Lateral pelvic compartment excision during pelvic exenteration

Extraperitoneal lateral pelvic sidewall excision: a novel rectal-sparing approach for lateral locally recurrent rectal cancer

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) involving the lateral pelvic sidewall requires a complex approach to maximize the likelihood of R0 resection, which is the only predictor of survival. The purpose of this report is to describe a novel technique to resect a localized lateral pelvic sidewall LRRC. A 63-year-old male patient was referred for a 15-mm LRRC near the right internal iliac vessels. Endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging excluded any involvement of the pelvic colon or residual rectum. A combined extraperitoneal antero-lateral approach and gluteal access were used to optimize vascular control on the internal iliac vessels, to promptly identify the ureter and to achieve a better posterior exposition of the sciatic notch. This technique allowed a controlled and tailored resection of pelvic sidewall without entering into the abdominal cavity. The postoperative course was uneventful. The pathologic report confirmed clear margins (R0), with one involving obturator lymph node. At 3 months, the patient is alive and free from local re-relapse. A right lung metastasis has occurred, and it was treated by stereotactic radiotherapy. The present report proposes a novel extraperitoneal pelvic sidewall excision to resect lateral LRRC with a colorectal-sparing approach, thus minimizing the risk of exenterative surgery-related complications. A proper selection of patients is mandatory, as the proposed technique could not be generalized as the standard of care in all lateral LRRCs.

Short-term results after robot-assisted surgery for primary rectal cancers requiring beyond total mesorectal excision in multiple compartments

AIM

Rectal cancers requiring beyond total mesorectal excision (bTME) are traditionally operated using an open approach, but the use of minimally invasive robot-assisted procedures is increasing. Introduction of minimal invasive surgery for complex cancer cases could be associated with compromised surgical margins or increased complication rates. Therefore, reporting results both clinical and oncological in large series is important. Since bTME procedure reports are heterogeneous, comparing results is often difficult. In this study, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) classification system was used to describe the bTME surgery according to pelvic compartments.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with primary rectal cancer operated with laparoscopic robot-assisted bTME were prospectively included for 2 years. All patients had tumors that threatened the mesorectal fascia, invaded adjacent organs, and/or involved metastatic pelvic lateral lymph nodes. Short-term clinical outcomes and oncological specimen quality were registered. Surgery was classified according to pelvic compartments resected.

RESULTS

Clear resection margins (R0 resection) were achieved in 95 out of 105 patients (90.5%). About 26% had Accordion Severity Grading System of Surgical Complications grade 3-4 complications and 15% required re-operations. About 7% were converted to open surgery. The number of compartments resected ranged from one to the maximum seven, with 83% having two or three compartments resected. All 10 R1 resections occurred in the lateral and posterior compartments.

CONCLUSIONS

The short-term clinical outcomes and oncological specimen quality after robot-assisted bTME surgery were comparable to previously published open bTME surgery. The description of surgical procedures using the Royal Marsden MRI compartment classification was feasible.

The Role of Pelvic Exenteration in Cervical Cancer: A Review of the Literature

Pelvic exenteration represents a radical procedure aimed at achieving complete tumor resection with negative margins. Although it is the only therapeutic option for some cases of advanced tumors, it is associated with several perioperative complications. We believe that careful patient selection is related to better oncologic outcomes and lower complication rates. The objectives of this review are to identify the most current indications for this intervention, suggest criteria for case selection, evaluate recommendations for perioperative care, and review oncologic outcomes and potential associated complications. To this end, an analysis of English language articles in PubMed was performed, searching for topics such as the indication for pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic neoplasms selection of oncologic cases, the impact of tumor size and extent on oncologic outcomes, preoperative and postoperative surgical management, surgical complications, and outcomes of overall survival and recurrence-free survival.

Late Local Recurrence after Neoadjuvant Therapy and Radical Resection for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) and lately total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) improved local recurrence rates of rectal cancer significantly compared to total mesorectal excision (TME) alone. Yet the occurrence and impact of late local recurrences after many years appears to be a distinct biological problem. We included n = 188 patients with rectal cancer after RCT and radical resection in this study; n = 38 of which had recurrent disease (sites: local (8.0%), liver (6.4%), lung (3.7%)). We found that 68% of all recurrences developed within the first two years. Four patients, however, experience recurrence >8 years after surgery. Here, we report and characterize four cases of late local recurrence (10% of patients with recurrent disease), suggesting that neoadjuvant therapy in principle delays local recurrence.

Improving R0 Resection Rates With a Posterior-First, 2-Stage Approach for En Bloc Resection of Locally Advanced Primary and Recurrent Anorectal Cancers Involving the Deep Pelvic Sidewall

BACKGROUND

Using standard anterior approaches, consistent R0 resection of locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancer involving the deep pelvic sidewall may be unattainable. Therefore, to improve R0 resection rates, we have used a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach to resection of tumors in this location.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes of the first 10 patients operated on using this approach.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective case series review of our prospectively maintained surgical pathology and tumor registries.

SETTING

This study was conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

PATIENTS

Ten patients (6 female individuals, median age 53.5 years) with primary or recurrent anal or rectal cancer treated with a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach were identified.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measures were the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

An R0 resection was achieved in all 10 patients. Nine patients developed 1 or more 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade III complications. Nine patients developed gluteal wound complications ranging from superficial wound dehiscence to flap necrosis. During the follow-up period, 4 patients were found to have metastatic disease and 1 patient had local re-recurrence.

LIMITATIONS

Small cohort with heterogeneous tumors and a short follow-up duration.

CONCLUSION

A posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach has allowed us to achieve consistent R0 resection margins in locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancers involving the deep pelvic sidewall. Poor wound healing of the posterior gluteal incision is a common complication. See Video Abstract.

