Pelvic exenteration for recurrent colorectal carcinoma: a review

Determinants of survival following pelvic exenteration for primary rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration is a potentially curative treatment for locally advanced primary rectal cancer. Previous studies have been limited by small sample sizes and heterogeneous data. A consecutive series of patients was studied to identify the clinicopathological determinants of survival.

METHODS

All patients undergoing pelvic exenterative surgery for primary rectal cancer (1992-2014) at this hospital were analysed. The primary outcome measure was 5-year overall survival. Secondary endpoints included length of hospital stay, complication rate, 30-day mortality and disease recurrence rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 174 patients with a median age of 65 (range 31-90) years were included. Ninety-six patients underwent posterior pelvic exenteration and 78 had total pelvic exenteration. Median follow-up was 48 (range 1-229) months. Two patients (1.1 per cent) died within 30 days of surgery and 16.1 per cent returned to the operating theatre. The 5-year survival rate following complete resection (R0) was 59.3 per cent. In univariable analysis, adverse survival was associated with advanced age (P = 0.003), metastatic disease (P = 0.001), pathological node status (P = 0.001), circumferential resection margin (P = 0.001), local recurrence (P = 0.015) and the need for neoadjuvant therapy (P = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Pelvic exenteration is an aggressive treatment option with a high morbidity rate that provides favourable long-term outcomes in patients with locally advanced primary rectal cancer.

Pelvic colorectal recurrence: crucial role of radiologists in oncologic and surgical treatment options

Radical resection is the only potential cure for patients with locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer and is considered curative only when the histologic margins are clear of tumour. Early diagnosis of the disease is essential as it increases the likelihood of a potentially curative resection and prevention of dissemination. Clinical examination, tumour markers and radiologic modalities such as ultrasonography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography are routinely used in an effort to accurately stage these patients and provide useful information for the selection of patients for further treatment/management. This review describes the methods of staging patients with locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancer prior to surgery emphasizing the role that radiologists have in this process.

Predictors for long-term survival after interdisciplinary salvage surgery for advanced or recurrent gynecologic cancers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We wanted to identify factors which allow predicting long-term survival after pelvic exenteration (PE) for locally advanced or recurrent gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

All patients undergoing PE at our institution from 1983 to 2002 were screened. In 203 cases data were obtainable and analyzed with respect to factors predicting outcome considering morbidity, mortality, and survival. Follow-up data and data concerning late complications not documented in our records were obtained by telephone interviews.

RESULTS

Mean age was 55 (22-77) years. PE was performed for locally advanced (36%) or recurrent (64%) cervical (n = 133), endometrial (n = 26), vaginal (n = 23), vulvar (n = 10), and ovarian cancer (n = 11, cases with rectum and/or bladder resections). In 13.4% (n = 26) the intent of the procedure was palliation in the remaining cure. Procedures performed were anterior (n = 91), posterior (45), or total (n = 67) PE. 53% of patients underwent preoperative radio-chemotherapy, 11.8% as a neoadjuvant treatment. Mean OR time was 8.1 hr, an average of 5.6 units of packed red blood cells were perioperatively transfused. Microscopically complete resection was achievable in n = 69 patients. Perioperative mortality was 1% (n = 2). Seventy-one percent (n = 144) of patients were available for follow-up. Five-year overall survival in patients treated with a curative intent was 21%, 5-year survival in those patients with complete resection was 32%. Forty-two percent of patients with a complete resection without lymph node involvement, age 30-50, curative intention, and the absence of a pelvic sidewall infiltration survived 5 years or longer.

CONCLUSION

In our series a 5-year survival rate of over 40% could be achieved for nodal-negative patients without pelvic sidewall infiltration when treated with curative intent and after complete resection.

Exenterative pelvic surgery—eleven year experience of the Swansea Pelvic Oncology Group

AIMS

To review indications for surgery and outcomes of patients with complex locally advanced pelvic malignancies treated by a multidisciplinary Pelvic Oncology Group.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between March 1992 and March 2003, 130 patients were jointly assessed in a monthly clinic involving urological, gynaecological, colorectal and plastic surgeons, an oncologist and nurse specialists. Seventy-six patients proceeded to exenterative surgery.

RESULTS

Rectal carcinoma and gynaecological cancers were the two most common indications for surgery. Median follow-up was 14 months (range 1-120 months). There were no deaths within 30 days of surgery. The morbidity rate was 28%. Predicted 5 years survival was 53% in cases with clear histological margins and no lymph node metastasis.

