Comparison of morbidity and survival between primary and interval cytoreductive surgery in patients after modified posterior pelvic exenteration for advanced ovarian cancer

A novel classification of posterior pelvic exenteration to assess prognosis in female patients with locally advanced primary rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study from China PelvEx collaborative

PURPOSE

Surgical techniques and the prognosis of posterior pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary rectal cancer in female patients pose challenges that need to be addressed. Therefore, we investigated the short-term and survival outcomes of posterior pelvic exenteration in female patients using a novel Peking classification.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed a prospective database from China PelvEx Collaborative across three tertiary referral centres. A total of 172 patients who underwent combined resection for locally advanced primary rectal cancer were classified based on four subtypes (PPE-I [64/172], PPE-II [68/172], PPE-III [21/172], and PPE-IV [19/172]) according to the Peking classification; perioperative characteristics and short-term and oncological outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Differences were significant among the four groups regarding colorectal reconstruction (p < 0.001), perineal reconstruction (p < 0.001), in-hospital complications (p < 0.05), and urinary retention (p < 0.05). The R0 resection rates for PPE-I, PPE-II, PPE-III, and PPE-IV were 90.6%, 89.7%, 90.5%, and 89.5%, respectively. The 5-year overall survival rates of the PPE-I, PPE-II, PPE-III, and PPE-IV groups were 73.4%, 68.8%, 54.7%, and 37.3%, respectively. Correspondingly, their 5-year disease-free survival rates were 76.0%, 62.5%, 57.7%, and 43.1%, respectively. Notably, the PPE-IV group demonstrated the lowest 5-year overall survival rate (p < 0.001) and 5-year disease-free survival rate (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The Peking classification can aid in determining suitable surgical techniques and conducting prognostic assessments in female patients with locally advanced primary rectal cancer.

Laparoscopic posterior pelvic exenteration is safe and feasible for locally advanced primary rectal cancer in female patients: a comparative study from China PelvEx collaborative

PURPOSE

Posterior pelvic exenteration (PPE) for locally advanced rectal cancer is a technical and challenging procedure. The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic PPE remain to be determined. This study aims to compare short-term and survival outcomes of laparoscopic PPE (LPPE) with open PPE (OPPE) in female patients.

METHOD

From January 2015 to December 2020, data from 105 female patients who underwent PPE at three institutions were retrospectively analyzed. The short-term and oncological outcomes between LPPE and OPPE were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 54 cases with LPPE and 51 cases with OPPE were enrolled. The operative time (240 vs. 295 min, p = 0.009), blood loss (100 vs. 300 ml, p < 0.001), surgical site infection (SSI) rate (20.4% vs. 58.8%, p = 0.003), urinary retention rate (3.7% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.020), and postoperative hospital stay (10 vs. 13 days, p = 0.009) were significantly lower in the LPPE group. The two groups showed no significant differences in the local recurrence rate (p = 0.296), 3-year overall survival (p = 0.129), or 3-year disease-free survival (p = 0.082). A higher CEA level (HR 1.02, p = 0.002), poor tumor differentiation (HR 3.05, p = 0.004), and (y)pT4b stage (HR 2.35, p = 0.035) were independent risk factors for disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

LPPE is safe and feasible for locally advanced rectal cancers and shows lower operative time and blood loss, fewer SSI complications, and better preservation of bladder function without compromising oncological outcomes.

Anastomotic Leak in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreduction Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Bowel resection is often required to obtain complete removal of ovarian cancer. A major complication of this operation is anastomotic leakage, which has been shown to increase morbidity and mortality in this population. Numerous original research studies have assessed the risk factors for anastomotic leaks. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify statistically significant risk factors. This meta-analysis identified multiple bowel resections as the only significant risk factor. With further research to identify additional risk factors, new management guidelines could be implemented to minimize the risk of anastomotic leaks and improve patient outcomes.

Abstract

Introduction: Anastomotic leaks (AL) following ovarian cytoreduction surgery could be detrimental, leading to significant delays in commencing adjuvant chemotherapy, prolonged hospital stays and increased morbidity. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors associated with anastomotic leaks after ovarian cytoreduction surgery. Material and methods: The MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Scopus bibliographical databases were searched. Original clinical studies investigating risk factors for AL in ovarian cytoreduction surgery were included. Results: Eighteen studies with non-overlapping populations reporting on patients undergoing cytoreduction surgery for ovarian cancer (n = 4622, including 344 cases complicated by AL) were included in our analysis. Patients undergoing ovarian cytoreduction surgery complicated by AL had a significantly higher rate of 30-day mortality but no difference in 60-day mortality. Multiple bowel resections were associated with an increased risk of postoperative AL, while no association was observed with body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, age, smoking, operative approach (primary versus interval cytoreductive, stapled versus hand-sewn anastomoses and formation of diverting stoma), neoadjuvant chemotherapy and use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Discussion: Multiple bowel resections were the only clinical risk factor associated with increased risk for AL after bowel surgery in the ovarian cancer population. The increased 30-day mortality rate in patients undergoing ovarian cytoreduction complicated by AL highlights the need to minimize the number of bowel resections in this population. Further studies are required to clarify any association between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and decreased AL rates.

