Pelvic Exenterations for Gynecological Malignancies: A Study of 36 Cases

Evaluation of survival and mortality in pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies: a systematic review, meta-analyses, and meta-regression study

OBJECTIVE

Pelvic exenteration is a radical surgery for advanced or recurrent pelvic tumors, requiring careful patient selection and a multi-disciplinary approach. Despite advancements, it remains high-risk, with limited data on outcomes. The present meta-analysis evaluates survival, mortality, and trends to clarify its role in gynecologic oncology.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in January 2025 to identify studies on pelvic exenteration outcomes for gynecologic malignancies. Studies with at least 10 patients reporting 5-year overall survival or 30-day mortality were included. Data extracted included patient and surgical characteristics, and a scoring system based on study design, sample size, and center volume was used to include high-quality studies (score ≥3). Poisson regression models were used to analyze the associations between predictors and outcomes, with results expressed as incidence rate ratios and a 95% CI.

RESULTS

A total of 46 studies involving 4417 patients met the inclusion criteria. Most patients underwent pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer (N = 3183). Positive pelvic and aortic nodal involvement were key predictors of reduced 5-year overall survival, decreasing by 3.9% and 5.9% per 1% increase in nodal positivity, respectively. Pelvic wall involvement also significantly reduced survival by 15.9%. The 30-day mortality rate was 5.1%, with sepsis (27.2%) being the leading cause of death. Peri-operative mortality decreased significantly over time, with each year of publication associated with a 2.6% decrease in incidence rate. However, pelvic sidewall involvement and total exenteration increased 30-day mortality by 11.5% and 0.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic exenteration remains a viable but high-risk option for select patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies. Pre-operative assessment and multi-disciplinary planning are essential for optimizing outcomes.

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.

Pelvic Exenteration for Recurrent Endometrial Cancer: A 15-Year Monocentric Retrospective Study

Treatment options for recurrent endometrial adenocarcinoma are limited. In those cases, secondary surgical procedures such as pelvic exenteration form the only possible curative approach. The aim of this study was analyzing the outcomes of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration during the treatment of recurrent endometrial cancer intending to identify prognostic factors. More than 300 pelvic exenterations were performed. Fifteen patients were selected that received pelvic exenteration for recurrent endometrial adenocarcinoma. Data regarding patient characteristics, indication for surgery, complete cytoreduction, tumor grading and p53- and L1CAM-expression were collected and statistically evaluated. Univariate Cox regression was performed to identify predictive factors for long-term survival. The mean survival after pelvic exenteration for the whole patient population was 22.7 months, with the longest survival reaching up to 69 months. Overall survival was significantly longer for patients with a curative treatment intention (p = 0.015) and for patients with a well or moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma (p = 0.014). Complete cytoreduction seemed favorable with a mean survival of 32 months in contrast to 10 months when complete cytoreduction was not achieved. Pelvic exenteration is a possible treatment option for a selected group of patients resulting in a mean survival of nearly two years, offering a substantial prognostic improvement.

Survival as a clinical outcome and its spiritual significance in a cohort of patients with advanced central pelvic neoplastic disease undergoing total pelvic evisceration: a poorly debated issue

BACKGROUND

Patients with either treatment-resistant or relapsing advanced central pelvic neoplastic disease present with a condition responsible for debilitating symptoms and consequently poor quality of life (QoL). For these patients, therapeutic strategies are very limited and total pelvic evisceration is the only option for relieving the symptoms and increasing survival. Of note, taking charge of these patients cannot be limited to increasing their lifespan but must also be aimed at improving the clinical, psychological, and spiritual conditions. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate the improvement in survival and QoL, focusing on spiritual wellbeing (SWB), in patients with poor life expectancy who underwent total pelvic evisceration for advanced gynecological cancers at our center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The QoL and SWB were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-SWB32, and SWB scale, which were repeatedly administered: 30 days before surgery, 7 days after the procedure, 1 and 3 months after surgery, and then every 3 months until death or the last follow-up assessment. Operative outcomes (blood loss, operative time, hospitalization, and incidence of complications) were evaluated as secondary endpoints. The patients and their families were included in a dedicated psycho-oncological and spiritual support protocol, which was managed by specifically trained and specialized personnel who accompanied them during all phases of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 20 consecutive patients from 2017 to 2022 were included in this study. Of these patients, 7 underwent total pelvic evisceration by laparotomy and 13 underwent laparoscopy. The median survival was 24 months (range: 1-61 months). After a median follow-up of 24 months, 16 (80%) and 10 patients (50%) were alive at 1 year and 2 years after surgery, respectively. The EORTC-QLQ-C30 scores significantly improved yet at 7 days and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, as compared with the preoperative values. In particular, an early improvement in pain, overall QoL, and physical and emotional functions was observed. With respect to the SWB, the global SWB item score of the EORTC QLQ-SWB32 questionnaire significantly increased after 1 month and 3 months, as compared with preoperative values (p = 0.0153 and p = 0.0018, respectively), and remained stable thereafter. The mean SWB scale score was 53.3, with a sense of low overall SWB in 10 patients, a sense of moderate SWB in eight patients, and a sense of high SWB in two patients. The SWB scale score significantly increased after 7 days, 1 month, and 3 months, as compared with the preoperative value (p = 0202, p = 0.0171, and p = 0.0255, respectively), and remained stable thereafter.

