Minimally Invasive Surgery for Pelvic Exenteration in Primary Colorectal Cancer

Robotic versus open and laparoscopic pelvic exenterations for pelvic cancer: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis in Japan

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is the last resort for achieving a complete cure for pelvic cancer; however, it is burdensome for patients. Minimally invasive surgeries, including robot-assisted surgery, have been widely used to treat malignant tumors and have also recently been used in PE. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted PE (RPE) by comparing the outcomes of open PE (OPE) with those of conventional laparoscopic PE (LPE) for treating pelvic tumors.

METHODS

Following the ethics committee approval, a multicenter retrospective analysis of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration between January 2012 and October 2022 was conducted. Data on patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were collected. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was performed to minimize group selection bias.

RESULTS

In total, 261 patients met the study criteria, of whom 61 underwent RPE, 90 underwent OPE, and 110 underwent LPE. After propensity score matching, 50 pairs were created for RPE and OPE and 59 for RPE and LPE. RPE was associated with significantly less blood loss (RPE vs. OPE: 408 mL vs. 2385 ml, p < 0.001), lower transfusion rate (RPE vs. OPE: 32% vs. 82%, p < 0.001), and lower rate of complications over Clavien-Dindo grade II (RPE vs. OPE: 48% vs. 74%, p = 0.013; RPE vs. LPE: 48% vs. 76%, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

This multicenter study suggests that RPE reduces blood loss and transfusion compared with OPE and has a lower rate of complications compared with OPE and LPE in patients with locally advanced and recurrent pelvic tumors.

Outcomes Following Treatment of Pelvic Exenteration for Rectal Cancer in a Tertiary Care Center

Pelvic exenteration is potentially curative for operable locally advanced primary and locally recurrent rectal cancers. R0 resection is associated with higher survival. This procedure is associated with low mortality rates but high postoperative morbidity proportional to the extent of resection. This study was done to find out the survival outcome and morbidity associated with this procedure and to determine prognostic factors associated with postoperative outcomes. Seventy-three patients with rectal cancer underwent pelvic exenteration between January 2009 and December 2020. Sixty-six patients had locally advanced rectal cancer and 7 patients had recurrent cancer. All patients with primary tumors were evaluated with MRI pelvis and CT scan of the chest and abdomen while patients with recurrence were evaluated with a PET scan. The median follow-up duration was 39 months. The majority of patients were in the age group 40-69 years. Thirty patients were males and 43 were females. The 30-day postoperative major morbidity was reported in 28 patients (38.4%). The most common morbidity was wound dehiscence. The mean overall survival (OS) was 110.6 months (95% CI, 97.5-123.7) and mean disease free survival (DFS) was 85 months (95% CI, 71.0-100.4). R0 resection was associated with favorable overall survival. Tailored exenterations were associated with low morbidity. En bloc partial sacrectomy helped achieve R0 resection in patients who underwent the procedure. Extended resections yielded high R0 resection rates with favorable survival (65 months) but were associated with high morbidity. These procedures shall be best practiced in high-volume institutes of expertise.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13193-024-01918-w.

Contemporary results from the PelvEx collaborative: improvements in surgical outcomes for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

The PelvEx Collaborative collates global data on outcomes following exenterative surgery for locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LARC and LRRC, respectively). The aim of this study is to report contemporary data from within the collaborative and benchmark it against previous PelvEx publications.

METHOD

Anonymized data from 45 units that performed pelvic exenteration for LARC or LRRC between 2017 and 2021 were reviewed. The primary endpoints were surgical outcomes, including resection margin status, radicality of surgery, rates of reconstruction and associated morbidity and/or mortality.

RESULTS

Of 2186 patients who underwent an exenteration for either LARC or LRRC, 1386 (63.4%) had LARC and 800 (36.6%) had LRRC. The proportion of males to females was 1232:954. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range 52-71 years) compared with a median age of 63 in both historical LARC and LRRC cohorts. Compared with the original reported PelvEx data (2004-2014), there has been an increase in negative margin (R0) rates from 79.8% to 84.8% and from 55.4% to 71.7% in the LARC and LRRC cohorts, respectively. Bone resection and flap reconstruction rates have increased accordingly in both cohorts (8.2%-19.6% and 22.6%-32% for LARC and 20.3%-41.9% and 17.4%-32.1% in LRRC, respectively). Despite this, major morbidity has not increased.

