The V-Y gluteal fold advancement flap: Outcomes following radical surgery for vulvar malignancies

Role of V-Y flap reconstruction in vulvar cancer patients: multicenter retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To assess if the use of a V-Y reconstructive flap after excisional radical surgery positively influences the surgical outcomes in patients with vulvar cancer.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, retrospective, controlled study. Surgical outcomes and complication rates of women with invasive vulvar cancer who underwent radical surgery and vulvar reconstruction and those who underwent radical surgery without the reconstruction step were compared. Only patients who underwent bilateral or unilateral V-Y advancement fascio-cutaneous flaps were included in the reconstruction group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to analyze predicting variables for their association with complication rates.

RESULTS

Overall, 361 patients were included: 190 (52%) underwent the reconstructive step after the excisional radical procedure and were compared with 171 (47.4%) who did not undergo the reconstructive step. At multivariate analysis, body mass index >30 kg/m2 (odds ratio (OR) 3.36, p=0.007) and diabetes (OR 2.62, p<0.022) were independently correlated with wound infection. Moreover, increasing age (OR 1.52, p=0.009), body mass index >30 kg/m2 (OR 3.21, p=0.002,) and International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stages III-IV (OR 2.25, p=0.017) were independent predictors of wound dehiscence. A significant reduction in the incidence of postoperative wound complications among patients who underwent V-Y reconstructive flaps was demonstrated. This was correlated more significantly in women with lesions >4 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of V-Y flaps in vulvar surgery was correlated with reduced surgical related complications, particularly in vulnerable patients involving large surgical defects following excisional radical procedures.

Perforator versus Non-Perforator Flap-Based Vulvoperineal Reconstruction-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced vulvoperineal cancer require a multidisciplinary treatment approach to ensure oncological safety, timely recovery, and the highest possible quality of life (QoL). Reconstructions in this region often lead to complications, affecting approximately 30% of patients. Flap design has evolved towards perforator-based approaches to reduce functional deficits and (donor site) complications, since they allow for the preservation of relevant anatomical structures. Next to their greater surgical challenge in elevation, their superiority over non-perforator-based approaches is still debated.

METHODS

To compare outcomes between perforator and non-perforator flaps in female vulvoperineal reconstruction, we conducted a systematic review of English-language studies published after 1980, including randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case series. Data on demographics and surgical outcomes were extracted and classified using the Clavien-Dindo classification. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to derive a pooled estimate of complication frequency (%) in patients who received at least one perforator flap and in patients who received non-perforator flaps.

RESULTS

Among 2576 screened studies, 49 met our inclusion criteria, encompassing 1840 patients. The overall short-term surgical complication rate was comparable in patients receiving a perforator (n = 276) or a non-perforator flap (n = 1564) reconstruction (p* > 0.05). There was a tendency towards fewer complications when using perforator flaps. The assessment of patients' QoL was scarce.

CONCLUSIONS

Vulvoperineal reconstruction using perforator flaps shows promising results compared with non-perforator flaps. There is a need for the assessment of its long-term outcomes and for a systematic evaluation of patient QoL to further demonstrate its benefit for affected patients.

Lotus petal flap reconstruction of labia major and perineum after necrotizing fasciitis infection: A case report

Necrotizing fasciitis is one of the most serious and deadly infections in surgery. The tissue defects that result after a severe infection with necrotizing fasciitis are often not easy to resolve surgically. The importance of this article is to show the reconstructive efficacy of the lotus petal flap based on two perforators. We present a 71-year-old female case with necrotizing fasciitis infection and defect of the region of the vulva (labia major) and perineum. We solved the reconstruction of the defect of the lower half of the labia major and the perineum, on the left side, by raising a fascio-cutaneous lotus petal flap along the gluteal fold, based on two perforators. Considering that the necrotizing fasciitis infection is very serious, it is also accompanied by large soft tissue defects. Raising the flap based on two perforators gives it greater vascular security and, at the same time, greater success in survival. We can conclude that the reconstruction of defects of the vulva and perineum with a lotus petal flap is a satisfactory solution and acceptable to the patient.

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Vulvar Cancer - Update 2023

BACKGROUND

As part of its mission to improve the quality of care for women with gynecological cancers across Europe, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) first published in 2017 evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with vulvar cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To update the ESGO guidelines based on the new evidence addressing the management of vulvar cancer and to cover new topics in order to provide comprehensive guidelines on all relevant issues of diagnosis and treatment of vulvar cancer.

METHODS

The ESGO Council nominated an international development group comprised of practicing clinicians who provide care to vulvar cancer patients and have demonstrated leadership through their expertize in clinical care and research, national and international engagement and profile as well as dedication to the topics addressed to serve on the expert panel (18 experts across Europe). To ensure that the statements were evidence-based, new data identified from a systematic search were reviewed and critically appraised. In the absence of any clear scientific evidence, judgment was based on the professional experience and consensus of the international development group. Prior to publication, the guidelines were reviewed by 206 international practitioners in cancer care delivery and patient representatives.

RESULTS

The updated guidelines cover comprehensively diagnosis and referral, staging, pathology, pre-operative investigations, surgical management (local treatment, groin treatment, sentinel lymph node procedure, reconstructive surgery), (chemo)radiotherapy, systemic treatment, treatment of recurrent disease (vulvar, inguinal, pelvic, and distant recurrences), and follow-up. Management algorithms are also defined.

Management of Vulvovaginal Cellular Angiofibroma: A Single-Center Experience

Objective

The study aimed to explore the clinical characteristics, treatment, and prognosis of cellular angiofibroma in females.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study in patients with vulvovaginal cellular angiofibroma treated at Peking Union Medical College Hospital between August 2012 and October 2021.

