Minimum radial margin in pelvic exenteration for locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer

Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT) in Gynecologic Cancers: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to analyze the current literature for IORT in gynecological cancers and summarized clinical outcomes regarding patient selection.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted utilizing PUBMED, Embase, and CINAHL to identify studies following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A PICOS structure was utilized: population: patients with epithelial gynecological cancers; intervention: IORT; C: a comparator was not required, as we aimed to analyze patient selection; outcome: clinical outcomes and overall survival; and S: experimental and quasi-experimental analytical observational studies and descriptive observational studies, excluding case series published in English and limited to the last 10 years. Data extraction was conducted for patient selection, IORT, oncological outcomes, and morbidity.

RESULTS

A total of 707 results were identified, and 509 studies were uploaded to Covidence for screening after removing duplications. Of the 21 eligible studies, 9 were included in the final review. The total number of patients included was 348. The studies were retrospective single-institution studies, except for one. There was significant heterogeneity in their design and protocols. IORT was exclusively used for recurrent and advanced stage gynecological cancers adjunct to pelvic exenteration or laterally extended endopelvic resections with variable indications across institutions. The mean number of IORT patients per study was 2.8 per year. Survival rates were variable and dependent on the surgical margin. Endometrial cancer had a favorable outcome compared to vulvar and cervical cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Current clinical practice, as demonstrated by the research, is consistent with NCCN guidelines that endorse the application of IORT in instances of recurrent cervical, vaginal, and vulvar malignancies; however, there are no established recommendations for primary tumors. The analysis shows that there are gaps in our knowledge, mainly regarding the status of the margins, the criteria used to choose patients, and the outcomes that are specific to each histology. The standardization of protocols and prospectively powered studies are needed to refine patient selection criteria.

A comparison of whole-mount and conventional sections for pathological mesorectal extension and circumferential resection margin assessment after total mesorectal excision

INTRODUCTION

The objective of the study is to compare 2 techniques for histological handling of rectal cancer specimens, namely whole-mount in a large block vs conventional sampling using small blocks, for mesorectal pathological assessment of circumferential resection margin status and depth of tumor invasion into the mesorectal fat.

METHODS

This is a prospective study including 27 total mesorectal excision specimens of rectal cancer from patients treated for primary rectal carcinoma between 2020 and 2022 in a specialized multidisciplinary Colorectal Unit. For each total mesorectal excision specimen, 2 contiguous representative tumoral slices were selected and comparatively analyzed with whole-mount and small blocks macroscopic dissection techniques, enabling comparison between them in the same surgical specimen. The agreement between the 2 techniques to assess the distance of the tumor from the circumferential resection margin as well as the depth of tumor invasion was evaluated with the Student's t-test for paired samples, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and the Bland-Altman method comparison analysis.

RESULTS

Complete mesorectal excision was observed in 8% of cases. Circumferential resection margin involvement was observed in only one case (4 %). The whole-mount and small block techniques obtained similar results when we assessed the distance to the circumferential resection margin (t-test P = 0.8, r = 0.92) and the depth of mesorectal infiltration (t-test P = 0.6, r = 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Both gross dissection techniques (whole-mount vs multiple small cassettes) are equivalent and reliable to assess the distance to circumferential resection margin and the depth of mesorectal infiltration in the mesorectal fat in rectal cancer staging.