Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Ann Coloproctol : Annals of Coloproctology

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Search

Page Path
HOME > Search
16 "Jung Wook Huh"
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Funded articles
Original Articles
Minimally invasive surgery
Learning curve for single-port robot-assisted colectomy
Moon Suk Choi, Seong Hyeon Yun, Sung Chul Lee, Jung Kyong Shin, Yoon Ah Park, Jungwook Huh, Yong Beom Cho, Hee Cheol Kim, Woo Yong Lee
Ann Coloproctol. 2024;40(1):44-51.   Published online December 20, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2022.00745.0106
  • 2,861 View
  • 197 Download
  • 3 Web of Science
  • 3 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose
Since the introduction of robotic surgery, robots for colorectal cancer have replaced laparoscopic surgery, and a single-port robot (SPR) platform has been launched and is being used to treat patients. We analyzed the learning curve and initial complications of using an SPR platform in colorectal cancer surgery.
Methods
We reviewed 39 patients who underwent SPR colectomy from April to October 2019. All surgeries were performed by the same surgeon using an SPR device. A learning curve was generated using the cumulative sum methodology to assess changes in total operation time, docking time, and surgeon console time. We grouped the patients into 3 groups according to the time period: the first 11 were phase 1, the next 11 were phase 2, and the last 17 were phase 3.
Results
The mean age of the patients was 61.28±13.03 years, and they had a mean body mass index of 23.79±2.86 kg/m2. Among the patients, 23 (59.0%) were male, and 16 (41.0%) were female. The average operation time was 186.59±51.30 minutes, the average surgeon console time was 95.49±35.33 minutes, and the average docking time (time from skin incision to robot docking) was 14.87±10.38 minutes. The surgeon console time differed significantly among the different phases (P<0.001). Complications occurred in 8 patients: 2 ileus, 2 postoperation hemoglobin changes, 3 urinary retentions, and 1 complicated fluid collection.
Conclusion
In our experience, the learning curve for SPR colectomy was achieved after the 18th case.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Da Vinci single-port robotic system current application and future perspective in general surgery: A scoping review
    Francesco Celotto, Niccolò Ramacciotti, Alberto Mangano, Giacomo Danieli, Federico Pinto, Paula Lopez, Alvaro Ducas, Jessica Cassiani, Luca Morelli, Gaya Spolverato, Francesco Maria Bianco
    Surgical Endoscopy.2024; 38(9): 4814.     CrossRef
  • Wristed articulated instrumentation for single‐incision plus one‐port laparoscopic surgery for obstructed sigmoid colon cancer—A video vignette
    Sung Uk Bae
    Colorectal Disease.2024; 26(9): 1782.     CrossRef
  • Evaluation of the da Vinci single-port system in colorectal cancer surgery: a scoping review
    Arcangelo Picciariello, Alfredo Annicchiarico, Gaetano Gallo, Agnese Dezi, Ugo Grossi
    Updates in Surgery.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
Malignant disease,Colorectal cancer
Proteomic identification of arginine-methylated proteins in colon cancer cells and comparison of messenger RNA expression between colorectal cancer and adjacent normal tissues
Yongchul Lim, Da Young Gang, Woo Yong Lee, Seong Hyeon Yun, Yong Beom Cho, Jung Wook Huh, Yoon Ah Park, Hee Cheol Kim
Ann Coloproctol. 2022;38(1):60-68.   Published online January 27, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2020.00899.0128
  • 3,885 View
  • 136 Download
  • 3 Web of Science
  • 4 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
Purpose
Identification of type I protein arginine methyltransferase (PRMT) substrates and their functional significance during tumorigenesis is becoming more important. The present study aimed to identify target substrates for type I PRMT using 2-dimensional (2D) gel electrophoresis (GE) and 2D Western blotting (WB).
Methods
Using immunoblot analysis, we compared the expression of type I PRMTs and endogenous levels of arginine methylation between the primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and adjacent noncancerous tissues paired from the same patient. To identify arginine-methylated proteins in HCT116 cells, we carried out 2D-GE and 2D-WB with a type I PRMT product-specific antibody (anti-dimethyl-arginine antibody, asymmetric [ASYM24]). Arginine-methylated protein spots were identified by mass spectrometry, and messenger RNA (mRNA) levels corresponding to the identified proteins were analyzed using National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) microarray datasets between the primary CRC and noncancerous tissues.
Results
Type I PRMTs and methylarginine-containing proteins were highly maintained in CRC tissues compared to noncancerous tissues. We matched 142 spots using spot analysis software between a Coomassie blue (CBB)-stained 2D gel and 2D-WB, and we successfully identified 7 proteins that reacted with the ASYM24 antibody: CACYBP, GLOD4, MAPRE1, CCT7, TKT, CK8, and HSPA8. Among these proteins, the levels of 4 mRNAs including MAPRE1, CCT7, TKT, and HSPA8 in CRC tissues showed a statistically significant increase compared to noncancerous tissues from patients using the NCBI microarray datasets.
Conclusion
Our results indicate that the method shown here is useful in identifying arginine-methylated proteins, and significance of arginine modification in the proteins identified here should be further identified during CRC development.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Multi-omics data-based analysis characterizes molecular alterations of the vesicle genes in human colorectal cancer
    Xi Wang
    American Journal of Cancer Research.2024; 14(3): 1402.     CrossRef
  • Expression of GLOD4 in the Testis of the Qianbei Ma Goat and Its Effect on Leydig Cells
    Jinqian Wang, Xiang Chen, Wei Sun, Wen Tang, Jiajing Chen, Yuan Zhang, Ruiyang Li, Yanfei Wang
    Animals.2024; 14(17): 2611.     CrossRef
  • Sperm protein antigen 17 and Sperm flagellar 1 cancer testis antigens are expressed in a rare case of ciliated foregut cyst of the common hepatic duct
    Fabio Grizzi, Maurizio Chiriva-Internati, Elena Miranda, Roxana Zaharie, Nadim Al Hajjar, Florin Zaharie, Cristina Díaz Del Arco, M.Jesús Fernández-Aceñero, Robert S. Bresalier, Emil Moiş
    Pathology - Research and Practice.2023; 247: 154546.     CrossRef
  • Inflammatory Response Markers as Predictors of Colorectal Cancer Prognosis
    Minsung Kim, Il Tae Son, Bo Young Oh
    The Ewha Medical Journal.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
Technical Note
Malignant disease, Rectal cancer,Minimally invasive surgery
Single-port robot-assisted abdominoperineal resection: a case review of the first four experiences
Moon Suk Choi, Seong Hyeon Yun, Jung Kyong Shin, Yoon Ah Park, Jung Wook Huh, Yong Beom Cho, Hee Cheol Kim, Woo Yong Lee
Ann Coloproctol. 2022;38(1):88-92.   Published online October 18, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2021.00395.0056
  • 3,417 View
  • 129 Download
  • 6 Web of Science
