-
BJA Education Feb 2024
Review
PubMed: 38304069
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjae.2023.11.002 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Dec 2021The aim of our study was to explain the technique and evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic anterior pelvic exenteration in cases of residual/recurrent cervical...
The aim of our study was to explain the technique and evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic anterior pelvic exenteration in cases of residual/recurrent cervical cancer as a salvage therapy. The study was conducted as a retrospective review of all the cases of central residual/recurrent cervical cancer who underwent anterior pelvic exenteration by robotic approach with curative intent at our centre between January 2013 and December 2019. Information regarding various treatment related parameters like duration of surgery, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, early and late complications and recurrence and survival was collected and evaluated. 14 patients underwent anterior pelvic exenteration by robotic approach in this period. The median age of patients at time of exenteration was 52.5 years. 13 out of 14 patients had received combined chemoradiation as a part of intial treatment. The median duration of surgery was 305 min with a median estimated blood loss of 135 ml and median length of hospital stay of 6.5 days. Early complications like urosepsis, uretero-ileal anastomotic leak and paralytic ileus occurred in 36% patients and late complications like ureteric stricture and bowel perforation occurred in 28.6% patients. Negative surgical margins could be achieved in all the patients. Over a median follow-up period of 17.5 months, five patients developed recurrence and five patients experienced mortality, with four out of five patients dying due to recurrent disease. The 12-month DFS was 68.2% and the 12-month OS was 77.1%. Robotic anterior pelvic exenteration is a safe and feasible option in selected patients with recurrent/residual cervical cancer as a salvage procedure, with acceptable morbidity and mortality.
Topics: Feasibility Studies; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Pelvic Exenteration; Retrospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Salvage Therapy; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 33515209
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01195-7 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Aug 2021Pelvic exenteration (PE) is the only option for long-term cure of advanced cancer originating from different types of tumor or recurrent disease in the lower pelvis. The...
BACKGROUND
Pelvic exenteration (PE) is the only option for long-term cure of advanced cancer originating from different types of tumor or recurrent disease in the lower pelvis. The aim was to show differences between colorectal and non-colorectal cancer in survival and postoperative morbidity.
METHODS
Retrospective data of 63 patients treated with total pelvic exenteration between 2013 and 2018 are reported. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative parameters, survival data, and risk factors for complications were analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 57.2% (n = 37) of the patients had colorectal cancer, 22.3% had gynecological malignancies (vulvar (n = 6) or cervical (n = 8) cancer), 11.1% (n = 7) had anal cancer, and 9.5% had other primary tumors. A total of 30.2% (n = 19) underwent PE for a primary tumor and 69.8% (n = 44) for recurrent cancer. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was 0%. Neoadjuvant treatment was administered to 65.1% (n = 41) of the patients and correlated significantly with postoperative complications (odds ratio 4.441; 95% CI: 1.375-14.342, P > 0.05). R0, R1, R2, and Rx resections were achieved in 65.1%, 19%, 1.6%, and 14.3% of the patients, respectively. In patients undergoing R0 resection, 2-year OS and RFS were 73.2% and 52.4%, respectively. Resection status was a significant risk factor for recurrence-free and overall survival (OS) in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis revealed age (P = 0.021), ASA ≥ 3 (P = 0.005), high blood loss (P = 0.028), low preoperative hemoglobin level (P < 0.001), nodal positivity (P < 0.001), and surgical complications (P = 0.003) as independent risk factors for OS.
CONCLUSION
Pelvic exenteration is a procedure with high morbidity rates but remains the only curative option for advanced or recurrent colorectal and non-colorectal cancer in the pelvis.
Topics: Anus Neoplasms; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Pelvic Exenteration; Rectal Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33677655
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-03893-y -
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology... Feb 2022The purpose of this work was to identify the results of pelvic exenteration for recurrent, persistent or locally advanced cervical cancer in terms of survival performed...