CONCLUSION

With careful patient selection and multi specialty care pelvic exenteration is a safe and effective option in the treatment of complex locally advanced pelvic malignancy.

The role of pelvic exenteration in the management of recurrent rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Use of extirpative surgery in the setting of recurrent rectal cancer is controversial given the poor overall outcome of such patients and the morbidity associated with exenteration.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients treated for recurrent rectal cancer from 1990 to 2002 was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients underwent pelvic exenteration. Seventeen underwent potentially curative resection, 5 were for palliation only. There was 1 operative death. Fifteen suffered at least 1 complication; 9 suffered multiple complications. Ten patients required readmission to the hospital. The overall disease-free interval was 11 months. Potentially curative and palliative resections resulted in median survivals of 20.4 and 8.4 months, respectively (P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

While patients may derive oncologic and palliative benefits from exenteration, the price in terms of operative morbidity remains high. Newer measures of operative morbidity are necessary to better appraise the value of this radical approach to recurrent rectal cancer.

Surgical management of the urinary tract in patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

To review cases of colorectal cancer requiring urologic management to clarify the role the urologist should play in the surgical procedures. A deterrent to radical surgery for advanced colorectal carcinoma with urinary involvement is the technical complexity and associated morbidity and mortality of this procedure.

METHODS

Thirty-six tumors in 35 patients, including 19 sigmoid cancers (Stage II, 17; Stage III, 2), 12 rectal cancers (Stage II, 11; Stage III, 1), and 5 local recurrences of colorectal carcinoma in the pelvis were reviewed. All tumors had invaded the bladder, prostate, or ureter. The demographic and clinical characteristics, type of operative procedure, and postoperative complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the patients with a sigmoid tumor, partial cystectomy was performed in 15 patients who underwent a bladder-sparing procedure; an ileal conduit and ileal neobladder were created in 2 patients each who required cystectomy. Four patients with rectal cancer underwent a bladder-sparing procedure: partial cystectomy in 1, partial cystectomy with ileal ureter in 1, and prostatectomy in 2. The remaining 8 patients underwent cystectomy with the following types of reconstruction: colonic neobladder in 1, ileal neobladder in 4, Indiana pouch in 1, ileal conduit in 1, and ureterocutaneostomy in 1 patient. The bladder was spared in a greater percentage of patients with sigmoid cancer than in those with rectal cancer. The incidence of complications was greater in patients with rectal cancer and local recurrence than in those with sigmoid tumors. The complication rate was especially low in patients who underwent a bladder-sparing procedure (10.5%) compared with patients who required cystectomy (58.3%). The survival in patients with sigmoid cancer who underwent bladder-sparing surgery also was better than in those who underwent cystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of advanced colorectal cancer is best managed by a committed team that includes an experienced urologist. Urologists play a critical role in determining the surgical options and creating appropriate urinary diversions to achieve curative resection with the highest quality of life.

Pain and quality of life after treatment in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Because survival in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is limited, pain control and quality of life (QOL) are important parameters. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence of posttreatment pain and QOL of patients with LRRC treated with nonsurgical palliation or resection and identify predictors of poor outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Posttreatment pain severity and QOL were prospectively assessed in 45 patients with LRRC using the Brief Pain Inventory and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal questionnaire.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients received nonsurgical palliation, and 30 patients underwent resection of their pelvic tumors. There was a significant association between higher posttreatment pain scores and worse QOL (P <.001). Patients treated with nonsurgical palliation reported moderate to severe pain beyond the third month of treatment. Resected patients reported comparable levels of pain during the first 3 postoperative years, particularly after bony resections; long-term survivors (beyond 3 years), however, reported minimal pain and good QOL. Female sex, pelvic/sciatic pain at presentation, total pelvic exenteration, and bony resection were associated with higher rates of moderate to severe posttreatment pain (P =.04, P <.001, P =.04, and P =.02, respectively). Pain at presentation was an independent predictor of posttreatment pain (odds ratio, 7.4 [95% confidence interval, 1.8 to 30.3]; P =.006).

CONCLUSION

Patients with LRRC treated with nonsurgical palliation or resection experience significant levels of pain after treatment. Close posttreatment pain monitoring is warranted in patients presenting with pelvic pain, and more aggressive pain management strategies may improve posttreatment QOL.