  • 6 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Recently, abdominoperineal resection (APR) using a robot has been demonstrated in other studies. However, there has been no report on APR for rectal cancer using the single-port robot (SPR) platform. In response to this research gap, we described the clinical experience of APR using a SPR. From April 2019 to March 2020, APR using a SPR platform was performed in a total of 4 patients. Three patients had a transumbilical approach, and 1 patient had a transstoma site approach. The average operation time was 307 minutes, and the patient docking time to the SPR platform was 133.5 minutes. There were no complications during the operation, and no laparoscopy or open conversion. No reoperation occurred within 30 days. Mild postoperative complications occurred in 2 patients. We found that APR has safety and feasibility in surgery using an SPR platform. There was no intraoperative event and severe postoperative complications.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Single-incision laparoscopic total extraperitoneal inguinal-hernia repair using the new articulating instruments: A video vignette
    Chul Seung Lee, Gwan Chul Lee, Choon Sik Chung, Dong Keun Lee
    Asian Journal of Surgery.2024; 47(8): 3586.     CrossRef
  • Evaluation of the da Vinci single-port system in colorectal cancer surgery: a scoping review
    Arcangelo Picciariello, Alfredo Annicchiarico, Gaetano Gallo, Agnese Dezi, Ugo Grossi
    Updates in Surgery.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Single-incision robotic colorectal surgery with the da Vinci SP® surgical system: initial results of 50 cases
    H. S. Kim, B.-Y. Oh, C. Cheong, M. H. Park, S. S. Chung, R.-A. Lee, K. H. Kim, G. T. Noh
    Techniques in Coloproctology.2023; 27(7): 589.     CrossRef
  • Short-term outcomes of single-incision robotic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer
    Ho Seung Kim, Bo-Young Oh, Soon Sup Chung, Ryung-Ah Lee, Gyoung Tae Noh
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2023; 17(5): 2351.     CrossRef
  • Short-term outcomes of da Vinci SP versus Xi for colon cancer surgery: a propensity-score matching analysis of multicenter cohorts
    Jin-Min Jung, Young Il Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Songsoo Yang, Min Hyun Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2023; 17(6): 2911.     CrossRef
  • Surgical Techniques for Transanal Local Excision for Early Rectal Cancer
    Gyoung Tae Noh
    The Ewha Medical Journal.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
Original Articles
Special issue, Malignant disease, Rectal cancer,Colorectal cancer,Epidemiology & etiology
Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Caused Upshifting in Colorectal Cancer Stage?
Ji Ha Lim, Woo Yong Lee, Seong Hyeon Yun, Hee Cheol Kim, Yong Beom Cho, Jung Wook Huh, Yoon Ah Park, Jung Kyong Shin
Ann Coloproctol. 2021;37(4):253-258.   Published online August 9, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2021.00269.0038
  • 4,191 View
  • 95 Download
  • 19 Web of Science
  • 19 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected many parts of daily life and healthcare, including cancer screening and diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was an upshift in the colorectal cancer stage at diagnosis due to delays related to the COVID-19 outbreak.
Methods
From January to June of each year from 2017 to 2020, a total of 3,229 patients who were first diagnosed with colorectal cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Those enrolled from 2017 to 2019 were classified as the ‘pre-COVID’ group, and those enrolled in 2020 were classified as the ‘COVID’ group. The primary outcome was the rate of stage IV disease at the time of diagnosis.
Results
There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of stage IV patients between the pre-COVID and COVID groups (P=0.19). The median preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level in the COVID group was higher than in the pre-COVID group in all stages (all P<0.05). In stage I, II patients who underwent radical surgery, the lymphatic invasion was more presented in COVID patients (P=0.009).
Conclusion
We did not find significant stage upshifting in colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 outbreak. However, there were more initially unresectable stage IV colorectal cancer patients with a low conversion rate to resectable status, and more patients had factors related to poor prognosis. These results may become more apparent over time, so it is vital not to neglect cancer screening to not delay the diagnosis during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • The impact of COVID-19 on patients diagnosed with melanoma, breast, and colorectal cancer
    Danielle Hanuschak, Mallori DePiero, Melissa DeMoraes, Shamoore Bailly, Muni Rubens, Paul Lindeman, Michael Zinner, Geoffrey Young
    The American Journal of Surgery.2024; 229: 36.     CrossRef
  • The global pandemic's second deadly hit: cancer care
    Emma Bradley, Magge Deepa
    The American Journal of Surgery.2024; 229: 34.     CrossRef
  • Trends in the Stage Distribution of Colorectal Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan: A Nationwide Hospital-claims Data Analysis
    Masato Ota, Kohei Taniguchi, Mitsuhiro Asakuma, Sang-Woong Lee, Yuri Ito
    Journal of Epidemiology.2024; 34(7): 356.     CrossRef
  • Inadvertent laparoscopic lavage of perforated colon cancer: a systematic review
    Mahir Gachabayov, Agon Kajmolli, Luis Quintero, Daniel M. Felsenreich, Dorin E. Popa, Dejan Ignjatovic, Roberto Bergamaschi
    Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Impact of the Sars-Cov-2 outbreak on the initial clinical presentation of new solid cancer diagnoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Simon Marty, Guillaume Lamé, Etienne Guével, Sonia Priou, Gilles Chatellier, Christophe Tournigand, Emmanuelle Kempf
    BMC Cancer.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Measuring the impact of COVID-19 on cancer survival using an interrupted time series analysis
    Pascal Lambert, Katie Galloway, Allison Feely, Oliver Bucher, Piotr Czaykowski, Pamela Hebbard, Julian O Kim, Marshall Pitz, Harminder Singh, Maclean Thiessen, Kathleen M Decker
    JNCI Cancer Spectrum.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Decreased Positive Fecal Occult Blood Tests and Delayed Medical Presentation for Colorectal Cancer during the Initial COVID-19 Pandemic Period: A Single-center Experience
    Tadataka Takagi, Fumikazu Koyama, Hiroyuki Kuge, Yosuke Iwasa, Takeshi Takei, Tomomi Sadamitsu, Kosuke Fujimoto, Suzuka Harada, Takashi Tamura, Goki Ejiri, Chihiro Yoshikawa, Masayuki Sho
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2024; 8(3): 188.     CrossRef
  • Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Clinical and Pathologic Characteristics of Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Multicenter Study in South Korea
    Jae Hyun Kang, Il Tae Son, Sang Nam Yoon, Jin Soo Ihm, Byung Mo Kang, Jong Kim
    Cancer Management and Research.2024; Volume 16: 1131.     CrossRef
  • The COVID-19 pandemic's impact on prostate cancer screening and diagnosis in Korea
    Byeong Jin Kang, Kyung Hwan Kim, Hong Koo Ha
    Kosin Medical Journal.2023; 38(3): 193.     CrossRef
  • Measuring the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on colorectal cancer presentation: a retrospective comparative study
    Kirsten Fullard, Daniel Steffens, Michael Solomon, Joo‐Shik Shin, Cherry Koh
    ANZ Journal of Surgery.2023; 93(12): 2951.     CrossRef
  • Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer
    In Ja Park
    The Ewha Medical Journal.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Colorectal Surgery in the COVID-19 Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Nikolaos Pararas, Anastasia Pikouli, Dimitrios Papaconstantinou, Georgios Bagias, Constantinos Nastos, Andreas Pikoulis, Dionysios Dellaportas, Panagis Lykoudis, Emmanouil Pikoulis
