Complications after double-barreled wet colostomy compared to separate urinary and fecal diversion during pelvic exenteration: Time to change back?

Trends and current aspects of reconstructive surgery for gynecological cancers

Gynecologic cancers can lead to gynecologic tract destruction with extension into both the gastrointestinal and urinary tracts. Recurrent disease can also affect the surrounding bony pelvis and pelvic musculature. As opposed to advanced ovarian cancer, where cytoreduction is the goal, in these scenarios, an oncologic approach to achieve negative margins is critical for benefit. Surgeries aimed at achieving a R0 resection in gynecologic oncology can have a significant impact on pelvic anatomy, and require reconstruction. Overall, it appears that these types of radical surgery are less frequently performed; however, when required, multidisciplinary teams at high-volume centers can potentially improve short-term morbidity. There are few data to examine the long-term, quality-of-life outcomes after reconstruction following oncologic resection in advanced and recurrent gynecologic cancers. In this review we outline considerations and approaches for reconstruction after surgery for gynecologic cancers. We also discuss areas of innovation, including minimally invasive surgery and the use of 3D surgical anatomy models for improved surgical planning.In the era of 'less is more', pelvic exenteration in gynecologic oncology is still indicated when there are no other curative-intent alternatives in persistent or recurrent gynecological malignancies confined to the pelvis or with otherwise unmanageable symptoms from fistula or radiation necrosis. Pelvic exenteration is one of the most destructive procedures performed on an elective basis, which inevitably carries a significant psychologic, sexual, physical, and emotional burden for the patient and caregivers. Such complex ultraradical surgery, which requires removal of the vagina, vulva, urinary tract, and/or gastrointestinal tract, subsequently needs creative and complex reconstructive procedures. The additional removal of sidewall or perineal structures, like pelvic floor muscles/vulva, or portions of the musculoskeletal pelvis, and the inclusion of intra-operative radiation further complicates reconstruction. This review paper will focus on the reconstruction aspects following pelvic exenteration, including options for urinary tract restoration, reconstruction of the vulva and vagina, as well as how to fill large empty spaces in the pelvis. While the predominant gastrointestinal outcome after exenteration in gynecologic oncology is an end colostomy, we also present some novel new options for gastrointestinal tract reconstruction at the end.

The double-barrel wet colostomy: An alternative for urinary diversion after pelvic exenteration

AIM

Pelvic exenteration is a radical procedure used to treat locally advanced and/or recurrent pelvic malignancies. Different reconstruction options exist, the most popular being the end colostomy with ileal conduit. The double barrel wet colostomy (DBWC) offers concomitant fecal and urinary diversion through a single stoma, but is infrequently utilized. We aim to review the evidence base of the postoperative complications, long-term oncologic risks and quality of life following creation of a double barrel wet colostomy.

METHODS

A narrative review of the literature was performed evaluating the DBWC. Patient demographics, perioperative complications, operative variables, long terms oncologic outcomes and quality of life data were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to define the data.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles with a total of 300 patients undergoing DBWC following pelvic exenteration were selected. 41% of malignancies were gastrointestinal in origin while 41.7% were gynecologic and 5.3% genitourinary. 42% of patients experienced at least one complication within in 40 days of surgery, the most common being wound infection (8.7%) and urinary leak (8.3%). There was no evidence of malignancy within the DBWC during long-term surveillance. Quality of life following DBWC is comparable to other reconstructive methods.

CONCLUSION

The DBWC is a well described reconstructive method for urinary and fecal diversion utilizing a single stoma following pelvic exenteration. The short- and long-term outcomes following DBWC are comparable to other reconstructive methods and the quality of life with a DBWC is acceptable. DBWC should remain a readily available option for reconstruction following pelvic exenteration.

