630
Đánh giá đáp ứng ung thư học với hóa xạ trị tân hỗ trợ và ảnh hưởng đến phẫu thuật cắt toàn bộ mạc treo trực tràng trong ung thư trực tràng thấp
137
Các số tạp chí
https://doi.org/10.51199/vjsel.2025.5.4
https://doi.org/10.51199
https://api-public.vjsel.vn
https://cdn.vjsel.vn

Đánh giá đáp ứng ung thư học với hóa xạ trị tân hỗ trợ và ảnh hưởng đến phẫu thuật cắt toàn bộ mạc treo trực tràng trong ung thư trực tràng thấp

H
Trần Đức Huy 1,2
Tác giả chính
S
Nguyễn Văn Sanh 3
Đồng tác giả
A
Nguyễn Tuấn Anh 1,3
Đồng tác giả
S
Trần Thanh Sang 2
Đồng tác giả
V
Ung Văn Việt 1,2
Đồng tác giả
1 Bệnh viện Đại học Y Dược thành phố Hồ Chí Minh
2 Đại học Y Dược thành phố Hồ Chí Minh
3 Bệnh viện Nhân dân Gia Định
Tiếng Việt

Tóm tắt

Đặt vấn đề: Ung thư trực tràng thấp thường cần điều trị đa mô thức. Hóa xạ trị tân hỗ trợ (nCRT) trước phẫu thuật cắt toàn bộ mạc treo trực tràng (TME) giúp giảm giai đoạn u, hỗ trợ bảo tồn cơ thắt và kiểm soát tại chỗ, nhưng đồng thời có nguy cơ làm tăng tai biến biến chứng phẫu thuật.

Đối tượng và phương pháp nghiên cứu: Nghiên cứu hồi cứu trên người bệnh ung thư trực tràng thấp giai đoạn II–III điều trị nCRT và được phẫu thuật TME tại một trung tâm đơn lẻ (2018–2024). Đánh giá đáp ứng ung thư học (pCR, TRG, mrTRG, MRF, CRM) và đặc điểm phẫu thuật, biến chứng sớm sau mổ.

Kết quả: Có 163 người bệnh, tuổi trung vị 58, nam/nữ = 2,1; trước điều trị chủ yếu cT3 (49,7%) và cT4b (33,1%). Sau nCRT có 9,8% đạt được pCR, pN0 74,2%, CRM âm 84,7%. Phân bố TRG: TRG0 6,2%, TRG1 21,6%, TRG2 56,7%, TRG3 15,5%. Tương quan trung binh giữa mrTRG–TRG đạt 79,4% (Kappa = 0,46; p < 0,001). Tai biến trong mổ 16,6%; biến chứng sớm sau mổ 46%, thường gặp: nhiễm trùng vết mổ 18,4%, tụ dịch/áp-xe vùng chậu 8,6%, rò miệng nối 7,2%, tắc ruột 3,7%.

Kết luận: nCRT kết hợp TME mang lại tỉ lệ CRM âm cao và đáp ứng mô học đáng kể, song tỉ lệ biến chứng sớm còn lớn, đặc biệt ở nhóm u thấp/phẫu thuật Miles. Cần tối ưu chiến lược tân hỗ trợ và chuẩn hóa kỹ thuật TME để nâng cao hiệu quả và an toàn phẫu thuật.

Từ khóa: ung thư trực tràng; hóa xạ trị tân hỗ trợ; phẫu thuật cắt toàn bộ mạc treo trực tràng; đáp ứng hoàn toàn về bệnh học; thang điểm thoái triển khối u.

English

Evaluation of the oncologic response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and impact on total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer

Tran Duc Huy1,3, Nguyen Van Sanh2, Nguyen Tuan Anh1,2, Tran Thanh Sang3, Ung Van Viet1,3

1. University Medical Center, Ho Chi Minh city, 2. Gia Dinh Peoples Hospital, 3. Shool of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh city

Abstract

Introduction: Low rectal cancer typically requires multimodal therapies. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) before total mesorectal excision (TME) downstages tumors, facilitates sphincter preservation, and improves local control, but may also increase perioperative morbidity.

Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with stage II–III distal rectal cancer treated with nCRT followed by TME at a single center (2018–2024). Outcomes included oncologic response: pathologic complete response (pCR), histologic tumor regression grade (TRG), MRI-based TRG (mrTRG), Mesorectal fascia involvement (MRF), circumferential resection margin (CRM); operative characteristics, and early postoperative complications.

Results: A total of 163 patients were included; median age was 58 years old and the male-to-female ratio was 2.1. Before nCRT, most tumors were cT3 (49.7%) or cT4b (33.1%). After nCRT, pCR was 9.8%; pN0 was 74.2%; and negative CRM was 84.7%. TRG distribution was TRG0 6.2%, TRG1 21.6%, TRG2 56.7%, and TRG3 15.5%. Concordance between mrTRG and TRG was 79.4% (κ = 0.43; p < 0.001), indicating moderate agreement. Intraoperative complications occurred in 16.6%; early postoperative complications accounted for 46.0% which the most commonly were surgical site infection in 18.4%, pelvic fluid collection/abscess in 8.6%, anastomotic leak in 7.2%, and bowel obstruction in 3.7%.

Conclusions: nCRT combined with TME achieved a high rate of negative CRM and meaningful tumor regression, but early morbidity remained substantial—particularly in low tumors/abdominoperineal resection (Miles). Optimization of neoadjuvant strategies and standardization of TME technique are needed to improve effectiveness and surgical safety.

Keywords: rectal cancer; neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; Total mesorectal excision; pathologic complete response; tumor regression grade.