Results

Eight patients were included in our study, with 7 cases of vulvar tumors and 1 case of vaginal stump tumors. The median age at diagnosis was 47.5 years (range, 38–83 years). The tumors were found incidentally in two patients (2/8, 25.00%) without specific history before diagnosis surgery. Of the other six patients, the median history from onset of the mass to diagnosis was 5.5 years (range, 3–14 years). Complete excision was performed in all 8 patients. According to histopathologic examination, the median tumor size was 3.4 cm (range, 1.7–11 cm). As the tumor size increased, both the operation time and postoperative length of stay increased. Gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonist was used in one case to minimize the size of the tumor, obtaining satisfactory results. Up to the last follow-up, no evidence of relapse was found in all 8 patients.

Conclusions

For vulvovaginal cellular angiofibroma, the mainstay of treatment remains surgical resection without residual tumor if possible; inadvertent urinary system injury and rectum injury should be avoided to the utmost; and enough attention should be paid to hemostasis to avoid hematoma after surgery. Before surgery, hormone receptor modulators may be considered to minimize the size of the tumor to reduce the surgery-associated risk.

Impact of vulvar reconstruction on the accuracy of a nomogram for predicting local recurrence after surgery for vulvar cancer

BACKGROUND DATA

Vulvar carcinoma is a rare disease accounting for 3%-5% of all gynaecological cancers. Although surgery is the standard treatment at an early stage, the outcomes are highly correlated with clear resection margins. Therefore, surgical defects can be important and require reconstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate vulvar reconstructions using a previously validated nomogram predicting the risk of local recurrence at 2 years.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery for vulvar cancer between 1998 and 2017 were extracted from eight FRANCOGYN centres. We estimated the probability of local recurrence at 2 years using a previously validated nomogram and compared it with actual relapse in patients with or without vulvar reconstruction. Patients were clustered into tiertiles according to their nomogram score: low-, intermediate-, and high-risk for local relapse probability.

RESULTS

We reviewed 254 patients, of whom 49 underwent immediate vulvar reconstruction. The predicted and actual probability of two-year local relapse were 20.1% and 15.7%, respectively, with a concordance index of 0.75. In the low- and intermediate-risk groups, the difference between predicted and observed recurrence was less than 10% in patients with or without vulvar reconstruction. For the high-risk group, the difference reached 25% and observed recurrence probability was lower in patients who underwent vulvar plasty compared with those who did not (20.0% vs. 36.2%, respectively). Local recurrence-free survival rates following vulvar reconstruction were comparable at two years (82.1% vs. 84.8%, respectively, p = 0.26).

CONCLUSION

Vulvar reconstruction after surgical resection for vulvar cancer is safe. Vulvar reconstruction should be considered in aggressive cases to decrease local recurrence.

The giant steps in surgical downsizing toward a personalized treatment of vulvar cancer

The present article aims to highlight the importance of changes of personalized surgical treatment for vulvar cancer. Current international literature regarding surgical treatment of vulvar cancer was evaluated. This included several studies and systematic reviews. Radical surgery approach, such as en bloc resection, was the first therapeutic option and the standard care for many years, even if burdened with a high complication rate and frequently disfiguring. Taussing and Way introduced radical vulvectomy approach with en bloc bilateral inguinal-femoral lymphadenectomy; modified radical vulvectomy was developed, with a wide radical excision of the primary tumor. The role of inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy (mono or bilateral) changed in the years too, particularly with the advent of SLN biopsy as minimally invasive surgical approach for lymph node staging, in patients with unifocal cancer <4 cm, without suspicious groin nodes. More personalized and conservative surgical approach, consisting of wide local or wide radical excisions, is necessary to reduce complications as lymphedema or sexual disfunction. The optimal surgical management of vulvar cancer needs to consider dimensions, staging, depth of invasion, presence of carcinoma at the surgical margins of resection and grading, with the goal of making the treatment as individualized as possible.

Reducing the radicality of surgery for vulvar cancer: are smaller margins safer?

INTRODUCTION

Vulvar cancer accounts for ~4% of all gynecological malignancies and the majority of tumors (>90%) are squamous cell (keratinizing, ~60% and warty/basaloid, ~30%). Surgical excision forms the foundation of treatment, with resection margin status being the single most influential factor when predicting clinical outcome. There has been a paradigm shift concerning surgical approaches and radicality when managing vulvar cancer within recent times, largely owing to a desire to preserve vulvar structure and function without compromising oncological outcome. As such the safety of the size of resection margin has been called into question. In this narrative review we consider the current literature on the safety of resection margins for vulvar cancer.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed, Medline and the Cochrane Database were searched for original peer-reviewed primary and review articles, from January 2005 to January 2020. The following search terms were used vulvar cancer surgery, vulvar squamous cell carcinoma, excision margins, adjuvant radiation.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A pathological tumor margin of <8 mm has been widely considered to indicate "close" margins. This measurement after fixation of the tumor is considered comparable to a surgical resection margin of around 1cm, following an estimated 20% tissue shrinkage after formalin fixation and a 1-2cm clinical surgical margin in order to achieve the 8 mm final pathological margin.

CONCLUSIONS

A surgical resection margin of 2-3mm does not appear to be associated with a higher rate of local recurrence than the widely used limit of 8 mm. As such the traditional practice of re-excision or adjuvant radiotherapy based on "close" surgical margins alone needs to be closely evaluated, since the attendant morbidity associated with these procedures may not be outweighed by oncological benefit.