Surgical therapy of recurrent vulvar cancer

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.

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.

Trends and Complications of Vulvar Reconstruction After Vulvectomy: A Study of a Nationwide Cohort

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to determine complications associated with primary closure compared with reconstruction after vulvar excision and predisposing factors to these complications.

METHODS

Patients undergoing vulvar excision with or without reconstruction from 2011 to 2015 were abstracted from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Common Procedural Terminology codes were used to characterize surgical procedures as vulvar excision alone or vulvar excision with reconstruction. Patient characteristics and 30-day outcomes were used to compare the 2 procedures. Descriptive and univariate statistics were performed. Adjusted odds ratios and confidence intervals were calculated using a logistic regression model to control for potential confounders. Two-sided α with P < 0.05 was designated as significant.

RESULTS

A total of 2698 patients were identified; 78 (2.9%) underwent reconstruction. There were no differences in age, race, body mass index, diabetes, hypertension, tobacco use, heart failure, renal failure, or functional status between the 2 groups. American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 and 4 patients and those with disseminated cancer were more likely to undergo reconstruction (both P < 0.001). On univariate analysis, reconstruction was associated with increased risk of readmission, surgical site infection, pulmonary complications, urinary tract infection, transfusion, deep venous thrombosis, sepsis, septic shock, unplanned reoperation, longer hospital stay, need for skilled nursing or subacute rehab on discharge, and death within 30 days. On logistic regression analysis, disseminated cancer, American Society of Anesthesiologists classes 3 and 4 and reconstruction remained significant risk factors for readmission and any postoperative complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing vulvar excision with reconstruction are at increased risk for readmission and postoperative complications compared with those undergoing excision alone. Careful patient selection and efforts to optimize surgical readiness are needed to improve outcomes. Long-term data could help determine if these 30-day outcomes are a reliable measure of surgical quality in vulvar surgery.

Prognostic impact of reduced tumor-free margin distance on long-term survival in FIGO stage IB/II vulvar squamous cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify the minimum tumor-free margin distance conferring long-term oncological safety in patients diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IB/II vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study in patients with stage IB/II VSCC treated at a single institution in Turin, Italy. The main aim was to identify the minimum tumor-free margin distance that confers oncological safety in early-stage VSCC. Patients were divided in groups according to tumor-free histological margin distance to compare survival outcomes. Overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence rate (RR) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method for the newly proposed and the currently recommended 8 mm margin cut-off. Log-rank test was used to compare survival between groups.

RESULTS

One hundred and fourteen patients met the study criteria. Median age was 68 years and median follow-up was 80 months. The minimum margin distance that conferred long-term oncological safety was 5 mm. OS, DSS were significantly lower in the <5 mm group when compared with the ≥5 mm group (p=0.002 and p=0.033, respectively) although no difference in RR was observed between groups. Analysis at the 8-mm cut-off indicated there is no difference in OS, DSS, or RR between groups.

CONCLUSION

FIGO stage IB/II VSCC patients' prognosis is affected by margin distance. Long-term survival is significantly reduced in patients with tumor-free margins <5 mm, even in the absence of lymph node metastasis. Thus, these patients should be offered further surgical or adjuvant treatment.

Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up Care of Vulvar Cancer and its Precursors. Guideline of the DGGG and DKG (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/059, November 2015

Purpose: This is an official guideline, published and coordinated by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO, Study Group for Gynecologic Oncology) of the Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft (DKG, German Cancer Society) and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG, German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics). The number of cases with vulvar cancer is on the rise, but because of the former rarity of this condition and the resulting lack of literature with a high level of evidence, in many areas knowledge of the optimal clinical management still lags behind what would be required. This updated guideline aims to disseminate the most recent recommendations, which are much clearer and more individualized, and is intended to create a basis for the assessment and improvement of quality care in hospitals. Methods: This S2k guideline was drafted by members of the AGO Committee on Vulvar and Vaginal Tumors; it was developed and formally completed in accordance with the structured consensus process of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften, AWMF). Recommendations: 1. The incidence of disease must be taken into consideration. 2. The diagnostic pathway, which is determined by the initial findings, must be followed. 3. The clinical and therapeutic management of vulvar cancer must be done on an individual basis and depends on the stage of disease. 4. The indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy must be evaluated very carefully. 5. Follow-up and treatment for recurrence must be adapted to the individual case.

Risk factors and treatment for recurrent vulvar squamous cell carcinoma

Recurrent disease occurs in 12-37% of patients with vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). Decisions about treatment of recurrent VSCC mainly depend on the location of the recurrence and previous treatment, resulting in individualized and consensus-based approaches. Most recurrences (40-80%) occur within 2 years after initial treatment. Currently, wide local excision is the treatment of choice for local recurrences. Isolated local recurrence of VSCC has a good prognosis, with reported 5-year survival rates of up to 60%. Groin recurrences and distant recurrences are less common and have an extremely poor prognosis. For groin recurrences, surgery with or without (chemo) radiotherapy is a treatment option, depending on prior treatment. For distant recurrences, there are only palliative treatment options. In this review, we give an overview of the available literature and discuss epidemiology, risk factors, and prognostic factors for the different types of recurrent VSCC and we describe treatment options and clinical outcome.

