Current developments for pelvic exenteration in gynecologic oncology

Robotic-Assisted Pelvic Exenteration for Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Novel Insights into Compartment-Based Imaging

Background: Patients with persistent or recurrent cervical cancer, following primary treatment with concurrent chemoradiation, represent a subgroup eligible for pelvic exenteration. In light of the substantial morbidity associated with open pelvic exenterations, minimally invasive surgical techniques have been introduced. This systematic review aims to analyze and discuss the current literature on robotic-assisted pelvic exenterations in cervical cancer. In addition, novel aspects of compartment-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are highlighted. Methods: This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines, and a comprehensive literature search on robotic-assisted pelvic exenterations in cervical cancer was conducted to assess, as main objectives, early and late postoperative complications as well as oncological outcomes. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select eligible studies. Results: Among the reported cases of robotic-assisted pelvic exenterations in cervical cancer, 79.4% are anterior pelvic exenterations. Intraoperative complications are minimal and early/late major complications averaged between 30-35%, which is lower compared to open pelvic exenterations. Oncological outcomes are similar between robotic and open pelvic exenterations. Sensitivity for locoregional invasion increases up to 93% for compartment-based MRI in colorectal cancer. A refined delineation of the seven pelvic compartments for cervical cancer is proposed here. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted pelvic exenterations have demonstrated feasibility and safety, with reduced rates of major complications compared to open surgery, while maintaining surgical efficiency and oncological outcomes. Compartment-based MRI holds promise for standardizing the selection and categorization of pelvic exenteration procedures.

Immediate Reconstruction After Colorectal Cancer Resection: A Cohort Analysis Through the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and Outcomes Review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common and fatal malignancies in the United States. When localized to the distal gastrointestinal tract, surgical therapy includes abdominoperineal resection (APR) or pelvic exenteration (PEX). Subsequent ablative defects are considerable, impart concerning morbidity, and often necessitate autologous reconstruction. The aim of this study was to assess postoperative outcomes after reconstruction of APR and PEX defects.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2005-2017) was queried for patients undergoing APR for lower gastrointestinal malignancies with concurrent autologous reconstructions. Cases of disseminated cancer were excluded. Postoperative adverse event profiles, including rates of wound and systemic complications, were evaluated. Multivariate regression analysis controlling for age, sex, body mass index, and operative time was performed to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

A total of 1309 patients were identified as undergoing APR/PEX with concomitant reconstruction. The majority (96.9%) of reconstructions consisted of muscle, myocutaneous, fasciocutaneous, or omental pedicled flaps. Of the cohort, 45.7% experienced at least 1 all-cause complication within 30-days of the procedure. Having a limited or moderate frailty (frailty index of "1" or "2") was identified as a predictor of all-cause complications [OR, 1.556; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.187-2.040, P = 0.001; and OR, 1.741; 95% CI, 1.193-2.541, P = 0.004, respectively], whereas smoking was a predictor of wound complications (OR, 1.462; 95% CI, 1.070-1.996, P = 0.017) and steroid use was a predictor of mild systemic complications (OR, 2.006; 95% CI, 1.058-3.805, P = 0.033).

CONCLUSION

Anorectal cancer resection often necessitates reconstruction secondary to postexenteration perineal defects. The incidence of postoperative complications is relatively high, and several risk factors are identified to help refine patient optimization.

Guidelines of the Brazilian Society of Oncologic Surgery for pelvic exenteration in the treatment of cervical cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The primary treatment for locally advanced cases of cervical cancer is chemoradiation followed by high-dose brachytherapy. When this treatment fails, pelvic exenteration (PE) is an option in some cases. This study aimed to develop recommendations for the best management of patients with cervical cancer undergoing salvage PE.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered to all members of the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology. Of them, 68 surgeons participated in the study and were divided into 10 working groups. A literature review of studies retrieved from the National Library of Medicine database was carried out on topics chosen by the participants. These topics were indications for curative and palliative PE, preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of tumor resectability, access routes and surgical techniques, PE classification, urinary, vaginal, intestinal, and pelvic floor reconstructions, and postoperative follow-up. To define the level of evidence and strength of each recommendation, an adapted version of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Health Service rating system was used.

RESULTS

Most conducts and management strategies reviewed were strongly recommended by the participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines outlining strategies for PE in the treatment of persistent or relapsed cervical cancer were developed and are based on the best evidence available in the literature.

