Page 250 - Read Online

Kim et al. Mini-invasive Surg 2019;3:33 I http://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2574-1225.2019.23 Page 5 of 6

CONCLUSION
TaTMEs are potential alternatives for East Asian male patients with rectal cancer who have deep and
narrow pelvis. Many RCT and prospective studies (especially the RCT in China) are underway that could
[41]
provide concrete indications for the usefulness and necessity of TaTMEs in East Asia. To further promote
TaTMEs in East Asia, further research with East Asian populations and training strategy are necessary.

DECLARATIONS
Authors’ contributions
Conceptualized the topic and oversaw the direction and final edits: Kim NK
Drafted the manuscript: Kim HS

Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.

Financial support and sponsorship
None.

Conflicts of interest
All authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.

Consent for publication
Not applicable.

Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019.

REFERENCES
1. Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery--the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg 1982;69:613-6.
2. Kang SB, Park JW, Jeong SY, Nam BH, Choi HS, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant
chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:637-45.
3. Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, et al. Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal
carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC trial group. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3061-8.
4. Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, Boller AM, George V, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or
III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2015;314:1346-55.
5. Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, Hewett P, Clouston AD, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on
pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2015;314:1356-63.
6. Van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, Furst A, Lacy AM, et al. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II):
short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:210-8.
7. Sylla P, Rattner DW, Delgado S, Lacy AM. NOTES transanal rectal cancer resection using transanal endoscopic microsurgery and
laparoscopic assistance. Surg Endosc 2010;24:1205-10.
8. Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S. Transanal minimally invasive surgery: a giant leap forward. Surg Endosc 2010;24:2200-5.
9. Marks JH, Myers EA, Zeger EL, Denittis AS, Gummadi M. Long-term outcomes by a transanal approach to total mesorectal excision
for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 2017;31:5248-57.
10. Row D, Weiser MR. An update on laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. Cancer Control 2010;17:16-24.
11. Young M, Pigazzi A. Total mesorectal excision: open, laparoscopic or robotic. Recent Results Cancer Res 2014;203:47-55.
12. Xiong B, Ma L, Huang W, Zhao Q, Cheng Y. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of
eight studies. J Gastrointest Surg 2015;19:516-26.
13. Bianchi PP, Ceriani C, Locatelli A, Spinoglio G, Zampino MG, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal
cancer: a comparative analysis of oncological safety and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 2010;24:2888-94.
14. Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, Min BS, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a
comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 2015;261:129-37.