MEJORANDO LAS TASAS DE RESECCIN R CON UN ABORDAJE DE DOS ETAPAS PRIMERO POSTERIOR PARA LA RESECCIN EN BLOQUE DE CNCERES ANORRECTALES PRIMARIOS Y RECURRENTES LOCALMENTE AVANZADOS QUE AFECTAN LA PARED LATERAL PLVICA PROFUNDA

ANTECEDENTES:Utilizando abordajes anteriores estándares, la resección R0 consistente del cáncer de recto y ano primario y recurrente localmente avanzado involucrando la pared lateral pélvica profunda puede ser inalcanzable. Por lo tanto, para mejorar las tasas de resección R0, hemos empleado un abordaje de 2 etapas primero posterior y luego anterior para la resección de tumores en esta ubicación.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos de los primeros 10 pacientes operados con este abordaje.DISEÑO:Realizamos una revisión retrospectiva de series de casos de nuestros registros de patología quirúrgica y tumores mantenidos prospectivamente.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en la Clínica Mayo en Rochester, Minnesota, EE. UU.PACIENTES:Se identificaron diez pacientes (6 mujeres, mediana de edad 53.5 años) con cáncer anal o rectal primario o recurrente tratados con un abordaje de dos etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las medidas de resultado primarias fueron la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos.RESULTADOS:Se logró una resección R0 en los 10 pacientes. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron una o más complicaciones de grado III de Clavien-Dindo a los 30 días. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron complicaciones de la herida del glúteo que variaron desde dehiscencia superficial de la herida hasta necrosis del colgajo. Durante el período de seguimiento, se encontró que 4 pacientes tenían enfermedad metastásica y un paciente tuvo recurrencia local.LIMITACIONES:Cohorte pequeño con tumores heterogéneos y corta duración de seguimiento.CONCLUSIÓN:Un abordaje en 2 etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior, nos ha permitido lograr márgenes de resección R0 consistentes en cánceres de recto y anal primarios y recurrentes localmente avanzados que afectan la pared lateral pélvica profunda. La mala cicatrización de la incisión glútea posterior es una complicación común. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez).

Navigation-Assisted Surgery for Locally Advanced Primary and Recurrent Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

In some surgical disciplines, navigation-assisted surgery has become standard of care, but in rectal cancer, indications for navigation and the utility of different technologies remain undetermined.

METHODS

The NAVI-LARRC prospective study (NCT04512937; IDEAL Stage 2a) evaluated feasibility of navigation in patients with locally advanced primary (LARC) and recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Included patients had advanced tumours with high risk of incomplete (R1/R2) resection, and navigation was considered likely to improve the probability of complete resection (R0). Tumours were classified according to pelvic compartmental involvement, as suggested by the Royal Marsden group. The BrainlabTM navigation platform was used for preoperative segmentation of tumour and pelvic anatomy, and for intraoperative navigation with optical tracking. R0 resection rates, surgeons' experiences, and adherence to the preoperative resection plan were assessed.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients with tumours involving the posterior/lateral compartments underwent navigation-assisted procedures. Fifteen patients required abdominosacral resection, and 3 had resection of the sciatic nerve. R0 resection was obtained in 6/8 (75%) LARC and 6/9 (69%) LRRC cases. Preoperative segmentation was time-consuming (median 3.5 h), but intraoperative navigation was accurate. Surgeons reported navigation to be feasible, and adherence to the resection plan was satisfactory.

CONCLUSIONS

Navigation-assisted surgery using optical tracking was feasible. The preoperative planning was time-consuming, but intraoperative navigation was accurate and resulted in acceptable R0 resection rates. Selected patients are likely to benefit from navigation-assisted surgery.

The evolution of oncovascular pelvic surgery: A historical perspective

Pelvic exenteration surgery has evolved dramatically in recent decades and now represents the standard of care for many patients with advanced pelvic malignancy. Most recently the use of complex vascular resection and reconstructive techniques have been applied in advanced pelvic oncology surgery at specialist units and these oncovascular techniques are considered one of the frontiers in this field. This article summaries the historical evolution of oncovascular surgery in the pelvis and sets the scene for where this treatment is going. The role of vascular resection and reconstruction in curative treatment of advanced pelvic malignancy is an evolving area that is redefining the boundaries of what was historically thought possible.

Clinical algorithm for the management of advanced pelvic tumours involving the aortoiliac axis

Pelvic exenteration offers potentially curative treatment for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic tumours. Laterally infiltrating tumours involving the pelvic sidewall have historically been considered unresectable. Highly specialised exenteration units have accumulated experience with en bloc resection of part or all of the iliac vascular system for tumours with major vessel involvement. These approaches involve complex vascular dissection and reconstructive techniques requiring collaboration with the vascular surgery unit. Adding to the complexity is the paucity of evidence on oncovascular techniques in the pelvis given its developing nature. An algorithm for the workup to determine resectability and the vascular reconstruction approach for advanced pelvic tumours involving the aortoiliac axis is suggested based on current literature and personal experience from the authors' unit.

Minimum standards of pelvic exenterative practice: PelvEx Collaborative guideline

This document outlines the important aspects of caring for patients who have been diagnosed with advanced pelvic cancer. It is primarily aimed at those who are establishing a service that adequately caters to this patient group. The relevant literature has been summarized and an attempt made to simplify the approach to management of these complex cases.

Updated systematic review of the approach to pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary rectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence regarding surgical advances in the management of primary locally advanced rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND

The management of rectal cancer has evolved significantly in recent decades, with improved (neo)adjuvant treatment strategies and enhanced perioperative protocols. Centralization of care for complex, advanced cases has enabled surgeons in these units to undertake more ambitious surgical procedures.

METHODS

A Pubmed, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane database search was conducted according to the predetermined search strategy. The review protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021245582).

RESULTS

14 studies were identified which reported on the outcomes of 3,188 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) for primary rectal cancer. 50% of patients had neoadjuvant radiotherapy. 24.2% underwent flap reconstruction, 9.4% required a bony resection and 34 patients underwent a major vascular excision. 73.9% achieved R0 resection, with 33.1% experiencing a major complication. Median length of hospital stay ranged from 13 to 19 days. 1.6% of patients died within 30 days of their operation. Five-year overall survival (OS) rates ranged 29%-78%.

LIMITATIONS

The studies included in our review were mostly single-centre observational studies published prior to the introduction of modern neoadjuvant treatment regimens. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis on the basis that most were non-randomized, non-comparative studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic exenteration offers patients with locally advanced rectal cancer the chance of long-term survival with acceptable levels of morbidity. Increased experience facilitates more radical procedures, with the introduction of new platforms and/or reconstructive options.

Understanding the Philosophy, Anatomy, and Surgery of the Extra-TME Plane of Locally Advanced and Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer; Single Institution Experience with International Benchmarking

Simple Summary

Worldwide there is still unwarranted variation in peri-operative management and subsequently oncological outcome following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. The major contributing factor seems to be a difference in treatment strategy with many centres aiming for more neoadjuvant treatment and less radical surgery. However, a radical resection with clear operative margins remains the single most important prognostic factor for survival and therefore an aggressive, radical approach is justified for an optimal oncological outcome and remains the gold standard of care.

Abstract

Pelvic exenteration surgery has become a widely accepted procedure for treatment of locally advanced (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). However, there is still unwarranted variation in peri-operative management and subsequently oncological outcome after this procedure. In this article we will elaborate on the various reasons for the observed differences based on benchmarking results of our own data to the data from the PelvEx collaborative as well as findings from 2 other benchmarking studies. Our main observation was a significant difference in extent of resection between exenteration units, with our unit performing more complete soft tissue exenterations, sacrectomies and extended lateral compartment resections than most other units, resulting in a higher R0 rate and longer overall survival. Secondly, current literature shows there is a tendency to use more neoadjuvant treatment such as re-irradiation and total neoadjuvant treatment and perform less radical surgery. However, peri-operative chemotherapy or radiotherapy should not be a substitute for adequate radical surgery and an R0 resection remains the gold standard. Finally, we describe our experiences with standardizing our surgical approaches to the various compartments and the achieved oncological and functional outcomes.