Posterior pelvic exenteration for ovarian cancer: surgical and oncological outcomes

Objective

Posterior pelvic exenteration (PPE) can be required to achieve complete resection in ovarian cancer (OC) patients with large pelvic disease. This study aimed to analyze morbidity, complete resection rate, and survival of PPE.

Methods

Ninety patients who underwent PPE in our Comprehensive Cancer Center between January 2010 and February 2021 were retrospectively identified. To analyze practice evolution, 2 periods were determined: P1 from 2010 to 2017 and P2 from 2018 to 2021.

Results

A 82.2% complete resection rate after PPE was obtained, with rectal anastomosis in 96.7% of patients. Complication rate was at 30% (grade 3 in 9 patients), without significant difference according to periods or quality of resection. In a binary logistic regression adjusted on age and stoma, only age of 51–74 years old was associated with a lower rate of complication (odds ratio=0.223; p=0.026). Median overall and disease-free survivals (OS and DFS) from initial diagnosis were 75.21 and 29.84 months, respectively. A negative impact on OS and DFS was observed in case of incomplete resection, and on DFS in case of final cytoreductive surgery (FCS: after ≥6 chemotherapy cycles). Age ≥75-years had a negative impact on DFS for new OC surgery. For patients with complete resection, OS and DFS were decreased in case of interval cytoreductive surgery and FCS in comparison with primary cytoreductive surgery.

Conclusion

PPE is an effective surgical measure to achieve complete resection for a majority of patients. High rate of colorectal anastomosis was achieved without any mortality, with acceptable morbidity and high protective stoma rate.

Posterior-pelvic-exenteration (PPE) can be required to achieve complete cyto-reductive-surgery (CS) in ovarian cancer (OC) patients. A 82.2% complete-CS rate was obtained for PPE, with rectal anastomosis in 96.7%. Complication rate was 30%. Negative impact on DFS for patients with incomplete-CS or final-CS or age ≥75-years for new OC and PPE.

Low rate of intraperitoneal port placement in ovarian cancer patients, a population-based assessment

INTRODUCTION

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend intraperitoneal chemotherapy in optimally debulked stage III ovarian cancer patients. The objective of this investigation was to determine the rate of intraperitoneal port placement in patients undergoing surgery for ovarian cancer in a national database maintained by the American College of Surgeons.

METHOD

We identified ovarian cancer patients in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2006 to 2012. Demographics, comorbidities, operative outcomes, and postoperative complications were abstracted. Descriptive analyses were conducted using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Chi square tests, and multivariate regression models were used to analyze pre-operative and post-operative variables associated with intraperitoneal port placement.

RESULTS

We identified 2659 ovarian cancer patients who underwent primary surgical management. Of these patients, only 128 (4.8%) had an intraperitoneal port placed at the time of surgery. In multivariable analyses, intraperitoneal ports were associated with body mass index ≤25, disseminated cancer, later portion of the study period (2009-2012), and operative time >200 min. Intraperitoneal port placement was not associated with any difference in surgical site infection, wound disruption, major postoperative complication, readmission within 30 days, or death within 30 days.

DISCUSSION

Recent investigation of practice at NCCN institutions between 2003 and 2012 found only 35% of eligible ovarian cancer patients received intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Using intraperitoneal port placement as a surrogate for intraperitoneal chemotherapy administration, our investigation suggests an even lower rate (4.8%) nationally.

[Surgery for advanced stage ovarian cancer: Article drafted from the French Guidelines in oncology entitled "Initial management of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer" developed by FRANCOGYN, CNGOF, SFOG, GINECO-ARCAGY under the aegis of CNGOF and endorsed by INCa]

Debulking surgery is the key step of advanced stage ovarian cancer treatment with chemotherapy. The quality of surgical resection is the main prognosis factor, thus a complete resection must be achieved (grade A) in an expert center (grade B). Surgery for stage IV is possible and has a benefit in case of complete peritoneal resection (LoE3). Pelvic and aortic lymphadenectomies are recommended in case of clinical or radiological suspicious lymph nodes (grade B). In absence of clinical or radiological suspicious lymph nodes and in case of complete peritoneal resection during initial debulking surgery, lymphadenectomy can be omitted because it won't change nor medical treatment nor overall survival (grade B). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be proposed in case of: impossibility to perform initial complete surgical resection (grade B) ; alteration of general state or co-morbidities or elderly patient (in order to decrease morbidity and increase quality of life) (grade B); stage IV with multiple intra-hepatic or pulmonary metastasis or important ascites with miliary (grade B). In case of stage III or IV ovarian cancer diagnosed on a biopsy during prior laparotomy, a neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval debulking surgery should be preferred (gradeC). In case of palliative surgery or peroperative impossibility to perform a complete resection, no data regarding the type of surgery to perform influencing survival or quality of life is available. Peritoneal carcinosis description before resection and residual disease at the end of the surgery should be reported (size, location and reason of non-extirpability) (grade B). A score of peritoneal carcinosis such as Peritoneal Carcinosis Index (PCI) should be used in order to objectively evaluate the tumoral burden (gradeC). A standardized operative report is recommended (gradeC).

