| Literature DB >> 19421811 |
F T J Ferenschild1, M Vermaas, C Verhoef, A C Ansink, W J Kirkels, A M M Eggermont, J H W de Wilt.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Complete resection is the most important prognostic factor in surgery for pelvic tumors. In locally advanced and recurrent pelvic malignancies, radical margins are sometimes difficult to obtain because of close relation to or growth in adjacent organs/structures. Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) is an exenterative operation for these advanced tumors and involves en bloc resection of the rectum, bladder, and internal genital organs (prostate/seminal vesicles or uterus, ovaries and/or vagina).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19421811 PMCID: PMC2691931 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-009-0066-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Surg ISSN: 0364-2313 Impact factor: 3.352
Previous procedures of patients with recurrent pelvic cancer
| Rectal | ( | Abdominal perineal resection | 8 |
| Low anterior resection | 5 | ||
| Rectosigmoid resection and end colostomy | 3 | ||
| Cervical | ( | Radical hysterectomy | 7 |
| Extrafascial abdominal hysterectomy | 3 | ||
| Vaginal hysterectomy | 1 | ||
| Chemoradiation | 2 | ||
| Sarcoma | ( | Local excision | 1 |
| Hysterectomy | 1 | ||
| Endometrial | ( | Abdominal uterus extirpation | 1 |
Pathology characteristics
| Rectal | Cervical | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prim | Rec | Prim | Rec | ||
| Total no. | (32) | (16) | (1) | (13) | |
| T stage | T0 | – | 8%a | – | 9% |
| T2 | – | – | – | 9% | |
| T3 | 35% | 25%b | – | 36% | |
| T4 | 65% | 67%c | 100% | 45% | |
| N stage | N0 | 57% | 42% | 100% | 45% |
| N1 | 9% | 16% | – | – | |
| N2 | 9% | – | – | – | |
| Nx | 26% | 42% | – | 54% | |
| Completeness | R0 | 82% | 58% | 100% | 64% |
| R1 | 9% | 25% | – | 36% | |
| R2 | 9% | 17% | – | – | |
aWanebo classification for recurrent rectal cancer stage Tr 0 (no recurrence)
bWanebo classification for recurrent rectal cancer stage Tr 3 (growth into surrounding soft tissue)
cWanebo classification for recurrent rectal cancer stage Tr 4 (penetration anterior structures)
Complications and reinterventions
| Prim rectum ( | Rec rectum ( | Cervix ( | Others ( | Total ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minor only | 12 (38%) | 5 (31%) | 2 (14%) | 3 (43%) | 22 (32%) |
| Major only | – | 4 (25%) | – | – | 4 (6%) |
| Major and minor | 9 (28%) | 4 (25%) | 6 (43%) | 1 (14%) | 20 (29%) |
| No complication | 11 (34%) | 3 (18%) | 6 (43%) | 3 (43%) | 23 (33% |
| Wound infection perineal | 4 (12%) | 1 (6%) | 3 (21%) | 2 (28%) | 10 (14%) |
| Wound infection midline | 6 (19%) | 3 (19%) | 3 (21%) | 1 (14%) | 13 (19%) |
| Pneumonia | 4 (12%) | 1 (6%) | 1 (7%) | 1 (14%) | 7 (10%) |
| Central venous catheter sepsis | 1 (3%) | 1 (6%) | – | – | 2 (3%) |
| Fever without known cause | 1 (3%) | – | – | – | 1 (1%) |
| Urinary tract infection | 3 (9%) | – | 2 (14%) | 1 (14%) | 6 (9%) |
| Neuropathy | 1 (3%) | 1 (6%) | – | – | 2 (3%) |
| TIA | – | 1 (6%) | – | – | 1 (1%) |
| Decubitus | 1 (3%) | 1 (6%) | – | – | 2 (3%) |
| Urostomy-related | |||||
| Nefrodrain placement | 2 (6%) | 2 (13%) | 2 (14%) | – | 6 (9%) |
| Small-bowel leakage-repair | 2 (6%) | 1 (6%) | 1 (7%) | – | 4 (6%) |
| Reimplantation ureter | 1 (3%) | – | 1 (7%) | – | 2 (3%) |
| Other | |||||
| Gracilis flap wound-repair | 2 (6%) | – | – | – | 1 (1%) |
| Sartorius flap fistula repair | – | 1 (6%) | – | – | 1 (1%) |
| Abdominal dehiscence repair | 1 (3%) | – | – | – | 1 (1%) |
| Ileus relaparotomy | – | 1 (6%) | – | – | 1 (1%) |
| Bleeding relaparotomy | – | – | – | 1 (14%) | 1 (1%) |
| Abscess drainage | – | 2 (12%) | 3 (21%) | 1 (14%) | 6 (9%) |
| Suture leakage repair (ileostomy) | – | – | 1 (7%) | – | 1 (1%) |
| Enterocutaneous fistula repair | – | – | 1 (7%) | – | 1 (1%) |
Major complication: a complication that causes the need for reintervention or is the cause of prolonged hospitalization
Minor complication: a complication that does not cause the need for reintervention or is the cause of prolonged hospitalization
Fig. 1Kaplan–Meier curve for local control
Fig. 2Kaplan–Meier curve for overall survival