Re-resection of Microscopically Positive Margins Found on Intraoperative Frozen Section Analysis Does Not Result in a Survival Benefit in Patients Undergoing Surgery and Intraoperative Radiation Therapy for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative frozen-section analysis provides real-time margin resection status that can guide intraoperative decisions made by the surgeon and radiation oncologist. For patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing surgery and intraoperative radiation therapy, intraoperative re-resection of positive margins to achieve negative margins is common practice.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess whether re-resection of positive margins found on intraoperative frozen-section analysis improves oncologic outcomes.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was an analysis of a prospectively maintained multicenter database.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent surgical resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer with intraoperative radiation therapy between 2000 and 2015 were included and followed for 5 years. Three groups were compared: initial R0 resection, initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, and initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection. Grossly positive margin resections (R2) were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measures were 5-year overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and local re-recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 267 patients were analyzed (initial R0 resection, n = 94; initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, n = 95; initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection, n = 78). Overall survival was 4.4 years for initial R0 resection, 2.7 years for initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, and 2.9 years for initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection ( p = 0.01). Recurrence-free survival was 3.0 years for initial R0 resection and 1.8 years for both initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection and initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection ( p ≤ 0.01). Overall survival did not differ for patients with R1 and re-resection R1 or R0 ( p = 0.62). Recurrence-free survival and freedom from local re-recurrence did not differ between groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the heterogeneous patient population restricted to those receiving intraoperative radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Re-resection of microscopically positive margins to obtain R0 status does not appear to provide a significant survival advantage or prevent local re-recurrence in patients undergoing surgery and intraoperative radiation therapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B886 .

LA RERESECCIN DE LOS MRGENES MICROSCPICAMENTE POSITIVOS ENCONTRADOS DE MANERA INTRAOPERATORIA MEDIANTE LA TCNICA DE CRIOSECCIN, NO DA COMO RESULTADO UN BENEFICIO DE SUPERVIVENCIA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGA Y RADIOTERAPIA INTRAOPERATORIA PARA EL CNCER RECTAL LOCALMENTE RECIDIVANTE

ANTECEDENTES:El análisis de la ténica de criosección para los margenes positivos encontrados de manera intraoperatoria proporciona el estado de la resección del margen en tiempo real que puede guiar las decisiones intraoperatorias tomadas por el cirujano y el oncólogo radioterapeuta. Para los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente recurrente que se someten a cirugía y radioterapia intraoperatoria, la re-resección intraoperatoria de los márgenes positivos para lograr márgenes negativos es una práctica común.OBJETIVO:Evaluar si la re-resección de los márgenes positivos encontrados en el análisis de la ténica por criosecciónde manera intraoperatorios mejora los resultados oncológicos.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Análisis de una base de datos multicéntrica mantenida de forma prospectiva.POBLACIÓN:Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a resección quirúrgica de cáncer de recto localmente recurrente con radioterapia intraoperatoria entre 2000 y 2015 fueron incluidos y seguidos durante 5 años. Se compararon tres grupos: resección inicial R0, R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección y R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección. Se excluyeron las resecciones de márgenes macroscópicamente positivos (R2).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Supervivencia global a cinco años, supervivencia sin recidiva y recidiva local.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron un total de 267 pacientes (resección inicial R0 n = 94, R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección n = 95, R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección n = 78). La supervivencia global fue de 4,4 años para la resección inicial R0, 2,7 años para la R1 inicial convertida en R0 después de la re-resección y 2,9 años para la R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección ( p = 0,01). La supervivencia libre de recurrencia fue de 3,0 años para la resección inicial R0 y de 1,8 años para el R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección y el R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección ( p ≤ 0,01). La supervivencia global no difirió para los pacientes con R1 y re-resección R1 o R0 ( p = 0,62). La supervivencia libre de recurrencia y la ausencia de recurrencia local no difirieron entre los grupos.LIMITACIONES:Población de pacientes heterogénea, restringida a aquellos que reciben radioterapia intraoperatoria.CONCLUSIONES:La re-resección de los márgenes microscópicamente positivos para obtener el estado R0 no parece proporcionar una ventaja de supervivencia significativa o prevenir la recurrencia local en pacientes sometidos a cirugía y radioterapia intraoperatoria para el cáncer de recto localmente recurrente. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B886 . (Traducción-Dr. Daniel Guerra ).

Pelvic exenteration: a review of current issues/controversies

Management of advanced or recurrent pelvic cancer has evolved dramatically over the past few decades. Patients who were previously considered inoperable are now candidates for potentially curative surgery and avoid suffering with intractable symptoms. Up to 10% of primary rectal cancers present with isolated advanced local disease and between 10% and 15% of patients develop localized recurrence following proctectomy. Advances in surgical technique, reconstruction and multidisciplinary involvement have led to a reduction in mortality and morbidity and culminated in higher R0 resection rates with superior longer-term survival outcomes. Recent studies boast over 50% 5-year survival for rectal with an R0 resection. Exenteration has cemented itself as an important treatment option for advanced primary/recurrent pelvic tumours, however, there are still a few controversies. This review will discuss some of these issues, including: limitations of resection and the approach to high/wide tumours; the role of acute exenteration; re-exenteration; exenteration in the setting of metastatic disease and palliation; the role of radiotherapy (including intra-operative and re-irradiation); management of the empty pelvis; and the impact on quality of life and function.

Extended pelvic resection for gynecological malignancies: A review of out-of-the-box surgery

The term 'out-of-the-box surgery' in gynecologic oncology was recently coined to describe the resection of tumor growing out of the endopelvic cavity. In the specific case of pelvic sidewall involvement, a laterally extended pelvic resection may be required. As previously defined by Höckel, this resection requires the en bloc removal of structures including the pelvic sidewall muscles, bones, nerves, and/or major vessels. This complex radical procedure leads to tumor-free margins in more than 75% of the patients, with reliable functional results. The rate of recurrence and overall survival are directly correlated with clear resection margins. Progress in imaging, surgical techniques, and perioperative care currently offer the opportunity to attempt surgical curative resection in selected patients for whom palliative therapy was the only alternative. However, the procedure is associated with a high rate of major postoperative complications affecting up to 60% of patients. Multidisciplinary expert centers are the most likely to achieve this complex surgery with favorable oncological outcomes. The aim of this review is to summarize the key issues of out-of-the-box surgery in gynecologic cancer.

