Pelvic exenterations for gynecologic cancers: A retrospective analysis of a 30-year experience in a cancer center

Primary flap closure of perineal defects to avoid empty pelvis syndrome after pelvic exenteration in gynecologic malignancies: An old question to explore a new answer

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a radical oncological surgical procedure proposed in patients with recurrent or persistent gynecological cancers. The radical alteration of pelvic anatomy and of pelvic floor integrity can cause major postoperative complications. Fortunately, PE can be combined with reconstructive procedures to decrease complications and functional and support problems of pelvic floor, reducing morbility and mortality and increasing quality of life. Many options for reconstructive surgery have been described, especially a wide spectrum of surgical flaps. Different selection criteria have been proposed to select patients for primary perineal defect flap closure without achieving any strict indication of the best option. The aim of this review is to focus on technical aspects and the advantages and disadvantages of each technique, providing an overview of those most frequently used for the treatment of pelvic floor defects after PE. Flaps based on the deep inferior epigastric artery, especially vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (VRAM) flaps, and gracilis flaps, based on the gracilis muscle, are the most common reconstructive techniques used for pelvic floor and vaginal reconstruction. In our opinion, reconstructive surgery may be considered in case of total PE or type II/III PE and in patients submitted to prior pelvic irradiation. VRAM could be used to close extended defects at the time of PE, while gracilis flaps can be used in case of VRAM complications. Fortunately, numerous choices for reconstructive surgery have been devised. As these techniques continue to evolve, it is advisable to adopt an integrated, multi-disciplinary approach within a tertiary medical center.

Salvage robotic anterior pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer: technique and feasibility

The aim of our study was to explain the technique and evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic anterior pelvic exenteration in cases of residual/recurrent cervical cancer as a salvage therapy. The study was conducted as a retrospective review of all the cases of central residual/recurrent cervical cancer who underwent anterior pelvic exenteration by robotic approach with curative intent at our centre between January 2013 and December 2019. Information regarding various treatment related parameters like duration of surgery, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, early and late complications and recurrence and survival was collected and evaluated. 14 patients underwent anterior pelvic exenteration by robotic approach in this period. The median age of patients at time of exenteration was 52.5 years. 13 out of 14 patients had received combined chemoradiation as a part of intial treatment. The median duration of surgery was 305 min with a median estimated blood loss of 135 ml and median length of hospital stay of 6.5 days. Early complications like urosepsis, uretero-ileal anastomotic leak and paralytic ileus occurred in 36% patients and late complications like ureteric stricture and bowel perforation occurred in 28.6% patients. Negative surgical margins could be achieved in all the patients. Over a median follow-up period of 17.5 months, five patients developed recurrence and five patients experienced mortality, with four out of five patients dying due to recurrent disease. The 12-month DFS was 68.2% and the 12-month OS was 77.1%. Robotic anterior pelvic exenteration is a safe and feasible option in selected patients with recurrent/residual cervical cancer as a salvage procedure, with acceptable morbidity and mortality.