A review of functional and surgical outcomes of gynaecological reconstruction in the context of pelvic exenteration.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Radical surgical excision may be the only curative option for patients with advanced pelvic malignancy, but concerns surrounding the functional outcomes and survivorship of patients undergoing exenterative surgery remain. This is especially important in the context of vulvovaginal resection, where patients are often younger and surgery can have a profoundly negative impact on quality of life, body image and overall wellbeing. Reconstructive procedures are an important means of mitigating these adverse effects but outcomes are poorly described. AIM: To define the outcomes associated with gynaecological reconstructive procedures following pelvic exenterative surgery and to compare them with the outcomes of those patients who did not undergo reconstruction. METHODS: An international, multicentre retrospective investigation comparing the outcomes of reconstruction with no reconstruction. The protocol was prospectively registered (NCT05074069). RESULTS: 334 patients were included. 77 patients had a neovagina reconstructed, 139 patients underwent flap reconstruction and 118 were not reconstructed. Patients who underwent reconstruction had a longer operative time and hospital stay with an increased risk of minor perineal complications. Reconstruction did not confer an increased risk of surgical reintervention, and overall complication rates were equivalent. Procedure-specific major morbidity was 5.2 % and 11.5 % for neovaginal and flap reconstruction, respectively. 66 % of patients undergoing neovaginal reconstruction experienced no long term morbidity. 7 % developed neovaginal stenosis and 12 % suffered disease recurrence. CONCLUSION: Neovaginal reconstruction is safe in carefully selected patients and offers specific advantages over alternative techniques, with few patients requiring reoperation. Primary closure does not increase perineal morbidity.