Contemporary Management of Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Views from the PelvEx Collaborative

Pelvic exenteration is a complex operation performed for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic cancers. The goal of surgery is to achieve clear margins, therefore identifying adjacent or involved organs, bone, muscle, nerves and/or vascular structures that may need resection. While these extensive resections are potentially curative, they can be associated with substantial morbidity. Recently, there has been a move to centralize care to specialized units, as this facilitates better multidisciplinary care input. Advancements in pelvic oncology and surgical innovation have redefined the boundaries of pelvic exenterative surgery. Combined with improved neoadjuvant therapies, advances in diagnostics, and better reconstructive techniques have provided quicker recovery and better quality of life outcomes, with improved survival This article provides highlights of the current management of advanced pelvic cancers in terms of surgical strategy and potential future developments.

Preoperative assessment and optimisation for pelvic exenteration in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer: A review

The pre-operative phase in planning a pelvic exenteration or extended resections is critical to optimising patient outcomes. This review summarises the key components of preoperative assessment and planning in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LLRC) being considered for potential curative resection. The preoperative period can be considered in 5 key phases: 1) Multidisciplinary meeting (MDT) review and recommendation for neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, 2) Anaesthetic preoperative assessment of fitness for surgery and quantification of risk, 3) Shared decision making with the patient and the process of informed consent, 4) Prehabilitation and physiological optimisation 5) Technical aspects of surgical planning. This review will focus on patients who have been recommended for surgery by the MDT and have completed neoadjuvant therapy. Other important considerations beyond the scope of this review are the various neoadjuvant strategies employed which in this patient group include Total Neo-adjuvant Therapy and reirradiation. Critical to improving perioperative outcomes is the dual aim of achieving a negative resection margin in a patient fit enough for extended surgery. Advanced, realistic communication is required pre-operatively and should be maintained throughout recovery. Optimising patient's physiological and psychological reserve with a preoperative prehabilitation programme is important, with physiotherapy, psychological and nutritional input. From a surgical perspective, image based technical preoperative planning is important to identify risk points and ensure correct surgical strategy. Careful attention to the entire patient journey through these 5 preoperative phases can optimise outcomes with the accumulation of marginal gains at multiple timepoints.

Surgical treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer: a narrative review

Objective

To summarize the recent literature on surgical treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

Background

LRRC is a heterogeneous disease that requires a multidisciplinary treatment approach. The treatment and prognosis depend on the site and type of recurrence. Radical resection remains the primary method for achieving long-term survival and improving symptom control. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy can reduce tumor volume and improve the R0 resection rate. Surgeons must clearly understand pelvic anatomy, develop a detailed preoperative plan, adopt a multidisciplinary approach for the surgical resection of the tumor as well as any invaded soft tissues, vessels, and bones, and ensure proper reconstruction. However, extended radical surgery often leads to a higher risk of postoperative complications and a low quality of life.

Methods

We searched English-language articles with keywords “locally recurrent rectal cancer”, “surgery” and “multidisciplinary team” in PubMed published between January 2000 to October 2020.

Conclusions

LRRC is a complex problem. Long-term survival is not impossible following multidisciplinary treatment in appropriately selected LRRC patients. The management of LRRC relies on a specialist team that determines the biological behavior of the tumor and evaluates treatment options through multidisciplinary discussions, thereby balancing the surgical costs and benefits, alleviating postoperative complications, and improving patients’ quality of life.

Laterally Extended Endopelvic Resection Versus Chemo or Targeted Therapy Alone for Pelvic Sidewall Recurrence of Cervical Cancer

Background

Laterally extended endopelvic resection (LEER) has been introduced for treatment of pelvic sidewall recurrence of cervical cancer (PSRCC), which occurs in only 8% of patients with relapsed cervical cancer. LEER can only be performed by a proficient surgeon due to the high risk of surgical morbidity and mortality, but there is no evidence as to whether LEER is may be more effective than chemo or targeted therapy alone for PSRCC. Thus, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between LEER and chemo or targeted therapy alone for treatment of PSRCC.

Methods

We prospectively recruited patients with PSRCC who underwent LEER between December 2016 and December 2019. Moreover, we retrospectively collected data on patients with PSRCC who received chemo or targeted therapy alone between January 2000 and December 2019. We compared treatment-free interval (TFI), progression-free survival (PFS), treatment-free survival (TFS), overall survival (OS), tumor response, neurologic disturbance of the low extremities, and pelvic pain severity in the different patient groups.

Results

Among 1295 patients with cervical cancer, we included 28 (2.2%) and 31 (2.4%) in the prospective and retrospective cohorts, respectively. When we subdivided all patients into two groups based on the median value of prior TFI (PTFI, 9.2 months), LEER improved TFI, PFS, TRS and OS compared to chemo or targeted therapy alone (median, 2.8 vs. 0.9; 7.4 vs. 4.1; 30.1 vs. 16.9 months; P ≤ 0.05) in patients with PTFI < 9.2 months despite no difference in survival in those with PTFI ≥ 9.2 months, suggesting that LEER may lead to better TFI, PFS, TRS and OS in patients with PTFI < 9.2 months (adjusted hazard ratios, 0.28, 0.27, 0.44 and 0.37; 95% confidence intervals, 0.12-0.68, 0.11-0.66, 0.18-0.83 and 0.15-0.88). Furthermore, LEER markedly reduced the number of morphine milligram equivalents necessary to reduce pelvic pain when compared with chemo or targeted therapy alone.

Conclusion

Compared to chemo or targeted therapy alone, LEER improved survival in patients with PSRCC and PTFI < 9.2 months, and it was effective at controlling the pelvic pain associated with PSRCC.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02986568.

Sciatic and Femoral Nerve Resection During Extended Radical Surgery for Advanced Pelvic Tumours: Long-term Survival, Functional, and Quality-of-life Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To report survival, functional, and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes after extended radical resection for advanced pelvic tumors with en bloc sciatic or femoral nerve resection.

BACKGROUND

Advanced pelvic tumors involving the sciatic or femoral nerve have traditionally been considered inoperable. Small studies have suggested acceptable functional outcomes can be achieved after pelvic exenteration with en bloc sciatic nerve resection.

METHOD

Consecutive patients who underwent extended radical pelvic surgery with en bloc resection of the sciatic or femoral nerves at a single center were included.