Pelvic exenterations for gynecologic cancers: A retrospective analysis of a 30-year experience in a cancer center

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to report a 30-year experience of PE for gynecologic malignancies in a cancer center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted at Institut Paoli-Calmette including patients who underwent PE for gynecologic malignancies. Four periods were evaluated: P1 before 1992, P2 between 1993 and 1999, P3 between 2000 and 2006 and P4 after 2006. The study evaluated the number of PE performed during each period, the type of PE, its level, indication, location of the primary tumor, patient age, previous radiotherapy ≥45 Gy, the rate of "curative" PE and exenteration-related reconstructive techniques. 90-day post-operative mortality and morbidity using the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) v 4.03 were reported.

RESULTS

277 PE were performed. The number of PE performed for recurrences rose during the study period (p = 0.042), PE performed for central tumors increased during P3 (64.4%) and P4 (67.4%) (p < 0.0001) and administration of radiotherapy ≥45 Gy was more frequent (p < 0.0001). The rate of "curative" PE increased (p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, "curative" PE were correlated with PE type, central locations and study period. Pelvic filling was progressively more frequently performed (p = 0.002). 90-day complication rate was 56.3%. In multivariate analysis there was a significant difference in distribution of CTCAE grade 3-4-5 morbidity depending on the period. Overall survival (OS) improved during the 2 last periods (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

A better selection of eligible patients for PE, namely through improvement in imaging techniques, has enabled to raise the rate of curative PE.

Locally Advanced Disease and Pelvic Exenterations

Advanced primary and recurrent colorectal cancer can be successfully treated by experienced, dedicated centers delivering good outcomes with low mortality and morbidity. Development and implementation of a comprehensive referral pathway is to be encouraged. Multidisciplinary team management is essential in the management of this complex group of patients and is associated with significantly more complete preoperative evaluation and more accurate provision of patient information, as well as improved access to the most appropriate individualized management plan. A structured selection process can improve outcomes through standardized approaches to service delivery to provide the highest quality of care.

Robotic surgery in gynecology

Robotic surgery is the most dynamic development in the sector of minimally invasive operations currently. It should not be viewed as an alternative to laparoscopy, but as the next step in a process of technological evolution. The advancement of robotic surgery, in terms of the introduction of the Da Vinci Xi, permits the variable use of optical devices in all four trocars. Due to the new geometry of the "patient cart," an operation can be performed in all spatial directions without re-docking. Longer instruments and the markedly narrower mechanical elements of the "patient cart" provide greater flexibility as well as access similar to those of traditional laparoscopy. Currently, robotic surgery is used for a variety of indications in the treatment of benign gynecological diseases as well as malignant ones. Interdisciplinary cooperation and cooperation over large geographical distances have been rendered possible by telemedicine, and will ensure comprehensive patient care in the future by highly specialized surgery teams. In addition, the second operation console and the operation simulator constitute a new dimension in advanced surgical training. The disadvantages of robotic surgery remain the high costs of acquisition and maintenance as well as the laborious training of medical personnel before they are confident with using the technology.

Vaginal reconstruction with pedicled vertical deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (diep) after pelvic exenteration. A consecutive case series

Vaginal reconstruction after pelvic exenteration (PE) represents a challenge for the oncologic surgeon. Since the introduction of perforator flaps, using pedicled vertical DIEP (deep inferior epigastric perforator) flap allows to reduce the donor site complication rate. From November 2012 to December 2014, 27 PEs were performed in our institution. 13 patients who underwent PE with vaginal reconstruction and programmed DIEP procedure for gynecologic malignancies were registered. Nine patients underwent PE for recurrent disease and four for primary treatment. Six of the 13 patients have a preoperative fistula. Anterior PE was performed in 10 patients, and total PE in 3 patients. A vertical DIEP flap was performed in 10 patients using one or two medial perforators. The reasons for abortion of vertical DIEP flap procedure were: failure to localizing perforator vessels in two cases, and unavailability of plastic surgeon in one case. A vertical fascia-sparring rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap was then harvested. Median length of surgery was 335min, and 60min for DIEP harvesting and vaginal reconstruction. No flap necrosis occurred. One patient in the VRAM (vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous) group experienced a late incisional hernia and one patient in the DIEP flap group required revision for vaginal stenosis. In our experience, DIEP flap represents our preferred choice of flap for circumferential vaginal reconstruction after PE. To achieve a high reproducibility, the technically demanding pedicled vertical DIEP flap has to be harvested by a trained surgeon, after strict evaluation of the preoperative imaging with identification and localization of perforator vessels.

Morbidity after pelvic exenteration for gynecological malignancies: a retrospective multicentric study of 230 patients

OBJECTIVE

Our study purpose was to evaluate morbidity and postoperative mortality in patients who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) for primary or recurrent gynecological malignancies.

METHODS

We identified 230 patients who underwent PE, referred to the gynecological oncology units of 4 institutions: Charitè University in Berlin, Friedrich-Schiller University in Jena, S. Orsola-Malpighi University in Bologna, and Catholic University in Rome and in Campobasso.