CONCLUSION

In the modern era, patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for advanced rectal cancer are undergoing more radical surgery and are more likely to achieve a negative resection margin (R0) with no increase in major morbidity.

Laparoscopic Posterior Pelvic Exenteration with Radical Vulvectomy for Intestinal-type Vulvar Adenocarcinoma

Vulvar intestinal adenocarcinoma is a rare malignancy. The most significant predictor of advanced vulvar cancer is achieving complete resection, although determining the optimal treatment for this rare histologic type remains uncertain. We report the case of a 63-year-old woman with a primary vulvar tumor suspected of having rectal invasion and inguinal lymph node metastases based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scans. To achieve complete resection of stage IIIC intestinal-type vulvar adenocarcinoma, we performed a laparoscopic posterior pelvic exenteration (PPE) and radical vulvectomy, along with bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection. This case report highlights the use of a novel hybrid procedure that combines laparoscopic PPE with radical vulvectomy and bilateral inguinal lymph node dissection for vulvar adenocarcinoma of the intestinal type. Laparoscopic PPE can be considered a minimally invasive approach for vulvar tumor when complete resection is achievable with an appropriate safety margin.

Short-term results after robot-assisted surgery for primary rectal cancers requiring beyond total mesorectal excision in multiple compartments

AIM

Rectal cancers requiring beyond total mesorectal excision (bTME) are traditionally operated using an open approach, but the use of minimally invasive robot-assisted procedures is increasing. Introduction of minimal invasive surgery for complex cancer cases could be associated with compromised surgical margins or increased complication rates. Therefore, reporting results both clinical and oncological in large series is important. Since bTME procedure reports are heterogeneous, comparing results is often difficult. In this study, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) classification system was used to describe the bTME surgery according to pelvic compartments.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with primary rectal cancer operated with laparoscopic robot-assisted bTME were prospectively included for 2 years. All patients had tumors that threatened the mesorectal fascia, invaded adjacent organs, and/or involved metastatic pelvic lateral lymph nodes. Short-term clinical outcomes and oncological specimen quality were registered. Surgery was classified according to pelvic compartments resected.

RESULTS

Clear resection margins (R0 resection) were achieved in 95 out of 105 patients (90.5%). About 26% had Accordion Severity Grading System of Surgical Complications grade 3-4 complications and 15% required re-operations. About 7% were converted to open surgery. The number of compartments resected ranged from one to the maximum seven, with 83% having two or three compartments resected. All 10 R1 resections occurred in the lateral and posterior compartments.

CONCLUSIONS

The short-term clinical outcomes and oncological specimen quality after robot-assisted bTME surgery were comparable to previously published open bTME surgery. The description of surgical procedures using the Royal Marsden MRI compartment classification was feasible.

A systematic review of oncosurgical and quality of life outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is now the standard of care for locally advanced (LARC) and locally recurrent (LRRC) rectal cancer. Reports of the significant short-term morbidity and survival advantage conferred by R0 resection are well established. However, longer-term outcomes are rarely addressed. This systematic review focuses on long-term oncosurgical and quality of life (QoL) outcomes following PE for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed®, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE® and Embase® databases was conducted, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies were included if they reported long-term outcomes following PE for LARC or LRRC. Studies with fewer than 20 patients were excluded.