RESULTS

Of 713 radical pelvic resections, 68 patients (9.5%) had en bloc sciatic or femoral nerve resection. Complete sciatic, partial sciatic, and complete femoral nerve resection was performed in 26 (38%), 38 (56%), and 4 patients (6%), respectively. Overall and major postoperative complication rates were 63% and 40%, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in 65% of patients, which translated to 55% and 76% overall and local recurrence-free 5-year survival in those with colorectal cancer. Twenty-two (96%) and 25 (92%) patients could mobilize independently after complete and partial sciatic nerve resection, respectively. Physical QoL was significantly lower at 6 months after surgery compared with baseline (P = 0.041), but returned to baseline at 12 months (P = 0.163). There was no difference in mental or overall QoL at 6 or 12 months compared with baseline.

CONCLUSION

En bloc sciatic and femoral nerve resection can be performed during extended radical pelvic resections with morbidity and survival outcomes comparable with existing exenteration literature, including in patients with recurrent rectal cancer. Physical QoL may be impaired after surgery, but returns to baseline by 12 months.

Pathology reporting of pelvic exenteration specimens for locally recurrent rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Reporting of pelvic exenteration specimens for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) can be challenging for structured pathological analysis and currently, there is a lack of specific guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of pathology reporting in a cohort of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC in a high-volume tertiary unit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of histopathology reports of consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC from 1996 to 2018, the quality of pathology reporting was assessed using the Structure Reporting Protocol for Colorectal Cancer. The primary endpoint was the completeness of pathology reporting, secondary endpoints were the association between the reporting style (narrative versus synoptic), reporting period (the first half versus the second half), as well as the activity of the pathologists with the completeness of pathology reporting.

RESULTS

221 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC were included into the study. There was a high variability in completeness of pathology reporting within the cohort, ranging from 9.5% to 100%. Notably, microscopic clearance was reported in only 92.4% of the reports. Overall, a significantly higher rate of completeness was observed in synoptic reports when compared to narrative reports and in more recent compared to earlier reports. There was no significant association between the activity of pathologists and the completeness of reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a significant variability in the quality of reporting in pelvic exenteration for LRRC. The use of synoptic reporting clearly resulted in more complete reports.

Pelvic exenteration: Pre-, intra-, and post-operative considerations

This review outlines the role of pelvic exenteration (PE) in the management of certain locally-advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancers. PE has undergone significant evolution over the past decades. Advances in pre-, intra-, and post-operative care have been directed towards achieving the 'holy grail' of an R0 resection, which remains the most important predictor of survival, quality of life, morbidity, and cost effectiveness following PE. Patient selection for surgery is largely determined by assessment of resectability. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging determines the extent of local disease, while positron emission tomography remains the most accurate tool for exclusion of distant metastases. PE in the setting of metastatic disease or with palliative intent remains controversial. The intra-operative approach is based on the anatomical division of the pelvis into five compartments (anterior, central, posterior, and two lateral). Within each compartment are various possible dissection planes which are elected depending on the extent of tumour involvement. Innovations in surgical technique have allowed 'higher and wider' dissection planes with resultant en bloc excision of major vessels, major nerves, and bone. Evidence of improved R0 resection and survival rates with these techniques justifies the radicality of these novel approaches. Post-operative care for PE patients is technically demanding with a substantial hospital resource burden. Unique considerations for PE patients include the 'empty pelvis syndrome', urological complications, and management of post-operative malnutrition. While undeniably a morbid procedure, quality of life largely returns to baseline at six months, and for long-term survivors is sustained for up to five years.

Excellent Outcomes After Extended Radical Pelvic Resection for Locally Advanced and Recurrent IBD-Associated Anorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Anorectal cancer arising in IBD can be challenging to manage. There is a paucity of reports describing locally advanced and recurrent anorectal cancer in this setting.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to describe patients who underwent extended radical pelvic resection for locally advanced and recurrent IBD-associated anorectal cancer.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of extended radical pelvic resection.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a quaternary pelvic malignancy referral center.

PATIENTS

All of the patients who underwent extended radical pelvic resection for IBD-associated anorectal cancer between September 1994 and September 2019 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic, operative, and oncologic outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Ten patients (1.3%) were identified of 765 (6 men; median age = 51 y). The average time from the diagnosis of IBD to cancer was 23 years. Five patients had surgery for primary cancer previously. All of the patients had previous complex abdominal and perineal surgical interventions. There were 7 adenocarcinomas and 3 squamous cell carcinomas. Nine underwent pelvic exenteration and 1 rectal resection with radical vaginectomy. The median operating time, intraoperative blood loss, and blood transfusion were 698 minutes, 1.8 L, and 4.5 units. The median hospital stay was 24 days. The operative mortality and morbidity rates were 0% and 60%. At a median follow-up of 51.3 months, 7 patients remained alive and free of cancer.

LIMITATIONS

This is a retrospective study of a small number of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended radical pelvic resection offers a potential cure for locally advanced and recurrent IBD-associated anorectal cancer with acceptable operative mortality and morbidity rates. A high index of suspicion is required to achieve early diagnosis. Multiple factors need to be considered in the multimodal treatment of such complex patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B418.

EXCELENTES RESULTADOS DESPUS DE LA RESECCIN PLVICA RADICAL EXTENDIDA POR CNCER ANORRECTAL RECURRENTE Y LOCALMENTE AVANZADA, ASOCIADA A ENFERMEDAD INFLAMATORIA INTESTINAL

ANTECEDENTES:Cáncer anorrectal surgiendo de la enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, puede ser difícil de manejar. Hay escasez de informes que describan el cáncer anorrectal localmente avanzado y recurrente en este contexto.OBJETIVO:El estudio tiene como objetivo, describir a los pacientes que se sometieron a resección pélvica radical extendida por cáncer anorrectal recurrente y localmente avanzada, asociada con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.DISEÑO:Esta es una revisión retrospectiva, de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente de resección pélvica radical extendida.AJUSTES:El estudio se realizó en un centro de referencia cuaternaria en malignidad pélvica.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron a todos los pacientes sometidos a resección pélvica radical ampliada por cáncer anorrectal, asociada a enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal entre septiembre de 1994 y septiembre de 2019.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se evaluaron los resultados demográficos, quirùrgicos y oncológicos.RESULTADOS:Diez pacientes (1.3%) fueron identificados de 765 (seis masculinos; mediana de edad 51 años). El tiempo promedio desde el diagnóstico de la enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal hasta el cáncer, fue de 23 años. Cinco pacientes fueron previamente sometidos a cirugía por cáncer primario. Todos los pacientes tuvieron previamente, intervenciones quirúrgicas abdominales y perineales complejas. Hubo siete adenocarcinomas y tres carcinomas de células escamosas. Nueve se sometieron a exenteración pélvica y una a resección rectal con vaginectomía radical. La mediana del tiempo de operación, pérdida de sangre intraoperatoria y transfusión sanguínea, fueron 698 minutos, 1.8 litros y 4.5 unidades respectivamente. La mediana de la estancia hospitalaria fue de 24 días. Las tasas de mortalidad y morbilidad operatoria fueron 0% y 60% respectivamente. En una mediana de seguimiento de 51,3 meses, siete pacientes permanecieron vivos y libres de cáncer.LIMITACIONES:Es un estudio retrospectivo con número pequeño de pacientes.CONCLUSIONES:La resección pélvica radical extendida, ofrece una cura potencial para el cáncer anorrectal recurrente y localmente avanzada, asociada a0 enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal y con tasas aceptables de mortalidad y morbilidad operatoria. Se requiere un alto índice de sospecha para obtener un diagnóstico temprano. Se deben considerar múltiples factores en el tratamiento multimodal de pacientes tan complejos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B418. (Traducción-Dr Fidel Ruiz Healy).

