With the development of surgical techniques, adjuvant therapy and neoadjuvant therapy, the survival time of rectal cancer patients after surgery has been significantly improved, but organ dysfunction is still an important problem affecting the quality of life of patients after surgery. With the continuous deepening of clinical research and practice and the updating of relevant theories, more detailed and reliable evidence-based medical evidence has been accumulated in the field of pelvic organ function protection in rectal cancer surgery, and has been continuously verified in the clinical real world at home and abroad. In order to further improve the awareness of domestic physicians on the protection of organ function during the treatment of rectal cancer, standardize the evaluation methods and surgical methods, reduce the incidence of organ dysfunction, and thus improve the quality of life of patients, Society of Colon & Rectal Surgeons of Chinese College of Surgeons of Chinese Medical Doctor Association, Section of Colorectal Surgery of Branch of Surgery of Chinese Medical Association, National Health Commission Capacity Building and Continuing Education Center Colorectal Surgery Committee, and Colorectal and Anal Function Surgeons Committee of China Sexology Association organized the discussion among relevant experts. On the basis of the 2021 edition of the Chinese Expert Consensus on the Protection of Pelvic Organ Function in Rectal Cancer Surgery, the recent evidence-based medical evidence was analyzed and summarized, and the definition, risk factors, evaluation methods, prevention and other issues of organ dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery were analyzed with reference to relevant domestic and foreign studies and combined with clinical practice. Proposed the diagnosis, evaluation and treatment of pelvic organ dysfunction in rectal cancer surgery, and finally formed the "Chinese expert Consensus on the protection of pelvic organ function in rectal cancer surgery (version 2025)".
Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Consensus ; Pelvis/physiopathology* ; Quality of Life ; Postoperative Complications/prevention & control*

Tianhe procedure^® is a functional sphincter-preserving surgical approach developed for rectal cancer patients following radiotherapy. This technique involves extended proximal resection of the colon beyond the pelvic cavity, followed by anastomosis of the non-irradiated proximal colon to the distal rectum or anal canal. This strategy aims to reduce the incidence of anastomotic complications and postoperative bowel dysfunction. However, there is currently a lack of standardized practice guideline for implementing Tianhe procedure^® in China. Therefore, the Chinese Radiation Intestinal Injury Research Group, the Colorectal Surgery Group of Surgery Branch of the Chinese Medical Association, the Anorectal Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association, the Colorectal Cancer Committee of the Chinese Medical Doctor Association, and the Colorectal Cancer Committee of China Anti-cancer Association, and the Gastrointestinal Surgical Branch of Guangdong Medical Doctor Association, have jointly convened a panel of national experts to discuss and establish this standardized surgical procedure. This standard, based on the latest evidence from literature, research advancements, and expert experience, focuses on key aspects of the Tianhe procedure^®, including its precise definition, indications, critical procedural steps, postoperative complications, and functional rehabilitation strategies. It aims to promote standardized implementation and broader clinical adoption of this innovative surgical technique.
Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms/radiotherapy* ; Anal Canal/surgery* ; Anastomosis, Surgical/methods* ; Organ Sparing Treatments/methods* ; Rectum/surgery* ; Postoperative Complications/prevention & control* ; Digestive System Surgical Procedures/methods*

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a common bowel dysfunction syndrome following sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer, characterized by stool storage dysfunction and evacuatory dysfunction. It has become a critical factor adversely affecting patients' quality of life and long-term clinical outcomes. Currently, the pathogenic mechanisms of LARS remain incompletely elucidated, and high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice is still lacking. However, emerging evidence suggests that strategic optimization across the clinical management pathway-including precision oncology planning, surgical technique selection, multidimensional symptom profiling, proactive prevention protocols, and comprehensive symptom management-may effectively reduce LARS severity and improve survivorship outcomes. Given the absence of consensus guidelines for LARS management among clinicians across China, the Chinese Society of Coloproctology (Chinese Medical Doctor Association) organized domestic experts in relevant fields. Through systematic review of global research findings, integration of international expertise and guidelines, and adaptation to domestic clinical realities, we developed the "Chinese Expert Consensus on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (2025 Edition)". This consensus elaborates on key aspects including the definition, clinical manifestations, risk factors, pathophysiological mechanisms, symptom assessment, treatment modalities, and prevention strategies for LARS, aiming to standardize the diagnosis and management of LARS in China.
Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Consensus ; Postoperative Complications/therapy* ; Quality of Life ; Syndrome ; China ; Low Anterior Resection Syndrome