CONCLUSION

Total pelvic evisceration is a valid approach for improving both survival and QoL in selected patients with advanced pelvic neoplasms and poor life expectancy. Our results particularly underline the importance of accompanying the patients and their families during the journey with dedicated psychological and spiritual support protocols.

Clinical outcomes of pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyze morbidity and survival after pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies and evaluate prognostic factors influencing postoperative outcome.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent a pelvic exenteration at the departments of gynecologic oncology of three tertiary care centers in the Netherlands, the Leiden University Medical Centre, the Amsterdam University Medical Centre, and the Netherlands Cancer Institute, during a 20-year period. We determined postoperative morbidity, 2- and 5-year overall survival (OS) and 2- and 5-year progression free survival (PFS), and investigated parameters influencing these outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients were included. The most common primary tumor was cervical cancer (n = 39, 43.3%). We observed at least one complication in 83 patients (92%). Major complications were seen in 55 patients (61%). Irradiated patients had a higher risk of developing a major complication. Sixty-two (68.9%) required ≥1 readmission. Re-operation was required in 40 patients (44.4%). Median OS was 25 months and median PFS was 14 months. The 2-year OS rate was 51.1% and the 2-year PFS rate was 41.5%. Tumor size, resection margins and pelvic sidewall involvement had a negative impact on OS (HR = 2.159, HR = 2.376, and HR = 1.200, respectively). Positive resection margins and pelvic sidewall involvement resulted in decreased PFS (HR = 2.567 and HR = 3.969, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative complications after pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies are common, especially in irradiated patients. In this study, a 2-year OS rate of 51.1% was observed. Positive resections margins, tumor size, and pelvic sidewall involvement were related to poor survival outcomes. Adequate selection of patients who will benefit from pelvic exenteration is important.

The changing role for extended resections in an era of advanced radiotherapy techniques and novel therapies in gynaecological malignancy

Pelvic exenteration, first described in 1948 and subsequently refined, may be offered as a last hope of cure to patients with recurrent or locally advanced pelvic tumours, where radiotherapy is not an option. It is a complex, morbid, ultra-radical procedure involving en-bloc resection of the female reproductive organs, lower urinary tract, and a portion of the rectosigmoid. This article discusses the evolution of and current indications for pelvic exenteration in gynaecologic oncology as well as the reasons for its decline: primary and secondary prevention of cervical cancer (the recurrence of which is the most common indication for exenteration); improvements in treatment of cervical, endometrial, vaginal and vulvar cancer in the primary and recurrent setting; and the advent of novel therapies.

Quality of life after extended pelvic exenterations

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to compare health-related quality of life (QoL) and oncological outcome between gynaecological cancer patients undergoing pelvic exenteration (PE) and extended pelvic exenteration (EPE). EPEs were defined as extensive procedures including, in addition to standard PE extent, the resection of internal, external, or common iliac vessels; pelvic side-wall muscles; large pelvic nerves (sciatic or femoral); and/or pelvic bones.

METHODS

Data from 74 patients who underwent PE (42) or EPE (32) between 2004 and 2019 at a single tertiary gynae-oncology centre in Prague were analysed. QoL assessment was performed using EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC CX-24, and QOLPEX questionnaires specifically developed for patients after (E)PE.

RESULTS

No significant differences in survival were observed between the groups (P > 0.999), with median overall and disease-specific survival in the whole cohort of 45 and 49 months, respectively. Thirty-one survivors participated in the QoL surveys (20 PE, 11 EPE). No significant differences were observed in global health status (P = 0.951) or in any of the functional scales. The groups were not differing in therapy satisfaction (P = 0.502), and both expressed similar, high willingness to undergo treatment again if they were to decide again (P = 0.317).

CONCLUSIONS

EPEs had post-treatment QoL and oncological outcome comparable to traditional PE. These procedures offer a potentially curative treatment option for patients with persistent or recurrent pelvic tumour invading into pelvic wall structures without further compromise of patients´ QoL.