FINDINGS

A total of 25 papers reported outcomes for 5,489 patients. Of these, 4,744 underwent PE for LARC (57.5%) or LRRC (42.5%). R0 resection rates ranged from 23.2% to 98.4% and from 14.9% to 77.8% respectively. The overall morbidity rates were 17.8-87.0%. The median survival ranged from 12.5 to 140.0 months. None of these studies reported functional outcomes and only four studies reported QoL outcomes. Numerous different metrics and timepoints were utilised, with QoL scores frequently returning to baseline by 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates that PE is safe, with a good prospect of R0 resection and acceptable mortality rates in selected patients. Morbidity rates remain high, highlighting the importance of shared decision making with patients. Longer-term oncological outcomes as well as QoL and functional outcomes need to be addressed in future studies. Development of a core outcomes set would facilitate better reporting in this complex and challenging patient group.

Current status of robot-assisted total pelvic exenteration focusing on the field of urology: a clinical practice review

Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) is a highly invasive surgery associated with high rates of perioperative morbidity and mortality and is commonly performed for several types of locally advanced or recurrent pelvic cancers. It involves multivisceral resection, including the rectum, sigmoid colon, bladder, prostate, uterus, vagina, or ovaries, and urologists normally perform radical cystectomy or radical prostatectomy and urinary diversion in collaboration with colorectal surgeons and gynecologists. In the urological field, robot-assisted surgeries have been widely performed as one of the main minimally invasive procedures because of their superior perioperative or oncological outcomes compared to open or laparoscopic surgeries. In pelvic exenteration (PE) surgery, laparoscopic surgeries have shown superior rates of mortality, morbidity, and R0 resection compared to open surgeries. Robot-assisted TPE for the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer was first reported in 2014, and reports of its safety and usefulness have gradually increased. Robot-assisted PE, in which multivisceral resection in a narrow pelvic space is easier, will eventually be a standard minimally invasive procedure, although evidence has been limited to date. This clinical practice review summarizes the indications for surgery, perioperative complications, and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted TPE and highlights the current status of robot-assisted TPE for patients with urological malignancies and its surgical technique, focusing on the manipulation of urological organs.

Empty pelvis syndrome: a retrospective audit from a tertiary cancer center

INTRODUCTION

Empty pelvis syndrome (EPS) has been defined as a complications arising as a sequel of empty space created after extensive pelvic surgery involving perineal resection. However this definition has been heterogenous throughout the limited literature available. Hence, EPS is a significant yet under recognized complication vexing both patients and surgeons. Even till date, prevention and management of EPS remain a challenge. Various preventive strategies have been employed each with its own complications. Few small studies mentioned incidence of this dreaded complication in between 20 and 40%. But most of these studies quote vague evidence and especially only after TPE surgeries. To the best of our knowledge, incidence after APR and PE has never been mentioned in literature.

PURPOSE

To assess the clinical burden of empty pelvis syndrome in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection (APR), posterior exenteration (PE), or total pelvic exenteration (TPE) for low rectal cancers.

METHODS

This is a retrospective audit from a high-volume tertiary cancer center in India. Patients who underwent APR, PE, or TPE between the years 2013 to 2021 were screened and analyzed for incidence, presentation, and management of empty pelvic syndrome (EPS).

RESULTS

A total of 1224 patients' electronic medical records were screened for complications related to empty pelvis. The overall incidence of EPS was 95/1224 (7%) with 55/1024 (5%) in APR, 8/39 (20.5%) in PE, and 32/143 (21.9%) in TPE. The most common clinical presentation was small bowel obstruction 43/95 (45.2%) and most presented late, 56/95 (60%), i.e., after 30 days of surgery. Most of the patients who had EPS were managed conservatively 55/95 (57%).

CONCLUSION

EPS is a significant clinical problem that can lead to major morbidity, especially after exenterative surgeries warranting effective preventive strategies.

Laparoscopic and robotic multivisceral resection in colorectal cancer: A case series and systematic review

PURPOSE

Multivisceral resection (MVR) with open approach is the standard surgical treatment for locally advanced colorectal cancer. However, the medical literature concerning the practice of minimally invasive MVR in order to reduce postoperative complications and hospital stay has been growing exponentially over the last years. The present study aimed to examine our experience and to provide a systematic review about the results and complications of minimally invasive MVR.