Pelvic exenteration for colorectal and non-colorectal cancer: a comparison of perioperative and oncological outcome

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.

Pelvic exenteration combined with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for advanced primary or recurrent colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases

AIM

The aim was to report early outcomes of six patients who underwent combined pelvic exenteration (PE), cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer with colorectal peritoneal metastases at a single centre. The literature contains limited data on the safety and oncological outcomes of patients who undergo this combined procedure.

METHODS

Six patients who underwent combined PE, CRS and HIPEC at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, between January 2017 and February 2020 were identified and included. Data were extracted from prospectively maintained databases.

RESULTS

Three patients underwent surgery for advanced primary rectal cancer, while two patients had recurrent sigmoid cancer and one had recurrent rectal cancer. All patients had synchronous peritoneal metastases. Two patients required total PE and two patients had a central (bladder-sparing) PE. The median peritoneal carcinomatosis index was 6 (range 3-12) and all patients underwent a complete cytoreduction. The median operating time was 702 min (range 485-900) and the median blood loss was 1650 ml (range 700-12,000). The median length of intensive care unit and hospital stay was 4.5 and 25 days, respectively. There was no inpatient, 30-day or 90-day mortality. Three patients (50%) experienced a major (Clavien-Dindo III/IV) complication. At a median follow-up of 11.5 months (range 2-18 months), two patients died with recurrent disease, one patient was alive with recurrence, while three patients remain alive and disease-free. Of the three patients who developed recurrent disease, one had isolated pelvic recurrence, one had pelvic and peritoneal recurrences and one had bone metastases.

CONCLUSION

Early results from this initial experience with simultaneous PE, CRS and HIPEC suggest that this combined procedure is safe and feasible; however, the long-term oncological and quality of life outcomes require further investigation.

Preemptive Femoral-Femoral Crossover Grafting of Artery and Vein Before Pelvic Exenterative Surgery for Locally Advanced and Recurrent Pelvic Malignancy Involving the Aortoiliac Axis

INTRODUCTION

Achieving a negative resection through a pelvic exenteration for a recurrent or an advanced pelvic malignancy offers the potential for cure. Exenterative surgical units have expanded the boundaries and redefined what constitutes resectable disease through improved surgical technique. In selected cases, contiguous tumor involvement of the aortoiliac axis requires en bloc resection and subsequent vessel reconstruction. However, vascular reconstruction can be challenging in a contaminated field during an extended radical resection.

TECHNIQUE

The aim of this Technical Note is to describe a novel method in the management of patients with recurrent or advanced pelvic malignancy involving the aortoiliac axis by performing preemptive femoral-femoral arterial and venous crossover grafts, with adjunctive arteriovenous loop fistula formation before undergoing an extended radical pelvic resection 4 weeks later.

RESULTS

Four patients have undergone preemptive femoral-femoral arterial and venous crossover grafts at our institution (median age = 60 y (range, 47-66 y); 2 women). There were no early complications, and all of the patients subsequently underwent extended radical pelvic resections for a pelvic malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Preemptive vascular reconstruction before major pelvic surgery reduces the risk of graft infection because this method avoids the wounds being contaminated by GI or genitourinary organisms. Other advantages to this technique include a reduction in the overall operating time for the pelvic exenteration, a significant reduction in the ischemia time to the lower limbs, and ensuring that the grafts are patent before embarking on major intra-abdominal surgery.

Outcomes of extended radical resections for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic malignancy involving the aortoiliac axis

AIM

Currently, there is no clear consensus on the role of extended pelvic resections for locally advanced or recurrent disease involving major vascular structures. The aims of this study were to report the outcomes of consecutive patients undergoing extended resections for pelvic malignancy involving the aortoiliac axis.

METHODS

Prospective data were collected on patients having extended radical resections for locally advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancies, with aortoiliac axis involvement, requiring en bloc vascular resection and reconstruction, at a single institution between 2014 and 2018.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were included (median age 60 years; range 31-69 years; seven women). The majority required resection of both arterial and venous systems (n = 8), and the technique for vascular reconstruction was either interposition grafts or femoral-femoral crossover grafts. The median operative time was 510 min (range 330-960 min). Clear resection margins (R0) were achieved in nine patients. The median length of stay was 25 days (range 7-83 days). Seven patients did not suffer an early complication. There was one serious complication (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3), an arterial graft occlusion secondary to thrombus in the immediate postoperative period, requiring a return to theatre and thrombectomy. The median length of follow-up in this study was 22 months (range 4-58 months).

CONCLUSION

This series demonstrates that en bloc major vascular resection and reconstruction can be performed safely and can achieve clear resection margins in selected patients with locally advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancy at specialist surgery centres.

Referral patterns and outcomes of a highly specialised pelvic exenteration multidisciplinary team meeting: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to review recommendations made from a specialist pelvic exenteration (PE) multidisciplinary team (MDT) and to provide insights as to the impact of the MDT on patient selection and clinical decision making.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital's PE MDT between June 2014 and December 2015. Data was collected from the recorded minutes of MDT meetings. Referral information and clinical data was extracted from individual patient files. Additional data including operative dates and surgical resection margins were collected from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Of the 183 patients considered for PE during the MDT meeting, 104 (57%) were recommended for surgery. Factors that influenced the recommendation in favour of surgery were referral by a surgeon (P = 0.004), referral from a rural location (P = 0.05) and having locally advanced primary cancer (P < 0.001). Patients who were seen by the unit's surgeon prior to the MDT did not impact on the MDT recommendation nor the decision for or against surgery (P = 0.771). The most common reason for recommendation against PE was unresectable distant metastatic disease (43%).

CONCLUSIONS

The PE MDT meeting is a critical step in the patient care pathway and facilitates critical decision making. Anatomically-based contraindications to surgery (i.e. involvement of adjacent organs, bone and neurovascular structures) do not appear to influence MDT decision making regarding resectability.

Pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer-how much more?

