Posterior high sacral segmental disconnection prior to anterior en bloc exenteration for recurrent rectal cancer

Contemporary results from the PelvEx collaborative: improvements in surgical outcomes for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

The PelvEx Collaborative collates global data on outcomes following exenterative surgery for locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LARC and LRRC, respectively). The aim of this study is to report contemporary data from within the collaborative and benchmark it against previous PelvEx publications.

METHOD

Anonymized data from 45 units that performed pelvic exenteration for LARC or LRRC between 2017 and 2021 were reviewed. The primary endpoints were surgical outcomes, including resection margin status, radicality of surgery, rates of reconstruction and associated morbidity and/or mortality.

RESULTS

Of 2186 patients who underwent an exenteration for either LARC or LRRC, 1386 (63.4%) had LARC and 800 (36.6%) had LRRC. The proportion of males to females was 1232:954. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range 52-71 years) compared with a median age of 63 in both historical LARC and LRRC cohorts. Compared with the original reported PelvEx data (2004-2014), there has been an increase in negative margin (R0) rates from 79.8% to 84.8% and from 55.4% to 71.7% in the LARC and LRRC cohorts, respectively. Bone resection and flap reconstruction rates have increased accordingly in both cohorts (8.2%-19.6% and 22.6%-32% for LARC and 20.3%-41.9% and 17.4%-32.1% in LRRC, respectively). Despite this, major morbidity has not increased.

CONCLUSION

In the modern era, patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for advanced rectal cancer are undergoing more radical surgery and are more likely to achieve a negative resection margin (R0) with no increase in major morbidity.

Improving Surgical Outcomes in Pelvic Exenteration Surgery: Comparison of Prone Sacrectomy With Anterior Cortical Sacrectomy Techniques

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of changing our sacrectomy approach from prone to anterior on surgical and oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND

In patients with advanced pelvic malignancy involving the sacrum, pelvic exenteration (PE) with en-bloc sacrectomy is the only potential curative option but morbidity is high. Over time sacrectomy techniques have evolved from prone sacrectomy (PS) to abdominolithotomy sacrectomy (ALS, ≤S3) and high anterior cortical sacrectomy (HACS, >S3) to optimize surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective, single institution analysis of prospectively collected data for patients undergoing PE with en-bloc sacrectomy between 1994 and 2021 was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 363 patients were identified and divided into PS (n=77, 21.2%), ALS (n=247, 68.0%), and HACS (n=39, 10.7%). Indications were: locally advanced (n=92) or recurrent (n=177) rectal cancer, primary other (n=31), recurrent other (n=60), and benign disease (n=3). PS resulted in longer operating time ( P <0.01) and more blood loss ( P <0.01). Patients with HACS had more major nerve (87.2%) and vascular (25.6%) resections ( P <0.01). Vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap repair was less common following HACS (7.7%) than ALS (25.5%) and PS (27.3%) ( P =0.040). R0 rate was 80.8%, 65.8%, and 76.9% following ALS, PS, and HACS, respectively ( P =0.024). Wound-related complications and re-operations were significantly reduced following ALS and HACS compared with PS.

CONCLUSIONS

Changing our practice from PS to an anterior approach with ALS or HAS has been safe and improved overall surgical and perioperative outcomes, while maintaining good oncological outcomes. Given the improved perioperative and surgical outcomes, it would be important for surgeons to learn and adopt the anterior sacrectomy approaches.

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.

Towards Standardisation of Technique for En Bloc Sacrectomy for Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Treatment strategies for advanced or recurrent rectal cancer have evolved such that the ultimate surgical goal to achieve a cure is complete pathological clearance. To achieve this where the sacrum is involved, en bloc sacrectomy is the current standard of care. Sacral resection is technically challenging and has been described; however, the technique has yet to be streamlined across units. This comprehensive review aims to outline the surgical approach to en bloc sacrectomy for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer, with standardisation of the operative steps of the procedure and to discuss options that enhance the technique.

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.

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 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.

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.