    Cancers.2022; 14(5): 1229.     CrossRef
  • Short-Term Impact of Temporary Shutdown of a University-Affiliated Hospital on Patients With Colorectal Cancer During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic
    Youn Young Park, Jaeim Lee, Kil-yong Lee, Seong Taek Oh
    Journal of Korean Medical Science.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Surgical safety in the COVID-19 era: present and future considerations
    Young Il Kim, In Ja Park
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 102(6): 295.     CrossRef
  • The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the outcomes of surgically treated colorectal diseases: a retrospective cohort study
    Gülten Çiçek Okuyan, Melih Yıldırım
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 103(2): 104.     CrossRef
  • Clinical presentation, management, screening and surveillance for colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic
    Sami Akbulut, Abdirahman Sakulen Hargura, Ibrahim Umar Garzali, Ali Aloun, Cemil Colak
    World Journal of Clinical Cases.2022; 10(26): 9228.     CrossRef
  • Epidemiology, risk factors, and prevention of colorectal cancer
    Kyung Uk Jung, Hyung Ook Kim, Hungdai Kim
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(9): 549.     CrossRef
  • Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Prevention of Colorectal Cancer-An English Version
    Kyung Uk Jung, Hyung Ook Kim, Hungdai Kim
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2022; 6(4): 231.     CrossRef
  • No evidence of delay in colorectal cancer diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic in Gwangju and Jeonnam, Korea
    Hye-Yeon Kim, Min-Gyeong Kim, Mi-Ran Kang, Jeong-Ho Yang, Min-Ho Shin, Sun-Seog Kweon
    Epidemiology and Health.2022; 44: e2022092.     CrossRef
Malignant disease,Rectal cancer,Prognosis and adjuvant therapy,Colorectal cancer
Clinical Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Colorectal Cancer Patients With Synchronous Resectable Liver Metastasis: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis
Sung Hae Park, Jung Kyong Shin, Woo Yong Lee, Seong Hyeon Yun, Yong Beom Cho, Jung Wook Huh, Yoon Ah Park, Jin Seok Heo, Gyu Seong Choi, Seung Tae Kim, Young Suk Park, Hee Cheol Kim
Ann Coloproctol. 2021;37(4):244-252.   Published online June 29, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2020.00710.0101
  • 6,526 View
  • 90 Download
  • 14 Web of Science
  • 14 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose
The survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) prior to surgical resection in colorectal cancer with liver metastases (CRCLM) patients remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare overall outcome of CRCLM patients who underwent NAC followed by surgical resection versus surgical treatment first.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed 429 patients with stage IV colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases who underwent simultaneous liver resection between January 2008 and December 2016. Using propensity score matching, overall outcome between 60 patients who underwent NAC before surgical treatment and 60 patients who underwent surgical treatment first was compared.
Results
Before propensity score matching, metastatic cancer tended to involve a larger number of liver segments and the primary tumor size was bigger in the NAC group than in the primary resection group, so that a larger percentage of patients in the NAC group underwent major hepatectomy (P<0.001). After propensity score matching, demographic features and pathologic outcomes showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. In addition, there was no significant difference in short-term recovery outcomes such as postoperative morbidity (P=0.603) and oncologic outcome, including 3-year overall survival rate (P=0.285) and disease-free survival rate (P=0.730), between the 2 groups.
Conclusion
NAC prior to surgical treatment in CRCLM is considered a safe treatment that does not increase postoperative morbidity, and its impact on oncologic outcome was not inferior.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Colon cancer: the 2023 Korean clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis and treatment
    Hyo Seon Ryu, Hyun Jung Kim, Woong Bae Ji, Byung Chang Kim, Ji Hun Kim, Sung Kyung Moon, Sung Il Kang, Han Deok Kwak, Eun Sun Kim, Chang Hyun Kim, Tae Hyung Kim, Gyoung Tae Noh, Byung-Soo Park, Hyeung-Min Park, Jeong Mo Bae, Jung Hoon Bae, Ni Eun Seo, Cha
    Annals of Coloproctology.2024; 40(2): 89.     CrossRef
  • Survival of patients with colorectal liver metastases treated with and without preoperative chemotherapy: Nationwide propensity score-matched study
    Michelle.R. de Graaff, Joost M. Klaase, Ronald M. van Dam, Koert F.D. Kuhlmann, Geert Kazemier, Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg, Arthur K.E. Elfrink, Cees Verhoef, J.Sven Mieog, Peter B. van den Boezem, Paul Gobardhan, Arjen M. Rijken, Daan J. Lips, Wouter G.K. Le
    European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2023; 49(9): 106932.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with aortocaval lymphadenectomy, and pelvic peritoneum partial resection for ascending colon cancer
    Hannah Kim, An Na Seo, Soo Yeun Park
    Annals of Coloproctology.2023; 39(3): 283.     CrossRef
  • Fluorescence-guided colorectal surgery: applications, clinical results, and protocols
    Jin-Min Jung, In Ja Park, Eun Jung Park, Gyung Mo Son
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2023; 105(5): 252.     CrossRef
  • Recurrence Patterns and Risk Factors after Curative Resection for Colorectal Cancer: Insights for Postoperative Surveillance Strategies
    Hyo Seon Ryu, Jin Kim, Ye Ryung Park, Eun Hae Cho, Jeong Min Choo, Ji-Seon Kim, Se-Jin Baek, Jung-Myun Kwak
    Cancers.2023; 15(24): 5791.     CrossRef
  • Surgical safety in the COVID-19 era: present and future considerations
    Young Il Kim, In Ja Park
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 102(6): 295.     CrossRef
  • Oncological outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastasis: A result from a propensity score matching study
    Yu-Juan Jiang, Si-Cheng Zhou, Jing-Hua Chen, Jian-Wei Liang
    Frontiers in Oncology.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Molecular analyses of peritoneal metastasis from colorectal cancer
    Chang Hyun Kim
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(9): 586.     CrossRef
  • Recent Advance in the Surgical Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-An English Version
    Eun Jung Park, Seung Hyuk Baik
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2022; 6(4): 213.     CrossRef
  • Update on Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer
    Chan Wook Kim
    The Ewha Medical Journal.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Direction of diagnosis and treatment improvement in colorectal cancer
    In Ja Park
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(9): 540.     CrossRef
  • Molecular Analyses in Peritoneal Metastasis from Colorectal Cancer: A Review-An English Version
    Chang Hyun Kim
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2022; 6(4): 197.     CrossRef
  • Surgical treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer
    Eun Jung Park, Seung Hyuk Baik