RESULTS

The median age was 55 years. The tumor site was the cervix in 177 patients, the endometrium in 28 patients, the vulva in 16 patients, and the vagina in 9 patients. Sixty-eight anterior, 31 posterior, and 131 total PEs were performed in 116 women together with hysterectomy. A total of 82.6% of the patients required blood transfusion. The mean operative time was 446 (95-970) minutes, and the median hospitalization was 24 (7-210) days. We noted a major complication rate of 21.3% (n = 49). We registered 7 perioperative deaths (3%) calculated within 30 days. The operation was performed within clear margins in 166 patients (72.2%). The overall mortality rate depending on tumor site at the end of the study was 75% for vulvar cancer, 57.6% for cervical cancer, 55.6% for vaginal cancer, and 53.6% for endometrial cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Although an important effort for surgeons and for patients, PE remains a therapeutic option with an acceptable complication rate and postoperative mortality. A strict selection of patients is mandatory to reach adequate surgical and oncologic outcomes.

Pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic malignancy: a study of 28 consecutive patients at a single institution

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration (PE) for recurrent gynecologic malignancy.

METHODS

A retrospective review using all medical records of 28 consecutive patients who underwent PE between January 2002 and December 2011 at a single institution was conducted. Complications were graded according to Clavien-Dindo. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated by the method of Kaplan-Meier.

RESULTS

Pelvic exenteration was performed for recurrent cancer in all patients. Distribution of primaries was as follows: cervix (n = 10), vagina (n = 5), ovary (n = 5), uterus (n = 4), tube (n = 2), Bartholin gland (n = 1), and vulva (n = 1). In all but 1 case, PE was performed with curative intent. Pelvic exenteration was total (n = 11), anterior (n = 2), or posterior (n = 15). Reconstructive procedures included urinary tract (n = 13), gastrointestinal tract (n = 26), pelvic floor (n = 6), and vagina (n = 5). There was no postoperative mortality within 30 days. All patients developed 1 or several early complications of various grades, and 22 patients (79%) developed late complications. Twelve patients (43%) underwent reoperation because of complications to PE, and 2 patients died within follow-up as a consequence of their PE. A complete tumor resection (R0) was obtained in 23 patients (82%). With a median follow-up of 27 months (range, 2-110 months), the 5-year OS and DFS rates were 70% and 41%, respectively. R0 resection was associated with increased OS (P < 0.001) and DFS (P = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic malignancies can be associated with long-term survival in selected patients. However, postoperative complications are common and can be lethal.

Robotic technology for pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer represents one of the most common types of neoplasia among women; the use of minimally invasive techniques in the treatment of cervical cancer is a challenge.

OBJECTIVES

To present evidence regarding robotic technology in the performance of pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

PubMed and Scopus databases were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Articles examining the use of robotic technology for pelvic exenteration in cases of cervical cancer were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four studies were included.

MAIN RESULTS

Most cancers treated with robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration were squamous cell carcinomas of the cervix. The stage of primary cancer ranged from IB2 to IVA. In 7 of the 8 patients, anterior pelvic exenteration was performed; the other patient underwent total pelvic exenteration. Procedure duration ranged from 375 to 600 minutes; blood loss was 200-550 mL. Postoperative complications occurred in 2 of the 8 patients and included perineal abscess, Miami pouch fistula, and ureteral stenosis. Postoperative hospital stay ranged from 3 to 53 days, and postoperative follow-up ranged from 2 to 31 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The gold standard for pelvic exenteration remains the open surgical approach; however, the application of robotic technology could be an alternate choice associated with excellent results.

Long-term experience on laparoscopic incontinent urinary diversion unrelated to cystectomy in radiated or recurrent pelvic malignancies

BACKGROUND:

There are few reports describing series of cases about development on laparoscopic urinary diversions no related to cystectomy. The aim of this paper is to show the experience of our reference institutions for treatment of pelvic malignancies when laparoscopic techniques were applied to perform only urinary diversion without cystectomy or pelvic exenteration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We included retrospectively 12 cases of cutaneous ureterostomy and 21 cases with a reservoir (16 ileal conduits, 2 colonic conduits and 3 wet colostomies) treated in our institute from 2004 to 2010. It was evaluated operative time, blood loss, intraoperative complications, conversion rate, length of large incision, post operative complications, analgesic consumption, time to food intake, hospital stay, time to recovery to normal activities. Mean time to follow-up was 3(2-7) years.

RESULTS:

All procedures were completed without conversions. In the cutaneous ureterostomy group the mean surgical time.

