (e.g. too large) or to be left unsutured (e.g. entry into peritoneal cavity)
• The patient is currently treated for chronic pain prior to surgery, has a known bleeding diathesis (e.g. warfarin treatment, hemophilia, etc) or is immunosuppressed (e.g. Prednisone, HIV,etc)