There have been significant advances in the surgical management of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer in recent decades. Patient with advanced pelvic tumours involving adjacent organs and neurovascular structures, beyond the traditional mesorectal planes, who would have traditionally been considered irresectable at many centres, now undergo surgery routinely at specialised units. While high rates of morbidity and mortality were reported by the pioneers of pelvic exenteration (PE) in early literature, this is now considered historical data. In 2019, patients who undergo PE for advanced or recurrent rectal cancer can expect reasonable rates of long-term survival (up to 60% at 5 years) and acceptable morbidity and quality of life. This article describes the surgical techniques that have been developed for radical multivisceral pelvic resections and reviews contemporary outcomes.

Pushing the boundaries of pelvic exenteration by maintaining survival at the cost of morbidity

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration (PE) provides a potentially curative option for advanced or recurrent malignancy confined to the pelvis. A clear (R0) resection margin is the strongest prognostic factor predicting long-term survival, driving most technical advances in PE surgery. The aim of this cohort study was to describe changing trends in extent of resection, postoperative complications, mortality and overall survival after PE surgery.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent PE for advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancy at a single institution in Sydney, Australia, were identified. The cohort was divided into three groups based on time periods reflecting annual surgical volume: 1994-2006 (20 or fewer procedures per year), 2007-2013 (21-50 procedures per year) and 2014-2017 (over 50 procedures per year). Primary outcomes were extent of resection, postoperative complications, 60-day mortality and 3-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes were patient characteristics, receipt of neoadjuvant therapy and duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

There were increases over time in rates of lateral and posterior compartment resections (P < 0·001), and bony pelvis (P = 0·002) and neurovascular (P < 0·001) excision. For patients undergoing reconstruction, the proportion receiving vertical rectus abdominus myocutaneous flaps increased significantly (P = 0·005). Rates of wound infection, dehiscence, and abdominal and pelvic collections increased over the study interval. Short-term mortality decreased, and 1- and 3-year survival rates improved.

CONCLUSION

Technical and surgical advancements have led to more complex PE resections, with R0 and mortality rates improving with higher annual volume. There were associated increases in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity.

Anatomical Variations of Iliac Vein Tributaries and Their Clinical Implications During Complex Pelvic Surgeries

BACKGROUND

During high sacrectomies and lateral pelvic compartment exenterations, isolating the external and internal iliac veins within the presacral area is crucial to avoid inadvertent injury and severe hemorrhage. Anatomical variations of external iliac vein tributaries have not been previously described, whereas multiple classifications of internal iliac vein tributaries exist.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to clarify the iliac venous system anatomy using soft-embalmed cadavers.

DESIGN

This is a descriptive study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted in Chulalongkorn University, Thailand.

PATIENTS

We examined 40 iliac venous systems from 20 human cadavers (10 males, 10 females).

INTERVENTIONS

Blue resin dye infused into the inferior vena cava highlighted the iliac venous system, which was meticulously dissected and traced to their draining organs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Iliac vein tributaries and their valvular system were documented and analyzed.

RESULTS

The external iliac vein classically receives 2 tributaries (inferior epigastric and deep circumflex iliac) near the inguinal ligament. However, external iliac vein tributaries in the presacral area were found in 20 venous systems among 15 cadavers (75%). The mean diameter of each tributary was 4.0 ± 0.35 mm, with 72% arising laterally. We propose a simplified classification for internal iliac vein variations: pattern 1 in 12 cadavers (60%) where a single internal iliac vein joins a single external iliac vein to drain into the common iliac vein; pattern 2 in 7 cadavers (35%) where the internal iliac vein is duplicated; and pattern 3 in 1 cadaver (5%) where bilateral internal iliac veins drain into a common trunk before joining the common iliac vein bifurcation.

LIMITATIONS

This study is limited by the number of cadavers included.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive understanding of previously unreported highly prevalent external iliac vein tributaries in the presacral region is vital during complex pelvic surgery. A simplified classification of internal iliac vein variations is proposed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A900.

Short- and long-term outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration surgery in a low-volume specialized tertiary setting

BACKGROUND

Most published data on pelvic exenteration comes from high-volume quaternary units, with limited data available from outside of this setting. This study reports outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration performed in a low-volume tertiary unit with multidisciplinary support.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration surgery for rectal/anal carcinoma, or gynaecological malignancy at Royal Adelaide Hospital between June 2008 and September 2018. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier analysis of 5-year disease-free and overall survival for patients treated with curative intent were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration were included. Most patients presented with primary rectal adenocarcinoma, and posterior and total pelvic exenterations were the most common operations performed (>90%). Median total operating time was 323 min, median hospital stay was 15 days, and the readmission rate was 14.8%. The overall complication rate (per patient) was 70.4%, and the re-intervention rate was 20.4%. Thirteen percent of patients required intensive care unit-admission, and there was one postoperative death (1.9%). R0 resection margins were achieved in 81.5% of patients, with R1 and R2 margins in 13.0 and 5.6% of patients, respectively. Estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 38.8%, and 5-year overall survival was 65.7%.

CONCLUSION

Short- and long-term outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration surgery are acceptable in a low-volume specialized tertiary setting with suitable multidisciplinary expertise. If the required expertise is not readily available, then outside referral is recommended.

Influence of the level of sacrectomy on survival in patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Exenterative surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer may involve partial sacrectomy to achieve complete resection. High sacrectomy is technically challenging, and can be associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of the level of sacrectomy on the survival of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was an international multicentre retrospective analysis of patients undergoing exenterative abdominosacrectomy between July 2006 and June 2016. High sacrectomy was defined as resection at or above the junction of S2-S3; low sacrectomy was below the S2-S3 junction. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to assess overall survival and cancer-specific survival. Predictive factors were determined using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 345 patients were identified, of whom 91 underwent high sacrectomy and 254 low sacrectomy. There was no difference in 5-year overall survival (53 versus 44·1 per cent; P = 0·216) or cancer-specific survival (60 versus 56·1 per cent; P = 0·526) between high and low sacrectomy. Negative margin rates were similar for primary and recurrent disease: 65 of 90 (72 per cent) versus 97 of 153 (63·4 per cent) (P = 0·143). Level of sacrectomy was not a significant predictor of mortality (P = 0·053). Positive resection margin and advancing age were the only significant predictors for death, with hazard ratios of 2·78 (P < 0·001) and 1·02 (P = 0·020) respectively.

CONCLUSION

There was no survival difference between patients who underwent high or low sacrectomy. In appropriately selected patients, high sacrectomy is feasible and safe.

Laterally Extended Pelvic Resection for Gynaecological Malignancies: A Multicentric Experience with Out-of-the-Box Surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate morbidity and oncological outcome in a multicentre series of women with gynaecological malignancies infiltrating pelvic side wall (PSW) that received laterally extended pelvic resection (LEPR).