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this work was to identify the results of pelvic exenteration for recurrent, persistent or locally advanced cervical cancer in terms of survival performed for 41 patients in Salah Azaiez Institute.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We conducted a retrospective unicentric study. The association between PE and OS was estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier using SPSS ver 24.
RESULTS
Median age at the time of intervention was 53.9 years old. FIGO stage IIB was the most frequent (46.3%). Eighteen patients had pelvic exenteration after neoadjuvant treatment. Resection margins were free of tumor in 83.3% of cases. Twenty-three patients underwent pelvic exenteration for recurrence of cervical cancer treated. The median time of recurrence was 23.4 months. Free resection margins were obtained in 69.5% of cases. Postoperative complications were noted in 61% of patients. Two deaths were seen in the early postoperative period. After a median follow-up of 40.5 months, 24.4% of recurrences were noted. Overall survival at 5 years was 51% and recurrence-free survival at one year was 39%. Prognostic factors which impact overall and recurrence-free survival were the size of recurrence and resection margins after exenteration. The time between the end of initial treatment and recurrence was the only predictive factor of recurrence after pelvic exenteration.
CONCLUSION
Pelvic exenteration remains a curative treatment of cervical cancer in certain indications despite high morbidity. A rigorous preoperative selection of candidate may reduce the morbidity and improve the survival of patients.
PubMed: 35125740
DOI: 10.1007/s13224-021-01502-0 -
La Radiologia Medica Jul 2019The aim of this review is to illustrate normal computed tomography (CT) findings and the most common complications in patients who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) for... (Review)
Review
The aim of this review is to illustrate normal computed tomography (CT) findings and the most common complications in patients who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) for advanced, persistent or recurrent gynecological cancers. We review the various surgical techniques used in PE, discuss optimal CT protocols for postsurgical evaluation and describe cross-sectional imaging appearances of normal postoperative anatomic changes as well as early and late complications. The interpretation of abdominopelvic CT imaging after PE is very challenging due to remarkable modifications of normal anatomy. After this radical pelvic surgery, the familiarity with expected CT appearances is crucial for diagnosis and appropriate management of potentially life-threatening complications in patients who underwent PE.
Topics: Contrast Media; Female; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Humans; Pelvic Exenteration; Postoperative Complications; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 30806919
DOI: 10.1007/s11547-019-01009-9 -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Jul 2022For those with certain recurrent gynaecological cancers where primary management such as chemo-radiotherapy has failed, or in cases of recurrence following primary... (Review)
Review
For those with certain recurrent gynaecological cancers where primary management such as chemo-radiotherapy has failed, or in cases of recurrence following primary surgery, pelvic exenteration (PE) is considered the only curative option. Whilst initially considered a morbid procedure, improved surgical techniques, advancing technology, and nuanced reconstructive options have facilitated more radical resections and improved morbidity and mortality. Open PE remains the gold standard approach, however, minimally invasive techniques for PE may lessen morbidity whilst achieving the same oncological outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive PE with a laparoscopic or robot-assisted approach. We also performed a review of the literature on robot-assisted PE which has not been widely reported for cases of recurrent gynaecological malignancy. Between 2015 and 2021six minimally invasive PE were performed. All patients underwent extensive multi-disciplinary assessment and counselling pre-operatively. Patient characteristics, treatment indication, perioperative data, short-term complications, and histological outcomes were recorded. There were two anterior exenterations, three posterior exenterations and one total exenteration performed. The primary cancer stage varied from stage 1a-3b. Five out of six patients had pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy. The average operative time (including surgical docking) was 600 min. Mean blood loss was 400 mL and the average length of stay was eight days. Enhanced recovery practices were used where possible. There were no intraoperative complications and one major post-operative complicationwhich was breakdown of an inferior gluteal artery perforator flap perineal reconstruction. All patients had negative margins at post-operative histopathology. All patients are alive and recurrence free at follow-up, but long-term outcome data is needed. This initial case series suggest that minimally invasive pelvic exenterationcan feasibly be performed in place of open pelvic exenteration. Furthermore, our findings suggest this may be a safe alternative as we report similar findings to the existing literature, however no firm conclusions can be drawn at such an early stage. Long term follow-up data and a larger cohort study will be needed to establish non-inferiority to open PE.