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(9): 568.     CrossRef
  • Applications of propensity score matching: a case series of articles published in Annals of Coloproctology
    Hwa Jung Kim
    Annals of Coloproctology.2022; 38(6): 398.     CrossRef
Editorial
Malignant disease
Colorectal Nonadenocarcinoma in South Korea
Jung Wook Huh
Ann Coloproctol. 2020;36(6):359-360.   Published online December 31, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2020.11.04
  • 2,618 View
  • 50 Download
PDF
Current Practice in Asia-Pacific Region
Malignant disease, Rectal cancer
Current Status of “Watch-and-Wait” Rectal Cancer Treatment in Asia-Pacific Countries
Jung Wook Huh, Kotaro Maeda, Zheng Liu, Xishan Wang, April Camilla Roslani, Woo Yong Lee
Ann Coloproctol. 2020;36(2):70-77.   Published online January 31, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2020.01.19
  • 4,304 View
  • 181 Download
  • 16 Web of Science
  • 15 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose
Current acceptance of the watch-and-wait (W&W) approach by surgeons in Asia-Pacific countries is unknown. An international survey was performed to determine status of the W&W approach on behalf of the Asia-Pacific Federation of Coloproctology (APFCP).
Methods
Surgeons in the APFCP completed an Institutional Review Board-approved anonymous e-survey and/or printed letters (for China) containing 19 questions regarding nonsurgical close observation in patients who achieved clinical complete response (cCR) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT).
Results
Of the 417 responses, 80.8% (n = 337) supported the W&W approach and 65.5% (n = 273) treated patients who achieved cCR after nCRT. Importantly, 78% of participants (n = 326) preferred a selective W&W approach in patients with old age and medical comorbidities who achieved cCR. In regard to restaging methods after nCRT, the majority of respondents based their decision to use W&W on a combination of magnetic resonance imaging results (94.5%, n = 394) with other test results. For interval between nCRT completion and tumor response assessment, most participants used 8 weeks (n = 154, 36.9%), followed by 6 weeks (n = 127, 30.5%) and 4 weeks (n = 102, 24.5%). In response to the question of how often responders followed-up after W&W, the predominant period was every 3 months (209 participants, 50.1%) followed by every 2 months (75 participants, 18.0%). If local regrowth was found during follow-up, most participants (79.9%, n = 333) recommended radical surgery as an initial management.
Conclusion
The W&W approach is supported by 80% of Asia-Pacific surgeons and is practiced at 65%, although heterogeneous hospital or society protocols are also observed. These results inform oncologists of future clinical study participation.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Patient and multidisciplinary team perspectives on watch and wait in rectal cancer
    Helen Mohan, Mohammed Rabie, Ciaran Walsh, Deena Harji, Paul Sutton, Ian Geh, Ian Jackson, Emma Helbren, Martyn Evans, John T. Jenkins
    Colorectal Disease.2023; 25(7): 1489.     CrossRef
  • Organ preservation for early rectal cancer using preoperative chemoradiotherapy
    Gyung Mo Son
    Annals of Coloproctology.2023; 39(3): 191.     CrossRef
  • International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons survey of surgeons’ preference on rectal cancer treatment
    Audrius Dulskas, Philip F. Caushaj, Domas Grigoravicius, Liu Zheng, Richard Fortunato, Joseph W. Nunoo-Mensah, Narimantas E. Samalavicius
    Annals of Coloproctology.2023; 39(4): 307.     CrossRef
  • Clinical Implication of Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Metastasis in Rectal Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy
    In Ja Park
    The Ewha Medical Journal.2022; 45(1): 3.     CrossRef
  • Multidisciplinary treatment strategy for early rectal cancer
    Gyung Mo Son, In Young Lee, Sung Hwan Cho, Byung-Soo Park, Hyun Sung Kim, Su Bum Park, Hyung Wook Kim, Sang Bo Oh, Tae Un Kim, Dong Hoon Shin
    Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(1): 32.     CrossRef
  • Watch and wait strategies for rectal cancer: A systematic review
    In Ja Park
    Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(2): 91.     CrossRef
  • Surgical treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer
    Eun Jung Park, Seung Hyuk Baik
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(9): 568.     CrossRef
  • Correlation between T stage and lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy
    Seijong Kim, Jung Wook Huh, Woo Yong Lee, Seong Hyeon Yun, Hee Cheol Kim, Yong Beom Cho, Yoonah Park, Jung Kyong Shin
    Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Recent Advance in the Surgical Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer-An English Version
    Eun Jung Park, Seung Hyuk Baik
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2022; 6(4): 213.     CrossRef
  • Update on Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer
    Chan Wook Kim
    The Ewha Medical Journal.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • The watch-and-wait strategy versus radical resection for rectal cancer patients with a good response (≤ycT2) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy
    Chungyeop Lee, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 103(6): 350.     CrossRef
  • Contemporary snapshot of tumor regression grade (TRG) distribution in locally advanced rectal cancer: a cross sectional multicentric experience
    Paola Germani, Francesca Di Candido, Daniel Léonard, Dajana Cuicchi, Ugo Elmore, Marco Ettore Allaix, Vittoria Pia Barbieri, Laura D’Allens, Seraina Faes, Marika Milani, Damiano Caputo, Carmen Martinez, Jan Grosek, Valerio Caracino, Niki Christou, Sapho X
    Updates in Surgery.2021; 73(5): 1795.     CrossRef
  • Non-operative Management (NOM) of Rectal Cancer: Literature Review and Translation of Evidence into Practice
    Christopher J. Anker, Dmitriy Akselrod, Steven Ades, Nancy A. Bianchi, Nataniel H. Lester-Coll, Peter A. Cataldo
    Current Colorectal Cancer Reports.2021; 17(2): 23.     CrossRef
  • Comparison between Local Excision and Radical Resection for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer in ypT0-1 Patients: An Analysis of the Clinicopathological Factors and Survival Rates
    Soo Young Oh, In Ja Park, Young IL Kim, Jong-Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim
    Cancers.2021; 13(19): 4823.     CrossRef
  • Widening role of multidisciplinary treatment for rectal cancer: toward diversity of cancer care
    Yong Beom Cho
    Precision and Future Medicine.2021; 5(4): 149.     CrossRef
Original Articles
Malignant disease, Prognosis and adjuvant therapy
Long-term Oncologic Outcome of Postoperative Complications After Colorectal Cancer Surgery
Chang Kyu Oh, Jung Wook Huh, You Jin Lee, Moon Suk Choi, Dae Hee Pyo, Sung Chul Lee, Seong Mun Park, Jung Kyong Shin, Yoon Ah Park, Yong Beom Cho, Seong Hyeon Yun, Hee Cheol Kim, Woo Yong Lee
Ann Coloproctol. 2020;36(4):273-280.   Published online November 13, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2019.10.15
  • 4,265 View
  • 165 Download
  • 18 Web of Science
  • 19 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose
The impact of postoperative complications on long-term oncologic outcome after radical colorectal cancer surgery is controversial. The aim of this study was to examine the risk factors and oncologic outcomes of surgery-related postoperative complication groups.
Methods
