Redefining the boundaries of advanced pelvic oncology surgery

Re-Do Plastic Reconstruction for Locally Advanced and Recurrent Colorectal Cancer Following a beyond Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) Operation-Key Considerations

Innovation in surgery and pelvic oncology have redefined the boundaries of pelvic exenteration for CRC. However, surgical approaches and outcomes following repeat exenteration and reconstruction are not well described. The resulting defect from a second beyond Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) presents a challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. The aim of this study was to explore reconstructive options for patients undergoing repeat beyond TME for recurrent CRC following previous beyond TME and regional reconstruction. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for relevant articles, yielding 2353 studies. However, following full text review and the application of the inclusion criteria, all the studies were excluded. This study demonstrated the lack of reporting on re-do reconstruction techniques following repeat exenteration for recurrent CRC. Based on this finding, we conducted a point-by-point discussion of certain key aspects that should be taken into consideration when approaching this patient cohort.

Why Is Surgery Still Done after Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer in Romania?

The incidence and mortality of cervical cancer are high in Romania compared to other European countries, particularly for locally advanced cervical cancer cases, which are predominant at the time of diagnosis. Widely accepted therapeutic guidelines indicate that the treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer consists of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (total dose 85-90 Gy at point A), with surgery not being necessary as it does not lead to improved survival and results in significant additional morbidity. In Romania, the treatment for locally advanced cervical cancer differs, involving lower-dose chemoradiotherapy (total dose 60-65 Gy at point A), followed by surgery, which, under these circumstances, ensures better local control. In this regard, we attempted to evaluate the role and necessity of surgery in Romania, considering that in our study, residual lesions were found in 55.84% of cases on resected specimens, especially in cases with unfavorable histology (adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma). This type of surgery was associated with significant morbidity (28.22%) in our study. The recurrence rate was 24.21% for operated-on patients compared to 62% for non-operated-on patients receiving suboptimal concurrent chemotherapy alone. In conclusion, in Romania, surgery will continue to play a predominant role until radiotherapy achieves the desired effectiveness for local control.

Development of a risk prediction tool for patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer undergoing pelvic exenteration: protocol for a mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic exenteration (PE) surgery represents the only potentially curative treatment option for patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer (LARRC). Given the potential morbidity, whether or not PE should be recommended for an individual patient presents a major decisional conflict. This study aims to identify the outcomes of PE for which there is consensus among patients, carers and clinicians regarding their importance in guiding treatment decision-making, and to develop a risk prediction tool which predicts these outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will be conducted at a specialist PE centre, and employ a mixed-methods study design, divided into three distinct phases. In phase 1, outcomes of PE will be identified through a comprehensive systematic review of the literature (phase 1a), followed by exploration of the experiences of individuals who have undergone PE for LARRC and their carers (phase 1b, target sample size 10-20 patients and 5-10 carers). In phase 2, a survey of patients, their carers and clinicians will be conducted using Delphi methodology to explore consensus around the outcomes of highest priority and the level of influence each outcome should have on treatment decision-making. In phase 3 a, risk prediction tool will be developed using data from a single PE referral centre (estimated sample size 500 patients) to predict priority outcomes using multivariate modelling, and externally validated using data from an international PE collaboration.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted for phases 1 and 2 (X22-0422 and 2022/ETH02659) and for maintenance of the database used in phase 3 (X13-0283 and HREC/13/RPAH/504). Informed consent will be obtained from participants in phases 1b and 2; a waiver of consent for secondary use of data in phase 3 will be sought. Study results will be submitted for publication in international and/or national peer reviewed journals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022351909.

The evolution of oncovascular pelvic surgery: A historical perspective

Pelvic exenteration surgery has evolved dramatically in recent decades and now represents the standard of care for many patients with advanced pelvic malignancy. Most recently the use of complex vascular resection and reconstructive techniques have been applied in advanced pelvic oncology surgery at specialist units and these oncovascular techniques are considered one of the frontiers in this field. This article summaries the historical evolution of oncovascular surgery in the pelvis and sets the scene for where this treatment is going. The role of vascular resection and reconstruction in curative treatment of advanced pelvic malignancy is an evolving area that is redefining the boundaries of what was historically thought possible.

