Literature DB >> 19574794

Modified posterior pelvic exenteration for ovarian cancer.

Gilles Houvenaeghel1, Martin Gutowski, Max Buttarelli, Jean Cuisenier, Fabrice Narducci, Christian Dalle, Gwenael Ferron, Phillippe Morice, Pierre Meeus, Eberhart Stockle, Marie Bannier, Eric Lambaudie, Phillippe Rouanet, Jean Fraisse, Eric Leblanc, Jacques Dauplat, Denis Querleu, Pierre Martel, Damien Castaigne.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: A modified posterior pelvic exenteration (MPE) might be needed to reach an optimal tumoral reduction. The issue of this study is to relate a multicentric experience of this kind of resection. MATERIALS: Three hundred five patients who needed an MPE were analyzed from 9 French cancer centers. One hundred sixty-eight MPEs were performed during initial surgery (55.1%), 69 during interval surgery (22.6%), 36 after chemotherapy (11.8%), and 32 for recurrences (10.5%).
RESULTS: Three hundred two colorectal anastomoses were realized with a protective stoma in 59 (19.5%) of cases and a stoma closure in 76.5% (51). The rate of functional anastomosis was 96% (290/302). Complications occurred in 26.9% (82/305) of the patients, with a fistula in 25 (8.2%). The reintervention rate was 8.8% (27/305). The median length of hospitalization was 15 days. The absence of a macroscopic residual disease was obtained in 58% (173/303) of cases. A residual disease that was 1 cm or smaller was observed in 73 cases (24%) and 2 cm or smaller observed in 36 (11.9%). Postoperative chemotherapy was started with a median time of 32 days.Postoperative death occurred in 1 patient (0.33%). The survival rates were 62.7% and 27.6% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. With a multivariate analysis, the 2 significant prognostic factors were residual disease and time of surgery (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: A rectal invasion should not be an obstacle to reach the aim to obtain a macroscopic minimal residual disease or, if possible, the absence of one. An MPE is useful in those cases to reach optimal cytoreduction, with comparable results whatever the patient's age is. A temporary protective stoma should be considered only exceptionally.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19574794     DOI: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181a7f38b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer        ISSN: 1048-891X            Impact factor:   3.437


  6 in total

1.  Role of preoperative MR imaging in the evaluation of patients with persistent or recurrent gynaecological malignancies before pelvic exenteration.

Authors:  Olivio F Donati; Yulia Lakhman; Evis Sala; Irene A Burger; Hebert A Vargas; Debra A Goldman; Vaagn Andikyan; Kay J Park; Dennis S Chi; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Sonographic diagnosis and Endo-SPONGE assisted vacuum therapy of anastomotic leakage following posterior pelvic exenteration for ovarian cancer without using a protective stoma.

Authors:  Jens Einenkel; Babett Holler; Albrecht Hoffmeister
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 4.401

3.  Total pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies.

Authors:  Elisabeth J Diver; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Marcela G Del Carmen
Journal:  Int J Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-06-10

4.  Early oral feeding is safe and useful after rectosigmoid resection with anastomosis during cytoreductive surgery for primary ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Kazuyoshi Kato; Kohei Omatsu; Sanshiro Okamoto; Maki Matoda; Hidetaka Nomura; Terumi Tanigawa; Yoichi Aoki; Mayu Yunokawa; Hiroyuki Kanao
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-03-15       Impact factor: 2.754

5.  Protective ostomies in ovarian cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Beatriz Navarro Santana; Esmeralda Garcia Torralba; Jose Verdu Soriano; Maria Laseca; Alicia Martin Martinez
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 4.401

6.  Posterior pelvic exenteration for ovarian cancer: surgical and oncological outcomes.

Authors:  Gilles Houvenaeghel; Alexandre de Nonneville; Guillaume Blache; Max Buttarelli; Camille Jauffret; Djamel Mokart; Laura Sabiani
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 4.756

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.