Advertisement

Promising Long-Term Outcomes After Pelvic Exenteration

  • Yakup Kulu
  • Arianeb Mehrabi
  • Elias Khajeh
  • Johannes Klose
  • Johanna Greenwood
  • Thilo Hackert
  • Markus W. Büchler
  • Alexis Ulrich
Colorectal Cancer
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a complex and challenging surgical procedure. The reported results of this procedure for primary and recurrent disease are limited and conflicting.

Methods

This study analyzed patient outcomes after all PEs performed in the authors’ department between October 2001 and December 2016. Relevant patient data were obtained from a prospective database. Morbidity and mortality were reported for all patients. For patients with malignant disease, differences in perioperative outcomes, prognostic indicators for overall survival, and local and systemic disease recurrence were analyzed using uni- and multivariate analyses.

Results

The study enrolled 187 patients. Of the 183 patients with malignant disease, 63 (38.2%) had primary locally advanced tumors and 115 (62.5%) had recurrent tumors. The 10-year overall survival rate was 63.5% for the patients with primary tumors that were curatively resected and 20.9% for the patients with recurrent disease (p = 0.02). The 10-year survival rate for the patients with extrapelvic disease who underwent curative resection was 37%. Multivariable analysis identified margin positivity (p < 0.01), surgery lasting longer than 7 h (p = 0.02), and recurrent disease (p < 0.01) as predictors of poor survival. Multivariate analysis of local and systemic disease recurrence showed recurrent disease (p < 0.01) as the only significant prognostic factor.

Conclusions

Pelvic exenteration has good long-term results, even for patients with extrapelvic disease. The oncologic outcome for patients with recurrent disease is worse than for patients with primary disease. However, even for these patients, long-time survival is possible.

Supplementary material

10434_2018_7090_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Brown KGM, Solomon MJ, Koh CE. Pelvic exenteration surgery: the evolution of radical surgical techniques for advanced and recurrent pelvic malignancy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60:745–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pawlik TM, Skibber JM, Rodriguez-Bigas MA. Pelvic exenteration for advanced pelvic malignancies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13: 612–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    PelvEx Collaborative. Surgical and survival outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary rectal cancer: results from an international collaboration. Ann Surg. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002528.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    PelvEx Collaborative. Factors affecting outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2018;105(6):650–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gannon CJ, Zager JS, Chang GJ, et al. Pelvic exenteration affords safe and durable treatment for locally advanced rectal carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:1870–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koh CE, Solomon MJ, Brown KG, et al. The evolution of pelvic exenteration practice at a single center: lessons learned from over 500 cases. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60:627–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yang TX, Morris DL, Chua TC. Pelvic exenteration for rectal cancer: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:519–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bhangu A, Ali SM, Brown G, et al. Indications and outcome of pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2014; 259: 315–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nielsen MB, Rasmussen PC, Lindegaard JC, et al. A 10-year experience of total pelvic exenteration for primary advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer based on a prospective database. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:1076–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Warren OJ, Solomon MJ. R0 resection, not surgical technique, is the key consideration in pelvic exenteration surgery. Tech Coloproctol. 2015;19:117–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferenschild FT, Vermaas M, Verhoef C, et al. Total pelvic exenteration for primary and recurrent malignancies. World J Surg. 2009;33:1502–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rottoli M, Vallicelli C, Boschi L, et al. Outcomes of pelvic exenteration for recurrent and primary locally advanced rectal cancer. Int J Surg. 2017;48:69–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vermaas M, Ferenschild FT, Verhoef C, et al. Total pelvic exenteration for primary locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:452–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kusters M, Austin KK, Solomon MJ, et al. Survival after pelvic exenteration for T4 rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2015;102:125–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Radwan RW, Jones HG, Rawat N, et al. Determinants of survival following pelvic exenteration for primary rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2015;102:1278–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Speicher PJ, Turley RS, Sloane JL, et al. Pelvic exenteration for the treatment of locally advanced colorectal and bladder malignancies in the modern era. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:782–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yakup Kulu
    • 1
  • Arianeb Mehrabi
    • 1
  • Elias Khajeh
    • 1
  • Johannes Klose
    • 1
  • Johanna Greenwood
    • 1
  • Thilo Hackert
    • 1
  • Markus W. Büchler
    • 1
  • Alexis Ulrich
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation SurgeryUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Chirurgische Klinik I, Lukaskrankenhaus NeussNeussGermany

Personalised recommendations