Clinical algorithm for the management of advanced pelvic tumours involving the aortoiliac axis

Pelvic exenteration offers potentially curative treatment for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic tumours. Laterally infiltrating tumours involving the pelvic sidewall have historically been considered unresectable. Highly specialised exenteration units have accumulated experience with en bloc resection of part or all of the iliac vascular system for tumours with major vessel involvement. These approaches involve complex vascular dissection and reconstructive techniques requiring collaboration with the vascular surgery unit. Adding to the complexity is the paucity of evidence on oncovascular techniques in the pelvis given its developing nature. An algorithm for the workup to determine resectability and the vascular reconstruction approach for advanced pelvic tumours involving the aortoiliac axis is suggested based on current literature and personal experience from the authors' unit.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer: Oncological outcomes for patients with a pathological complete response after neoadjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

For patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer, it is an ongoing pursuit to establish factors predicting or improving oncological outcomes. In locally advanced rectal cancer, a pCR appears to be associated with improved outcomes. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the oncological outcomes of patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer with and without a pCR.

METHODS

Patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment and surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer with curative intent between January 2004 and June 2020 at a tertiary referral hospital were analysed. Primary outcomes included overall survival, disease-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and local re-recurrence-free survival, stratified according to whether the patient had a pCR.

RESULTS

Of a total of 345 patients, 51 (14.8 per cent) had a pCR. Median follow-up was 36 (i.q.r. 16-60) months. The 3-year overall survival rate was 77 per cent for patients with a pCR and 51.1 per cent for those without (P < 0.001). The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 56 per cent for patients with a pCR and 26.1 per cent for those without (P < 0.001). The 3-year local re-recurrence-free survival rate was 82 and 44 per cent respectively (P < 0.001). Surgical procedures (for example soft tissue, sacrum, and urogenital organ resections) and postoperative complications were comparable between patients with and without a pCR.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that patients with a pCR have superior oncological outcomes to those without a pCR. It may therefore be safe to consider a watch-and-wait approach in highly selected patients, potentially improving quality of life by omitting extensive surgical procedures without compromising oncological outcomes.

Development and validation of a patient reported outcome measure for health-related quality of life for locally recurrent rectal cancer: a multicentre, three-phase, mixed-methods, cohort study

Background

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) occurs in 5-10% of patients following previous treatment of rectal cancer. It has a significant impact on patients' overall health-related quality of life (HrQoL). Major advances in surgical treatments have led to improved survival outcomes. However, due to the lack of disease-specific, validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), HrQoL, is variably assessed. The aim of this study is to develop a disease-specific, psychometrically robust, and validated PROM for use in LRRC.

Methods

A multicentre, three phase, mixed-methods, observational study was performed across five centres in the UK and Australia. Adult patients (>18 years old) with an existing or previously treated LRRC within the last 2 years were eligible to participate. Patients completed the proposed LRRC-QoL, EORTC QLQ-CR29, and FACT-C questionnaires. Scale structure was analysed using multi-trait scaling analysis and exploratory factor analysis, reliability was assessed using Cronbach's and the intra-class coefficient, convergent validity was assessed using Pearson's correlation, and known-groups comparison was assessed using the student t-test or ANOVA.

Findings

Between 01/03/2015 and 31/12/2019, 117 patients with a diagnosis of LRRC were recruited. The final scale structure of the LRRC-QoL consisted of nine multi-item scales (healthcare services, psychological impact, pain, urostomy-related symptoms, lower limb symptoms, stoma, sexual function, sexual interest, and urinary symptoms) and three single items. Cronbach's Alpha and Intraclass correlation values of >0.7 across the majority of scales supported overall reliability. Convergent validity was demonstrated between LRRC-QoL Pain Scale and FACT-C Physical Well Being scale (r = 0.528, p < 0.001), LRRC-QoL Psychological Impact scale with EORTC QLQ CR29 Body Image (r = 0.680, p < 0.001) and the FACT-C Emotional Well Being scale (r = 0.326, p < 0.001), and LRRC-QoL Urinary Symptoms scale with EORTC QLQ-CR29 Urinary Frequency scale (r = 0.310, p < 0.001). Known-groups validity was demonstrated for gender, disease location, treatment intent, and re-recurrent disease.