The modified Bacon procedure is a staged, sphincter-preserving surgical technique for low rectal tumors, which involves transanal or transabdominal division of the tumor, extraction of the specimen via the anus or abdomen, exteriorization and fixation of the proximal colon through the anus, followed by a second-stage resection of the exteriorized colon to restore intestinal continuity. This approach offers advantages such as a reduced risk of anastomotic leakage and operational safety. However, several clinical aspects lack consensus, including indications for the procedure, the optimal length of the exteriorized colon, methods of anal fixation, and the timing of the second-stage resection. To address these issues, the Colorectal Cancer Committee of the Chinese Medical Doctor Association, the Colorectal Cancer Committee of China Anti-Cancer Association, and the NOSES Committee of China Anti-Cancer Association jointly initiated a collaborative effort to convene experts in the field. Through discussions, 10 key clinical questions were identified, and based on a systematic review of relevant domestic and international clinical studies combined with expert opinions, 13 recommendations were formulated. These recommendations cover indications, contraindications, technical details, surgical complications, functional outcomes related to anal function, and oncological efficacy of the modified Bacon procedure. This consensus aims to provide guidance for the clinical practice of the modified Bacon procedure in China, thereby promoting its standardized and evidence-based implementation.
Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Consensus ; Anal Canal/surgery*

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate sphincter-preserving surgical technique for low rectal cancer. Accurate preoperative diagnosis and staging, appropriate selection of surgical approaches and technique, standardized perioperative management, and postoperative rehabilitation are the keys to ensuring the oncological effect and functional preservation of ISR. To date, there is still a lack of standardized guidance on the clinical implementation of ISR in China. Therefore, based on the latest evidence from literature, expert experience, and the intervention situation in China, the Chinese Society of Colorectal Surgery, Chinese Society of Surgery, Chinese Medical Association organized domestic experts in colorectal surgery to discuss and produce "Chinese expert consensus on intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer (2023 edition)". This consensus focuses on definition, classification, related pelvic anatomy, operational techniques, postoperative complications, and long-term oncological and functional outcomes, and aims to guide the standardized clinical practice of ISR in the operation of low rectal cancer in China.
Humans ; Laparoscopy/methods* ; Consensus ; Anal Canal/surgery* ; Digestive System Surgical Procedures/methods* ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Treatment Outcome

Humans ; Colonic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Laparoscopy ; Treatment Outcome ; Retrospective Studies

Objective: To examine the preliminary effect of laparoscopic extraperitoneal colostomy anterior to posterior sheath of rectus abdominis-transversus abdominis for the prevention of parastomal hernia after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer. Methods: This study is a prospective case series study. From June 2021 to June 2022, patients with low rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection combined with extraperitoneal colostomy anterior to posterior sheath of rectus abdominis-transversus abdominis at the First Department of General Surgery, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital were enrolled. The clinical data and postoperative CT images of patients were collected to analyze the incidence of surgical complication and parastomal hernia. Results: Totally 6 cases of patient were enrolled, including 3 males and 3 females, aging 72.5 (19.5) years (M(IQR)) (range: 55 to 79 years). The operation time was 250 (48) minutes (range: 190 to 275 minutes), the stoma operation time was 27.5 (10.7) minutes (range: 21 to 37 minutes), the bleeding volume was 30 (35) ml (range: 15 to 80 ml). All patients were cured and discharged without surgery-related complications. The follow-up time was 136 (105) days (range: 98 to 279 days). After physical examination and abdominal CT follow-up, no parastomal hernia occurred in the 6 patients up to this article. Conclusions: A method of laparoscopic extraperitoneal colostomy anterior to posterior sheath of rectus abdominis-transversus abdominis is established. Permanent stoma can be completed with this method safely. It may have a preventive effect on the occurrence of parastomal hernia, which is worthy of further study.
Male ; Female ; Humans ; Colostomy/methods* ; Rectus Abdominis ; Laparoscopy/methods* ; Incisional Hernia/surgery* ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Hernia, Ventral/surgery* ; Surgical Mesh/adverse effects*