METHODS

Data of patients that underwent minimally invasive MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The literature was searched for studies concerning minimally invasive MVR for colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 39 laparoscopic MVR were performed in our department. Complications occurred in 14 patients (35.9%) with major complications in five patients (18.82%) according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Conversion was required in one case (2.56%) with subsequent mortality (2.56%). Pathologic adjacent organs or structures invasion was observed in 30 patients (76.9%) and positive resection margin occurred in two cases (5.2%). Twenty-two studies including 1055 patients were identified after literature search. In these studies, laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery were performed in 90.15% and 9.85% of the patients, respectively. R0 resection was established in 95% of cases, conversion rate varied between 0% and 41.7%, and postoperative mortality ranged between 0% and 7.7% in the included articles.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive approach may be a safe option for patients requiring MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer, with equivalent oncological results and could result in better early postoperative outcomes to open approach. However, further studies on this topic are needed to confirm the results of the current study.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer: a single-center propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Research on short-term outcomes and long-term oncological results of laparoscopic pelvic exenteration (LPE) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is still limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of LPE and open pelvic exenteration (OPE).

METHODS

Between January 2010 and December 2019, consecutive LARC patients who underwent radical pelvic exenteration at Peking University First Hospital were enrolled. Groups were matched at a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. The primary endpoints were 3 year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary endpoints were postoperative short-term outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 144 patients (68 males and 76 females, median age 58.5 [range 27.0-86.0] years). After matching, patients were stratified into LPE (n = 48) and OPE (n = 48) groups (LPE: 24 males and 24 females, median age 57.0 [range 27.0-81.0] years; OPE: 26 males and 22 females, median age 58.0[range 36.0-80.0] years). There were no significant differences on baseline data between the two groups. Compared with the OPE group, the LPE group had a significantly lower estimated blood loss (200 vs 500 ml, p = 0.003), less overall postoperative complications (12/48 vs 25/48, p = 0.006), less surgical site infection (8/48 vs 20/48, p = 0.007), shorter length of stay (12 vs. 15 days, p = 0.005), but similar operative time (344 vs. 360 min, p = 0.493). The pathological R0 resection rate (98.0% vs. 93.7%, p = 0.610), 3 year local recurrence (18.4% vs. 23.5, p = 0.140), 3 year OS (74.6% vs. 65.5%, p = 0.290) and 3-year DFS (60.0% vs. 50.3%, p = 0.208) were similar between the two groups. Shorter distance from anal verge (HR = 0.92, p = 0.042), (y) pT4b (HR = 2.45, p = 0.023), (y)pN1-2 (HR = 2.42, p = 0.004) and positive CRM (HR = 6.23, p = 0.004) were independent prognostic risks for 3 year DFS.

CONCLUSIONS

LPE can be performed safely and has certain short-term advantages over OPE, most notably less blood loss and surgical site infection. However, LPE does not improve long-term oncological outcomes.

Minimum standards of pelvic exenterative practice: PelvEx Collaborative guideline

This document outlines the important aspects of caring for patients who have been diagnosed with advanced pelvic cancer. It is primarily aimed at those who are establishing a service that adequately caters to this patient group. The relevant literature has been summarized and an attempt made to simplify the approach to management of these complex cases.

Laparoscopic posterior pelvic exenteration for clear cell adenocarcinoma arising in an episiotomy scar

Malignant degeneration of endometriosis is a very rare event, especially when it develops in an episiotomy scar. A 53-year-old woman with an enlarged perineal mass presented to the hospital. She had undergone vaginal delivery with episiotomy twice. Imaging analyses showed a mass involving the levator ani muscle apart from the rectum, with lymph node metastases to the right inguinal and internal iliac regions. A biopsy specimen of the right inguinal lymph node revealed poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma. She underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to the treatment strategy of anal fistula cancer. Laparoscopic posterior pelvic exenteration and pelvic lymph node dissection with anterior inguinal node dissection was performed, along with perineal reconstruction. Pathological examination revealed clear cell adenocarcinoma with lymph node metastases, derived from extrapelvic endometriosis in the episiotomy scar. She was treated with adjuvant chemotherapy according to the treatment strategy of vulvar cancer, and showed no evidence of recurrence after 15 months of surgery.