From January 2010 to December 2010, 310 patients experienced surgery-related postoperative complications after radical colorectal cancer surgery. These stage I–III patients were classified into 2 subgroups, minor (grades I, II) and major (grades III, IV) complication groups, according to extended Clavien-Dindo classification system criteria. Clinicopathologic differences between the 2 groups were analyzed to identify risk factors for major complications. The diseasefree survival rates of surgery-related postoperative complication groups were also compared.
Results
Minor and major complication groups were stratified with 194 patients (62.6%) and 116 patients (37.4%), respectively. The risk factors influencing the major complication group were pathologic N category and operative method. The prognostic factors associated with disease-free survival were preoperative perforation, perineural invasion, tumor budding, and receiving neoadjuvant therapy. With a median follow-up period of 72.2 months, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 84.4% in the minor group and 78.5% in the major group, but there was no statistical significance between the minor and major groups (P = 0.392).
Conclusion
Advanced cancer and open surgery were identified as risk factors for increased surgery-related major complications after radical colorectal cancer surgery. However, severity of postoperative complications did not affect disease-free survival from colorectal cancer.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Accelerated enhanced recovery after colon cancer surgery with discharge within one day after surgery: a systematic review
    Misha A. T. Sier, Anke H. C. Gielen, Thaís T. T. Tweed, Noémi C. van Nie, Tim Lubbers, Jan H. M. B. Stoot
    BMC Cancer.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Risk Factors of Postoperative Complication and Hospital Mortality after Colorectal Perforation Surgery
    Kensuke Kudou, Shuhei Kajiwara, Takashi Motomura, Takafumi Yukaya, Tomonori Nakanoko, Yosuke Kuroda, Masahiro Okamoto, Tadashi Koga, Yo-Ichi Yamashita
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2024; 8(2): 118.     CrossRef
  • Predictive value of POSSUM scoring system for postoperative complications and mortality in elderly patients with colorectal cancer
    Qiang Li, Yingjun Lu
    Technology and Health Care.2024; 32(6): 4653.     CrossRef
  • Postoperative Complications Result in Poor Oncological Outcomes: What Is the Evidence?
    Anjana Wajekar, Sohan Lal Solanki, Juan Cata, Vijaya Gottumukkala
    Current Oncology.2024; 31(8): 4632.     CrossRef
  • The role of robotic-assisted surgery in the management of rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chenxiong Zhang, Hao Tan, Han Xu, Jiaming Ding
    International Journal of Surgery.2024; 110(10): 6282.     CrossRef
  • Effect of postoperative complications on 5-year survival following laparoscopic surgery for resectable colorectal cancer: a retrospective study
    Jae Eun Lee, Kyeong Eui Kim, Woon Kyung Jeong, Seong Kyu Baek, Sung Uk Bae
    International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Robotic versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision Surgery in Rectal Cancer: Analysis of Medium-Term Oncological Outcomes
    Jing-jing Li, Zhi-bo Zhang, Shi-yun Xu, Cheng-ren Zhang, Xiong-fei Yang, Yao-xing Duan
    Surgical Innovation.2023; 30(1): 36.     CrossRef
  • Do postoperative infectious complications really affect long‐term survival in colorectal cancer surgery? A multicenter retrospective cohort study
    Akihisa Matsuda, Hiroshi Maruyama, Shinji Akagi, Toru Inoue, Kenichiro Uemura, Minako Kobayashi, Hisanori Shiomi, Manabu Watanabe, Hiroki Arai, Yutaka Kojima, Yusuke Mizuuchi, Hajime Yokomizo, Yuji Toiyama, Toru Miyake, Yasuyuki Yokoyama, Kei Ishimaru, Sh
    Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery.2023; 7(1): 110.     CrossRef
  • International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons survey of surgeons’ preference on rectal cancer treatment
    Audrius Dulskas, Philip F. Caushaj, Domas Grigoravicius, Liu Zheng, Richard Fortunato, Joseph W. Nunoo-Mensah, Narimantas E. Samalavicius
    Annals of Coloproctology.2023; 39(4): 307.     CrossRef
  • Effect of serum lactate dehydrogenase-to-albumin ratio (LAR) on the short-term outcomes and long-term prognosis of colorectal cancer after radical surgery
    Xin-Peng Shu, Ying-Chun Xiang, Fei Liu, Yong Cheng, Wei Zhang, Dong Peng
    BMC Cancer.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Modified Clavien–Dindo–sink classification system for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
    Ndéye F. Guissé, Joseph D. Stone, Lukas G. Keil, Tracey P. Bastrom, Mark A. Erickson, Burt Yaszay, Patrick J. Cahill, Stefan Parent, Peter G. Gabos, Peter O. Newton, Michael P. Glotzbecker, Michael P. Kelly, Joshua M. Pahys, Nicholas D. Fletcher
    Spine Deformity.2022; 10(1): 87.     CrossRef
  • Surgical site infection after laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer is associated with compromised long-term oncological outcome
    Nana Sugamata, Takashi Okuyama, Emiko Takeshita, Haruka Oi, Yuhei Hakozaki, Shunya Miyazaki, Musashi Takada, Takashi Mitsui, Takuji Noro, Hideyuki Yoshitomi, Masatoshi Oya
    World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Does Preoperative Waiting Time Affect the Short-Term Outcomes and Prognosis of Colorectal Cancer Patients? A Retrospective Study from the West of China
    Xiao-Yu Liu, Zi-Wei Li, Bing Kang, Yu-Xi Cheng, Wei Tao, Bin Zhang, Hua Zhang, Zheng-Qiang Wei, Dong Peng, Antonio Giovanni Solimando
    Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.2022; 2022: 1.     CrossRef
  • Surgical safety in the COVID-19 era: present and future considerations
    Young Il Kim, In Ja Park
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 102(6): 295.     CrossRef
  • Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer
    Hyo Seon Ryu, Jin Kim
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 103(1): 1.     CrossRef
  • Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer
    Sung Uk Bae
    Journal of the Korean Medical Association.2022; 65(9): 577.     CrossRef
  • Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: Pathophysiology, Risk Factors, and Current Management
    Seung Mi Yeo, Gyung Mo Son
    The Ewha Medical Journal.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Current Status and Future of Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer-An English Version
    Sung Uk Bae
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2022; 6(4): 221.     CrossRef
  • A propensity score-matched analysis of advanced energy devices and conventional monopolar device for colorectal cancer surgery: comparison of clinical and oncologic outcomes
    Woo Jin Song, Sung Uk Bae, Woon Kyung Jeong, Seong Kyu Baek
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2022; 103(5): 290.     CrossRef
Transanal Endoscopic and Transabdominal Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Mid-to-Low Rectal Cancer: Comparison of Short-term Postoperative and Oncologic Outcomes by Using a Case-Matched Analysis
Ki Young Lee, Jung Kyoung Shin, Yoon Ah Park, Seong Hyeon Yun, Jung Wook Huh, Yong Beom Cho, Hee Cheol Kim, Woo Yong Lee
Ann Coloproctol. 2018;34(1):29-35.   Published online February 28, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2018.34.1.29
  • 6,297 View
  • 109 Download
  • 21 Web of Science
  • 19 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose

This study aimed to compare short-term postoperative and oncologic outcomes of a transanal endoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) to those of a transabdominal robotic TME.

Methods

A total of 62 patients with rectal cancer underwent transanal (n = 26) or robotic (n = 36) TME between June 2013 and December 2014. After case-matching by tumor location and TNM stage, 45 patients were included for analysis. The median follow-up period was 21.3 months. Operative, histopathologic and postoperative outcomes and recurrences were analyzed.

Results

Patients younger than 60 years of age were more frequently observed in the robotic TME group (75.0% vs. 47.6%, P = 0.059), but tumor location, cT and cN category, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy were not different between the 2 groups. Estimated blood loss was greater in the transanal group (283 mL vs. 155 mL, P = 0.061); however, the operation time and the rate of a diverting ileostomy and subsequent ileostomy repair were not different between the groups. The proximal resection margin was longer in the transanal TME group (20.8 cm ± 16.0 cm, P = 0.030), but the distal resection margins, involvements of the circumferential resection margin, TME quality, numbers of retrieved lymph nodes, postoperative complications, including anastomotic leak and voiding difficulty, and recurrence rates for the 2 groups were not statistically different.

Conclusion

Transanal endoscopic and transabdominal robotic TME showed similar histopathologic and postoperative outcomes with the exception of the estimated blood loss and the proximal resection margin for a select group of patients.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes of robotic versus transanal total mesorectal excision in patients with rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    A. Y. Y. Mohamedahmed, S. Zaman, A. A. Wuheb, A. Ismail, M. Nnaji, A. A. Alyamani, H. A. Eltyeb, N. A. Yassin
    Techniques in Coloproctology.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing robotic total mesorectal excision versus transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer
    Mohamed Ali Chaouch, Mohammad Iqbal Hussain, Maissa Jellali, Amine Gouader, Alessandro Mazzotta, Adriano Carneiro da Costa, Bassem Krimi, Jim Khan, Hani Oweira
    Scandinavian Journal of Surgery.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • A systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive total mesorectal excision versus transanal total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer
    Du Yong Gang, Lin Dong, Zhang DeChun, Zhang Yichi, Lu Ya
    Frontiers in Oncology.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection versus trans-anal total mesorectal excision for malignant rectal lesion: a prospective cohort trial
    Ahmed F.A. Farag, Ahmed M.A. Mahmoud, Haitham M. Azmy, Abdrabbou N. Mashhour, Ahmed S. Khalifa, Yasser Debakey, Mohamed Y. Elbarmelgi
    The Egyptian Journal of Surgery.2023; 42(4): 859.     CrossRef
  • Robotic or transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) approach for rectal cancer, how about both? Feasibility and outcomes from a single institution
    Yusuke Inoue, Jing Yu Ng, Chun-Ho Chu, Yi-Ling Lai, I.-Ping Huang, Shung-Haur Yang, Chien-Chih Chen
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2022; 16(1): 149.     CrossRef
  • Long-term oncologic outcomes of transanal TME compared with transabdominal TME for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Jae Young Moon, Min Ro Lee, Gi Won Ha
    Surgical Endoscopy.2022; 36(5): 3122.     CrossRef
  • Multidisciplinary treatment strategy for early rectal cancer
    Gyung Mo Son, In Young Lee, Sung Hwan Cho, Byung-Soo Park, Hyun Sung Kim, Su Bum Park, Hyung Wook Kim, Sang Bo Oh, Tae Un Kim, Dong Hoon Shin
    Precision and Future Medicine.2022; 6(1): 32.     CrossRef
  • Comparison of transanal total mesorectal excision and robotic total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy
    Jung Kyong Shin, Hee Cheol Kim, Seong Hyeon Yun, Yoon Ah Park, Yong Beom Cho, Jung Wook Huh, Woo Yong Lee
    Surgical Endoscopy.2021; 35(12): 6998.     CrossRef
  • Statistical, Clinical, Methodological Evaluation of Local Recurrence Following Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review
    Hans H. Wasmuth, Mahir Gachabayov, Les Bokey, Abe Fingerhut, Guy R. Orangio, Feza H. Remzi, Roberto Bergamaschi
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2021; 64(7): 899.     CrossRef
  • A nationwide comparison of short‐term outcomes after transanal, open, laparoscopic, and robot‐assisted total mesorectal excision
    Ilze Ose, Sharaf Karim Perdawood
    Colorectal Disease.2021; 23(10): 2671.     CrossRef
  • Robotic total mesorectal excision or transanal total mesorectal excision meta‐analysis
    Michelle Zhiyun Chen, Yeng Kwang Tay, Satish K. Warrier, Alexander G. Heriot, Joseph C. Kong
    ANZ Journal of Surgery.2021; 91(11): 2269.     CrossRef
  • A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic-assisted transabdominal total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision: which approach offers optimal short-term outcomes for mid-to-low rectal adenocarcinoma?
    J. W. Butterworth, W. A. Butterworth, J. Meyer, C. Giacobino, N. Buchs, F. Ris, R. Scarpinata
    Techniques in Coloproctology.2021; 25(11): 1183.     CrossRef
  • Outcomes of robotic low anterior resection versus transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer
    J L B Buan, W Z So, X C Lim, C S Chong
    BJS Open.2021;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Initial Experience of Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer
    Jung Kyong Shin, Jung Wook Huh
    Annals of Robotic and Innovative Surgery.2020; 1(1): 33.     CrossRef
  • Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: Current Evidences and Future Perspectives
    Je-Ho Jang, Chang-Nam Kim
    Annals of Coloproctology.2020; 36(5): 293.     CrossRef
  • Systemic review and network meta‐analysis comparing minimal surgical techniques for rectal cancer: quality of total mesorectum excision, pathological, surgical, and oncological outcomes
    Emanuele Rausa, Federica Bianco, Michael E. Kelly, Alberto Aiolfi, Fausto Petrelli, Gianluca Bonitta, Giovanni Sgroi
    Journal of Surgical Oncology.2019; 119(7): 987.     CrossRef
  • Does transanal total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer improve histopathology metrics and/or complication rates? A meta-analysis
    Mahir Gachabayov, Inna Tulina, Roberto Bergamaschi, Petr Tsarkov
    Surgical Oncology.2019; 30: 47.     CrossRef
  • Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes
    Hyuk Hur
    Annals of Coloproctology.2018; 34(1): 1.     CrossRef
  • Evolution of surgery for rectal cancer: Transanal total mesorectal excision~new standard or fad?~
    Hirotoshi Hasegawa, Koji Okabayashi, Masashi Tsuruta, Takashi Ishida, Fumitaka Asahara, Mark G Coleman
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2018; 2(4): 115.     CrossRef
Clinical Significance of Signet-Ring-Cell Colorectal Cancer as a Prognostic Factor
Sang-Oh Yun, Yong Beom Cho, Woo Yong Lee, Hee Cheol Kim, Seong Hyeon Yun, Yoon Ah Park, Jung Wook Huh
Ann Coloproctol. 2017;33(6):232-238.   Published online December 31, 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.33.6.232
  • 5,117 View
  • 47 Download
  • 27 Web of Science
  • 26 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose

The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognosis for patients with a signet-ring-cell carcinoma (SRCC) who undergo curative surgery by comparing them to patients with an adenocarcinoma (ADC), excluding a mucinous ADC.

Methods

Between September 1994 and December 2013, 14,110 patients with colorectal cancer underwent surgery and among them, 12,631 patients were enrolled in this study. 71 patients with a SRCC and 12,570 patients with a ADC were identified. We analyzed the disease-free survival and the overall survival rates before and after a 1:2 propensity score matching and evaluated those rates after stage stratification.

Results

The median follow-up durations were 48.5 months for the SRC group and 48.6 months for the ADC group. The disease-free survival rates and the overall survival rates were significantly lower in the SRC group before and after propensity score matching (P < 0.001). After stratification by stage, no differences were observed between the SRC and the ADC groups for the disease-free survival (DFS) and the overall survival (OS) rates for patients with cancer in its early stages (P = 0.913 and P = 0.380 for the DFS and the OS, respectively, in stages 0 and I, and P = 0.223 and P = 0.991 for the DFS and the OS, respectively, in stage II), but those rates were significantly lower in the SRC group for cancer in its later stages (P < 0.001, respectively in stages III and IV).

