Background/aim: In selected patients, pelvic exenteration (PE) is curative, but morbidity and mortality are feared. Unfortunately, prerequisites for indicating PE are not generally defined. The aim of the study was to identify prognostic factors for survival after PE in advanced pelvic gynecological malignancies for finding possible prerequisites for the indication of PE.
Patients And Methods: Between 2002 and 2016, 49 patients underwent pelvic exenteration for advanced pelvic malignancies apart from ovarian cancer. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated based on the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors significantly affecting 5-year overall survival were identified using multivariate regression analysis. Survival distributions between the best and the worst group were compared by the log rank test.
Results: Forty-nine patients with recurrent or primary pelvic gynecological malignancy (20 recurrent disease, 29 primary disease) were included. Seventeen patients had oligometastatic disease at surgical intervention. Resection margin, age, primary versus secondary exenteration and metastatic disease were independent prognostic factors in multivariate regression analysis. A significant difference was observed in 5-year overall survival regarding the best group (57.14%) and the worst group (10%) (p=0.009). Cervical cancer was the only identified risk factor for increased morbidity.
Conclusion: Pelvic exenteration is a valuable therapeutic option with most long-term survivors in the group of patients below 63 years, as primary treatment, with clear microscopic margins and no distant metastases. These four factors may serve as valuable prerequisites for the indication of pelvic exenteration as survival and morbidity in this group of patients compares favorably to alternative therapeutic options.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.15086 | DOI Listing |
Cancers (Basel)
January 2025
Southampton Complex Cancer and Exenteration Team, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK.
Conventional pelvic exenteration (PE) comprises the removal of all or most central pelvic organs and is established in clinical practise. Previously, tumours involving bone or lateral sidewall structures were deemed inoperable due to associated morbidity, mortality, and poor oncological outcomes. Recently however high-complexity PE is increasingly described and is defined as encompassing conventional PE with the additional resection of bone or pelvic sidewall structures.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnn Surg Oncol
January 2025
Division of Colorectal Surgery, Changzheng Hospital, Navy Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Background: Local relapse has not been eradicated even in the era of total mesorectum excision. Although various approaches have been attempted, R0 resection remains the only potentially curative treatment. PATIENT AND METHODS: A 45-year-old woman with a history of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection was diagnosed with pelvic recurrence 7 months ago.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnn Surg
January 2025
Surgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe), Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Objective: To explore the perspectives and experiences of patients and carers living with the long-term consequences of pelvic exenteration.
Summary Background Data: Pelvic exenteration is accepted as the standard of care for selected patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer. With contemporary 5-year survival reported at 40-60%, the number of long-term survivors is expected to increase.
Ann Surg Oncol
January 2025
Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!