Long-Term Survival, Prognostic Factors, and Quality of Life of Patients Undergoing Pelvic Exenteration for Cervical Cancer

Background: Considerable efforts have been carried out over the past 30 years to support patients with advanced cervical cancer. Throughout this time, Eastern European countries have been left aside from the decision-making groups on this matter, hence the absence of similar studies in this geographical area. In these countries, the quality of life (QoL) of patients with cervical cancer might be considered a “caprice”, and the discomforts they encounter following pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer are often perceived as a “normal phenomenon”. Methods: This study examined forty-seven patients submitted to pelvic exenteration followed up for nine years after the surgical intervention. The first objective of this study is to identify the prognostic factors that influence the overall survival (OS) of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for FIGO stage IVA, recurrent or persistent cervical cancer after previous conclusive treatments. The second objective is to assess the QoL of the surviving patients using the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CX24 standardized questionnaires. Results: The mean age of the participants was 54 years (range 36−67). At the time of the study, there were 25 living patients (53.2%), the 3-year OS was 61%, and the 5-year OS was 48.7%. Cox regression analysis recognized parameter invasion, pelvic lymph node metastases, positive resection margins, early postoperative complications, and infralevatorian pelvic exenteration as negative prognostic factors influencing the OS (p < 0.05). Of the 25 survivors, 18 patients answered the QoL questionnaires. The cost of favorable survival has been translated into poor overall QoL, unsatisfactory functional, social, and symptom scores, a high prevalence of cervical cancer-specific symptoms such as lymphedema, peripheral neuropathy, severe menopausal symptoms, distorted body image, and lack of sexual desire. The lower scores are comparable to the only three studies available in the literature that assessed the QoL of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration precisely for cervical cancer. Conclusions: Despite its retrospective nature and some limitations, this paper, similar to other studies, shows a decent OS but with a marked adverse impact on QoL, suggesting the importance of adequate psycho-emotional and financial support for these patients following pelvic exenteration. This study also contributes to the current knowledge regarding advanced cervical cancer treatment, depicting survival, prognostic factors, and QoL of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer in a reference center in Eastern Europe. Our study can provide a comparison for future prospective randomized trials needed to confirm these results.

Gynecologic Oncology: Pelvic Exenteration for Advanced or Recurring Cervical Cancer - A Single Center Analysis

BACKGROUND/AIM

Cervical cancer is the most common gynecological indication for pelvic exenteration (PE). It is an ultima ratio approach to cure advanced or recurring tumors. This study aimed to evaluate data from a Single Center Institution in order to assess morbidity, mortality and survival data.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data of 24 patients, who underwent anterior (APE) or total PE (TPE) for cervical cancer at the University Hospital Marburg between 2011 and 2016, were extracted and retrospectively evaluated. Survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meyer method.

RESULTS

Lymph node status was pN0, pN1 and pNX in 33.3%, 20.8% and 45.8% respectively. Negative margins could be achieved in 70.8%. A total of 16.7% of patients presented with metastatic disease, while 20.8%, 37.5% and 20.8% received 1, 2 or 3 modalities of treatment respectively; 20.8% underwent up-front PE. Predominant urinary diversion was an ileum conduit (66.7%). No complications were noted for 16.7%, major complications (≥Clavien Dindo 3) in 41.7%. Overall survival was 29.2% with a median overall survival (mOS) of 19.1 months. Curative PE was undertaken in 20 cases, with 2- and 3-year survival rates of 52.6% and 29.4% respectively. and a mOS of 24 months. Positive margins, metastatic disease, positive lymph nodes, TPE and a surgical time >6 h had a significant impact on OS.

CONCLUSION

PE for cervical cancer remains a feasible option in cases of advanced or recurring tumors when alternative treatment options would fail. For selected patients it may represent a chance of cure with acceptable complication and satisfactory survival rates.

Electrochemotherapy as an Alternative Treatment Option to Pelvic Exenteration for Recurrent Vulvar Cancer of the Perineum Region

Objective: Pelvic exenteration in women with recurrent vulvar carcinoma is associated with high morbidity and mortality and substantial treatment costs. Because pelvic exenteration severely affects the quality of life and can lead to significant complications, other treatment modalities, such as electrochemotherapy, have been proposed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and suitability of electrochemotherapy in the treatment of recurrent vulvar cancer. We aimed to analyze the treatment options, treatment outcomes, and complications in patients with recurrent vulvar cancer of the perineum. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients who had undergone pelvic exenteration for vulvar cancer at the Institute of Oncology Ljubljana over a 16-year period was performed. As an experimental, less mutilating treatment, electrochemotherapy was performed on one patient with recurrent vulvar cancer involving the perineum. Comparative data analysis was performed between the group with pelvic exenteration and the patient with electrochemotherapy, comparing hospital stay, disease recurrence after treatment, survival after treatment in months, and quality of life after treatment. Results: We observed recurrence of disease in 2 patients with initial FIGO stage IIIC disease 3 months and 32 months after pelvic exenteration, and they died of the disease 15 and 38 months after pelvic exenteration. Two patients with FIGO stage IB were alive at 74 and 88 months after pelvic exenteration. One patient with initial FIGO stage IIIC was alive 12 months after treatment with electrochemotherapy with no visible signs of disease progression in the vulvar region, and the lesions had a complete response. The patient treated with electrochemotherapy was hospitalized for 4 days compared with the patients with pelvic exenteration, in whom the average hospital stay was 19.75 (± 1.68) days. Conclusion: Our experience has shown that electrochemotherapy might be a less radical alternative to pelvic exenteration, especially for patients with initially higher FIGO stages.