Double barrelled uro-colostomy versus Ileal conduit for urinary diversion following pelvic exenteration: a single centre experience

INTRODUCTION

The ideal method for urinary diversion following total pelvic exenteration (TPE) remains unclear. This study compares the outcomes of double-barrelled uro-colostomy (DBUC) and ileal conduit (IC) in a single Australian centre.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration with the formation of either a DBUC or an IC between 2008 and November 2022 were identified from the prospective database from the Royal Adelaide Hospital and St. Andrews Hospital. Demographic, operative characteristics, general perioperative, long-term urological and other relevant surgical complications were compared via univariate analyses.

RESULTS

Of 135 patients undergoing exenteration, 39 patients were eligible for inclusion: 16 patients with a DBUC, and 23 patients with an IC. More patients in the DBUC group had previous radiotherapy (93.8% vs. 65.2%, P = 0.056) and flap pelvic reconstruction (93.7% vs. 45.5%, P = 0.002). The rate of ureteric stricture trended higher in the DBUC group (25.0% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.21), but in contrast, urine leak (6.3% vs. 8.7%, P>0.999), urosepsis (43.8% vs. 60.9%, P = 0.29), anastomotic leak (0.0% vs. 4.3%, P>0.999), and stomal complications requiring repair (6.3% vs. 13.0%, P = 0.63) trended lower. These differences were not statistically significant. Rates of grade III or greater complications were similar; however, no patients in the DBUC group died within 30-days or had grade IV complications requiring ICU admission compared with two deaths and one grade IV complication in the IC group.

CONCLUSION

DBUC is a safe alternative to IC for urinary diversion following TPE, with potentially fewer complications. Quality of life and patient-reported outcomes are required.

Comparation between the Bricker ileal conduit vs double-barrelled wet colostomy after pelvic exenteration for gynaecological malignancies

BACKGROUND

After exhausting other therapeutic options, pelvic exenteration is performed in patients who suffer from relapsed gynaecologic tumours, with most of them requiring some sort of urinary diversion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The main objective of this study was to assess the short- and medium/long-term urinary complications associated with the Bricker ileal conduit versus double-barrelled wet colostomy after performing a pelvic exenteration for gynaecologic malignancies.

RESULTS

A total of 61 pelvic exenterations were identified between November 2010 and April 2022; 29 Bricker ileal conduits and 20 double-barrelled wet colostomies were included in the urinary diversion analysis. Regarding the specific short-term urinary complications, no differences were found in the rate of urinary leakage (3 vs 0 %; p = 1), urostomy complications (7 vs 0 %; p = 0.51), acute renal failure (10 vs 20 %; p = 0.24) or urinary infection (0 vs 5 %; p = 0.41). Up to 69 % of patients with Bricker ileal conduits and 65 % of double-barrelled wet colostomies (p = 0.76) presented specific medium/long-term urinary complications. No differences in the rates of pyelonephritis (59 vs 53 %; p = 0.71), urinary fistula (0 vs 12 %; p = 0.13), ureteral stricture (10 vs 6 %; p = 1), conduit failure and reconstruction (7 vs 0 %; p = 0.53), renal failure (38 vs 29 %; p = 0.56) or electrolyte disorders (24 vs 18 %; p = 0.72) were found.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no significant differences in the rate of complications between double-barrelled wet colostomy and the Bricker ileal conduit. The long-term complications related to urinary diversion remained high regardless of the type of technique. In this context, the double-barrelled wet colostomy presents advantages such as the single stoma placement and the simplicity of the technique.