Conclusion

For cancer in advanced stages, patients with a resectable colorectal SRCC had a poorer prognosis after propensity score matching than those with an ADC did. Therefore, more intensive surveillance and closer observation should be offered to such patients.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Prognostic implications of T stage in different pathological types of colorectal cancer: an observational study using SEER population-based data
    Nan Yao, Wenqiang Li, Jiwei Wang, Hongyuan Chu, Ning Duan, Xinyu Niu, Guoyong Yu, Jun Qu
    BMJ Open.2024; 14(2): e076579.     CrossRef
  • Systematic review of risk factors, prognosis, and management of colorectal signet-ring cell carcinoma
    Frederiek Nuytens, Vincent Drubay, Clarisse Eveno, Florence Renaud, Guillaume Piessen
    World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.2024; 16(5): 2141.     CrossRef
  • Unraveling the complexities of colorectal cancer and its promising therapies – An updated review
    Sayan Saha, Shreya Ghosh, Suman Ghosh, Sumit Nandi, Aditi Nayak
    International Immunopharmacology.2024; 143: 113325.     CrossRef
  • Case report: Preclinical efficacy of NEDD8 and proteasome inhibitors in patient-derived models of signet ring high-grade mucinous colorectal cancer from a Lynch syndrome patient
    Erica Torchiaro, Consalvo Petti, Sabrina Arena, Francesco Sassi, Giorgia Migliardi, Alfredo Mellano, Roberta Porporato, Marco Basiricò, Loretta Gammaitoni, Enrico Berrino, Monica Montone, Giorgio Corti, Giovanni Crisafulli, Caterina Marchiò, Alberto Barde
    Frontiers in Oncology.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Prognosis of Different Histological Types in Patients with Stage II and III Colon Cancer
    Yasmeen Z. Qwaider, Naomi M. Sell, Caitlin E. Stafford, Chloe Boudreau, Hiroko Kunitake, Robert N. Goldstone, Rocco Ricciardi, Liliana G. Bordeianou, Christy E. Cauley, David L. Berger
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2022; 26(2): 476.     CrossRef
  • Tumor budding as a prognostic indicator in colorectal carcinoma: a retrospective study of primary colorectal carcinoma cases in a tertiary care center
    Ashini H. Shah, Amisha J. Gami, Neetal H. Desai, Jahnavi S. Gandhi, Priti P. Trivedi
    Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology.2022; 13(3): 459.     CrossRef
  • The Association of Microbiome Dysbiosis With Colorectal Cancer
    Artem Artemev, Sheetal Naik, Anastasia Pougno, Prasanna Honnavar, Nandan M Shanbhag
    Cureus.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Simple synthesis of WO3 based activated carbon co-doped CuS composites for photocatalytic applications
    Tahir Iqbal, Maria Ashraf, Arslan Masood
    Inorganic Chemistry Communications.2022; 139: 109322.     CrossRef
  • Predictors of Long-Time Survivors in Nonmetastatic Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma: A Large Population-Based Study
    Wuguang Zhang, Wenqian Gong, Changhai Wu, Mengting Li, Xiaolong Tu, Stephen Fink
    Gastroenterology Research and Practice.2022; 2022: 1.     CrossRef
  • Applications of propensity score matching: a case series of articles published in Annals of Coloproctology
    Hwa Jung Kim
    Annals of Coloproctology.2022; 38(6): 398.     CrossRef
  • Does signet ring cell carcinoma component signify worse outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer?
    Liming Wang, Yasumitsu Hirano, Gregory Heng, Toshimasa Ishii, Hiroka Kondo, Kiyoka Hara, Nao Obara, Masahiro Asari, Takuya Kato, Shigeki Yamaguchi
    Asian Journal of Surgery.2021; 44(1): 105.     CrossRef
  • The Impact of Histologic Subtype on Receipt of Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Overall Survival in Stage III Colon Cancer: a Retrospective Cohort Analysis
    Benjamin D. Powers, Seth I. Felder, Iman Imanirad, Sophie Dessureault, Sean P. Dineen
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer.2021; 52(2): 719.     CrossRef
  • Colorectal adenocarcinomas diagnosed following a negative faecal immunochemical test show high‐risk pathological features in a colon screening programme
    Michael J. Steel, Hussam Bukhari, Laura Gentile, Jennifer Telford, David F. Schaeffer
    Histopathology.2021; 78(5): 710.     CrossRef
  • Colorectal cancer of the young displays distinct features of aggressive tumor biology: A single-center cohort study
    Matteo Mueller, Marcel André Schneider, Barla Deplazes, Daniela Cabalzar-Wondberg, Andreas Rickenbacher, Matthias Turina
    World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2021; 13(2): 164.     CrossRef
  • Clinicopathological factors and survival outcomes of signet-ring cell and mucinous carcinoma versus adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Michael G. Fadel, George Malietzis, Vasilis Constantinides, Gianluca Pellino, Paris Tekkis, Christos Kontovounisios
    Discover Oncology.2021;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • MRI features of signet ring rectal cancer
    Meena Suthar, Akshay D. Baheti, Suman K. Ankathi, Amit Choudhari, Purvi D. Haria, Reena Engineer, Vikas Ostwal, Mukta S. Ramadwar, Ashwin Desouza, Avanish Saklani
    Abdominal Radiology.2021; 46(12): 5536.     CrossRef
  • Metastatic patterns and survival outcomes in patients with stage IV colon cancer: A population‐based analysis
    Jiwei Wang, Song Li, Yanna Liu, Chunquan Zhang, Honglang Li, Bin Lai
    Cancer Medicine.2020; 9(1): 361.     CrossRef
  • Prognostic factors influencing survival in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for isolated colorectal peritoneal metastases: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
    V. Narasimhan, S. Tan, J. Kong, T. Pham, M. Michael, R. Ramsay, S. Warrier, A. Heriot
    Colorectal Disease.2020; 22(11): 1482.     CrossRef
  • Deconvolution of diffuse gastric cancer and the suppression of CD34 on the BALB/c nude mice model
    Seon-Jin Yoon, Jungmin Park, Youngmin Shin, Yuna Choi, Sahng Wook Park, Seok-Gu Kang, Hye Young Son, Yong-Min Huh
    BMC Cancer.2020;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Predictive factors of complete pathological response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer
    Rebekah M. Engel, Karen Oliva, Christine Koulis, Raymond Yap, Paul J. McMurrick
    International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2020; 35(9): 1759.     CrossRef
  • Clinicopathological Characteristics and Mutation Spectrum of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma With Mucinous Component in a Chinese Cohort: Comparison With Classical Adenocarcinoma
    Jingci Chen, Liangrui Zhou, Jie Gao, Tao Lu, Jing Wang, Huanwen Wu, Zhiyong Liang
    Frontiers in Oncology.2020;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Signet ring cell component in pretreatment biopsy predicts pathological response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer
    Xue Chao, Zixian Wang, Shixun Lu, Yuhua Huang, Shengbing Zang, Peirong Ding, Huizhong Zhang, Jingping Yun
    International Journal of Clinical Oncology.2020; 25(9): 1653.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer in Korea: Nationwide Data from 2013 to 2018
    Sun Jin Park, Kil Yeon Lee, Suk-Hwan Lee
    Cancer Research and Treatment.2020; 52(3): 938.     CrossRef
  • Outcomes of Definitive Treatment of Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma of the Rectum: Is Minimal Invasive Surgery Detrimental in Signet Ring Rectal Cancers?
    S. Raghavan, Deepak Kumar Singh, J. Rohila, A. DeSouza, R. Engineer, A. Ramaswamy, V. Ostwal, A. Saklani
    Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology.2020; 11(4): 597.     CrossRef
  • Aggressive Colorectal Cancer in the Young
    Blake Read, Patricia Sylla
    Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2020; 33(05): 298.     CrossRef
  • Prognoses of different pathological subtypes of colorectal cancer at different stages: A population-based retrospective cohort study
    Xiaoli Wu, Han Lin, Shaotang Li
    BMC Gastroenterology.2019;[Epub]     CrossRef
Editorials
Venous Thromboembolic Complications in Colorectal Surgery
Jung Wook Huh
Ann Coloproctol. 2015;31(5):172-173.   Published online October 31, 2015
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2015.31.5.172
  • 2,697 View
  • 25 Download
PDF
Stoma Creation After Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Temporary or Permanent?
Jung Wook Huh
Ann Coloproctol. 2015;31(3):82-82.   Published online June 30, 2015
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2015.31.3.82
  • 2,707 View
  • 32 Download
  • 1 Web of Science
  • 2 Citations
PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Temporary Stomas after Rectal Cancer Resection; Predilection of Being Permanent and Predictors of Complications?
    Islam H. Metwally, Mohamed Abdelkhalek, Mohammad Zuhdy, Saleh S. Elbalka
    Journal of Coloproctology.2023; 43(03): e191.     CrossRef
  • Colorectal cancer in Taiwan: A case‐control retrospective analysis of the impact of a case management programme on refusal and discontinuation of treatment
    Ting‐Yu Chiang, Chao‐Hui Wang, Yu‐Fen Lin, Jeng‐Fu You, Jinn‐Shiun Chen, Shu‐Ching Chen
    Journal of Advanced Nursing.2018; 74(2): 395.     CrossRef
Minimally Invasive Techniques for an Intersphincteric Resection and Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Rectal Cancer
Jung Wook Huh
Ann Coloproctol. 2014;30(4):163-164.   Published online August 26, 2014
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2014.30.4.163
  • 3,313 View
  • 34 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
  • 5 Citations
PDF