Pelvic exenteration for recurrent or advanced gynecologic malignancies - Analysis of outcome and complications

•

Overall survival was 25.5% with a median follow-up of 47 months.

•

Positive resection margins had a negative impact on survival.

•

Neoadjuvant treatment correlated with achieving negative margins.

•

19% had no postoperative complications, major complications were observed in 40.4%

Pelvic exenterations are known to be a last resort therapeutic option for advanced or recurrent gynecologic malignancies, which are known to have poor prognosis.

All women treated with anterior (APE) or total (TPE) pelvic exenteration at our University hospital within a five-year period were identified and their data retrospectively analysed. Parameters such as demographic information, tumor type and stage, previous therapy as well as complication rate and overall survival were evaluated.

47 women were enrolled in this study. Most common indication for PE was cervical cancer (51.1%) followed by carcinoma of the vagina (17%), vulva (10.6%), endometrium (8.5%), ovaries (4.3%) and uterus (2.1%). Patients had received 1, 2 or 3 treatment modalities prior in 12.8%, 38.8% and 21.2% respectively. Predominant urinary diversion was ileum conduit (75.5%). Major complications (Clavien Dindo ≥ III) were observed in 40.4%, none in 19.2%. Early mortality was 4.3%. Median Overall Survival (mOS) was 14 months with 2- and 3-year survival rates of 38.8% and 21.2% respectively. After a median follow up of 47 months, 25.5% were still alive. Excluding patients with metastatic disease (n = 10), mOS was 20.6 months with 2- and 3-year survival rates of 46% and 35.2%. OS was significantly worse for patients with positive margins (p = 0.003). Receiving neoadjuvant treatment (25.5%) correlated with negative margins (p = 0.013) but not with overall survival.

PE is feasible with acceptable complication and mortality rates. The long-time benefit is notable bearing in mind the extensive nature of the malignancies and the procedure undertaken.

Laparoscopic assessment improves case selection for exenterative surgery in recurrent cervical and endometrial cancer

The objective of this study is to evaluate the role of laparoscopy in the case selection of patients for pelvic exenteration to treat recurrent cervical or endometrial cancer. Pelvic exenteration is a rare surgical procedure performed by specialised multidisciplinary surgical teams. We performed a review of 55 consecutive laparoscopies for patients being evaluated for possible exenterative surgery for recurrent cervical or endometrial cancer at a single centre in the UK with a significant exenterative surgical practice. All patients had no evidence of metastatic disease on imaging prior to the laparoscopy. Despite thorough radiological assessment laparoscopy detected peritoneal, nodal or extrapelvic metastases in 20.8% of cases. 5.6% of the patients who underwent exenterative surgery were found to have unresectable pelvic disease intraoperatively. In these cases, the extent of disease was not determined radiologically or during the initial exploratory laparotomy. In our view, laparoscopic assessment is an essential component of the pre-operative work up of patients with recurrent cervical or endometrial cancer being considered for exenterative surgery.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Pelvic exenteration is potentially curative in cases of recurrent pelvic malignancy. Case selection is essential to determine those patients without metastases and with resectable pelvic disease - this will improve patient outcomes, avoid the unnecessary morbidity of major surgery, as well as the psychological consequences of abandoned procedures. The only two previous studies, published in 1998 (Plante and Roy 1998) and 2002 (Köhler et al. 2002) have shown laparoscopic assessment to be safe and improve case selection.What do the results of this study add? This study provides evidence that in the context of modern imaging modalities, including PET-CT scans, laparoscopic assessment continues to improve case selection for exenterative surgery.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? This study provides further evidence of the benefit of laparoscopy in the assessment of patients being considered for exenterative surgery for recurrent pelvic cancer. Routine laparoscopy improves case selection and will enhance patient experiences and outcomes.

Pelvic exenteration as ultimate ratio for gynecologic cancers: single-center analyses of 37 cases

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenterations are a last resort procedure for advanced gynecologic malignancies with elevated risks in terms of patients' morbidity.