Recurrent or residual pelvic bowel cancer: accuracy of MRI local extent before salvage surgery

PURPOSE

To determine pre-operative MRI accuracy in assessing local disease extent in recurrent/residual pelvic bowel cancer by comparing MRI assessment and staging examination under anaesthesia (EUA), with laparotomy/histopathological findings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven consecutive patients with recurrent (n = 21) or residual (n = 6) pelvic bowel cancer (13 of the rectum, eleven of the anus and three of the colon) underwent EUA and pelvic MRI (1T) using a phased array pelvic coil. Retrospective analysis of eight specific anatomical regions for tumour involvement on MRI was performed. Findings at EUA and biopsy were recorded. The MRI and EUA findings were correlated with findings at surgery and histopathology. Statistical comparison between MRI and EUA results was performed using the chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Overall MRI accuracy in determining tumour invasion for all sites assessed was 452/499 (91%), sensitivity was 95/109 (87%), specificity was 357/390 (92%), positive predictive value (PPV) was 95/128 (74%) and negative predictive value (NPV) was 357/371 (96%). PPV and NPV for specific areas were 21/38 (55%) and 134/136 (99%) for genitourinary tract, 4/6 (67%) and 61/65 (94%) for pelvic side wall, 21/26 (81%) and 40/41 (98%) for pelvic floor, 1/6 (17%) and 40/43 (93%) for the posterior pelvis pre-sacrum/sacrum. For those anatomical sites evaluated by both EUA and MRI, MRI was superior to EUA, with an accuracy of 89% vs 73% (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

MRI is an accurate technique for assessing disease extent in recurrent/residual pelvic bowel cancer.

Radical surgery for extensive rectal cancer: is it worthwhile?

In a small proportion of patients with extensive primary or locally recurrent rectal cancer, disease remains confined to the pelvis for a prolonged period. Symptoms are highly prejudicial to quality of life and often refractory to treatment short of extirpative surgery. Cure requires en bloc excision of all involved pelvic viscera with tumor-free margins. The pelvic exenterations (PE) are the most radical operations for rectal cancer. PE carries a high risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality, and has profound functional, psychological, and psychosexual implications for patients. Careful preoperative counseling regarding surgical risks and the impact of PE on body function and image is indispensable; the patient's consent must be truly informed. Patients with major medical or psychiatric/emotional comorbidity and those who are mentally incompetent are not candidates. Tenesmus and central pelvic/perineal pain are amenable to PE whereas radicular pain is not; sciatica and lower extremity lymphedema portend unresectability. Extrapelvic disease should be excluded preoperatively. While invaded sacrum can be resected en bloc with involved viscera (sacropelvic exenteration), fixity of tumor to the pelvic sidewall(s) in nonirradiated patients almost invariably implies unresectability. Other contraindications to PE include invasion of the proximal (S1 or higher) lumbosacral spine or lumbosacral plexus/sciatic nerves, ureteric obstruction proximal to the ureterovesical junctions, and encasement of the external or common iliac vessels by tumor. PE for advanced primary rectal carcinoma yields 5-year survival of over 40%; when performed for recurrent disease, long-term salvage rates are not as high. While radical surgery is rarely indicated for palliation, PE in carefully selected (good performance status and life expectancy, complete excision of all gross disease) incurable patients results in abrogation of disabling symptoms and reasonable intervals of high-quality survival.

Quality of life and cost effectiveness analysis of therapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer

PURPOSE

This study was performed to determine the quality of life and cost-effectiveness of therapeutic options for patients with locally recurrent rectal carcinoma, determined from the perspectives of patients and health care providers.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of patients (N = 68) with locally recurrent rectal carcinoma evaluated from 1992 through 1995. We constructed a decision-analytic model incorporating outcomes, survival, and costs. Utilities were elicited from convenience samples of health care providers and patients using the standard gamble technique.

RESULTS

The median survival for patients undergoing surgical resection (n = 40) was 42 months, compared with 16.8 months for patients undergoing diagnostic or palliative surgery (n = 16) and 18.3 months for patients treated nonoperatively (n = 12; P < 0.005). The mean cost of treatment per patient was $19,283 for the nonoperative group, $45,647 for the diagnostic or palliative surgery group, and $70,878 for the surgical resection group. The diagnostic or palliative surgical strategy was dominated by the nonoperative strategy because the former had greater costs with fewer health benefits. The incremental cost-utility ratio of surgical resection compared with nonoperative management using health care provider utilities was $109,777 per quality-adjusted life year gained; it was reduced to $56,698 using per quality-adjusted life year using mean patient utilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with recurrent rectal carcinoma view surgery and morbidity to be less severe than health care providers. Diagnostic or palliative surgery is expensive and affects quality-adjusted survival adversely compared with nonoperative therapy. Surgical resection may be a cost-effective use of resources, particularly when cost-effectiveness is calculated using patient preferences.