Urinary diversion after pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies

Pelvic exenteration combines multiple organ resections and functional reconstruction. Many techniques have been described for urinary reconstruction, although only a few are routinely used. The aim of this review is to focus beyond the technical aspects and the advantages and disadvantages of each technique, and to include a critical analysis of continent techniques in the gynecologic and urologic literature. Selecting a technique for urinary reconstruction must take into account the constraints entailed by the natural history of the disease, patient characteristics, healthcare institution, and surgeon experience. In gynecologic oncology, the Bricker ileal conduit is the most commonly employed diversion, followed by the self-catheterizable pouch and orthotopic bladder replacement. Continent and non-continent diversions present similar immediate and long-term complication rates, including lower tract urinary infections and pyelonephritis (5-50%), ureteral stricture (3-27%), urolithiasis (5-25%), urinary fistula (5%), and more rarely, vitamin B12 deficiency and metabolic acidosis. Urinary incontinence for the ileal orthotopic neobladder (50%), stoma-related complications for the Bricker ileal conduit (24%), difficulty with self-catheterization (18%) for the continent pouch, and induction of secondary malignancy for the ureterosigmoidostomy (3%) are the most relevant technique-related complications following urinary diversion. The self-catheterizable pouch and orthotopic bladder require a longer learning curve from the surgical team and demand adaptation from the patient compared with the ileal conduit. Quality of life between different techniques remains controversial, although it would seem that young patients may benefit from continent diversions. We consider that centralization of pelvic exenteration in referral centers is crucial to optimize the oncologic and functional outcomes of complex ablative reconstructive surgery.

Avoiding the Need for Bowel Anastomosis during Pelvic Exenteration-Urinary Sigmoid or Descending Colon Conduit-Short and Long Term Complications

OBJECTIVE

To educate surgeons of distal colon urinary diversion as an alternative to ileal conduit. To assess perioperative outcomes of distal colon conduit in pelvic exenteration including conduit-related, gastrointestinal, infectious, metabolic, and wound complications within 30 days, 31-89 days, and greater than 90 days from the time of surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-one patients who underwent distal colon urinary diversion for malignancy, fistula, or neurogenic bladder were identified in our IRB approved database from 1/2007 to 7/2017.

RESULTS

Twenty-six (63.4%) were male with mean age of 54.1 years. Complications were stratified by early (≤30 days), intermediate (31-89 days), and late (≥90 days). Within 30 days, 2 (4.9%) had partial small bowel obstructions requiring nasogastric tube (NGT) placement and total parenteral nutrition (TPN); 8 (19.5%) prolonged ileus with 6 (14.6%) requiring TPN and 5 (12.2%) requiring NGT placement; 1 (2.4%) enterocutaneous fistula; 1 (2.4%) conduit hemorrhage, 10 (24.4%) treated urinary tract infections (UTIs). Between 31 and 89 days, 1 patient (2.4%) had urinary conduit leak and 3 (7.3%) treated UTIs. At ≥90 days, 2 (4.9%) had partial small bowel obstructions requiring NGT placement, 4 (9.8%) ureterocolonic strictures and 1 (2.4%) parastomal hernia, 3 (7.3%) treated UTIs. Readmission rate in ≤30 days was 10 (24.4%), 31-89 days was 13 (31.7%), and 90+ days was 16 (39%). Long-term metabolic complications at ≥90 days included 16 (39%) with hypokalemia, 10 (24.4%) with hyperchloremia, and 14 (34.1%) with metabolic acidosis.

CONCLUSION

Distal colon urinary conduit is a relatively safe and feasible option and obviates the need for small bowel anastomosis and possible associated complications.

Ureteroarterial fistula following retrograde ureteral stenting in a patient with a double-barreled wet colostomy for cervical cancer

•

Ureteroarterial fistula (UAF) is a rare cause of massive hematuria.

•

Percutaneous retrograde ureteral stents via DBWC can be done safely in the compliant patient for improved comfort.

•

Understanding the anatomy, risks, and minimally invasive treatment options for UAF is important for prompt patient care.

Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) for gynecologic malignancies

Every year almost 95,000 women are diagnosed with a gynecologic malignancy and over 28,000 women will succumb to their disease. For patients with an isolated locoregional recurrence after primary therapy, surgical resection may sometimes provide a chance of cure. To optimize the chance of local control intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) has been used. The combination of salvage surgery and IORT has resulted in reasonable control in the IORT field. The addition of external beam radiation to limited volumes seems to result in improved disease control over surgery and IORT alone. Side effects are closely related to radical surgery, although neuropathy is seen more frequently after IORT; especially if doses of >20Gy are prescribed. Margin status remains critical, even with IORT.

