View clinical trials related to Rectal Neoplasms.
Filter by:Anastomotic leak (AL) is a breakdown of a suture line in a surgical anastomosis with a subsequent leakage of the luminal content. Anastomotic leakage occurs commonly in rectal and esophageal anastomosis than the other parts of the alimentary tract due to technical difficulties in accessing these areas and their easily compromised blood supply. Anastomotic leakage is the most feared complication following rectal resection and anastomosis. The incidence of anastomotic leakage ranges from 2.8% to more than 15%, with mortality rate more than 30%. Subclinical anastomotic failure may occur in up to 51% of patients. Anastomotic leakage leads to increase the rate of secondary interventions, re-operations, longer postoperative hospital stay, increased cost, and major impact on the patient's quality of life. In the medium to long term, patient may be unfit for post-operative adjuvant therapy with decreased the disease survival. Furthermore anastomotic leakage itself may increase the local recurrence, a reduction in overall survival, and a large proportion of patients are left with a permanent stoma.
The proposed study is an observational, prospective, multicenter study of patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for medium-low rectal cancer. Recently the investigators have published the findings of a multicenter Italian phase II study showing that the rate of local recurrence, with a 3 year follow-up, is less than 5% in patients with baseline T2-3 mid-low rectal cancer who, after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (pCRT), showed a major clinical response and underwent a transanal local excision. Based on these results, an organ-sparing approach for patients showing a major clinical response is feasible without reducing the good results obtained with the standard treatment. While a phase III trial is the best way to compare the standard treatment with the organ-sparing approach (local excision or wait-and-see) it is impracticable and likely unethical. An observational study is therefore one of the best way to evaluate the impact that an organ-sparing approach may have on oncological outcomes, quality of life, and bowel function for patients with rectal cancer who, after a pCRT, show a clinical major/complete response. This phase II trial is designed to test the hypothesis that conservative treatments, in patients with low-mid rectal cancer who undergo a major or complete clinical response after neoadjuvant treatment, will be safe and effective compared to standard surgery. The investigators will compare rectum-sparing approaches to standard surgery, firstly in terms of rate of organ preservation at 2 years. Additionally they will compare survival outcomes (DFS, OS), stoma rates, clinical and tumor factors related to pathological complete response, correlation between major and complete clinical response. To add value, the investigators will measure QoL in patients treated with rectum-sparing approaches in comparison to patients treated with standard surgery (TME or abdomino-perineal amputation). Rectum-sparing approach can be considered clinically acceptable if percentage of conservation of the rectum at two years is not less than 50%. The collected data on 164 patients who underwent "rectum-sparing" allow to test the hypothesis that the rectum is preserved in 60% of patients with 80% power (exact binomial test for proportions, alpha = 5 %, 1 tail) and the study will be considered positive if it obtains a frequency of conservation of the rectum of not less than 87 cases. The analysis results will be reported in accordance with STROBE guidelines (von Elm et al., 2008). For all analyzes, continuous variables are described using the mean and standard deviation of position and appropriate measures when appropriate. Categorical variables will be described using the contingency tables.
Open to patients undergoing any pre-operative treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer, TRIGGER is the only phase III clinical trial in the UK offering watch and wait. All patients will have post treatment MRI scans routinely performed, no change from the MERCURY trials high resolution MRI protocol is required. Patients will be randomised to either the control arm for management according to national guidelines - conventional MDT, clinical assessment post-treatment planning using the baseline MRI. Patients in the interventional arm will have their post treatment MRI scans read by a radiologist trained and supported to reliably report the mrTRG grade and have their management directed accordingly - 'Good response' (mrTRG 1&2) - watch and wait (avoidance of surgery) offered. 'Poor response' (mrTRG 3-5) - local colorectal MDT is informed and uses information to discuss and agree next steps in treatment and surveillance. Patients are followed up for five years with QoL questionnaires completed at registration, 3 and 5 years.
The purpose of this study is to determine the pathological complete tumor response rate.
The purpose of this study is to see how effective and safe LY2157299, in combination with chemotherapy and radiation therapy, might be in treating rectal cancer. Also as part of this study, research will be done on tumor samples to see if it is possible to predict if patients will respond to treatment, and blood samples to look at the immune system response to study treatment. About 50 people will take part in this study. The study treatment will be given over an 8 week period and the investigators will continue to collect your health information for up to 5 years, as part of this study
The rate of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic anterior resection（LAR） for medium & low rectal cancer is still high. the transanal drainage tube (TDT) was thought to be useful for deduce the rate. There were several studies, but most of them were not randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies. There was only one RCT study with enough samples, but it was designed for open anterior resection, and the patients underwent diverting stoma were excluded, so there was the selection bias. LAR now is thought to been with the same effect, and it is safe and feasible. So a RCT investigation for the use of TDT for prevention of anastomotic leakage after LAR for medium & low rectal cancer is needed.
Rationale: The surgical complication of intestinal anastomotic leak remains a clear and present danger to patients despite advances in surgical technique and ever more powerful antibiotics. No surgeon is immune from this complication and leak rates have not changed in decades. The consequences of a leak (peritonitis, sepsis, death) can be so severe that in the case of rectal cancer, diverting ileostomies are routinely performed to divert the fecal stream away from the healing anastomosis. We have recently discovered that certain intestinal bacteria, with the capacity to express collagenase and cleave MMP9 (Matrix metallopeptidase 9) to its active collagen degrading form, play a key and causative role in anastomotic leak. These bacteria often escape elimination due to the failure of current antibiotic regimens and their delivery methods to remain functionally durable at anastomotic tissue sites. Purpose: This phase II clinical trial will track, in real time, the process of anastomotic healing and its associated microbiome by performing serial endoscopic surveillance (SES) following rectal cancer resection. By capturing anastomotic images and the associated microbial and inflammatory mediators from anastomotic fluids via SES performed at three time points following rectal cancer resection, we will correlate healing to microbial composition and inflammatory mediator status. Patients will be randomized and, at each time point, will receive lavage of their anastomosis with either saline or a triple antibiotic solution (ciprofloxacin, metronidazole, neomycin). An anastomotic healing score captured during SES will be compared between the two treatment arms and correlated to microbial and inflammatory mediator analyses of fluid samples to determine how intestinal microbes influence the process of anastomotic healing.
This study compared robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (RTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) with regard to urinary function, sexual function and sphincter- preservation outcomes for low rectal cancer.
There are severel problems associated with the closing of a temporary loop-ileostomy after surgery for rectal cancer. The purpose of this study is to answer two questions: 1. The choice of anastomotic method - does it influence the postoperative course? 2. The use of a prophylactic mesh when closing the stoma site - will there be less hernias?
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the appropriate timing to do preventive ileostomy closure after total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of preventive ileostomy closure at different time (12 weeks / 24 weeks after radical resection of rectal carcinoma). This study was expected to demonstrate that the early preventive ileostomy closure after total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer does not increase the risk of complications.