Simultaneous pelvic exenteration and liver resection for primary rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: results from the PelvEx Collaborative

A systematic review of oncosurgical and quality of life outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is now the standard of care for locally advanced (LARC) and locally recurrent (LRRC) rectal cancer. Reports of the significant short-term morbidity and survival advantage conferred by R0 resection are well established. However, longer-term outcomes are rarely addressed. This systematic review focuses on long-term oncosurgical and quality of life (QoL) outcomes following PE for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed®, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE® and Embase® databases was conducted, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies were included if they reported long-term outcomes following PE for LARC or LRRC. Studies with fewer than 20 patients were excluded.

FINDINGS

A total of 25 papers reported outcomes for 5,489 patients. Of these, 4,744 underwent PE for LARC (57.5%) or LRRC (42.5%). R0 resection rates ranged from 23.2% to 98.4% and from 14.9% to 77.8% respectively. The overall morbidity rates were 17.8-87.0%. The median survival ranged from 12.5 to 140.0 months. None of these studies reported functional outcomes and only four studies reported QoL outcomes. Numerous different metrics and timepoints were utilised, with QoL scores frequently returning to baseline by 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates that PE is safe, with a good prospect of R0 resection and acceptable mortality rates in selected patients. Morbidity rates remain high, highlighting the importance of shared decision making with patients. Longer-term oncological outcomes as well as QoL and functional outcomes need to be addressed in future studies. Development of a core outcomes set would facilitate better reporting in this complex and challenging patient group.

Current Management of Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), which occurs in 6-12% of patients previously treated with surgery, with or without pre-operative chemoradiation therapy, represents a complex and heterogeneous disease profoundly affecting the patient's quality of life (QoL) and long-term survival. Its management usually requires a multidisciplinary approach, to evaluate the several aspects of a LRRC, such as resectability or the best approach to reduce symptoms. Surgical treatment is more complex and usually needs high-volume centers to obtain a higher rate of radical (R0) resections and to reduce the rate of postoperative complications. Multiple factors related to the patient, to the primary tumor, and to the surgery for the primary tumor contribute to the development of local recurrence. Accurate pre-treatment staging of the recurrence is essential, and several classification systems are currently used for this purpose. Achieving an R0 resection through radical surgery remains the most critical factor for a favorable oncologic outcome, although both chemotherapy and radiotherapy play a significant role in facilitating this goal. If a R0 resection of a LRRC is not feasible, palliative treatment is mandatory to reduce the LRRC-related symptoms, especially pain, minimizing the effect of the recurrence on the QoL of the patients. The aim of this manuscript is to provide a comprehensive narrative review of the literature regarding the management of LRRC.

Pelvic exenterations combined with cytoreductions for T4 rectal cancers with peritoneal metastasis: a safety analysis

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenterations and cytoreduction are individually morbid procedures with oncological validity. The combination of these simultaneously in patients with rectal cancers has not been evaluated. The present study aimed to assess the surgical and survival outcomes of the combined procedure.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-centre analysis of consecutive patients that underwent pelvic exenterations and cytoreductions for advanced or recurrent rectal cancers with peritoneal metastasis between 2013 and 2022. The primary outcome measure for safety was major complications (≥Grade IIIA). The threshold for considering the procedure unsafe was set at 50% for the upper confidence limit of major morbidity. Overall and recurrence-free survival were also assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients underwent the combined procedure that included 24 total pelvic and 15 posterior pelvic exenterations. The median age of the cohort was 35 years, 18 (46.2%) had signet ring cell cancers, and eight patients (21%) had extraperitoneal disease as well. The median PCI was 4 and CC-0 was achieved in 38 patients (97.4%). Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy was delivered in 15 patients, and four had placement of an intraperitoneal chemo port. Major complications were experienced by 7 patients (18%; 95% confidence interval: 7.5%-33.5%). Median recurrence-free and overall survivals were 9 and 17 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Combined pelvic exenterations and cytoreductions are safe operations in terms of morbidity. Survival, however, remains poor for this group of patients despite aggressive surgery.