The Influence of Analgesic Modalities on Postoperative Cancer Recurrence

The potential for cancer cells to grow and to metastasize depends on complex interactions between inflammatory signals and pathways, immune cells, and elements of the stromal tissue in which they invade. Related to the nature of many cancers, the probability of recurrence can potentially be quite high for some patients. Immunology, lifestyle modifications, timing of disease, genetics, age, gender, and race are only a handful of ways the likelihood of cancer recurrence can be influenced. The quantity, or density, of certain immunological cells or factors, plays a role in the propagation of cancer cells. Opioids are often used in cancer patients for acute postoperative and chronic pain management. While they can produce significant pain relief, the type of analgesic utilized is important, as it may influence cancer propagation. In this regard, certain opioids have been found to increase T regulatory cells while suppressing NK cell function. Morphine may promote tumor neovascularization and expansion. Fentanyl administration significantly diminishes NK-cells and CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells. In a recent meta-analysis, propofol-based anesthesia improved both cancer-free survival and overall survival. COX inhibitors have also shown promise in persevering cancer immune function, as in literature involving ketorolac and celecoxib. In summary, inhaled anesthesia and opioids may contribute to a pro-tumor metastasis environment also known as cancer propagation; whereas propofol and COX inhibitors may provide a better alternative to reduce cancer recurrence and propagation.

Vaginal reconstruction using a gluteal transposition flap after abdominoperineal excision for anorectal malignancy

The purpose of this study is to present and evaluate a surgical method using gluteal flap for combined perineal and vaginal reconstruction after abdominoperineal excision (APE) with partial vaginectomy for anorectal malignancy. The method is a two-centre study of consecutive patients undergoing APE including partial vaginectomy for anorectal tumours, with immediate combined perineal and vaginal reconstruction using gluteal flaps. Follow-up data were retrieved via retrospective review of medical records, questionnaires and gynaecological examinations. Some 34 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. At the time of follow-up, 14 (78%) of the 18 patients alive responded to questionnaires. Seven (50%) of the survey responders agreed to undergo gynaecological examination. Major flap-specific complications (Clavien–Dindo > 2) were observed in 3 (9%) patients. Among survey responders, 11 (79%) had been sexually active preoperatively of which five (45%) resumed sexual activity postoperatively and three (27%) resumed vaginal intercourse. These three patients had all implemented an active vaginal health promotion strategy postoperatively. Perineo-vaginal reconstruction using gluteal flap after extended APE for anorectal malignancy is feasible. Although comparable to other methods of reconstruction, the rate of perineo-vaginal complications is high and post-operative sexual dysfunction is substantial. Postoperative strategies for vaginal health promotion may improve sexual function after vaginal reconstruction.

Opportunities and Limitations of Pelvic Exenteration Surgery

PURPOSE

The practice of exenterative surgery is sometimes controversial and has garnered a certain scepticism. Surgical studies are difficult to conduct due to insufficient data. The aim of this review is to present the current standing of pelvic exenteration from a surgical, gynaecological and urological point of view.

METHODS

This review is based upon a literature review (MEDLINE (PubMed), CENTRAL (Cochrane) and EMBASE (Elsevier)) of retrospective studies on exenterative surgery from 1993-2020. Using MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) search terms, 1572 publications were found. These were evaluated and screened with respect to their eligibility using algorithms and well-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Therefore, the guidelines for systematic reviews (PRISMA) were used.

RESULTS

A complete tumour resection (R0) often represents the only curative option for advanced pelvic carcinomas and their recurrences. A recent systematic review showed significant symptom relief in 80% of palliative patients after pelvic exenteration. Surgical limitations (distant metastases, involvement of the pelvic wall, etc.) are diminished by adequate surgical expertise and close interdisciplinary cooperation. While the mortality rate is low (2-5%), the still relatively high morbidity rate (32-84%) can be minimized by optimizing the perioperative setting. Following exenterations, roughly 79-82% of patients report satisfying results according to PROs (patient-reported outcomes).

