Background: Scant data are available on heterogenous staining of mismatch repair protein in colorectal cancer.
Objective: This study aimed to improve insights into clinicopathologic features and prognosis of colorectal cancer harboring heterogenous mismatch repair protein staining.
Design: A single-center retrospective observational study.
Setting: This study was conducted in a tertiary referral center in China between 2014 and 2018.
Patients: Colorectal cancers with heterogenous staining of mismatch repair protein were included.
Main outcomes measures: Clinicopathologic and molecular features, and survival outcomes were analyzed.
Results: A total of 151 out of 6721 colorectal cancers (2.2%) exhibited heterogenous staining for at least one mismatch repair protein, with intraglandular heterogeneity being the most common pattern (89.4%). Heterogenous MLH1 staining was significantly associated with distant metastasis (p = 0.03), while heterogenous MSH2 staining was associated with left-sided (p = 0.03) and earlier pT stage tumors (p = 0.02). The rates of microsatellite instability-high, KRAS and BRAF mutation were 12.6%, 47.3% and 3.4%, respectively. Microsatellite instability-high was significantly associated with higher intraglandular MSH6 heterogeneity frequency (p < 0.001) and decreased MSH6 expression level (< 27.5%, p = 0.01). BRAF mutation was associated with the coexistence of intraglandular and clonal heterogeneity (p = 0.003) and decreased PMS2 expression level (p = 0.01). Multivariable analysis revealed that progression-free survival was significantly associated with tumor stage (p = 0.003), stroma fraction (p = 0.004), and heterogenous PMS2 staining (p = 0.02). Overall survival was linked to tumor stage (p = 0.006) and BRAF mutation (p = 0.01).
Limitations: The limitations of this study include the absence of testing for MLH1 promoter methylation and mismatch repair gene mutations, its retrospective design, and insufficient data related to direct comparison with deficient mismatch repair and proficient mismatch repair colorectal cancer.
Conclusions: Heterogenous mismatch repair protein staining in colorectal cancer exhibits distinct associations with tumor location, stage, microsatellite instability, BRAF mutation and prognosis. It is recommended to report MSH6 heterogeneity as it may indicate microsatellite instability-high. See Video Abstract.
Background: Long rectal cuff (>2 cm) and remnant mesorectum are known causes of pouch dysfunction due to obstructive defecation, as well as pelvic sepsis after prolonged obstruction.
Objective: The aim of this study is to report the rates and the management of patients who underwent re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis due to pouch failure associated with retained mesorectum and long rectal cuff.
Design: This is a retrospective study.
Settings: The investigation is based on a quaternary inflammatory bowel disease center.
Patients: Patients undergoing re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery and had long rectal cuff and/or remnant mesorectum between September 2016 and September 2023 were included in the study.
Main outcome measures: The main outcomes were functioning pouch rate and functional results.
Results: Of the 245 patients who underwent re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery, 98 (40%) patients had long rectal cuff and/or remnant mesorectum. Re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis in this patient group was successful (92%) at a median follow-up of 28 (18-52) months.
Limitations: The retrospective nature of the study and this is the experience of a single specialized center.
Conclusions: Long rectal cuff and remanent mesorectum are major causes of pouch failure which can be successfully managed with re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery. Nearly half of pouch failure patients who had successful re-do ileal pouch anal anastomosis surgery initially received unnecessary biologic therapy before coming to our center. See Video abstract.
Background: Resection rectopexy and ventral mesh rectopexy are widely accepted surgical options for the treatment of rectal prolapse, however reports on long-term recurrence rates and functional outcomes are lacking.
Objective: We compared quality of life, long-term functional outcomes and prolapse recurrence after resection rectopexy versus ventral mesh rectopexy.
Design: We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively collected rectal prolapse surgery database.
Settings: Patients who underwent resection rectopexy or ventral mesh rectopexy at our center between 2009 and 2016 were included.
Patients: Two hundred twenty patients were included, of which 208 (94%) female; 85 (39%) underwent resection rectopexy, 135 (61%) ventral mesh rectopexy.
Main outcomes measure: Prolapse recurrence.
Results: The resection rectopexy group was younger (median 52 vs 60 years old, p = 0.02) and had more open procedures (20% vs 9%, p < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 110 (IQR 94 - 146) months for resection rectopexy and 113 (87 - 137) for ventral mesh rectopexy, recurrences occurred in 21 (26%) in the resection rectopexy and 50 (39%) in the ventral mesh rectopexy group (p = 0.041). Median time to recurrence was 44 (18 - 80) months in the resection rectopexy group and 28.5 (11 - 52.5) in the ventral mesh rectopexy group (p = 0.14). There were no differences in the recurrence rate for primary prolapses in resection rectopexy vs ventral mesh rectopexy. Recurrence rate for re-do prolapses was higher in the ventral mesh rectopexy group 63% at 10 years, versus 25% in resection rectopexy group (p = 0.006). Functional outcomes were similar between the two groups.
Limitations: Retrospective review, recall bias.
Conclusion: Long-term quality of life and functional outcomes after resection rectopexy and ventral mesh rectopexy were comparable. Ventral mesh rectopexy was associated with a higher prolapse recurrence rate after recurrent rectal prolapse repair. See Video Abstract.