Locally advanced mid/low rectal cancer with synchronous resectable liver metastases: systematic review of the available strategies and outcome

The management of patients with locally advanced mid/low rectal cancer with resectable liver metastases is complex because of the need to combine the optimal treatment of both tumors. This study aims to review the available treatment strategies and compare their outcome, focusing on radiotherapy (RT) and liver-first approach (LFA). A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Embase, and web sources including articles published between 2000 and 02/2023 and reporting mid-/long-term outcomes. Overall, twenty studies were included (n = 1837 patients). Three- and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 51-88% and 36-59%. Although several strategies were reported, most patients received RT (1448/1837, 79%; > 85% neoadjuvant). RT reduced the pelvic recurrence risk (5.8 vs. 13.5%, P = 0.005) but did not impact OS. Six studies analyzed LFA (n = 307 patients). LFA had a completion rate similar to the rectum-first approach (RFA, 81% vs. 79%) but the interval strategy-an LFA variant with liver surgery in the interval between radiotherapy and rectal surgery-had a better completion rate than standard LFA (liver surgery/radiotherapy/rectal surgery, 92% vs. 75%, P = 0.011) and RFA (79%, P = 0.048). Across all series, LFA achieved the best survival rates, and in one paper it led to a survival advantage in patients with multiple metastases. In conclusion, different strategies can be adopted, but RT should be included to decrease the pelvic recurrence risk. LFA should be considered, especially in patients with high hepatic tumor burden, and RT before liver surgery (interval strategy) could maximize its completion rate.

Multimodality Imaging to Direct Management of Primary and Recurrent Rectal Adenocarcinoma Beyond the Total Mesorectal Excision Plane

Rectal tumors extending beyond the total mesorectal excision (TME) plane (beyond-TME) require particular multidisciplinary expertise and oncologic considerations when planning treatment. Imaging is used at all stages of the pathway, such as local tumor staging/restaging, creating an imaging-based "roadmap" to plan surgery for optimal tumor clearance, identifying treatment-related complications, which may be suitable for radiology-guided intervention, and to detect recurrent or metastatic disease, which may be suitable for radiology-guided ablative therapies. Beyond-TME and exenterative surgery have gained acceptance as potentially curative procedures for advanced tumors. Understanding the role, techniques, and pitfalls of current imaging techniques is important for both radiologists involved in the treatment of these patients and general radiologists who may encounter patients undergoing surveillance or patients presenting with surgical complications or intercurrent abdominal pathology. This review aims to outline the current and emerging roles of imaging in patients with beyond-TME and recurrent rectal malignancy, focusing on practical tips for image interpretation and surgical planning in the beyond-TME setting. Keywords: Abdomen/GI, Rectum, Oncology © RSNA, 2024.

Tata Memorial Centre Evidence Based Management of Colorectal cancer

This review article examines the evidence-based management of colorectal cancers, focusing on topics characterized by ongoing debates and evolving evidence. To contribute to the scientific discourse, we intentionally exclude subjects with established guidelines, concentrating instead on areas where the current understanding is dynamic. Our analysis encompasses a thorough exploration of critical themes, including the evidence surrounding complete mesocolic excision and D3 lymphadenectomy in colon cancers. Additionally, we delve into the evolving landscape of perioperative chemotherapy in both colon and rectal cancers, considering its nuanced role in the context of contemporary treatment strategies. Advancements in surgical techniques are a pivotal aspect of our discussion, with an emphasis on the utilization of minimally invasive approaches such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery in both colon and rectal cancers, including advanced rectal cases. Moving beyond conventional radical procedures, we scrutinize the feasibility and implications of endoscopic resections for small tumors, explore the paradigm of organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancers, and assess the utility of total neoadjuvant therapy in the current treatment landscape. Our final segment reviews pivotal trials that have significantly influenced the management of colorectal liver and peritoneal metastasis.

