Robotic pelvic exenteration in males: systematization of the technique

Male pelvic exenteration is a challenging procedure with high morbidity. In very selected cases, the robotic approach could make dissection easier and decrease morbidity due to the better vision provided and higher range of movements. In this paper, we describe port placement, instruments, minilaparotomy location, and the stepwise sequence of these procedures. We address 3 different situations: total pelvic exenteration with abdominoperineal resection, colostomy and urostomy; pelvic exenteration with colorectal/anal anastomosis and urostomy; and pelvic exenteration with abdominoperineal resection, colostomy and urinary tract reconstruction.

Exenteración pélvica para cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y recurrente: resultados a largo plazo y factores pronósticos

OBJETIVO

El objetivo de este trabajo fue analizar los resultados perioperatorios y a largo plazo de los pacientes sometidos a exenteración pélvica para cáncer de recto en un centro de referencia en la Ciudad de México.

MÉTODO

Se incluyeron todos los pacientes que se sometieron a exenteración pélvica por cáncer de recto entre 1995 y 2019. Se analizaron variables demográficas, clínicas, quirúrgicas y patológicas.

RESULTADOS

Se incluyeron 18 pacientes operados por cáncer de recto (16 localmente avanzados y 2 recurrentes). La relación hombre: mujer fue de 1:3.5. La morbilidad mayor fue del 27.7%. El sangrado intraoperatorio ≥ 1000 ml se asoció con morbilidad (80 vs. 20%; p = 0,029) y mortalidad posoperatoria (100 vs. 0; p = 0.043). La mediana de sobrevida global fue 102 meses. Las sobrevidas global y libre de enfermedad a los 5 años fueron del 44.4% y el 38.8%, respectivamente. La invasión linfovascular fue un factor de mal pronóstico para sobrevida libre de enfermedad (p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONES

La exenteración pélvica para el cáncer de recto es un procedimiento quirúrgico con altas morbilidad y mortalidad. La invasión linfovascular es un factor de mal pronóstico para la sobrevida libre de enfermedad.

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic exenteration is a radical treatment for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic tumors. The aim of this study was to analyze the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for rectal cancer at a referral center in Mexico City.

METHOD

We included all patients who underwent pelvic exenteration due to rectal cancer between 1995 and 2019. Demographic, clinical, surgical and pathological variables were analyzed.

RESULTS

18 patients were included (16 locally advanced and 2 recurrent). The male-female ratio was 1:3.5. The highest morbidity was 27.7%. Intraoperative bleeding ≥ 1000 ml was associated with postoperative morbidity (80 vs. 20%; p = 0.029) and mortality (100 vs. 0; p = 0.043). The median overall survival was 102 months. Overall survival and disease free survival at 5 years after exenteration were 44.4% and 38.8%, respectively. Lymphovascular invasion of the tumor was a poor prognostic factor for disease free survival (p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic exenteration for rectal cancer is a surgical procedure with high morbidity and mortality. Lymphovascular invasion is a poor prognostic factor for disease-free survival.

Pelvic exenteration with rectal resection for different types of malignancies at two tertiary referral centres

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic exenteration (PE) offers the best chance of cure for locally advanced primary or recurrent pelvic organ malignancies invading adjacent organs. The aims of this study were to analyse results for any pelvic exenteration that includes rectal resection and the analysis of results of fecal and urinary reconstruction.

METHOD

From January 2000 to April 2014, 111 PE with rectal resection for any pelvic cancer were analysed retrospectively at two national tertiary referral centers.

RESULTS

Thirty-six colorectal anastomosis were performed. Urologic reconstructions performed were 30 double barrelled wet colostomy (DBWC), 14 Bricker ileal conduit (BIC), and 2 ureterocutaneostomies. Postoperative complications occurred in 71 patients (64%). Six deaths (5.4%) occurred within 30 postoperative days. Five-year overall survival following R0 resection was 62.6%; R1: 42.7%; R2: 24.2% (P=.018). The resection margin status was associated with overall survival, local recurrence and distant recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic exenterations for any cause need to be performed in referral centers and by specialized surgeons. Anastomosis after modified supralevator pelvic exenteration for ovarian cancer, is safe. DBWC can be considered a valid option for urologic reconstruction. The most important prognostic factor after pelvic exenteration for malignant pelvic tumors is the status of surgical margins.