METHODS

Patients operated between 2007 and 2017 at three institutions were included. LEPR was defined as an en bloc lateral resection of a pelvic tumour involving sidewall muscle, and/or bone, and/or major nerve, and/or major vascular structure. Postsurgical complications and survivals were evaluated.

RESULTS

Sixty-three women with gynaecological tumours involving PSW were treated with LEPR. Five women underwent primary LEPR, whereas 58 (92%) patients needed LEPR because of recurrence. Twenty-four women (38%) received previous radiation therapy before the surgery. R0 resection was achieved in 54 patients (85.7%), whereas the pathologic margins were microscopically and macroscopically positive in 8 (12.7%) patients and 1 (1.6%) patient, respectively. There was one perioperative death, whereas major postoperative complications occurred in 17 patients (27.7%). Thirty (47.5%) women experienced recurrences: 24/54 (44.4%) were in the R0 group, and 6/9 (66.6%) were in the R1 group, with a median PFS of 15 months and 7 months, respectively (p = 0.024). In total, 11 of 54 (20.3%) patients died of disease in the R0 group and 5 of 9 (55.5%) in the R1 group; a median OS was not reached and was 32 months for R0 and R1 groups, respectively (p = 0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

Involvement of the PSW should not prevent obtaining R0 resection. Although the LEPR is associated with considerable morbidity (≈ 30%), a long-term survival seems to be achieved in those women with complete resection.

Transperineal retropubic approach in total pelvic exenteration for advanced and recurrent colorectal and anal cancer involving the penile base: technique and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Complete pathological resection of locally advanced and recurrent anorectal cancer is considered the most important determinant of survival outcome. Involvement of the retropubic space with cancer threatening or involving the penile base poses specific challenges due to the potential for margin involvement and blood loss from the dorsal venous plexus. In the present study we evaluate a new transperineal surgical approach to excision of anterior compartment organs involved or threatened by cancer which facilitates exposure and visualisation of the bulbar urethra and the deep vein of the penis caudal to the retropubic space and penile base.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on male patients with tumour extension into the penile base treated at our institution using the transperineal surgical approach. Descriptive data for patient demographics, radiology, operative details, postoperative histology, complications and outcomes were collated.

RESULTS

Ten male patients with tumour extension into the penile base were identified. Two patients had recurrent anal cancer, 6 had locally advanced primary rectal cancer and 2 had recurrent rectal cancer. All patients had exenterative surgery with excision of the penile base utilising the transperineal approach. All patients had R0 resection. No local recurrence developed after a median follow up period of 15 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The transperineal approach to the penile base and retropubic space allows for high rates of R0 resection margin status with direct visualisation of the dorsal venous plexus, thereby minimising blood loss. In our experience, this technique is the preferred approach to excision of cancers threatening and involving the penile base and also for most male patients requiring total pelvic exenteration.

[Resection of recurrent rectal cancer]

A curative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) can only be achieved with a complete resection and microscopically tumor-free surgical margins (R0). Imaging techniques are the most important investigations for the preoperative staging of local and systemic diseases. Due to substantial improvements in surgical strategies and techniques, previously unresectable tumors can now be excised. Several publications have demonstrated the oncological benefits of high sacral resection for LRRC. High subcortical sacrectomy (HiSS), extended lateral resection and extended lateral pelvic sidewall excision (ELSiE) belong to the newer surgical options. Biological meshes, various myocutaneous flaps, titanium and bone allografts can be used for reconstruction. Specialized centers provide an efficient management of complications and postoperative treatment.

Pelvic local recurrence from colorectal cancer: surgical challenge with changing preconditions

AIM

Although the rate of local recurrence (LR) after colorectal cancer surgery has decreased, it still poses major surgical and oncological challenges. The aims of this study, based on an audit from a tertiary referral centre, was to evaluate determinants associated with outcomes after surgery for pelvic LR and how these have changed over time.

METHOD

Retrospective analysis of all resections for pelvic LR of colorectal cancer performed at the Karolinska University Hospital from January 2003 until August 2009 (period 1) and from September 2009 until November 2013 (period 2) .

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients with pelvic LR were operated on with a curative intent. An R0 resection was achieved in 77% and an R1 resection in 23%. Lateral compartments were invaded in 48% and this proportion increased in resections performed in period 2 (37% vs 60%, P = 0.05). R1 resections were associated with a higher risk of local re-recurrence than R0 resections (64% vs 16%; OR = 8.90, 95% CI: 2.71-29.78). Lateral recurrences were associated with a lower R0-resection rate than nonlateral recurrences (63% vs 90%; OR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.64) and a higher risk of treatment failure in terms of local re-recurrence or distant metastases, or death, as first event (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.06-2.75). However, in a multivariate analysis only R1 resections remained a significant prognostic factor for treatment failure (HR = 2.37, 95% CI: 1.32-4.27).

CONCLUSION

The proportion of lateral pelvic recurrences has increased over time. In comparison with non-lateral LRs, lateral LRs are more difficult to resect radically and are associated with worse overall and disease-free survival. However, with radical surgery many patients with pelvic locally recurrent colorectal cancer may be offered curative treatment.

Factors affecting outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is associated with variable outcomes, with the majority of data from single-centre series. This study analysed data from an international collaboration to determine robust parameters that could inform clinical decision-making.

METHODS

Anonymized data on patients who had pelvic exenteration for LRRC between 2004 and 2014 were accrued from 27 specialist centres. The primary endpoint was survival. The impact of resection margin, bone resection, node status and use of neoadjuvant therapy (before exenteration) was assessed.

RESULTS

Of 1184 patients, 614 (51·9 per cent) had neoadjuvant therapy. A clear resection margin (R0 resection) was achieved in 55·4 per cent of operations. Twenty-one patients (1·8 per cent) died within 30 days and 380 (32·1 per cent) experienced a major complication. Median overall survival was 36 months following R0 resection, 27 months after R1 resection and 16 months following R2 resection (P < 0·001). Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy had more postoperative complications (unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·53), readmissions (unadjusted OR 2·33) and radiological reinterventions (unadjusted OR 2·12). Three-year survival rates were 48·1 per cent, 33·9 per cent and 15 per cent respectively. Bone resection (when required) was associated with a longer median survival (36 versus 29 months; P < 0·001). Node-positive patients had a shorter median overall survival than those with node-negative disease (22 versus 29 months respectively). Multivariable analysis identified margin status and bone resection as significant determinants of long-term survival.

CONCLUSION

Negative margins and bone resection (where needed) were identified as the most important factors influencing overall survival. Neoadjuvant therapy before pelvic exenteration did not affect survival, but was associated with higher rates of readmission, complications and radiological reintervention.