The influence of surgeon volume on outcomes after pelvic exenteration for a gynecologic cancer

Perioperative outcomes in gynecologic pelvic exenteration before and after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program

OBJECTIVES

To compare perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies before and after implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols.

METHODS

We performed an institutional retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies before (1/1/2006-12/30/2014) and after (1/1/2015-6/30/2023) ERAS implementation. We described ERAS compliance rates. We compared outcomes up to 60 days post-exenteration. Complication grades were defined by the Clavien-Dindo system.

RESULTS

Overall, 105 women underwent pelvic exenteration; 74 (70.4%) in the pre-ERAS and 31 (29.5%) in the ERAS cohorts. There were no differences between cohorts in age, body mass index, race, primary disease site, type of exenteration, urinary diversion, or vaginal reconstruction. All patients had complications, with at least one grade II+ complication in 94.6% of pre-ERAS and 90.3% of ERAS patients. The ERAS cohort had more grade I-II gastrointestinal (61.3% vs 21.6%, p < 0.001) and hematologic (61.3% vs 36.5%, p = 0.030) and grade III-IV renal (29.0% vs 12.2%, p = 0.048) and wound (45.2% vs 18.9%, p = 0.008) complications compared to the pre-ERAS cohort. ERAS patients had a higher rate of ileus (38.7% vs 10.8%, p = 0.002), urinary leak (22.6% vs 5.4%, p = 0.014), pelvic abscess (35.5% vs 10.8%, p = 0.005), postoperative bleeding requiring intervention (61.3% vs 28.4%, p = 0.002), and readmission (71.4% vs 46.5%, p = 0.025). Median ERAS compliance was 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic exenteration remains a morbid procedure, and complications were more common in ERAS compared to pre-ERAS cohorts. ERAS protocols should be optimized and tailored to the complexity of pelvic exenteration compared to standard gynecologic oncology ERAS pathways.

Predictive factors of surgical complications after pelvic exenteration for gynecological malignancies: a large single-institution experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate pre-operative predictors of early (<30 days) severe complications (grade Dindo 3+) in patients with gynecological malignancy submitted to pelvic exenteration (PE).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 129 patients submitted to surgery at Fondazione Policlinico Gemelli between 2010 and 2019. We included patients affected by primary or recurrent/persistent cervical, endometrial, or vulvar/vaginal cancers. Post-operative complications were graded according to the Dindo classification. Logistic regression was used to analyze potential predictors of complications.

RESULTS

We performed 63 anterior PE, 10 posterior PE, and 56 total PE. The incidence of early severe post-operative complications was 27.9% (n=36), and the early mortality rate was 2.3% (n=3). More frequent complications were related to the urinary diversion and intestinal surgery. In univariable analysis, hemoglobin ≤10 g/dL (odds ratio [OR]=4.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.65-10.7; p=0.003), low albumin levels (OR=3.9; 95% CI=1.27-12.11; p=0.025), diabetes (OR=4.15; 95% CI=1.22-14.1; p=0.022), 2+ comorbidities at presentation (OR=5.18; 95% CI=1.49-17.93; p=0.012) were predictors of early severe complications. In multivariable analysis, only low hemoglobin and comorbidities at presentation were independent predictors of complications.

CONCLUSION

Pelvic exenteration is an aggressive surgery characterized by a high rate of post-operative complications. Pre-operative assessment of comorbidities and patient health status are crucial to better select the right candidate for this type of surgery.

Long-Term Survival, Prognostic Factors, and Quality of Life of Patients Undergoing Pelvic Exenteration for Cervical Cancer