Rationale for bladder-sparing surgery in patients with locally advanced colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) with urinary diversion is a standard surgical approach for patients with locally advanced rectal carcinoma. Because only approximately 50% of patients undergoing TPE have tumor involving the bladder, the authors evaluated the feasibility of bladder salvage in this setting. The current study presents the results of a retrospective study of patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma (classification of >/= T3) to formulate criteria for selecting patients for bladder-sparing procedures.

METHODS

The charts of 81 patients with rectal carcinoma classified as >/= T3 were reviewed for age, gender, computed tomography (CT) findings, results of intraoperative examination under anesthesia, final pathologic evaluation, urologic complications, local recurrence, and patient survival.

RESULTS

Among the 46 patients who underwent TPE, final pathologic evaluation demonstrated tumor involvement of the bladder in 58% of patients. Preoperative identification of a bladder mucosal abnormality accurately predicted bladder involvement in only 57% of the 30 patients who underwent cystoscopy. CT and intraoperative palpation of the bladder individually predicted the final pathologic findings in 69% and 70% of patients, respectively; of the 21 patients in whom both were positive, 90% had bladder involvement. Of the 35 patients (26 females and 9 males) who underwent bladder-sparing procedures, 22 had complete sparing of the bladder, 9 underwent partial cystectomy (5 with ureteroneocystostomy), 4 underwent ureteroneocystostomy alone, and 2 underwent prostatectomy alone. Ninety-four percent of these 35 patients had negative histologic margins. There was no difference in the incidence rate of urinary complications between patients who underwent TPE and those who underwent a bladder-sparing surgery (17% each). The incidence rates of local recurrence (14% vs. 17%) and the 3-year survival rates (49% vs. 39%) did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Bladder-sparing surgery to treat patients with locally invasive colorectal carcinoma provides good local control without sacrificing survival. Women, whose reproductive organs act as a natural barrier, and selected men in whom CT and intraoperative evaluation identify only localized involvement of the prostate or bladder appear to be reasonable candidates for bladder-sparing procedures.

Pelvic exenteration for advanced pelvic malignancy

Pelvic exenteration is a demanding, yet potentially curative operation, for patients with advanced pelvic cancer. The majority will present with recurrence after prior surgery and radiotherapy. After exenteration, 5-year survival is 40% to 60% in patients with gynecologic cancer as compared to 25% to 40% for patients with colorectal cancer. Physiologic age and absence of co-morbidities appear to be more important when selecting patients for exenteration than chronological age. Careful pre-operative staging, including either computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), usually will identify patients with distant metastases, extrapelvic nodal disease, or disease involving the pelvic sidewall (which generally precludes surgery). The recent application of intra-operative radiotherapy or postoperative high-dose brachytherapy for patients with more advanced pelvic disease, which may include sidewall involvement, may expand the standard indications for exenteration. However, the intent of this procedure, with or without radiotherapy, should be resection of all tumor with the aim of cure since the place of palliative exenteration is controversial at best. The operative details of exenteration are presented, as are two surgical approaches to composite resection of pelvic structures in continuity with sacrectomy. Filling the pelvis with large tissue flaps, usually a rectus abdominus flap, has decreased morbidity rates, particularly with small bowel complications. Peri-operative mortality is usually 5% to 10%, and significant morbidity occurs in over 50% of patients. Restorative techniques for both urinary and gastrointestinal tracts can diminish the need for stomas and, along with vaginal reconstruction, can significantly improve quality of life for many patients after exenteration. These advances in surgery and radiotherapy help make the procedure a viable option for patients with otherwise incurable pelvic malignancy.

Multidisciplinary management of recurrent colorectal cancer

Isolated pelvic recurrence of rectal carcinoma may occur in up to one third of patients following definitive resection of primary disease. The means by which recurrence is diagnosed, methods by which it may be treated, and reported outcomes are all evolving and improving. Current data indicate that a substantial proportion of patients treated by aggressive multi-modality salvage therapy may be provided with durable survival. This review highlights current concepts in the diagnosis and management of locally recurrent rectal carcinoma.