METHODS

This single-center analysis reports surgical details, outcome and survival of all patients treated with exenteration for non-ovarian gynecologic malignancies at our university hospital during a 13-year time period. We collected data regarding patients and tumor characteristics, surgical procedures, peri- and postoperative management, transfusions, complications, and analyzed the impact on survival outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 37 patients between 2005 and 2013 with primary or relapsed cervical cancer (59.5%), vulvar cancer (24.3%) or endometrial cancer (16.2%). Median age was 60 years and most patients (73%) had squamous cell carcinomas. Median progression-free survival was 26.2 months and median overall survival was 49.9 months. The 5-year survival rates were 34.4% for progression-free survival and 46.4% for overall survival. There were no significant differences in progression-free survival and overall survival with regard to disease entity. Patients with tumor at the resection margins (R1) had a nearly significantly worse progression-free survival (median: 28.5 vs. 7.3 months, HR 2.59, 95% CI 0.98-6.88, p = 0.056) and a significantly worse overall survival (median: not reached vs. 10.9 months, HR 4.04, 95% CI 1.40-11.64, p = 0.010) compared to patients with complete tumor resection (R0). In addition, patients without lymphovascular space invasion had a significantly better progression-free survival (p = 0.017) and overall survival (p = 0.034) then patients with lymphovascular space invasion. We observed complications in 14 patients (37.8%), 10 of those were classified as Clavien-Dindo 3 or 4. There was a trend to worse progression-free survival in patients that suffered complications (p = 0.052). Median total amount of transfused blood products was 4 (range 0-20).

CONCLUSION

Pelvic exenteration is a procedure that provides substantial progression-free survival and overall survival improvement and-in selected patients-can even achieve cure in otherwise hopeless clinical situations. Patients need to be offered earnest counseling for sufficient informed consent with realistic expectations what to expect.

Pelvic exenteration in gynecologic cancer: complications and oncological outcome

Introduction

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is indicated in cases of unresponsive, recurrent pelvic cancer or for palliative intent. Despite the fact that the surgery is associated with a high rate of morbidity, it is currently the only real option that can effect a cure.

Material and methods

Patients who underwent PE between January 2011 and July 2017 in our centre were retrospectively reviewed. Data related to surgery, complications and outcomes were recorded.

Results

Twenty-three patients were included. PE was performed due to recurrent gynaecological cancer, persistence of disease and after first diagnosis in 19 (82%), 2 (9%) and 2 patients (9%), respectively. Total PE was performed in 15 cases (65%), followed by anterior PE in 5 cases (22%) and posterior PE in 3 cases (13%). Early grade II, III and IV complications occurred in 15 (65%), 5 (22%) and 2 patients (9%), respectively. No mortality was observed within 30 days. Medium-late grade II, III, IV and V complications occurred in 15 (65%), 11 (48%), 3 (13%) and 2 cases (9%), respectively. Two patients died after > 30-day period from surgery-related complications. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 48 months after PE was 41.6% and 30.8% respectively.

Conclusions

PE provides about a 40% 4-year survival chance in a selected group of patients. The early-complications rate and 30-day mortality were acceptable. Nevertheless, the medium-late complication grades II–V were 65, 48, 18 and 9%, respectively. We must focus on identifying those patients who could potentially benefit most from PE.

Factors Predictive of 90-Day Morbidity, Readmission, and Costs in Patients Undergoing Pelvic Exenteration

OBJECTIVE

Pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecological malignancies is characterized by a high rate of severe complications. Factors predictive of morbidity, readmission, and cost were analyzed.

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients undergoing pelvic exenteration between January 2007 and December 2016 were prospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients were included in the analysis. Anterior, posterior, and total exenterations were executed in 39 (67%), 9 (16%), and 10 (17%) patients, respectively. Ten (15.5%) severe complications occurred: 8 (20.5%), 0 (0%), and 1 (10%) after anterior, posterior, and total exenterations, respectively. Radiotherapy dosage, time between radiotherapy and surgery, and previous administration of chemotherapy did not influence 90-day complications and readmission. At multivariable analysis, albumin levels less than 3.5 g/dL (odds ratio, 16.2 [95% confidence interval, 2.85-92.8]; P = 0.002) and history of deep vein thrombosis (odds ratio, 9.6 [95% confidence interval, 0.93-98.2]; P = 0.057) were associated with 90-day morbidity. Low albumin levels independently correlated with readmission (P = 0.011). The occurrence of 90-day postoperative complications and readmission increased costs of a median of +12,500 and +6000 euros, respectively (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative patient selection is a key point for the reduction of postoperative complications after pelvic exenteration. Further prospective studies are warranted to improve patient selection.

Pelvic exenteration by robotically-assisted laparoscopy: A feasibility series of 6 cases

After concomitant chemo-radiation therapy, 20 to 30% of advanced cervical cancers recur in irradiated territory. Pelvic exenteration remains a therapeutic option for selected patients. However, this procedure remains complex because of tissue fragility after radiotherapy and their associated co-morbidities. Minimally invasive surgery such as robotically assisted laparoscopy may overcome these surgical challenges. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of pelvic exenteration with robotically assisted laparoscopy.

