Pelvic exenteration for advanced malignancy in elderly patients

Different uses of the breast implant to prevent empty pelvic complications following pelvic exenteration

Pelvic exenteration surgery is used as a standard procedure in recurrent pelvic cancers. Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) includes resection of the uterus, prostate, ureters, bladder and rectosigmoid colon from pelvic space. Empty pelvis syndrome is a complication of the TPE procedure. Following TPE, complications such as haematoma, abscess leading to permanent pus discharge and chronic infections can occur. Herein, we present the case of a man in his 50s who was referred for pelvic pain, foul-smelling discharge and non-functioning colostomy, and operated for distal rectal cancer 1.5 years ago and underwent low anterior resection. In this case, we performed TPE for the recurrent tumour. To prevent TPE complications, we used a breast implant for filling the pelvic cavity. The early and late postoperative course was uneventful.

Elderly Patients Have Better Quality of Life but Worse Survival Following Pelvic Exenteration: A 25-Year Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

To describe quality of life (QOL) and survival outcomes following pelvic exenteration (PE) in old and young patients.

BACKGROUND

PE is a management option for complete resection in locally advanced pelvic cancers. Few studies have examined the impact of age on the outcome in elderly patients following PE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospective cohort of consecutive patients undergoing partial and complete PE between 1994 and 2019. Patients were divided into a younger (< 65 years) or older cohort (≥ 65 years) based on their age. QoL was assessed using the SF-36 and FACT-C questionnaires and survival estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

For 710 patients who underwent PE during the study period, FACT-C total score was significantly better in the elderly during the whole follow-up period of 5 years. Mental component score (SF-36) was significantly better at baseline (p = 0.008) and at 24 months postoperatively (p = 0.042), in the elderly group. Median overall survival was 75 months in the younger cohort and 53 months in the older cohort (p = 0.004). In subgroup analysis, older patients with recurrent or primary rectal cancer had a median survival of 37 and 70 months, respectively. Postoperative cardiovascular complications were greater in the elderly cohort (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients had better overall QoL but lower survival that is probably related to cardiovascular complications rather than to cancer as both groups had similar R0 resection rate. Hence, the elderly population should be considered equally for PE.

Empty pelvis syndrome: the use of breast prosthesis in the prevention of complications

AIM

Empty pelvis syndrome and radiation-induced bowel injury are two major clinical issues resulting from the pelvic dead space after pelvic exenteration (PE). In order to avoid these complications, different methods of pelvic floor reconstruction have been proposed. We report our experience on the use of breast prosthesis.

METHOD

Fifty-three patients who underwent PE and three who underwent palliative surgery with silicone breast prosthesis placement were included.

RESULTS

Forty-seven posterior PE, six total PE and three palliative procedures were identified. Sphincter preservation was feasible in 34 patients (62.3%). There were no deaths. Overall morbidity was 37.5%. There were no complications such as sepsis or obstruction related to the prosthesis. Adjuvant radiotherapy was delivered in 16 cases (30.1%) without any side-effects. Reconstruction of intestinal continuity was possible in 12 patients (36.3%) with sphincter preservation and the prosthesis allowed a prompt identification of the rectal stump.

CONCLUSION

Breast prosthesis placement is a simple and safe method to minimize complications resulting from empty pelvis syndrome and can be adopted to exclude bowel loops from the radiation field. Reconstruction of intestinal continuity after resection is also simplified.

A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial of Perioperative Palliative Care Surrounding Cancer Surgery for Patients and Their Family Members (PERIOP-PC)