Pelvic Exenteration Surgery: The Evolution of Radical Surgical Techniques for Advanced and Recurrent Pelvic Malignancy

Pelvic exenteration was first described by Alexander Brunschwig in 1948 in New York as a palliative procedure for recurrent carcinoma of the cervix. Because of initially high rates of morbidity and mortality, the practice of this ultraradical operation was largely confined to a small number of American centers for most of the 20 century. The post-World War II era saw advances in anaesthesia, blood transfusion, and intensive care medicine that would facilitate the evolution of more radical and heroic abdominal and pelvic surgery. In the last 3 decades, pelvic exenteration has continued to evolve into one of the most important treatments for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. This review aimed to explore the evolution of pelvic exenteration surgery and to identify the pioneering surgeons, seminal articles, and novel techniques that have led to its current status as the procedure of choice for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

The Evolution of Pelvic Exenteration Practice at a Single Center: Lessons Learned from over 500 Cases

Considerable progress has been made in the management of patients with locally advanced or recurrent cancers of the pelvis over the past 60 years since the inception of pelvic exenteration. Early progress in pelvic exenteration was marred by the high surgical mortality and morbidity, which drew scepticism from the broader surgical community. Subsequent evolution in the procedure hinged on establishing surgical safety and a better understanding of outcome predictors. Surgical mortality from pelvic exenteration is now comparable to that of elective resection for primary colorectal cancers. The importance of a clear resection margin is also now well established in providing durable local control and predicting long-term survival that, in turn, has driven the development of novel surgical techniques for pelvic side wall resection, en bloc sacrectomy, and pubic bone resection. A tailored surgical approach depending on the location of the tumor with resection of contiguously involved organs, yet preserving uninvolved organs to minimize unnecessary surgical morbidity, is paramount. Despite improved surgical and oncological outcomes, surgical morbidity following pelvic exenteration remains high with reported complication rates ranging between 20% and 80%. Extended antibiotic prophylaxis and preemptive parenteral nutrition in the immediate postoperative period may reduce septic and nutritional complications. A high index of suspicion is needed in the early diagnosis and management of complications that may avoid prolonged duration of hospitalization. An acceptable quality of life has been reported among patients after pelvic exenteration. Further research into novel chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and reconstructive options are currently underway and are needed to further improve outcomes.

Systematic Review of Pelvic Exenteration With En Bloc Sacrectomy for Recurrent Rectal Adenocarcinoma: R0 Resection Predicts Disease-free Survival

BACKGROUND

The management of recurrent rectal cancer is challenging. At the present time, pelvic exenteration with en bloc sacrectomy offers the only hope of a lasting cure.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome measures and complication rates following sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer.

DATA SOURCES

A search was conducted on Pub Med for English language articles relevant to sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer with no time limitations.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reported sacrectomy with survival data for recurrent rectal adenocarcinoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Disease-free survival following sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer was the main outcome measured.

RESULTS

A total of 220 patients with recurrent rectal cancer were included from 7 studies, of which 160 were men and 60 were women. Overall median operative time was 717 (570-992) minutes and blood loss was 3.7 (1.7-6.2) L. An R0 (>1-mm resection margin) resection was achieved in 78% of patients. Disease-free survival associated with R0 resection was 55% at a median follow-up period of 33 (17-60) months; however, none of the patients with R1 (<1-mm resection margin) survived this period. Postoperative complication rates and median length of stay were found to decrease with more distal sacral transection levels. In contrast, R1 resection rates increased with more distal transection.

LIMITATION

The studies assessed by this review were retrospective case series and thus are subject to significant bias.

CONCLUSION

Sacrectomy performed for patients with recurrent rectal cancer is associated with significant postoperative morbidity. Morbidity and postoperative length of stay increase with the level of sacral transection. Nevertheless, approximately half of patients eligible for rectal excision with en bloc sacrectomy may benefit from disease-free survival for up to 33 months, with R0 resection predicting disease-free survival in the medium term.

Locally advanced rectal cancer: management challenges

Between 5% and 10% of patients with rectal cancer present with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), and 10% of rectal cancers recur after surgery, of which half are limited to locoregional disease only (locally recurrent rectal cancer). Exenterative surgery offers the best long-term outcomes for patients with LARC and locally recurrent rectal cancer so long as a complete (R0) resection is achieved. Accurate preoperative multimodal staging is crucial in assessing the potential operability of advanced rectal tumors, and resectability may be enhanced with neoadjuvant therapies. Unfortunately, surgical options are limited when the tumor involves the lateral pelvic sidewall or high sacrum due to the technical challenges of achieving histological clearance, and must be balanced against the high morbidity associated with resection of the bony pelvis and significant lymphovascular structures. This group of patients is usually treated palliatively and subsequently survival is poor, which has led surgeons to seek innovative new solutions, as well as revisit previously discarded radical approaches. A small number of centers are pioneering new techniques for resection of beyond-total mesorectal excision tumors, including en bloc resections of the sciatic notch and composite resections of the first two sacral vertebrae. Despite limited experience, these new techniques offer the potential for radical treatment of previously inoperable tumors. This narrative review sets out the challenges facing the management of LARCs and discusses evolving management options.