Patients who underwent this procedure between 2015 and 2016 were included. Patients characteristics, treatment indication, intraoperative events, immediate and late complications, and histological outcomes were recorded.

The data of 6 patients were analyzed. The primary cancer staging ranged from IB1 to IIB. All cases were loco-regional recurrence and 2 cases presented with with vesico-vaginal fistula. All patients had a history of pelvic irradiation. The mean operative time was 6.7 h. No complications occurred during surgery. The average hospital stay was 11.5 days. Immediate complications were mostly represented by urinary tract infections (4/5). Histological margins were clear in 67% (4/6), and a focal involvement was found in 33% (2/6) of cases. Late complications occurred within 82 days on average and included stenosis of ileal anastomosis, wound infection, acute renal failure, and pulmonary embolism. Revision surgery was necessary in 2 cases. There were 3 local recurrences occurring within an average of 215 days.

In the light of these results, pelvic exenteration by robotically assisted laparoscopy may represent a valuable treatment modality of recurrent cervical cancer with low immediate postoperative morbidity.

•

Robotic-assisted laparoscopy improve surgical performance in pelvic exenterations.

•

Robotic-assisted laparoscopy is associated with good post-operative results.

•

Robotic-assisted laparoscopy is associated with good histological results.

•

This series described 6 real pelvic exenterations contrary to other smaller series.

Pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies: Postoperative complications and oncologic outcomes

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

To evaluate complications, morbidity and oncologic outcomes of pelvic exenteration as treatment for gynecologic malignancies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2008 and 2015, a total of 35 patients underwent pelvic exenteration, due to recurrence of gynecological cancer. Surgical outcomes, early and late postoperative complications, and recurrence/survival outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 53.8 years. Anterior exenteration was done in 20 patients, while 15 were total exenterations. Ileal conduit was done in 24 patients, while 8 received a neobladder and 3 a cutaneous ureterostomy. Postoperative complications were divided in 2groups, early (<30 days) and late complications (>30 days). A total of 25 patients (71.4%) had one or more early complications; 16 (45.7%) had fever due to a urinary tract infection, pyelonephritis or intra-abdominal collection; 2 (5.7%) developed a vesicovaginal fistula; 4 (11.4%) a rectovaginal fistula; 3 (8.5%) acute kidney failure and one (2.85%) uronephrosis. Regarding to late complications, 8patients (22.8%) had fever. Six (17%) presented with uronephrosis, and 5 (14.2%) with ureteral-pouch stricture. Five patients (14.2%) had acute renal insufficiency, 3 (8,6%) rectovaginal fistula and one (2.85%) urinary fistula. Mean follow up time was 20.3 month (2-60). A total of 22patients (62.8%) were free of disease. Another 13 (37.1%) patients relapsed. Only 4 (11.4%) patients died after pelvic exenteration due to underlying disease.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic exenteration has a high rate of complications and morbidity, but can be the last curative opportunity in patients with recurrent or persistent gynecologic malignancies. This procedure should be performed by multidisciplinary, experienced teams in a tertiary medical center.

[Laparoscopic anterior pelvic exenteration in a patient with locally advanced melanoma]

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration is one of the most mutilating surgical procedures with high post-operative morbidity. The laparoscopic technique aims to reduce perioperative complications and reduce post-surgical recovery.

OBJECTIVE

We present the first case of laparoscopic anterior exenteration for locally advanced melanoma, held at the National Cancer Institute and published in Mexico.

CASE REPORT

Patient 60 years of age diagnosed with invasive vulvar melanoma with bladder extension upon whom laparoscopic anterior pelvic exenteration with external urinary reconstruction was performed. Time in surgery was 505minutes and estimated blood loss was 400ml. No complications occurred during or immediately after surgery. The final histopathological study reported: nodular lesion that completely replaces the clitoris and spreads to the left labia majora, measures 3×2.5×2cm and is located relative to the free margins with perineural invasion intraepithelial spread in space and urethra and bladder trigone.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic anterior pelvic exenteration is a safe alternative in well-selected patients, with acceptable time in surgery, surgical complications and recovery time.

Locally advanced vulva cancer: A single centre review of anovulvectomy and a systematic review of surgical, chemotherapy and radiotherapy alternatives. Is an international collaborative RCT destined for the "too difficult to do" box?

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of locally advanced vulva cancer (LAVC) remains challenging. Due to the lack of randomised trials many questions regarding the indications for different treatment options and their efficacy remain unanswered.

METHODS

In this retrospective study we provide the largest published series of LAVC patients treated with anovulvectomy, reporting oncological outcomes and morbidity. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed for all treatment options 1946-2015.