Multimodal treatment of rectal cancer with resectable synchronous liver metastases: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Specific studies on stage IV rectal cancer are lacking. The aim of this study is to describe the current status of rectum-first approach (RFA), liver-first approach (LFA) and simultaneous approach (SA) in these patients.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed on PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane including studies published from January 2005 to January 2021. Studies on colon cancer only, colon and rectal cancer without distinction, extrahepatic metastases at diagnosis, or case reports/letters were excluded. Main outcomes were 5-yr overall survival (OS) and treatment completion rates.

RESULTS

22 studies were included for a total of 1,653 patients. 77% of the studies were retrospective and mainly (59%) reported one treatment approach. The primary endpoint was declared in 27% of the studies. Irrespective of treatment approaches, the 5-yr OS rate was reported in 72% of the studies. The 5-yr OS rates ranged from 38.5% to 75% for LFA, from 28% and 80% for RFA and from 28.2% to 77.3% for SA. Treatment completion rates ranged from 50% to 100% for LFA, from 37% to 100% for RFA, and from 66% to 100% for SA.

CONCLUSION

The wide heterogeneity of the results reflects that the therapeutic strategy in this setting is a case-by-case multidisciplinary decision and depends on several patient-specific features.

Prognostic Factors and a Predictive Nomogram of Cancer-Specific Survival of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Patients with Pelvic Exenteration Treatment

Objective

The aim of this study was to explore prognostic factors, develop and internally validate a prognostic nomogram model, and predict the cancer-specific survival (CCS) of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) patients with pelvic exenteration (PE) treatment.

Methods

A total of 454 EOC patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were collected according to the inclusion criteria and randomly divided into the training (n = 317) and validation (n = 137) cohorts. Prognostic factors of EOC patients with PE treatment were explored by univariate and multivariate stepwise Cox regression analyses. A predictive nomogram was constructed based on selected risk factors. The predictive power of the constructed nomogram was assessed by the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Kaplan-Meier (KM) curve stratified by patients' nomoscore was also plotted to assess the risk stratification of the established nomogram. In internal validation, the C index, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were employed to assess the discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of the models, respectively.

Results

In the training cohort, age, histological type, Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, number of examined lymph nodes, and number of positive lymph nodes were found to be independent prognostic factors of postoperative CSS. A practical nomogram model of EOC patients with PE treatment was constructed based on these selected risk factors. Time-dependent ROC curves and KM curves showed the superior predictive capability and excellent clinical stratification of the nomogram in both training and validation cohorts. In the internal validation, the C index, calibration plots, and DCA in the training and validation cohorts confirmed that the nomogram presents a high level of prediction accuracy and clinical applicability.

Conclusion

Our nomogram exhibited satisfactory survival prediction and prognostic discrimination. It is a user-friendly tool with high clinical pragmatism for estimating prognosis and guiding the long-term management of EOC patients with PE treatment.

Simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastasis: Feasibility and development of a prediction model

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS

Timing of resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) has been debated for decades. The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility of simultaneous resection of CRLM in terms of major complications and develop a prediction model for safe resections.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center study of synchronous, resectable CRLM, operated between 2013 and 2021 was conducted. Upper limit of 95% confidence interval (CI) of major complications (≥ grade IIIA) was set at 40% as the safety threshold. Logistic regression was used to determine predictors of morbidity. Prediction model was internally validated by bootstrap estimates, Harrell's C-index, and correlation of predicted and observed estimates.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients were operated. Of them, 41.3% had rectal cancers. Major hepatectomy (≥ 4 segments) was performed for 25 patients (27.2%). Major complications occurred in 20 patients (21.7%, 95% CI: 13.8%-31.5%). Predictors of complications were the presence of comorbidities and major hepatectomy (area under the ROC curve: 0.692). Unacceptable level of morbidity (≥ 40%) was encountered in patients with comorbidities who underwent major hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous bowel and CRLM resection appear to be safe. However, caution should be exercised when combining major liver resections with bowel resection in patients with comorbid conditions.

Minimum standards of pelvic exenterative practice: PelvEx Collaborative guideline

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

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.

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

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

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.