Surgical results of pelvic exenteration in the treatment of gynecologic cancer

Background

Our aim in the present study was to evaluate surgical outcomes and complications of pelvic exenteration in the treatment of gynecologic malignancy and to compare surgery-related complications associated with different types of exenteration.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for the treatment of gynecologic cancer between January 2008 and August 2011. Patients were divided into two groups for comparison: total pelvic exenteration (TPE) and nontotal pelvic exenteration (NTE, including anterior pelvic exenteration (APE) posterior pelvic exenteration (PPE)). Outcomes are reported according to the modified Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications.

Results

Twenty-eight patients were included in the analysis. Eighteen had cervical cancer (64.3%). The prevalence of stage IIIB cervical cancer was 55%. Primary treatment with radiotherapy was performed in 53.3% of patients. Fifty percent of patients underwent TPE, 25% had APE and 25% underwent PPE. Patients who underwent TPE had worse outcomes, with a mean operative time of 367 minutes, use of blood transfusion in 93% of patients, ICU stay of 4.3 days and total hospital stay of 9.4 days. The overall mortality rate was 14.3%, and the surgical site infection rate was 25%. In the TPE group, 78.6% of patients experienced surgical complications. One-fourth of the total patient sample required reoperation, and the leading cause was urinary fistula (57.1%). Urinary leakage occurred in 22.7% of urinary reconstruction patients. Wet colostomy was the most common form of reconstruction with 10% of leakage.

Conclusions

Postoperative urinary and infectious complications accounted for 75% of all causes of morbidity and mortality after pelvic exenteration. TPE is a more complex and morbid procedure than NTE.

Double-Barreled Wet Colostomy versus Ileal Conduit and Terminal Colostomy for Urinary and Fecal Diversion: A Single Institution Experience

Background and Aims:

The aim of this study was to compare the feasibility and early postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing double-barreled wet colostomy and patients undergoing terminal colostomy and ileal conduit for simultaneous urinary and fecal diversion.

Material and Methods:

Between 1995 and 2012, we had 181 patients in whom it was necessary to make simultaneous urinary and fecal diversion. This is a retrospective study and patients were divided into two groups, depending on the technique applied for the fecal and urinary diversion. The first group consisted of patients undergoing ileal conduit and terminal colostomy and the second group consisted of patients undergoing  double-barreled wet colostomy.

Results:

Ileal conduit and terminal colostomy was performed in 77 (43%) cases, while wet colostomy was performed in 104 (57%) cases. Median length of stay was shorter for double-barreled wet colostomy (13.1 vs 18.1, p < 0.0001). Median operating times for urinary and fecal diversion were shorter for double-barreled wet colostomy (32 vs 64 min, p < 0.0001). The morbidity was lower for double-barreled wet colostomy (11.5% vs 23.4%, p = 0.0432), retrospectively. The mortality was 3.8% for double-barreled wet colostomy and 10.3% for ileal conduit and terminal colostomy group (p = 0.1282).

Conclusions:

Double-barreled wet colostomy is a safe, fast, and simple alternative to traditional ileal conduit and terminal colostomy diversion. The technique is relatively easy to learn, and it reduces the time for urinary and fecal diversion, length of stay, and morbidity rate.

Options for repair of rectus abdominis myocutaneous perineal/vaginal flap prolapse: A case series

•

The VRAM flap is commonly used for perineal and vaginal reconstruction at the time of pelvic exenteration.

•

Prolapse of the VRAM flap may be under reported.

•

We have shown successful repair of VRAM flap prolapse via an obliterative technique and sacral suspension.