CONCLUSION

Due to multimodality treatment strategies combined with extended surgical expertise and patients' preferences, pelvic exenteration can be offered nowadays with low mortality and acceptable postoperative quality of life. The possibilities of surgical treatment are often underestimated. A multi-centre database (PelvEx Collaborative) was established to collect data and experiences to optimize the research in this field.

Concepts and prospects of minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery

It is important that clinical radiologists understand and appreciate the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) options available to surgeons. Operative technologies are constantly evolving, and accurate, informed interpretation of clinical imaging is essential for optimum surgical management. Concurrent advancements in both MIS and radiological staging have certainly improved treatment decisions and outcomes. This article outlines the history, current concepts, evolving techniques, and future prospects of MIS as it pertains to colorectal cancer surgery.

Minimally invasive versus open pelvic exenterations for rectal cancer: a comparative analysis of perioperative and 3-year oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

This study compared the surgical and oncological outcomes of open and minimally invasive pelvic exenteration.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pelvic exenterations for primary locally advanced rectal cancers with invasion of the urogenital organs (central and anterior disease) between August 2013 and September 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were categorized as undergoing open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and these groups were compared for perioperative outcomes and 3-year survival (overall, recurrence-free and local relapse-free survival). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the independent influence of approach of surgery and cancer features on recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

Of the 158 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration, 97 (61.4 per cent) had open exenterations and 61 (38.6 per cent) patients had an MIS resection (44 patients (72 per cent) using laparoscopy and 17 (28 per cent) using robotic surgery). There were 96 (60.8 per cent) total pelvic exenterations and 62 (39.2 per cent) posterior pelvic exenterations. MIS exenterations had significantly longer operative times (MIS versus open: 640 mins versus 450 mins; P < 0.001) but reduced blood loss (MIS versus open: 900 ml versus 1600 ml; P < 0.001) and abdominal wound infections (MIS versus open: 8.2 versus 17.5 per cent; P = 0.020) without a difference in hospital stay (MIS versus open: 11 versus 12 days; P = 0.620). R0 resection rates and involvement of circumferential resection margins were similar (MIS versus open: 88.5 versus 91.8 per cent, P = 0.490 and 13.1 versus 8.2 per cent, P = 0.342 respectively). At a median follow-up of 29 months, there were no differences in 3-year overall survival (MIS versus open: 79.4 versus 60.2 per cent; P = 0.251), RFS (MIS versus open: 51.9 versus 47.8 per cent; P = 0.922) or local relapse-free survival (MIS versus open: 89.7 versus 75.2 per cent; P = 0.491. On multivariable analysis, approach to surgery had no bearing on RFS, and only known distant metastasis, aggressive histology and inadequate response to neoadjuvant radiation (pathological tumour regression grade greater than 3) predicted worse RFS.

CONCLUSION

MIS exenterations documented longer procedures but resulted in less blood loss and fewer wound infections compared with open surgeries. In the setting of an experienced centre, the hospital stay, R0 resection rates and oncological outcomes at 3 years were similar to those of open exenterations.

State-of-the-art surgery for recurrent and locally advanced rectal cancers

Extended and beyond total mesorectal excisions (TME) for advanced and recurrent rectal cancers are increasingly performed with acceptable oncological and functional outcomes. These are undoubtedly due to better understanding of tumor biology and improved patient selection rather than surgical valor and technical refinements alone. In the present review, we attempt to present the current surgical standards for advanced and recurrent cancers requiring surgery outside the TME planes based on involved pelvic compartments. The available procedures, their indications, and extent of resection and reconstruction are highlighted. Emphasis is on formation of dedicated exenteration teams, structured training, and referral systems that increase hospital and surgeon volume to improve patient outcomes and reduce morbidity. Areas of deficiencies in literature were recognized with regards to factors influencing recurrences, patient selection, and quality of life. Finally, the most appropriate preoperative therapy for these tumors is unclear in both the primary and recurrent settings.