Interpretation

The LRRC-QoL has demonstrated robust psychometric properties and can be used in clinical and academic practice.

Funding

None.

Oncovascular surgery for advanced pelvic malignancy

BACKGROUND

The number of units with experience in extended radical resections for advanced pelvic tumours has grown substantially in recent years. The use of complex vascular resections and reconstructive techniques in these units is expected to increase with experience. This review aimed to provide a cutting-edge overview of this evolving surgical approach to complex pelvic tumours with vascular involvement.

METHODS

This was a narrative review of published data on major vascular resection and reconstruction for advanced pelvic tumours, including preoperative evaluation, techniques used, and outcomes. Advice for treatment decisions is provided, and based on current literature and the personal experience of the authors. Current controversies and future directions are discussed.

RESULTS

Major vascular resection and reconstruction during surgery for advanced pelvic tumours is associated with prolonged operating time (510-678 min) and significant blood loss (median 2-5 l). R0 resection can be achieved in 58-82 per cent at contemporary specialist units. The risk of major complications is similar to that of extended pelvic resection without vascular involvement (30-40 per cent) and perioperative mortality is acceptable (0-4 per cent). Long-term survival is achievable in approximately 50 per cent of patients.

CONCLUSION

En bloc resection of the common or external iliac vessels during exenterative pelvic surgery is a feasible strategy for patients with advanced tumours which infiltrate major pelvic vascular structures. Oncological, morbidity, and survival outcomes appear comparable to more central pelvic tumours. These encouraging outcomes, combined with an increasing interest in extended pelvic resections globally, will likely lead to more exenteration units developing oncovascular experience.

Differences in Surgical Outcomes and Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Pelvic Exenteration Between Locally Advanced Versus Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancers

BACKGROUND

Although pelvic exenteration remains the only curative option for locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer, only limited evidence is available on the differences in surgical and quality-of-life outcomes between the two.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes and identify any differences or predictors of quality of life of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing pelvic exenteration.

DESIGN

This was a cohort study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

PATIENTS

This study included patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer who underwent pelvic exenteration between July 2008 and March 2019.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures included Short Form 36 version 2 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal score.

RESULTS

A total of 271 patients were included in this study. Locally advanced rectal cancer patients had higher rates of R0 resection ( p = 0.003), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy ( p < 0.001), and had greater median overall survival (75.1 vs. 45.8 months), although the latter was clinically but not statistically significant. There was a higher blood loss ( p < 0.001), longer length of stay ( p = 0.039), and longer operative time ( p = 0.002) in the locally recurrent rectal cancer group. This group also had a higher mean baseline physical component summary score and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal score; however, there were no significant differences in complications or quality-of-life outcomes between with the two groups at any time points postoperatively up to 12 months.

LIMITATION

The study was from a specialized experienced center, which could limit its generalizability.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer tend to require a more extensive surgery with a longer operative time and more blood loss and longer recovery from surgery, but despite this, their quality of life is comparable to those with locally advanced rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B1000 .

