A transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a smart alternative to a conventional TME. However, worrisome reports of a high recurrence and complications triggered a moratorium in a few countries. This study assessed the outcomes and resource utilization of a taTME. Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer treated by a taTME were prospectively included. Outcomes were reported as the median and interquartile range (IQR). One hundred sixty-five patients (67% male and 33% female) with a tumor 7 cm (IQR 5–10) from the anal verge were followed for 50 months (IQR 32–79). The resection margins were threatened in 25% of the patients, while 75% of the patients received neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. A good mesorectal dissection and clear margins were achieved in 96% of the specimens, and 27 lymph nodes (IQR 20–38) were harvested. Ninety-day major morbidity affected 36 patients (21.8%), including 12 with anastomotic leakages (7.2%). A recurrence occurred locally in 9 patients (5.4%), and 44 patients had a distant metastasis (26.7%). The five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were 67% and 90%, respectively. A multivariate analysis found a long operation and frailty predicted an anastomotic leak, while a positive distal margin and lymph nodes predicted a local recurrence and distant metastasis. A two-team taTME saved 102 min of operative time and EUR 1385 when compared to a one-team approach. Transanal total mesorectal excision produced sound surgical quality and excellent oncologic outcomes.

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic surgery has reduced morbidity and mortality rates, shorter postoperative recovery periods and lower complication rates than open surgery. It is routine practice in high-income countries and is becoming increasingly common in countries with limited resources. However, introducing laparoscopic surgery in low-and-middle-income countries (LMIC) can be expensive and requires resources, equipment, and trainers. AIM To report the challenges and benefits of introducing laparoscopic surgery in LMIC as well as to identify solutions to these challenges for countries with limited finances and resources. METHODS MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for studies reporting first experience in laparoscopic surgery in LMIC. Included studies were published between 1996 and 2022 with full text available in English. Exclusion criteria were studies considering only open surgery, ear, nose, and throat, endoscopy, arthroscopy, hysteroscopy, cystoscopy, transplant, or bariatric surgery. RESULTS Ten studies out of 3409 screened papers, from eight LMIC were eligible for inclusion in the final analysis, totaling 2497 patients. Most reported challenges were related to costs of equipment and training programmes, equipment problems such as faulty equipment, and access to surgical kits. Training-related challenges were reliance on foreign trainers and lack of locally trained surgeons and theatre staff. The benefits of introducing laparoscopic surgery were economic and clinical, including a reduction in hospital stay, complications, and morbidity/mortality. The introduction of laparoscopic surgery also provided training opportunities for junior doctors. CONCLUSION Despite financial and technical challenges, many studies emphasise the overall benefit of introducing laparoscopic surgery in LMICs such as reduced hospital stay and the related lower cost for patients. While many of the clinical centres in LMICs have proposed practical solutions to the challenges reported, more support is critically required, in particular regarding training.