Advances in gynaecological oncology surgery

Latest surgical advances in the field of gynaecological oncology, a sub-specialty of gynaecology, are reviewed in this chapter. The surgery is mainly practised in cancer centres by board-certified gynaecologists, and requires a 2-3 year period of additional training in gynaecological oncology. Surgical treatment of gynaecological malignancies has progressed in two directions: reduction of the invasiveness of the surgery and expansion of the number and type of procedures performed. Gynaecological oncology focuses on the pelvis to the upper abdomen and the thorax to target (all visible disease) the last cancer cell in women with advanced ovarian cancer. Minimal-access surgery has evolved to include any operation by laparoscopy. It uses fewer ports (single-port surgery), and robotic assistance improves the comfort of the surgeon. The concept of fertility-sparing surgery for women with cervical cancer is now supported by mature data. The indication and the aggressiveness of the exenterative surgery are also broader than originally recommended. The ideal timing of surgery is under investigation in several areas, mainly in women with ovarian and cervical cancer. The aim is to reduce morbidity and mortality of surgical procedures while maintaining the survival outcome.

Total pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies

Total pelvic exenteration (PE) is a radical operation, involving en bloc resection of pelvic organs, including reproductive structures, bladder, and rectosigmoid. In gynecologic oncology, it is most commonly indicated for the treatment of advanced primary or locally recurrent cancer. Careful patient selection and counseling are of paramount importance when considering someone for PE. Part of the evaluation process includes comprehensive assessment to exclude unresectable or metastatic disease. PE can be curative for carefully selected patients with gynecologic cancers. Major complications can be seen in as many as 50% of patients undergoing PE, underscoring the need to carefully discuss risks and benefits of this procedure with patients considering exenterative surgery.

Pelvic exenteration in gynecologic oncology: a single institution study over 20 years

OBJECTIVE

The profile of women with gynecologic malignancies treated with pelvic exenteration has changed since the initial description of this procedure. We sought to evaluate our experience with pelvic exenteration over the last 20 years.

METHODS

Patients who underwent anterior, posterior, or total pelvic exenteration for vulvar, vaginal, and cervical cancer at Barnes-Jewish Hospital between January 1, 1990 and August 1, 2009 were identified through hospital databases. Patient characteristics, the indications for the procedure, procedural modifications, and patient outcomes were retrospectively assessed. Categorical variables were analyzed with chi-square method, and survival data was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log rank test.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were identified who had pelvic exenteration for cervical, vaginal, or vulvar cancer. Recurrent cervical cancer was the most common procedural indication. One year overall survival from pelvic exenteration for the entire cohort was 64%, with 44% of patients still living at 2 years and 34% at 50 months. Younger age was associated with improved overall survival after exenteration (p = 0.01). Negative margin status was associated with a longer disease-free survival (p=0.014). Nodal status at the time of exenteration was not associated with time to recurrence or progression, site of recurrence, type of post-operative treatment, early or late complications, or survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite advances in imaging and increased radical techniques, outcomes and complications after total pelvic exenteration in this cohort are similar to those described historically. Pelvic exenteration results in sustained survival in select patients, especially those that are young with recurrent disease and pathologically negative margins.

Chemotherapy and patient co-morbidity in ventral site hernia development

OBJECTIVE

The risk factors associated with early ventral site hernia development following cancer surgery are ill defined and associated with an undetermined incidence.

METHODS

We analyzed 1,391 gynecologic cancer patient charts to identify the number of post-operative ventral site hernias over a nearly 6 year period. The following study variables were noted for evaluation: patient demographics, disease co-morbidity (hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes), body mass index (BMI), treatment (e.g., chemotherapy regimen), intra-operative (e.g., bleeding) and postoperative (e.g., infection) complications, time to hernia development and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Twenty-six gynecologic cancer patients who developed a post-operative ventral hernia and subsequently underwent herniorrhaphy by our gynecologic oncology service were identified. The patient group's overall time to initial hernia development was 11.23 months. Following a multiple regression analysis, we found that treatment (e.g., bevacizumab, liposomal doxorubicin or radiotherapy associated with compromised wound healing [p=0.0186] and disease co-morbidity [0.0432]) were significant prognostic indicators for an accelerated time to hernia development. Moreover, five patients underwent treatment associated with compromised wound healing and also had disease co-morbidity. In this sub-group, post-operative hernia development occurred more rapidly (3.8 months) than the overall group of patients. BMI and age did not impact time to hernia development (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

In the present gynecologic cancer patient series, a tendency for early post-operative hernia development appeared to coincide with treatment associated with compromised wound healing and disease co-morbidity. Gynecologic cancer surgeons should anticipate this potential complication and consider employing prophylactic intra-operative mesh to potentially prevent this condition.