Michael P Flood1,2, Peadar S Waters3, Mikael Soucisse3, Robert Ramsay3,4, Michael Michael4,5, Jacob J McCormick3, Satish Warrier3, Alexander Heriot3,4. 1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Michael.flood@petermac.org. 2. Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. Michael.flood@petermac.org. 3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. 4. Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. 5. Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Pelvic exenteration (PE) for locally advanced pelvic malignancy is well established, though high rates of morbidity and mortality exist. Such a complication profile has often deterred the surgical community from offering exenteration in combination with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). We aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes following pelvic exenteration when combined with CRS and HIPEC for peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM) in a tertiary referral centre. METHODS: A review of a prospectively maintained PSM database from June 2015 to December 2020 at a tertiary referral institution was performed. Patients who underwent CRS, PE, and HIPEC were matched with patients who underwent PE alone. Primary endpoints were perioperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: From June 2015 to December 2020, 20 patients required PE as part of their CRS and HIPEC for PSM. The majority of patients were female (n = 16, 80%) with a median age of 52 (range 21-70). Colorectal cancer was the predominant pathology (n = 12, 60%). Median PCI was 11.5 (range 3-39). CC0 and R0 resections were achieved in all patients. CRS, PE, and HIPEC and PE-alone groups were well matched for clinicopathological variables. There was no difference in perioperative major morbidity (HIPEC: 30% vs PE: 15% p = 0.256) and mortality (HIPEC: 0 vs PE: 5% p = 0.311) between groups. Median follow-up was 17.5 months (range 7-68). Eight patients (40%) died from disease-related issues during the study period. CONCLUSION: An aggressive surgical strategy with complete resection is feasible and safe in select patients with complex PSM involving the pelvis.
PURPOSE: Pelvic exenteration (PE) for locally advanced pelvic malignancy is well established, though high rates of morbidity and mortality exist. Such a complication profile has often deterred the surgical community from offering exenteration in combination with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). We aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes following pelvic exenteration when combined with CRS and HIPEC for peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM) in a tertiary referral centre. METHODS: A review of a prospectively maintained PSM database from June 2015 to December 2020 at a tertiary referral institution was performed. Patients who underwent CRS, PE, and HIPEC were matched with patients who underwent PE alone. Primary endpoints were perioperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: From June 2015 to December 2020, 20 patients required PE as part of their CRS and HIPEC for PSM. The majority of patients were female (n = 16, 80%) with a median age of 52 (range 21-70). Colorectal cancer was the predominant pathology (n = 12, 60%). Median PCI was 11.5 (range 3-39). CC0 and R0 resections were achieved in all patients. CRS, PE, and HIPEC and PE-alone groups were well matched for clinicopathological variables. There was no difference in perioperative major morbidity (HIPEC: 30% vs PE: 15% p = 0.256) and mortality (HIPEC: 0 vs PE: 5% p = 0.311) between groups. Median follow-up was 17.5 months (range 7-68). Eight patients (40%) died from disease-related issues during the study period. CONCLUSION: An aggressive surgical strategy with complete resection is feasible and safe in select patients with complex PSM involving the pelvis.