Palliative electro-chemotherapy in elderly patients with vulvar cancer: A phase II trial

OBJECTIVE

The primary endpoint of this trial was to assess clinical response (cCR) of squamocellular vulvar cancer (V-SCC) in elderly patients treated with electro-chemotherapy (ECT). Secondary endpoints were symptoms relief and local tumor control.

METHODS

A phase II study was designed and elderly patients with V-SCC unfit for other treatments were treated. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST criteria) were applied to evaluate tumor response. Quality of life (QoL) was evaluated by visual analogue score (VAS) for pain and four items of vulvar cancer subscale (VCS), of functional assessment of vulvar cancer therapy (FACT-V) [16], before, one month after the procedure and during follow-up.

RESULTS

Median age was 85 years (range 66-96 years). One month after treatment complete response was observed in 13 patients (52%), partial response in 7 (28%), stable disease in 3 (12%), and progressive disease in 2 (8%). Local tumor control at 1 and 6 months was 91% and 53%, respectively. Symptom free survival at 1 and 6 months was 78% and 40%, respectively, with significant reduction of pain (P < 0.01). One-year overall survival was 34%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that ECT produces high response rate with significant reduction of pain and improvement of local symptoms.

Recent trends in surgical and reconstructive management of vulvar cancer: review of literature

Vulvar cancer (VC) is a rare disease. The most common histologic type is squamous-cell carcinoma. VC could be divided into two types: type one, commonly associated with HPV infection, occurs in young women and type two, associated with non-neoplastic lesions that usually occurs in older women. Previously VC was often treated with radical Vulvectomy. Today update in diagnostic and surgery technique, capable to identify early stages of disease and adaptation in surgery procedures, according to the stage of disease, age of patients and possible physical and psychological morbidity consequence, allow using less radical surgery approaches. That has led to decrease therapy-associated morbidity while preserving oncologic safety and improving psychosexual outcomes. Finally, several surgical treatments are available in case of VC and, despite radical surgery is often required, less radical surgery associated with reconstructive plastic surgery decreases some of short- and long-term associated complications.

Reconstruction of acquired perineovulvar defects: a proposal of sequence

Acquired perineovulvar defects are usually the result of excision of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) or invasive squamous cell carcinoma. Because both VIN and vulvar carcinoma have a tendency toward local recurrence, future reconstructive options should be reckoned with during treatment of the primary and all subsequent (pre-) malignant perineovulvar lesions. Hence, a proposal of sequence of reconstructive options for these defects is called for. In cases where local skin flaps suffice, these are preferably designed in such a fashion as not to sever the branches of the internal pudendal vascular system. In cases where either a pudendal thigh flap or an infragluteal flap may be used to close the perineovulvar defect, the pudendal thigh flap is to be preferred to preserve the infragluteal flap for future use. Only when these flaps no longer are available or sufficient to cover the defect should the gluteal thigh flap be applied. The use of myocutaneous flaps is rarely indicated to close isolated superficial perineovulvar defects.

Diagnosis and treatment options of vulvar cancer: a review

INTRODUCTION

Vulvar cancer is a rare malignancy in women. However, within the past decade, a distinct increase in the incidence of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) as a precursor lesion, and an increase of vulvar cancer have been reported within Europe and the USA. Surgery is the first choice in treating patients with vulvar cancer, especially in its early stages. In an attempt to decrease the incidence of complications, research was made into modifications of the surgical procedure without compromising the prognosis. The replacement of radical vulvectomy by less wide local excision is one of these modifications. As vulvar cancer is relatively rare, it is possible to give evidence-based treatment recommendations, but usually on a low evidence level. Aim of this paper is to elucidate diagnostics and surgical treatment options in the management of vulvar cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched major databases (i.e. pubmed) with the following selection criteria: vulvar cancer, en bloc resection, triple incision, and sentinel node biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Today, the operative therapy is much less radical and more emphasized on individualized therapeutic concepts. The tendency is to leave the ultraradical surgical options which suffer from high morbidity towards less radical, minimal invasive techniques. Due to the rarity of the disease further studies will have to be performed by international collaborative groups.

May the rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap be the best option for the reconstruction of complicated large defects of pelvic exenteration for vulvar malignancies after pelvic radiation?

Reconstruction of the large defects that develop after pelvic exenteration with local flaps may result in higher morbidity because of poor perineal wound healing after pelvic radiation. A well vascularised reconstructive flap originating from distant non-irradiated areas is needed. We report two cases of pelvic exenteration and rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap procedure in patients with recurrent vulvar malignancies that had undergone external beam pelvic radiation and subsequently developed pelvic fibrosis, necrosis and fistulas. Both flaps were totally viable postoperatively; the abdominal wound healed without any complication, no perineal wound complications developed with a follow-up of nine months. In conclusions, rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap reconstruction seems to be an ideal option for the large defects resulting from exenteration operations in patients with previous perineal radiation.

[Vulvoperineal reconstruction after extended radical vulvectomy: two reconstructive procedures]

Poor perineal healing is often a major complication of extended radical vulvectomy in case of vulvar carcinoma. Procedures of vulvoperineal reconstruction require several criteria of quality for their use. The chosen technique should be: (1) reliable; (2) reproducible; (3) with minimal morbidity; (4) not much invasive with good anatomical and functional results. We describe two procedures of perineal reconstruction that correspond to the previous criteria: a local fasciocutaneous flap with lateral transposition and a regional musculocutaneous flap using the gluteus maximus muscle.