Roboterassistierte Proktokolektomie mit ileopouchanaler Anastomose bei Verdacht auf hereditäre Polyposis

Zusammenfassung

Zielsetzung In der Literatur werden verschiedene Formen der hereditären Polyposis beschrieben. Die klassische familiäre adenomatöse Polyposis (FAP) ist eine seltene, autosomal-dominant vererbte Erkrankung, die durch eine Keimbahnmutation im Adenomatous-Polyposis-coli-Gen (APC) verursacht wird und sich klinisch durch einen ausgedehnten Befall des Kolons mit multiplen Polypen charakterisiert. Unbehandelt führt die Erkrankung beinahe unweigerlich zur malignen Entartung.

Indikation Wir präsentieren den Fall eines 37-jährigen Patienten mit histologisch gesichertem, stenosierendem Adenokarzinom des Colon descendens sowie initialem Verdacht auf eine hereditäre Polyposis bei multiplen Polypen im Colon descendens und sigmoideum.

Methoden Das Video erläutert die präoperativen bildgebenden sowie endoskopischen Befunde und zeigt die Technik der zweizeitigen, roboterassistierten Proktokolektomie mit ileopouchanaler Anastomose (IPAA) und Anlage eines protektiven Loop-Ileostomas.

Schlussfolgerung Hinsichtlich der chirurgischen Therapie der klassischen FAP kann die restaurative Proktokolektomie (RPC) mit Anlage eines Ileum-J-Pouches – trotz Kontroversen hinsichtlich verschiedener technischer Aspekte – als etabliertes Standardverfahren angesehen werden. Dabei sind die minimalinvasiven Strategien gegenüber den konventionellen Techniken als zumindest gleichwertig zu betrachten.

Abstract

Background Various forms of hereditary polyposis have been described in the literature. Classical familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a rare, autosomal dominantly inherited disease which is caused by a germline mutation in the adenomatous polyposis coli gene (APC). Patients with this diagnosis successively develop multiple polyps of the colon. Left untreated, FAP almost inevitably leads to malignant transformation.

Indication We present the case of a 37-year-old patient with histologically confirmed, stenotic adenocarcinoma of the descending colon and an initially suspected hereditary polyposis due to multiple polyps in the descending and sigmoid colon.

Methods The video describes the preoperative imaging as well as endoscopic findings and demonstrates the technique of a two-stage, robotically assisted proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) and the creation of a temporary loop ileostomy.

Conclusions With respect to the surgical treatment of classic FAP, restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileal J-pouch construction can be regarded as an established standard procedure, despite controversy regarding various technical aspects. Minimally invasive strategies should be considered as an equivalent option compared to conventional techniques.

Schlüsselwörter

hereditäre Polyposis - familiäre adenomatöse Polyposis (FAP) - Kolonkarzinom - kolorektales Karzinom - roboterassistierte Proktokolektomie - ileopouchanale Anastomose (IPAA)

Key words

hereditary polyposis - familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) - colon cancer - colorectal carcinoma - robotically assisted proctocolectomy - ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA)