Objective: To examine the patterning cropped and shaped mesh repair for perineal hernia after abdominoperineal excision (APE) in rectal cancer. Methods: The clinical data of 8 patients with perineal hernia after APE who accepted surgical treatment in the Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Hernia Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University from March 2017 to December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. There were 3 males and 5 females, aged (67.6±7.2) years (range: 56 to 76 years). Eight patients developed a perineal mass at (11.3±2.9) months (range: 5 to 13 months) after APE. After surgical separation of adhesion and exposing the pelvic floor defect, a 15 cm×20 cm anti-adhesion mesh was fashioned as a three-dimensional pocket shape to fit the pelvic defect, then fixed to the promontory or sacrum and sutured to the pelvic sidewalls and the anterior peritoneum, while two side slender slings were tailored in front of the mesh and fixed on the pectineal ligament. Results: The repair of their perineal hernias went well, with an operating time of (240.6±48.8) minutes (range: 155 to 300 minutes). Five patients underwent laparotomy, 3 patients tried laparoscopic surgery first and then transferred to laparotomy combined with the perineal approach. Intraoperative bowel injury was observed in 3 patients. All patients did not have an intestinal fistula, bleeding occurred. No reoperation was performed and their preoperative symptoms improved significantly. The postoperative hospital stay was (13.5±2.9) days (range: 7 to 17 days) and two patients had postoperative ileus, which improved after conservative treatment. Two patients had a postoperative perineal hernia sac effusion, one of them underwent placement of a tube to puncture the hernia sac effusion due to infection, and continued irrigation and drainage. The postoperative follow-up was (34.8±14.0) months (range: 13 to 48 months), and 1 patient developed recurrence in the seventh postoperative month, no further surgery was performed. Conclusions: Surgical repair of the perineal hernia after APE can be preferred transabdominal approach, routine application of laparoscopy is not recommended, combined abdominoperineal approach can be considered if necessary. The perineal hernia after APE can be repaired safely and effectively using the described technique of patterning cropped and shaped mesh repair.
Male ; Female ; Humans ; Animals ; Herniorrhaphy/methods* ; Surgical Mesh ; Retrospective Studies ; Hernia, Abdominal/surgery* ; Hernia ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Proctectomy ; Laparoscopy ; Perineum/surgery* ; Postoperative Complications ; Incisional Hernia/surgery* ; Hominidae

