Impact of Modern Management Strategies on the Clinical Outcome of Patients With Low Rectal Cancer - A Retrospective, Monocentric Cohort Study

Background: The aim of this study was to retrospectively investigate the impact of intersphincteric resection (ISR) and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols for rectal cancer.

Patients and methods: Since we implemented rectal ERAS protocol and ISR in 2016, we retrospectively assessed and compared clinical, pathological and survival outcomes of two groups of patients: group 1, treated 2000-2015 (n=242); and group 2, treated 2016-2020 (n=108). Propensity score matching using nearest-neighbor method was used to match each patient of group 1 to a patient of group 2.

Results: Before and after matching, the American Society of Anesthesiology score for patients in group 1 was significantly lower than in group 2 (score of 3: 9.9% vs. 25.9%, p<0.0001) as were grade I-II complications (27.7% vs. 45.4% p<0.001). Before and after matching, the quality of the mesorectum excision was significantly lower in group 1 (complete in 31% vs. 59.2% p<0.0001). After matching, 3-year overall survival for groups 1 and 2 were similar (88.2% vs. 92.6%; p=0.988).

Conclusion: ERAS and ISR had no negative impact on the oncological outcome of our patients and increased the preservation of bowel continuity.