Background: Considerable efforts have been carried out over the past 30 years to support patients with advanced cervical cancer. Throughout this time, Eastern European countries have been left aside from the decision-making groups on this matter, hence the absence of similar studies in this geographical area. In these countries, the quality of life (QoL) of patients with cervical cancer might be considered a “caprice”, and the discomforts they encounter following pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer are often perceived as a “normal phenomenon”. Methods: This study examined forty-seven patients submitted to pelvic exenteration followed up for nine years after the surgical intervention. The first objective of this study is to identify the prognostic factors that influence the overall survival (OS) of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for FIGO stage IVA, recurrent or persistent cervical cancer after previous conclusive treatments. The second objective is to assess the QoL of the surviving patients using the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CX24 standardized questionnaires. Results: The mean age of the participants was 54 years (range 36−67). At the time of the study, there were 25 living patients (53.2%), the 3-year OS was 61%, and the 5-year OS was 48.7%. Cox regression analysis recognized parameter invasion, pelvic lymph node metastases, positive resection margins, early postoperative complications, and infralevatorian pelvic exenteration as negative prognostic factors influencing the OS (p < 0.05). Of the 25 survivors, 18 patients answered the QoL questionnaires. The cost of favorable survival has been translated into poor overall QoL, unsatisfactory functional, social, and symptom scores, a high prevalence of cervical cancer-specific symptoms such as lymphedema, peripheral neuropathy, severe menopausal symptoms, distorted body image, and lack of sexual desire. The lower scores are comparable to the only three studies available in the literature that assessed the QoL of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration precisely for cervical cancer. Conclusions: Despite its retrospective nature and some limitations, this paper, similar to other studies, shows a decent OS but with a marked adverse impact on QoL, suggesting the importance of adequate psycho-emotional and financial support for these patients following pelvic exenteration. This study also contributes to the current knowledge regarding advanced cervical cancer treatment, depicting survival, prognostic factors, and QoL of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer in a reference center in Eastern Europe. Our study can provide a comparison for future prospective randomized trials needed to confirm these results.

The impact of distance to closest negative margin on survival after pelvic exenteration

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of distance to closest negative margin on survival after pelvic exenteration (PE).

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis of PE at Moffitt Cancer Center from 2000 to 2019, baseline characteristics, clinical details, and outcomes were ascertained. Distance to closest negative margin was measured. Close and distant negative margins were defined as <3 mm and ≥3 mm from malignancy to nearest surgical margin, respectively. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined, and Kaplan-Meier curves were compared. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the association of margin status with OS and PFS.

RESULTS

Of 124 PEs with malignancy, 80 (64.5%) had negative margins. Median survival was 62 (95% confidence interval [CI] 27-70) months for negative and 21 (95% CI 15-29) months for positive margins. Of 76 with negative margins and documented margin length, 26 had close and 50 had distant margins. Median survival was 32 (95% CI 14-62) months for close and 111 (95% CI 42-166) months for distant margins. Distant margins were associated with improved OS (p = 0.0054) and PFS (p = 0.0099) compared to close margins. After adjusting for other prognostic factors, patients with distant margins had significantly decreased risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.78; p = 0.008) and progression (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23-0.99; p = 0.04) compared to positive margins. No significant differences in OS or PFS were observed between close and positive margins. This survival benefit remained among those with cervical cancer. Median survival in this cohort was 34.1 (95% CI 2.0-69.8) months for close and 165.7 (95% CI 24.5-165.7) for distant margins.

CONCLUSIONS

Distant margins following PE are associated with improved OS and PFS compared to close margins.

Analysis of long-term outcomes in 44 patients following pelvic exenteration due to cervical cancer

Background

Pelvic exenteration (PE) may be associated with prolonged overall survival (OS) in selected patients with advanced or recurrent cervical cancer. However, the factors related to improved survival following PE are not clearly defined. The aim of this study was to perform a retrospective analysis of OS rates in a group of patients undergoing PE in order to identify the factors related to improved long-term outcomes.

Methods

Our study group consisted of 44 patients, including 21 squamous cell cancer (SCC) patients, 22 patients with adenocarcinomas (AC) of the cervix, and one patient with undifferentiated cervical carcinoma. The patients were categorized according to the type of surgery, namely, primary surgery (12 patients) or surgery due to cancer recurrence (32 patients).

Results

In the group of patients with recurrent cervical cancer, we found that improved OS correlated with the SCC histological type and the presence of vaginal fistula. The need for reoperation within 30 days and the presence of severe adverse events significantly worsened the prognosis. We found a non significant trend toward improved survival in those patients with tumor-free margins. Lymph node metastases, the initial stage of the disease, the time to recurrence, and a history of hysterectomy had no impact on patients’ OS. In the group of patients undergoing primary PE, we observed a trend toward improved survival among those diagnosed with vaginal fistula.

Conclusions

Pelvic exenteration seemed to improve the long-term outcomes for patients with SCC cancer recurrence and vaginal fistula whose surgery was unrelated to severe adverse events.