RESULTS

In our case series, 57/70 (81%) patients were treated in the primary setting with anovulvectomy and 13 patients underwent anovulvectomy for recurrent disease. The median overall survival (OS) was 69months (1-336) with disease specific survival of 159months (1-336). Following anovulvectomy for primary disease, time to progression and OS were significantly higher in node negative disease (10 vs. 96months; 19 vs. 121months, p<0.0001). Post-surgical complications were observed in 36 (51.4%), the majority of which were Grade I/II infections. There was one peri-operative death. Review of the literature showed that chemotherapy, radiotherapy or combination treatments are alternatives to surgery. Evidence relating to all of these consisted mostly of small retrospective series, which varied considerably in terms of patient characteristics and treatment schedules. Significant patient and treatment heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis with significant biases in these studies. It was unclear if survival or morbidity was better in any one group with a lack of data reporting complications, quality of life, and long term follow-up. However, results for chemoradiation are encouraging enough to warrant further investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

There remains inadequate evidence to identify an optimal treatment for LAVC. However, there is sufficient evidence to support a trial of anovulvectomy versus chemoradiation. Discussions and consensus would be needed to determine trial criteria including the primary outcome measure. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy alone may be best reserved for the palliative setting or metastatic disease.

Pelvic Exenteration in Gynecologic Cancer: La Paz University Hospital Experience

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration is an ultraradical surgery involving the en bloc resection of the pelvic organs, including the internal reproductive organs, the distal urinary tract (ureters, bladder, urethra), and/or anorectum. It is mainly applied as a salvage surgery for recurrent gynecologic tumors of any origin (vulva, vagina, cervix, uterine, and also ovary). Our aim was to establish the most favorable cases for this type of surgery by means of a review of our institution experience.

METHODS

Retrospective analyses of all patients treated with pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic cancer from 2008 to 2014 at La Paz University Hospital.

RESULTS

Ten patients underwent pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic cancers including uterine, cervical, vaginal, vulvar, and ovarian cancer. All patients had received prior treatment: surgery, radiotherapy, and/or chemotherapy. Eight patients underwent total pelvic exenteration, one anterior and one posterior pelvic exenteration. Urinary diversions technique consisted of ileal conduits in all cases. Permanent colostomy was performed in all cases. Postoperative complications were related to the urinary diversion in 50% of the cases, to the reconstructive technique in 30%, and to systemic or pelvic infections in 20%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the high morbidity and mortality rates, pelvic exenteration is feasible, and in selected cases of cancer recurrence is the last possible treatment.

[Curative pelvic exenteration for recurrent cervical carcinoma in the era of concurrent chemotherapy and radiation therapy. A systematic review]

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to assess the preoperative management in case of recurrent cervical cancer, to assess patients for a surgical curative treatment.

METHODS

English publications were searched using PubMed and Cochrane Library.

RESULTS

In the purpose of curative surgery, pelvic exenteration required clear margins. Today, only half of pelvic exenteration procedures showed postoperative clear margins. Modern imaging (RMI and Pet-CT) does not allow defining local extension of microcopic disease, and thus postoperative clear margins. Despite the same generic term of pelvic exenteration, there is a wide heterogeneity in surgical procedures in published cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Because clear margins are required for curative pelvic exenteration, but are not predictable by preoperative assessment. The larger surgery, i.e. the infra-elevator exenteration with vulvectomy, could be the logical surgical choice to increase the rate of clear margins and therefore, recurrent cervical carcinoma patient survival.

Pelvic exenteration: experience from a rural cancer center in developing world

Background. Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a morbid procedure. Ours is a rural based cancer center limited trained surgical oncology staff. Hence, this audit was planned to evaluate morbidity and outcomes of all patients undergoing PE at our center. Methods. This is a IRB approved retrospective audit of all patients who underwent PE at our center from January 2010 to August 2013. The toxicity grades were retrospectively assigned according to the CTCAE version 4.02 criteria. Chi-square test was done to identify factors affecting grades 3–5 morbidity. Kaplan Meier survival analysis has been used for estimation of median PFS and OS. Results. 34 patients were identified, with the median age of 52 years (28–73 years). Total, anterior, posterior, and modified posterior exenterations were performed in 4 (11.8%), 5 (14.7%), 14 (41.2%), and 11 (32.4%) patients, respectively. The median time for surgery was 5.5 hours (3–8 hours). The median blood loss was 500 mL (200–4000 mL). CTCAE version 4.02 grades 3-4 toxicity was seen in nine patients (25.7%). The median estimated progression free survival was 31.76 months (25.13–38.40 months). The 2-year overall survival was 97.14%. Conclusion. PE related grades 3–5 morbidity of 25.7% and mortality of 2.9% at our resource limited center are encouraging.

Prognostic factors for curative pelvic exenterations in patients with recurrent uterine cervical or vaginal cancer

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic factors after curative pelvic exenterations performed for recurrent uterine cervical or vaginal cancers in the era of concomitant chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 16 patients with recurrent uterine cervical or vaginal cancer and tumor-free resection margins on pelvic exenteration pathological analysis between October 1997 and April 2014.