Objective: To investigate the feasibility of Cai tube-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: This was a descriptive case-series study. Inclusion criteria: (1) colorectal or gastric cancer diagnosed by preoperative pathological examination or redundant sigmoid or transverse colon detected by barium enema; (2) indications for laparoscopic surgery; (3) body mass index <30 kg/m² (transanal surgery) and 35 kg/m² (transvaginal surgery); (4) no vaginal stenosis or adhesions in female patients undergoing transvaginal specimen extraction; and (5) patients with redundant colon aged 18-70 years and a history of intractable constipation for more than 10 years. Exclusion criteria: (1) colorectal cancer with intestinal perforation or obstruction, or gastric cancer with gastric perforation, gastric hemorrhage, or pyloric obstruction; (2) simultaneous resection of lung, bone, or liver metastases ; (3) history of major abdominal surgery or intestinal adhesions; and (4) incomplete clinical data. From January 2014 to October 2022, 209 patients with gastrointestinal tumors and 25 with redundant colons who met the above criteria were treated by NOSES utilizing a Cai tube (China invention patent number:ZL201410168748.2) in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Xiamen University. The procedures included eversion and pull-out NOSES radical resection in 14 patients with middle and low rectal cancer, NOSES radical left hemicolectomy in 171 patients with left-sided colorectal cancer, NOSES radical right hemicolectomy in 12 patients with right-sided colon cancer, NOSES systematic mesogastric resection in 12 patients with gastric cancer, and NOSES subtotal colectomy in 25 patients with redundant colons. All specimens were collected by using an in-house-made anal cannula (Cai tube) with no auxiliary incisions. The primary outcomes included 1-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) and postoperative complications. Results: Among 234 patients, 116 were male and 118 were female. The mean age was (56.6±10.9) years. NOSES was successfully completed in all patients without conversion to open surgery or procedure-related death. The negative rate of circumferential resection margin was 98.8% (169/171) with both two positive cases having left-sided colorectal cancer. Postoperative complications occurred in 37 patients (15.8%), including 11 cases (4.7%) of anastomotic leakage, 3 cases(1.3%) of anastomotic bleeding, 2 cases (0.9%) of intraperitoneal bleeding, 4 cases (1.7%) of abdominal infection, and 8 cases (3.4%) of pulmonary infection. Reoperations were required in 7 patients (3.0%), all of whom consented to creation of an ileostomy after anastomotic leakage. The total readmission rate within 30 days after surgery was 0.9% (2/234). After a follow-up of (18.3±3.6) months, the 1-year RFS was 94.7%. Five of 209 patients (2.4%) with gastrointestinal tumors had local recurrence, all of which was anastomotic recurrence. Sixteen patients (7.7%) developed distant metastases, including liver metastases(n=8), lung metastases(n=6), and bone metastases (n=2). Conclusion: NOSES assisted by Cai tube is feasible and safe in radical resection of gastrointestinal tumors and subtotal colectomy for redundant colon.
Humans ; Male ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Aged ; Anastomotic Leak/surgery* ; Stomach Neoplasms/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Laparoscopy ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Colectomy ; Postoperative Complications ; Liver Neoplasms/surgery* ; Treatment Outcome

Objective: To methodically assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted total rectal mesenteric resection (RTME), laparoscopic-assisted total rectal mesenteric resection (laTME), and transanal total rectal mesenteric resection (taTME). Methods: A computer search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases to identify English-language reports published between January 2017 and January 2022 that compared the clinical efficacy of the three surgical procedures of RTME, laTME, and taTME. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the NOS and JADAD scales for retrospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials, respectively. Direct meta-analysis and reticulated meta-analysis were performed using Review Manager software and R software, respectively. Results: Twenty-nine publications comprising 8,339 patients with rectal cancer were ultimately included. The direct meta-analysis indicated that the length of hospital stay was longer after RTME than after taTME, whereas according to the reticulated meta-analysis the length of hospital stay was shorter after taTME than after laTME (MD=-0.86, 95%CI: -1.70 to -0.096, P=0.036). Moreover, the incidence of anastomotic leak was lower after taTME than after RTME (OR=0.60, 95%CI: 0.39 to 0.91, P=0.018). The incidence of intestinal obstruction was also lower after taTME than after RTME (OR=0.55, 95%CI: 0.31 to 0.94, P=0.037). All of these differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the three surgical procedures regarding the number of lymph nodes cleared, length of the inferior rectal margin, or rate of positive circumferential margins (all P>0.05). An inconsistency test using nodal analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between the results of direct and indirect comparisons of the six outcome indicators (all P>0.05). Furthermore, we detected no significant overall inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence. Conclusion: taTME has advantages over RTME and laTME, in terms of radical and surgical short-term outcomes in patients with rectal cancer.
Humans ; Robotics ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects* ; Network Meta-Analysis ; Retrospective Studies ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/methods* ; Rectum/surgery* ; Rectal Neoplasms/pathology* ; Laparoscopy/methods* ; Treatment Outcome