Tài liệu tham khảo

  1. You YN, Hardiman KM, Bafford A, Poylin V, Francone TD, Davis K, et al. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Rectal Cancer. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 2020;63(9):1191-222. doi: 10.1097/dcr.0000000000001762. PubMed PMID: 00003453-202009000-00006.
  2. Manisundaram N, DiBrito SR, Hu C-Y, Kim Y, Wick E, Palis B, et al. Reporting of Circumferential Resection Margin in Rectal Cancer Surgery. JAMA Surgery. 2023;158(11):1195-202. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.4221.
  3. Wu Q, Zhou J, Huang J, Deng X, Li C, Meng W, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy versus chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: Bayesian network meta-analysis. Br J Surg. 2023;110(7):784-96. Epub 2023/05/16. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znad120. PubMed PMID: 37191308.
  4. Bahadoer RR, Dijkstra EA, van Etten B, Marijnen CAM, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM, et al. Short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy before total mesorectal excision (TME) versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy, TME, and optional adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (RAPIDO): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(1):29-42. Epub 2020/12/11. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30555-6. PubMed PMID: 33301740.
  5. Conroy T, Bosset JF, Etienne PL, Rio E, François É, Mesgouez-Nebout N, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX and preoperative chemoradiotherapy for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (UNICANCER-PRODIGE 23): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(5):702-15. Epub 2021/04/17. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00079-6. PubMed PMID: 33862000.
  6. Achilli P, Magistro C, Abd El Aziz MA, Calini G, Bertoglio CL, Ferrari G, et al. Modest agreement between magnetic resonance and pathological tumor regression after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer in the real world. Int J Cancer. 2022;151(1):120-7. Epub 2022/02/23. doi: 10.1002/ijc.33975. PubMed PMID: 35191540.
  7. Chen HLR, Seow-En I, Chok AY, Ngo NT, Cheng TL, Tan KE. The role of magnetic resonance tumour regression grade in the prediction of regression and survival of rectal adenocarcinoma after long-course chemoradiotherapy: a cohort study. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2023;85(4):842-8. Epub 2023/04/28. doi: 10.1097/ms9.0000000000000441. PubMed PMID: 37113901; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10129100.
  8. Maas M, Nelemans PJ, Valentini V, Das P, Rưdel C, Kuo LJ, et al. Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(9):835-44. Epub 20100806. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(10)70172-8. PubMed PMID: 20692872.
  9. Jiang W-Z, Xu J-M, Xing J-D, Qiu H-Z, Wang Z-Q, Kang L, et al. Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncology. 2022;8(11):1607-15. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.4079.
  10. Acuna SA, Chesney TR, Ramjist JK, Shah PS, Kennedy ED, Baxter NN. Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Noninferiority Meta-analysis of Quality of Surgical Resection Outcomes. Ann Surg. 2019;269(5):849-55. Epub 2018/10/20. doi: 10.1097/sla.0000000000003072. PubMed PMID: 30339624.
  11. Chen HY, Feng LL, Li M, Ju HQ, Ding Y, Lan M, et al. College of American Pathologists Tumor Regression Grading System for Long-Term Outcome in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer. Oncologist. 2021;26(5):e780-e93. Epub 2021/02/06. doi: 10.1002/onco.13707. PubMed PMID: 33543577; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8100558.
  12. Patel UB, Taylor F, Blomqvist L, George C, Evans H, Tekkis P, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-detected tumor response for locally advanced rectal cancer predicts survival outcomes: MERCURY experience. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(28):3753-60. Epub 20110829. doi: 10.1200/jco.2011.34.9068. PubMed PMID: 21876084.
  13. Verheij FS, Omer DM, Williams H, Lin ST, Qin LX, Buckley JT, et al. Long-Term Results of Organ Preservation in Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma Treated With Total Neoadjuvant Therapy: The Randomized Phase II OPRA Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(5):500-6. Epub 2023/10/26. doi: 10.1200/jco.23.01208. PubMed PMID: 37883738; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC11578087.
  14. Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH, Kim S, Kang SB, Lim SB, 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(7):767-74. Epub 2014/05/20. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70205-0. PubMed PMID: 24837215.
  15. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, et al. Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to Open Laparotomy Among Patients Undergoing Resection for Rectal Cancer: The ROLARR Randomized Clinical Trial. Jama. 2017;318(16):1569-80. Epub 2017/10/27. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.7219. PubMed PMID: 29067426; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5818805 ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Drs Jayne, Pigazzi, Rautio, Thomassen, and Bianchi and Mr Gudgeon reported serving as proctors for Intuitive Surgical Inc. Dr Pigazzi reported serving as a consultant for Intuitive Surgical Inc. Mr Gudgeon reported receiving travel expenses from Intuitive Surgical Inc. No other disclosures were reported.
  16. Gamboa AC, Lee RM, Turgeon MK, Varlamos C, Regenbogen SE, Hrebinko KA, et al. Impact of Postoperative Complications on Oncologic Outcomes After Rectal Cancer Surgery: An Analysis of the US Rectal Cancer Consortium. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(3):1712-21. Epub 2020/09/25. doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-08976-8. PubMed PMID: 32968958; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7955158.
  17. Planellas P, Cornejo L, Ehsan A, Reina F, Ortega-Torrecilla N, Maldonado E, et al. Urethral Injury in Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Study Using Cadaveric Dissection, Imaging Analyses, and Clinical Series. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(20). Epub 2023/10/28. doi: 10.3390/cancers15204955. PubMed PMID: 37894322; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10605354.
  18. Kreis ME, Ruppert R, Kube R, Strassburg J, Lewin A, Baral J, et al. MRI-Based Use of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Rectal Carcinoma: Surgical Quality and Histopathological Outcome of the OCUM Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(2):417-27. Epub 2019/08/16. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07696-y. PubMed PMID: 31414295.
  19. Musters GD, Sloothaak DA, Roodbeen S, van Geloven AA, Bemelman WA, Tanis PJ. Perineal wound healing after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: a two-centre experience in the era of intensified oncological treatment. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014;29(9):1151-7. Epub 2014/07/30. doi: 10.1007/s00384-014-1967-y. PubMed PMID: 25064389.
  20. Degiuli M, Elmore U, De Luca R, De Nardi P, Tomatis M, Biondi A, et al. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): A nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group. Colorectal Dis. 2022;24(3):264-76. Epub 2021/11/25. doi: 10.1111/codi.15997. PubMed PMID: 34816571; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9300066.