Morbidity of rectosigmoid resection in cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. Risk factor analysis

AIM

Rectosigmoid resection is often performed during cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer, to achieve the goal of no residual tumour. Here, we evaluated the morbidity associated with rectosigmoid resection and the underlying risk factors.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed consecutive patients managed with rectosigmoid resection during cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer at our centre in Paris, France, between 2005 and 2013. All previously identified risk factors were analysed. Major complications were defined as grade III-IV in the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

Of 228 patients, 116 had primary and 112 interval surgery; 43/228 [18.9%]; experienced major complications, and these were more common after primary surgery [24.1% vs. 13.4%, p = .04]. The 69 patients who had rectosigmoid resection [33 primary vs. 36 interval surgery, p = .32] had a higher morbidity rate compared to the other patients [30.4% vs. 14.6%, p = .006]. The anastomotic leakage rate was 2.89%. By multivariate logistic regression, independent risk factors for morbidity were postmenopausal status [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 13.7; 95% confidence interval (95%CI), 1.2;161.9], surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy [aOR, 4.4; 95%CI, 1.1;18.8], and peritoneal stripping of the left; paracolic gutter [aOR, 11.3; 95%CI, 2.3;54.3].

CONCLUSION

The morbidity of rectosigmoid resection during cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer seems acceptable. Ileostomy does not seem associated with a lower risk of major complications or adjuvant bevacizumab with a higher complication rate.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus primary debulking surgery in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis of peri-operative outcome

Objective

To assess whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is superior to primary debulking surgery (PDS) with regard to optimal cytoreduction, peri-operative morbidity, mortality, and quality of life (QOL) in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Methods

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Registers of Clinical Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NACT to PDS in women with Federation of International Gynaecologists and Obstetricians stage Ⅲ-Ⅳ EOC. RevMan 5.3 software was utilized for statistical analysis.

Results

Four RCTs involving 1,607 women with advanced EOC were included. Compared with PDS, NACT provided a higher rate of complete cytoreduction (risk ratio [RR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33 to 2.87), optimal cytoreduction (RR: 1.61 [95%CI: 1.05 to 2.47]), but there was no significant difference in residual disease 0–1 cm (p = 0.49). NACT was associated with lower peri-operative morbidity with respect to infection (RR: 0.30 [95% CI: 0.16 to 0.56]), gastrointestinal fistula (RR: 0.24 [95% CI: 0.06 to 0.95]), any grade 3 or 4 adverse event (RR: 0.29 [95% CI: 0.11 to 0.78]), and less post-surgical death within 28 days (RR: 0.14 [95% CI: 0.04 to 0.49]). NACT provided better QOL in terms of fatigue (weight mean difference [WMD], -3.28; [95% CI: -3.99 to -2.57]), role functioning (WMD: 5.29 [95% CI: 4.44 to 6.14]), emotional functioning (WMD: 6.19 [95% CI: 5.57 to 6.82]), and cognitive functioning (WMD: 1.02 [95% CI: 0.43 to 1.61]) at 6-month follow-up compared with PDS.

Conclusions

NACT is associated with superior optimal cytoreduction, lower peri-operative morbidity as well as post-surgical mortality, and better QOL compared to initial surgery in patients with advanced EOC. Future research should focus on improving the efficacy of NACT.

Pelvic exenteration: experience from a rural cancer center in developing world

Background. Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a morbid procedure. Ours is a rural based cancer center limited trained surgical oncology staff. Hence, this audit was planned to evaluate morbidity and outcomes of all patients undergoing PE at our center. Methods. This is a IRB approved retrospective audit of all patients who underwent PE at our center from January 2010 to August 2013. The toxicity grades were retrospectively assigned according to the CTCAE version 4.02 criteria. Chi-square test was done to identify factors affecting grades 3–5 morbidity. Kaplan Meier survival analysis has been used for estimation of median PFS and OS. Results. 34 patients were identified, with the median age of 52 years (28–73 years). Total, anterior, posterior, and modified posterior exenterations were performed in 4 (11.8%), 5 (14.7%), 14 (41.2%), and 11 (32.4%) patients, respectively. The median time for surgery was 5.5 hours (3–8 hours). The median blood loss was 500 mL (200–4000 mL). CTCAE version 4.02 grades 3-4 toxicity was seen in nine patients (25.7%). The median estimated progression free survival was 31.76 months (25.13–38.40 months). The 2-year overall survival was 97.14%. Conclusion. PE related grades 3–5 morbidity of 25.7% and mortality of 2.9% at our resource limited center are encouraging.