RESULTS

Pelvic exenterations were performed for 13 recurrent cervical cancers and 3 recurrent vaginal cancers. All of the patients had received pelvic irradiation (external radiotherapy for 14 patients and brachytherapy for 2 patients). The median age at the recurrence was 59.5 years (49-77 years), and the median tumor size was 4.35 cm (2-9 cm). There were no intraoperative or postoperative deaths. The 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival were 30% and 34.1%, respectively. The following 3 factors affected the disease-free survival: tumor size greater than 5 cm (P = 0.05), mesorectal lymph node involvement (P = 0.02), and vascular emboli (P = 0.0093).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of vascular emboli is a new prognostic factor in cases of recurrent cervical or vaginal cancer. Assessing the presence of vascular emboli on pretherapeutic biopsies could facilitate the selection of patients eligible for curative pelvic exenterations.

Unintended consequences: surgical complications in gynecologic cancer

More than 91,000 women in the USA will be diagnosed with a gynecologic malignancy in 2013. Most will undergo surgery for staging, treatment or both. No therapeutic intervention is without consequence, therefore, it is imperative to understand the possible complications associated with the perioperative period before undertaking surgery. Complication rates are affected by a patient population that is increasingly older, more obese and more medically complicated. Surgical modalities consist of abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches, and also affect rates of complications. An understanding of the various approaches, patient characteristics and surgeon experience allow for individualized decision-making to minimize the complications after surgery for gynecologic cancer.

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.

HDR brachytherapy for the reirradiation of cervical and vaginal cancer: analysis of efficacy and dosage delivered to organs at risk

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of HDR brachytherapy (BT) for the reirradiation of cervical or vaginal cancer arising within a previously irradiated area with a special focus on dosage delivery to organs at risk.

METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients with cervical (N = 19) or vaginal (N = 1) cancer were reirradiated with curative intent using BT with or without external beam irradiation and hyperthermia. The median biologically equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2), assuming α/β = 10, for reirradiation was 48.8 Gy (range: 16.0-91.0 Gy), and the median cumulative EQD2 (for primary treatment and reirradiation) was 133.5 Gy (range: 96.8-164.2 Gy). The median follow-up after retreatment was 31 months (range: 6-86 months).

RESULTS

The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 68% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 44%-91%). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 42% (95% CI: 19%-65%). The 3-year local control (LC) rate was 45% (95% CI: 22%-69%). For nine patients who received 3D treatment planning, the median cumulative EQD2 to 2 cm(3) of rectum was 94.4 Gy (range: 67.1-118.8 Gy) and to 2 cm(3) of bladder was 99.3 Gy (range: 70.4-122.3 Gy). Grade 3 late toxicity was observed in 3 patients (15%). An interval between primary RT and reirradiation of ≤ 12 months and a tumor diameter >3 cm were significant prognostic factors adversely affecting OS, DFS and LC.

CONCLUSIONS

HDR BT is a valuable method for the reirradiation of cervical cancer. A cumulative EQD2 of approximately 100 Gy was safely delivered to 2 cm(3) of the bladder and the rectum.

Feasibility of adjuvant chemotherapy after pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies

OBJECTIVE

It is well documented that recurrence after pelvic exenteration remains high (up to 50%), and patients may require a prolonged period of recuperation following this aggressive surgery. We conducted a retrospective review to evaluate the feasibility of administering adjuvant chemotherapy after pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of patients with any gynecologic cancer who underwent exenterative surgery between January 2005 and February 2011 at our institution. Patients were referred for postexenteration adjuvant chemotherapy based on surgeon's discretion and/or presence of high-risk features: positive margins, positive lymph nodes, and/or lymphovascular space invasion. Suitability for chemotherapy was assessed by a gynecologic medical oncologist. Regimens consisted of 4 to 6 cycles of platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. Chemotherapy-related toxicities were assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.

RESULTS

We identified 42 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration during the study period. Eleven (26%) were referred for adjuvant chemotherapy. Three (27%) of the 11 patients did not receive chemotherapy because of delayed postoperative recovery or physician choice. Seven (88%) of the remaining 8 patients completed all scheduled chemotherapy. Grade 2 toxicities or greater were documented in 6 patients (75%), the most common being neutropenia, neuropathy, and fatigue. Median follow-up time was 25 months (range, 6-56 months). The 3-year progression-free and overall survival rates of the 8 patients who received chemotherapy were 58% (95% confidence interval, 18%-84%) and 54% (95% confidence interval, 13%- 83%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of adjuvant chemotherapy is feasible for a select group of patients after pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies. Our results need to be interpreted with caution because of the small and heterogeneous cohort of patients included.