Hospital surgical volume and perioperative mortality of pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To examine the association between hospital surgical volume and perioperative mortality of pelvic exenteration performed for gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

A population-based retrospective study utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample was conducted to examine pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies from 2001 to 2011. Annualized hospital surgical volume was defined as the average number of procedures a hospital performed per year in which at least one case was performed, and this was correlated to perioperative mortality.

RESULTS

A total 1912 exenterations performed at 181 centers were included. Nearly two thirds of exenteration-performing centers had a minimum surgical volume of one case per year (121 centers, 66.9%). Perioperative mortality rate was 1.8%. In multivariable analysis surgical volume remained an independent factor for perioperative mortality (adjusted-odds ratio 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.49; P < .001). Perioperative mortality rates were 3.7% for the centers with minimum surgical volume (1 exenteration a year), 1.4% for the centers performing more than one but two or less exenterations a year, and 0% for the top decile centers (>2 exenterations a year), respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancy is a rare surgical procedure with most hospitals performing few cases annually. A higher surgical volume of pelvic exenteration was associated with lower perioperative mortality.

Short- and long-term outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration surgery in a low-volume specialized tertiary setting

BACKGROUND

Most published data on pelvic exenteration comes from high-volume quaternary units, with limited data available from outside of this setting. This study reports outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration performed in a low-volume tertiary unit with multidisciplinary support.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration surgery for rectal/anal carcinoma, or gynaecological malignancy at Royal Adelaide Hospital between June 2008 and September 2018. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier analysis of 5-year disease-free and overall survival for patients treated with curative intent were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration were included. Most patients presented with primary rectal adenocarcinoma, and posterior and total pelvic exenterations were the most common operations performed (>90%). Median total operating time was 323 min, median hospital stay was 15 days, and the readmission rate was 14.8%. The overall complication rate (per patient) was 70.4%, and the re-intervention rate was 20.4%. Thirteen percent of patients required intensive care unit-admission, and there was one postoperative death (1.9%). R0 resection margins were achieved in 81.5% of patients, with R1 and R2 margins in 13.0 and 5.6% of patients, respectively. Estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 38.8%, and 5-year overall survival was 65.7%.

CONCLUSION

Short- and long-term outcomes of selective pelvic exenteration surgery are acceptable in a low-volume specialized tertiary setting with suitable multidisciplinary expertise. If the required expertise is not readily available, then outside referral is recommended.

Performance and outcome of pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies: A population-based study

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in performance and outcomes of pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

This is a population-based retrospective study examining the Nationwide Inpatient Sample between 2001 and 2015. Women with cervical, uterine, vaginal, and vulvar malignancies who underwent pelvic exenteration were examined. Comorbidity, perioperative complications, total charges, length of stay, and mortality were assessed.

RESULTS

There were 2647 cases included. Cervical cancer was the most common malignancy (45.1%), followed by vaginal cancer (27.6%). 26.9% of women had a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥3, which significantly increased from 23.3% in 2001-2005 to 33.3% in 2011-2015 (42.9% relative increase, P < 0.001). Obese women undergoing exenteration increased significantly from 4.5% in 2001-2005 to 19.4% in 2011-2015 (3.3-fold relative increase, P < 0.001). The perioperative complication rate was 68.1%, including 38.7% with multiple complications. The mortality rate was 1.9%. The number of women with multiple perioperative complications increased from 29.4% in 2001-2005 to 52.8% in 2011-2015 (78.6% relative increase, P < 0.001). More recent year of surgery, obesity, higher comorbidity, higher household income, surgery at large bedsize hospital, urinary diversion, vaginal reconstruction, and vulvar cancer were associated with an increased risk of multiple complications on multivariable analysis (all, P < 0.05). Median length of stay was 14 (IQR 9-21) days, and the number of women hospitalized ≥28 days significantly increased from 12.6% in 2001-2005 to 19.1% in 2011-2015 (51.6% relative increase, P < 0.001). The median corrected total charges increased from $121,854 to $185,100 between 2001 and 2015 (net difference +$63,246, 51.9% relative increase, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Women undergoing pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies became more obese and comorbid during the study period. Pelvic exenteration for women with gynecologic malignancies is associated with high morbidity and mortality as well as substantial treatment-related costs.