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Penile Cancer With Inguinal Lymph Node Extranodal Extension: A Multicenter Experience
    Zai-Shang Li, Hui Han, Chuang-Zhong Deng, Yong-Hong Li, Chong Wu, Peng Chen, Zhuo-Wei Liu, Zi-Ke Qin, Fang-Jian Zhou
    Frontiers in Surgery.2021;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes
    Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Seon Hahn Kim
    Annals of Coloproctology.2021; 37(6): 351.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic and open surgery in rectal cancer patients in Germany: short and long-term results of a large 10-year population-based cohort
    Valentin Schnitzbauer, Michael Gerken, Stefan Benz, Vinzenz Völkel, Teresa Draeger, Alois Fürst, Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke
    Surgical Endoscopy.2020; 34(3): 1132.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection versus an open approach for low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis
    Hanyu Chen, Bin Ma, Peng Gao, Hongchi Wang, Yongxi Song, Linhao Tong, Peiwen Li, Zhenning Wang
    World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2017;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • The impact of obesity on the outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy: An observational study
    Seoung Wook Choi, Jung Wook Huh, Bo Young Oh, Yoon Ah Park, Yong Beom Cho, Seong Hyeon Yun, Hee Cheol Kim, Woo Yong Lee, Ho-Kyung Chun
    Korean Journal of Clinical Oncology.2016; 12(2): 129.     CrossRef
Second Primary Cancers Following Colorectal Cancer
Jung Wook Huh
Ann Coloproctol. 2014;30(1):2-2.   Published online February 28, 2014
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2014.30.1.2
  • 2,430 View
  • 28 Download
PDF
Original Article
Clinical Significance of Serial Serum Carcinoembryonic Antigen Values for Treating Rectal Cancer with Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy
Young Jae Ryu, Chang Hyun Kim, Hun Jin Kim, Hyo Kang, Sang Woo Lim, Jung Wook Huh, Jae Kyun Ju, Young Jin Kim, Hyeong Rok Kim
J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2012;28(4):205-212.   Published online August 31, 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2012.28.4.205
  • 3,371 View
  • 43 Download
  • 6 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is now widely accepted to treat rectal cancer; however, the prognosis for rectal cancer patients during and after chemoradiotherapy must be determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the serial serum carcinoembryonic antigen (s-CEA) samples in patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery after concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

Methods

This study evaluated 236 patients with rectal cancer who received preoperative CRT followed by curative surgery between June 2005 and June 2010. We measured the patient's s-CEA levels pre-CRT, post-CRT and post-surgery. Patients were classified into four groups according to their s-CEA concentrations (group 1, high, high, high; group 2, high, high, normal; group 3, high, normal, normal; group 4, normal, normal, normal). We analyzed the clinicopathologic factors and the outcomes among these groups.

Results

Of the 236 patients, 12 were in group 1, 31 were in group 2, 67 were in group 3, and 126 were in group 4. The 3-year disease-free survival rate in group 1 was poorer than those in group 3 (P = 0.007) and group 4 (P < 0.001). In a univariate analysis, type of surgery, clinical N stage, pathologic T or N stage, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and CEA group were prognostic factors. A multivariate analysis revealed that type of surgery, pathologic T stage, and lymphovascular invasion were independent prognostic factors; however, no statistical significance was associated with the CEA group.

Conclusion

High pre-CRT, post-CRT, and post-surgery s-CEA levels in patients with rectal cancer were associated with high rates of systemic recurrence and poor survival. Therefore, patients with sustained high s-CEA levels during CRT require careful monitoring after surgery.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Accessing new prognostic significance of preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen in colorectal cancer receiving tumor resection: More than positive and negative
    Zerong Cai, Jian Xiao, Xiaosheng He, Jia Ke, Yifeng Zou, Yufeng Chen, Xianrui Wu, Xiaoling Li, Lei Wang, Jianping Wang, Ping Lan, Xiaojian Wu
    Cancer Biomarkers.2017; 19(2): 161.     CrossRef
  • Prognosis Can Be Predicted More Accurately Using Pre- and Postchemoradiotherapy Carcinoembryonic Antigen Levels Compared to Only Prechemoradiotherapy Carcinoembryonic Antigen Level in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients Who Received Neoadjuvant Chemor
    SooYoon Sung, Seok Hyun Son, Chul Seung Kay, Yoon Suk Lee
    Medicine.2016; 95(10): e2965.     CrossRef
  • New clinical advances in immunotherapy for the treatment of solid tumours
    Valentina A. Zavala, Alexis M. Kalergis
    Immunology.2015; 145(2): 182.     CrossRef
  • Biomarkers and Molecular Imaging as Predictors of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
    Chiara Molinari, Federica Matteucci, Paola Caroli, Alessandro Passardi
    Clinical Colorectal Cancer.2015; 14(4): 227.     CrossRef
  • Prognostic factors associated with locally recurrent rectal cancer following primary surgery (Review)
    YANTAO CAI, ZHENYANG LI, XIAODONG GU, YANTIAN FANG, JIANBIN XIANG, ZONGYOU CHEN
    Oncology Letters.2014; 7(1): 10.     CrossRef
  • Factors predicting long-term survival in colorectal cancer patients with a normal preoperative serum level of carcinoembryonic antigen
    Jung Wook Huh, Chang Hyun Kim, Sang Woo Lim, Hyeong Rok Kim, Young Jin Kim
    Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology.2013; 139(9): 1449.     CrossRef

Ann Coloproctol : Annals of Coloproctology Twitter Facebook
TOP