Topics: Cohort Studies; Female; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Pelvic Exenteration; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35584578
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.05.003 -
Annals of Surgery Nov 2019To determine factors associated with outcomes following pelvic exenteration for advanced nonrectal pelvic malignancy.
OBJECTIVE
To determine factors associated with outcomes following pelvic exenteration for advanced nonrectal pelvic malignancy.
BACKGROUND
The PelvEx Collaborative provides large volume data from specialist centers to ascertain factors associated with improved outcomes.
METHODS
Consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for nonrectal pelvic malignancy between 2006 and 2017 were identified from 22 tertiary centers. Patient demographics, neoadjuvant therapy, histopathological assessment, length of stay, 30-day major complication/mortality rate were recorded.The primary endpoints were factors associated with survival. The secondary endpoints included the difference in margin rates across the cohorts, impact of neoadjuvant treatment on survival, associated morbidity, and mortality.
RESULTS
One thousand two hundred ninety-three patients were identified. 40.4% (n = 523) had gynecological malignancies (endometrial, ovarian, cervical, and vaginal), 35.7% (n = 462) urological (bladder), 18.1% (n = 234) anal, and 5.7% had sarcoma (n = 74).The median age across the cohort was 63 years (range, 23-85). The median 30-day mortality rate was 1.7%, with the highest rates occurring following exenteration for recurrent sarcoma or locally advanced cervical cancer (3.3% each). The median length of hospital stay was 17.5 days. 34.5% of patients experienced a major complication, with highest rate occurring in those having salvage surgery for anal cancer.Multivariable analysis showed R0 resection was the main factor associated with long-term survival. The 3-year overall-survival rate for R0 resection was 48% for endometrial malignancy, 40.6% for ovarian, 49.4% for cervical, 43.8% for vaginal, 59% for bladder, 48.3% for anal, and 48.1% for sarcoma.
CONCLUSION
Pelvic exenteration remains an important treatment in selected patients with advanced or recurrent nonrectal pelvic malignancy. The range in 3-year overall survival following R0 resection (40%-59%) reflects the diversity of tumor types.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cause of Death; Cohort Studies; Databases, Factual; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Pelvic Exenteration; Pelvic Neoplasms; Prognosis; Proportional Hazards Models; Retrospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Survival Analysis; Tertiary Care Centers
PubMed: 31634184
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003533 -
Urology Aug 2022To investigate the impact of pelvic exenteration (PelvEX) on patient-reported pain, distress, and quality of life along with physiologic indicators of health in cancer... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the impact of pelvic exenteration (PelvEX) on patient-reported pain, distress, and quality of life along with physiologic indicators of health in cancer survivors with radiated, non-repairable rectourethral fistula (RUF).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We reviewed a prospectively maintained quality improvement database of RUF patients at our institution from 2012 to 2020. Patients with radiated, non-repairable RUF who underwent PelvEX and had follow up to 1 year were included. Pain and distress scores were collected preoperatively and at 1-year follow up. Number of narcotic prescriptions in the 3 months before surgery and the year after surgery were abstracted. Short Form 12 surveys were administered in the postoperative period. Serum albumin, creatinine, carbon dioxide, hematocrit, and glucose were abstracted from electronic health records. Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon signed-rank and Mann-Whitney tests.
RESULTS
Eleven patients met inclusion criteria. Patient-reported pain significantly decreased at 1 year follow-up compared to preoperative scores (median pre: 4 vs 1 year post: 0, P = .0312). Patient-reported distress significantly decreased pre- versus post-PelvEX (median pre: 5 vs post: 0, P = .0156). At the time of postoperative pain and distress surveys, 9 (82.8%) patients did not have narcotic prescriptions. Postoperative Short Form 12 scores were similar to an age-matched United States population (mental: P = .3125; physical: P = .1484). Serum-based indicators of health were not different in the pre- versus postoperative period (all P >.05).