• Literatur

• 1 Half E, Bercovich D, Rozen P. Familial adenomatous polyposis. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2009; 4: 22 doi:10.1186/1750-1172-4-22
• 2 Vasen HF, Moslein G, Alonso A. et al. Guidelines for the clinical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). Gut 2008; 57: 704-713 doi:10.1136/gut.2007.136127
• 3 Lam AK, Chan SS, Leung M. Synchronous colorectal cancer: clinical, pathological and molecular implications. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20: 6815-6820 doi:10.3748/wjg.v20.i22.6815
• 4 Hernegger GS, Moore HG, Guillem JG. Attenuated familial adenomatous polyposis: an evolving and poorly understood entity. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45: 127-134 doi:10.1007/s10350-004-6127-y
• 5 Dörner J, Taghavi Fallahpour M, Möslein G. Polypen, Polyposis und Lynch-Syndrom: ein Update der kolorektalen Karzinomdispositionen. Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie up2date 2018; 12: 243-259 doi:10.1055/a-0600-3364
• 6 Ishida H, Yamaguchi T, Tanakaya K. et al. Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) guidelines 2016 for the clinical practice of hereditary colorectal cancer (translated version). J Anus Rectum Colon 2018; 2 (Suppl. I) S1-S51
• 7 Herzig D, Hardiman K, Weiser M. et al. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Inherited Polyposis Syndromes. Dis Colon Rectum 2017; 60: 881-894 doi:10.1097/DCR.0000000000000912
• 8 Balmaña J, Balaguer F, Cervantes A. et al. Familial risk-colorectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 2013; 24 (Suppl. 06) vi73-vi80 doi:10.1093/annonc/mdt209
• 9 Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft (DKG), Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF. S3-Leitlinie Kolorektales Karzinom. Januar 2019. AWMF-Registernummer: 021/007OL2019. Im Internet (Stand: 13.01.2020): https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/021-007OLl_S3_Kolorektales-Karzinom-KRK_2019-01.pdf
• 10 Hardt J, Kienle P. [The technique of restorative proctocolectomy with ileal J-pouch: standards and controversies]. Chirurg 2017; 88: 559-565 doi:10.1007/s00104-017-0434-z
• 11 Möslein G. Surgical considerations in FAP-related pouch surgery: could we do better?. Fam Cancer 2016; 15: 457-466 doi:10.1007/s10689-016-9904-6
• 12 Trigui A, Frikha F, Rejab H. et al. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: Points of controversy. J Visc Surg 2014; 151: 281-288 doi:10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2014.05.004
• 13 Ng KT, Tsia AKV, Chong VYL. Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. World J Surg 2019; 43: 1146-1161 doi:10.1007/s00268-018-04896-7
• 14 Phan K, Kahlaee HR, Kim SH. et al. Laparoscopic vs. robotic rectal cancer surgery and the effect on conversion rates: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched studies. Tech Coloproctol 2019; 23: 221-230 doi:10.1007/s10151-018-1920-0
• 15 Prete FP, Pezzolla A, Prete F. et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg 2018; 267: 1034-1046 doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002523
• 16 Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H. 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: 1569-1580 doi:10.1001/jama.2017.7219
• 17 Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA. et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 1324-1332 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1414882
• 18 Gorgun E, Cengiz TB, Aytac E. et al. Does laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis reduce infertility compared with open approach?. Surgery 2019; 166: 670-677 doi:10.1016/j.surg.2019.04.045
• 19 Konishi T, Ishida H, Ueno H. et al. Feasibility of laparoscopic total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis: results of a nationwide multicenter study. Int J Clin Oncol 2016; 21: 953-961 doi:10.1007/s10147-016-0977-x
• 20 Baek SJ, Dozois EJ, Mathis KL. et al. Safety, feasibility, and short-term outcomes in 588 patients undergoing minimally invasive ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a single-institution experience. Tech Coloproctol 2016; 20: 369-374 doi:10.1007/s10151-016-1465-z
• 21 Kjaer MD, Laursen SB, Qvist N. et al. Sexual function and body image are similar after laparoscopy-assisted and open ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. World J Surg 2014; 38: 2460-2465 doi:10.1007/s00268-014-2557-4
• 22 Ahmed Ali U, Keus F, Heikens JT. et al. Open versus laparoscopic (assisted) ileo pouch anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (01) CD006267
• 23 Larson DW, Cima RR, Dozois EJ. et al. Safety, feasibility, and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic ileal-pouch-anal anastomosis: a single institutional case-matched experience. Ann Surg 2006; 243: 667-670 doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000216762.83407.d2
• 24 Hamzaoglu I, Baca B, Esen E. et al. Short-term results after totally robotic restorative total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2019;
• 25 Lightner AL, Grass F, McKenna NP. et al. Short-term postoperative outcomes following robotic versus laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis are equivalent. Tech Coloproctol 2019; 23: 259-266 doi:10.1007/s10151-019-01953-8