DIFERENCIAS EN LOS RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS Y LOS RESULTADOS DE LA CALIDAD DE VIDA EN LA EXENTERACIN PLVICA ENTRE EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO Y EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE RECIDIVANTE

ANTECEDENTES:Aunque la exenteración pélvica sigue siendo la única opción curativa para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y el cáncer de recto localmente recurrente, solo hay evidencia limitada disponible sobre las diferencias en los resultados quirúrgicos y de calidad de vida entre los dos.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo comparar los resultados quirúrgicos e identificar cualquier diferencia o predictor de la calidad de vida de los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y cáncer de recto localmente recurrente sometidos a exenteración pélvica.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en el Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.PACIENTES:Este estudio incluyó pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y cáncer de recto localmente recurrente que se sometieron a exenteración pélvica entre julio de 2008 y marzo de 2019.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las principales medidas de resultado incluyeron el formulario corto 36 versión 2 y la puntuación de la evaluación funcional de la terapia del cáncer colorrectal.RESULTADOS:Un total de 271 pacientes fueron incluidos en este estudio. Los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado tuvieron tasas más altas de resección R0 ( p = 0,003), quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante ( p < 0,001) y una mediana de supervivencia general más alta (75,1 frente a 45,8 meses),a pesar de que esta última fue clínica pero no estadísticamente significativa. Hubo una mayor pérdida de sangre ( p < 0,001), una estancia más prolongada ( p = 0,039) y un tiempo operatorio más prolongado ( p = 0,002) en el grupo de cáncer de recto localmente recurrente. También tenían una puntuación de componente físico inicial media más alta y una puntuación de Evaluación funcional de la terapia del cáncer colorrectal; sin embargo, no hubo diferencias significativas en las complicaciones o los resultados de la calidad de vida entre los dos grupos en ningún momento después de la operación hasta los 12 meses.LIMITACIÓN:El estudio fue de un centro especializado con experiencia, lo que podría limitar su generalización.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente recurrente tienden a requerir una cirugía más extensa con un tiempo operatorio más largo y más pérdida de sangre y una recuperación más prolongada de la cirugía, pero a pesar de esto, su calidad de vida es comparable a aquellos con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B1000 . (Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

Contemporary Management of Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Views from the PelvEx Collaborative

Pelvic exenteration is a complex operation performed for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic cancers. The goal of surgery is to achieve clear margins, therefore identifying adjacent or involved organs, bone, muscle, nerves and/or vascular structures that may need resection. While these extensive resections are potentially curative, they can be associated with substantial morbidity. Recently, there has been a move to centralize care to specialized units, as this facilitates better multidisciplinary care input. Advancements in pelvic oncology and surgical innovation have redefined the boundaries of pelvic exenterative surgery. Combined with improved neoadjuvant therapies, advances in diagnostics, and better reconstructive techniques have provided quicker recovery and better quality of life outcomes, with improved survival This article provides highlights of the current management of advanced pelvic cancers in terms of surgical strategy and potential future developments.

Survival and morbidity outcomes after pelvic exenteration for pelvic sarcoma: an institutional series

BACKGROUND

To describe our institutional experience in the management of locally advanced primary, and recurrent pelvic sarcoma through pelvic exenteration (PE).

METHODS

Patients undergoing PE for locally advanced primary or recurrent pelvic sarcoma between 2003 and 2017 were identified from a prospectively maintained database at a single quaternary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia were eligible for review. The primary outcomes measured were surgical resection margin and survival. Secondary outcome measures included 30-day morbidity, in hospital length of stay (LOS) and return to theatre.

RESULTS

There were 29 patients who underwent PE for pelvic sarcoma during the study period, with 55% (n = 16) having advanced primary tumours and 45% (n = 13) having recurrent disease. The R0 resection rate was 52% (n = 15); and five-year-survival of 38% (n = 11). The R0 resection was noted to be higher in patients having primary advanced tumours (56%) compared to those with recurrent disease (46%), however this failed to reach statistical significance in this cohort. There was no recorded 30-day mortality. Grade 3 or higher Clavien-Dindo complications were uncommon (14%), but more likely in patients undergoing surgery for recurrent disease (75%).

CONCLUSION

In our cohort of patients with locally advanced and recurrent disease, more than 50% achieved an R0 resection. Recurrent disease makes R0 resection more difficult and can lead to higher morbidity, need for 30-day re-intervention and longer in hospital LOS. PE surgery remains the only curative option for locally advanced, and recurrent sarcoma in the pelvis, and can be performed with acceptable survival and morbidity outcomes.