CONCLUSION
PelvEX may be a valuable treatment option to decrease patient-reported pain and distress without compromising quality of life or physiologic health in patients with radiated, non-repairable RUF.
Topics: Humans; Narcotics; Pain, Postoperative; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Pelvic Exenteration; Quality of Life; Rectal Fistula; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Urethral Diseases; Urinary Fistula
PubMed: 35584735
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2022.03.041 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology May 2021Total pelvic exenterations (TPEs) for malignancies are complex operations often performed by multidisciplinary teams. The differences among primary cancer for TPE and...
BACKGROUND
Total pelvic exenterations (TPEs) for malignancies are complex operations often performed by multidisciplinary teams. The differences among primary cancer for TPE and multicentered results are not well described. We aimed to describe TPE outcomes for different malignant origins in a national multicentered sample.
METHODS
Patients from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database who underwent TPE between 2005 and 2016 for all malignant indications (colorectal, gynecologic, urologic, or other) were included. Chi square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare patient characteristics by primary malignancy. Multivariate logistic and linear regression models were used to determine factors associated with any 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complication, length of hospital stay (LOS; days), 30-day wound infection, and 30-day mortality.
RESULTS
Overall, 2305 patients underwent TPE. Indications for surgery included 33% (749) colorectal, 15% (335) gynecologic, 9% (196) other, and 45% (1025) urologic malignancies. Median LOS decreased from 10 to 8 days during the study period (p < 0.001), 36% were males, and 50% required blood transfusion. High-grade complications occurred in 15% of patients and were associated with bowel diversion [odds ratio (OR) 1.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-2.4], disseminated cancer (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.3), and gynecologic cancers (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.8-4.7). Mortality was 2% and was associated with disseminated cancer (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.3) and male sex (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.4).
CONCLUSIONS
TPE is associated with high rates of complications, however mortality rates remain low. Preoperative and perioperative outcomes differ depending on the origin of the primary malignancy.
Topics: Blood Transfusion; Female; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Humans; Male; Morbidity; Pelvic Exenteration; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors
PubMed: 33105501
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09247-2 -
European Journal of Surgical Oncology :... Dec 2023Chronic fistulating pelvic sepsis is an uncommon complication of multimodal treatment of visceral pelvic tumours. Radical multi-visceral resection is reserved for...
BACKGROUND
Chronic fistulating pelvic sepsis is an uncommon complication of multimodal treatment of visceral pelvic tumours. Radical multi-visceral resection is reserved for patients with persistent, debilitating symptoms despite less invasive treatments and for which there is minimal published data. This study aimed to report the rates of morbidity and long-term sepsis control after pelvic exenteration for chronic fistulating pelvic sepsis.
METHODS
This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a high-volume pelvic exenteration referral centre. Patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for chronic fistulating pelvic sepsis between September 1994 and January 2023 after previous treatment for pelvic malignancy were included. Data relating to postoperative morbidity, mortality and the rate of recurrent pelvic sepsis or fistulae were retrospectively collected.
RESULTS
19 patients who underwent radical resection for chronic fistulating pelvic sepsis after previous pelvic cancer treatment were included. 11 patients were male (58 %) and median age was 62 years (range 42-79). Previously treated rectal (8 patients, 42 %), prostate (5, 26 %) and cervical cancer (5, 26 %) were most common. 18 patients (95 %) had previously received high-dose pelvic radiotherapy, and 14 (74 %) had required surgical resection. Total pelvic exenteration was performed in 47 % of patients, total cystectomy in 68 % and major pubic bone resection in 37 %. There was no intraoperative or postoperative mortality. Major complication rate was 32 %. 12-month readmission rate was 42 %. At last follow up, 74 % had no signs or symptoms of persisting pelvic sepsis.
CONCLUSIONS
Pelvic exenteration for refractory pelvic sepsis following treatment of malignancy is safe and effective in selected patients.
Topics: Humans; Male; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Female; Pelvic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Pelvic Exenteration; Combined Modality Therapy; Sepsis; Rectal Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37879161
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.107124