• 26 Mark-Christensen A, Pachler FR, Norager CB. et al. Short-term outcome of robot-assisted and open IPAA: an observational single-center study. Dis Colon Rectum 2016; 59: 201-207 doi:10.1097/DCR.0000000000000540
• 27 Roviello F, Piagnerelli R, Ferrara F. et al. Robotic single docking total colectomy for ulcerative colitis: first experience with a novel technique. Int J Surg 2015; 21: 63-67 doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.07.642
• 28 Miller AT, Berian JR, Rubin M. et al. Robotic-assisted proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease: a case-matched comparison of laparoscopic and robotic technique. J Gastrointest Surg 2012; 16: 587-594 doi:10.1007/s11605-011-1692-6
• 29 Kim MJ, Park SC, Park JW. et al. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a phase II open label prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 2018; 267: 243-251 doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002321
• 30 Trinh BB, Jackson NR, Hauch AT. et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery. JSLS 2014; 18 doi:10.4293/JSLS.2014.00187
• 31 Vasen HF, Watson P, Mecklin JP. et al. New clinical criteria for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC, Lynch syndrome) proposed by the International Collaborative group on HNPCC. Gastroenterology 1999; 116: 1453-1456 doi:10.1016/s0016-5085(99)70510-x
• 32 Umar A, Boland CR, Terdiman JP. et al. Revised Bethesda Guidelines for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome) and microsatellite instability. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96: 261-268 doi:10.1093/jnci/djh034
• 33 Aretz S, Uhlhaas S, Caspari R. et al. Frequency and parental origin of de novo APC mutations in familial adenomatous polyposis. Eur J Hum Genet 2004; 12: 52-58 doi:10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201088
• 34 Siaperas P, Hartley J. Ileorectal anastomosis. Sem Colon Rect Surg 2009; 20: 78-81 doi:10.1053/j.scrs.2009.05.005
• 35 Kirat HT, Remzi FH. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: indications and technique. Semin Colon Rect Surg 2009; 20: 82-87 doi:10.1053/j.scrs.2009.05.002
• 36 Konishi T, Ishida H, Ueno H. et al. Postoperative complications after stapled and hand-sewn ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis: a multicenter study. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 2017; 1: 143-149 doi:10.1002/ags3.12019
• 37 Ganschow P, Warth R, Hinz U. et al. Early postoperative complications after stapled vs. handsewn restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in 148 patients with familial adenomatous polyposis coli: a matched-pair analysis. Colorectal Dis 2014; 16: 116-122 doi:10.1111/codi.12385
• 38 Lovegrove RE, Constantinides VA, Heriot AG. et al. A comparison of hand-sewn versus stapled ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) following proctocolectomy: a meta-analysis of 4183 patients. Ann Surg 2006; 244: 18-26 doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000225031.15405.a3
• 39 Spinelli A, Cantore F, Kotze PG. et al. Fluorescence angiography during transanal trans-stomal proctectomy and ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a video vignette. Colorectal Dis 2017;
• 40 Jafari MD, Wexner SD, Martz JE. et al. Perfusion assessment in laparoscopic left-sided/anterior resection (PILLAR II): a multi-institutional study. J Am Coll Surg 2015; 220: 82-92.e1 doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.09.015
• 41 Ris F, Hompes R, Cunningham C. et al. Near-infrared (NIR) perfusion angiography in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 2014; 28: 2221-2226 doi:10.1007/s00464-014-3432-y
• 42 Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC. et al. Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2005; 6: 477-484 doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(05)70221-7
• 43 Guerra F, Giuliani G. Comment on „robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a phase II open label prospective randomized controlled trial“. Ann Surg 2019; 270: e103-e104 doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000003267
• 44 Renshaw S, Silva IL, Hotouras A. et al. Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of robotic colorectal resections for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic literature review. Tech Coloproctol 2018; 22: 161-177 doi:10.1007/s10151-018-1766-5
• 45 Panteleimonitis S, Popeskou S, Aradaib M. et al. Implementation of robotic rectal surgery training programme: importance of standardisation and structured training. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2018; 403: 749-760 doi:10.1007/s00423-018-1690-1
• 46 Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Rubio-Dorado-Manzanares M, Díaz-Pavón JM. et al. Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs. Int J Colorectal Dis 2016; 31: 1807-1815 doi:10.1007/s00384-016-2660-0
• 47 Miskovic D, Ahmed J, Bissett-Amess R. et al. European consensus on the standardization of robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 2019; 21: 270-276 doi:10.1111/codi.14502
• 48 Wise AK, Bhutiani N, Rudolph KP. et al. Single-dock robotic total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis. Surg Innov 2019; 26: 511 doi:10.1177/1553350619842754
• 49 Morelli L, Guadagni S, Mariniello MD. et al. Hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2015; 400: 741-748 doi:10.1007/s00423-015-1331-x