Background: Despite positive outcomes associated with specialist palliative care (PC) in diverse medical populations, little research has investigated specialist PC in surgical ones. Although cancer surgery is predominantly safe, operations can be extensive and unpredictable perioperative morbidity and mortality persist, particularly for patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Objectives and Hypotheses: Our objective is to complete a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing surgeon-PC co-management with surgeon-alone management among patients pursuing curative-intent surgery for upper GI cancers. We hypothesize that perioperative PC will improve patient postsurgical quality of life. This study and design are based on >8 years of engagement and research with patients, family members, and clinicians surrounding major cancer surgery and advance care planning/PC for surgical patients. Methods: Randomized controlled superiority trial with two study arms (surgeon-PC team co-management and surgeon-alone management) and five data collection points over six months. The principal investigator and analysts are blinded to randomization. Setting: Four, geographically diverse, academic tertiary care hospitals. Data collection began December 20, 2018 and continues to December 2020. Participants: Patients recruited from surgical oncology clinics who are undergoing curative-intent surgery for an upper GI cancer. Interventions: In the intervention arm, patients receive care from both their surgical team and a specialist PC team; the PC is provided before surgery, immediately after surgery, and at least monthly until three months postsurgery. Patients randomized to the usual care arm receive care from only the surgical team. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome: patient quality of life. Secondary outcomes: patient: symptom experience, spiritual distress, prognostic awareness, health care utilization, and mortality. Caregiver: quality of life, caregiver burden, spiritual distress, and prognostic awareness. Intent-to-treat analysis will be used. Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been approved by the institutional review boards of all study sites and is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03611309, First received: August 2, 2018).

Pelvic Exenteration for Recurrent and Persistent Cervical Cancer

Background:

Pelvic exenteration (PE) for primary and recurrent cervical cancer has resulted in favorable survival outcomes, but there are controversies about specific prognosis factors, and up to now, there have been no published reports from China. This study aimed to share our experiences of PE, which were performed in a single institution.

Methods:

From January 2009 to January 2016, 38 patients with recurrent or persistent cervical cancer were included in the study, and they were followed up until January 2017. Epidemiological and clinicopathological characteristics of patients were compared for survival outcomes in univariate and Cox hazard regression analysis.

Results:

There were thirty-one and seven patients with recurrent and persistent cervical cancer, respectively. The median age of patients was 45 years (range 29–65 years). Total, anterior, and posterior PE consisted of 52.6%, 28.9%, and 18.4% of cases, respectively. Early and late complications occurred in 21 (55.3%) patients and 15 (39.5%) patients, respectively. Two (5.3%) patients died due to complications related to surgeries within 3 months after PE. The median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 28.5 months (range 9–96 months) and 23 months (range 4–96 months), respectively, and 5-year OS and DFS were 48% and 40%, respectively. Cox hazard regression analysis showed that, the margin status of the incision and mesorectal lymph node status were independent risk factors for OS and DFS.

Conclusion:

In our patients with recurrent and persistent cervical cancer, the practice of PE might achieve favorable survival outcomes.

Trial Registration:

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03291275; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03291275?term=NCT03291275&rank=1.

Total pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) is a radical approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) in case of tumour invasion into the urogenitary tract. The aim of this study is to assess surgical and oncological outcomes of TPE for LARC and LRRC in elderly patients compared to younger patients.

METHODS

All patients who underwent TPE for LARC and LRRC between January 1990 and March 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients aged <70 years were classified as younger and ≥70 years as elderly patients.

RESULTS

In total 126 patients underwent TPE, of whom 88 younger and 38 elderly patients. Elderly patients had a significantly higher number of ASA > II patients (p = 0.01). Indication for surgery LARC (n = 73) and LRRC (n = 53) did not differ significantly. The 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher (p = 0.01) in elderly (13%) compared to younger patients (3%). Elderly patients experienced more anastomotic leakage (p = 0.02). Median overall survival (OS) was 75 months [95%CI 37.1; 112.9] for elderly and 45 months [95%CI 22.4; 67.8] for younger patients (p = 0.77). The 5-year OS rate was 44% in both groups. Median disease specific survival (DSS) was 78 months [95%CI 69.1; 86.9] for elderly and 60 months [95%CI 36.6; 83.4] for younger patients (p = 0.34). The 5-year DSS rate was 57% and 49%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

TPE is an invasive treatment for rectal cancer with high 30-day mortality in elderly patients. Oncological outcomes are similar in elderly and younger patients. Therefore, TPE should not be withheld because of high age only, but careful patient selection is needed.