Feasibility of transperineal minimal invasive surgery when performing sacrectomy for advanced primary and recurrent pelvic malignancies.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive transabdominal surgery (MIS) with transperineal minimal invasive surgery (tpMIS) for sacrectomy in advanced primary and recurrent pelvic malignancies. METHODS: Using a prospectively collected database, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical, surgical, and pathological outcomes of MIS with tpMIS for sacrectomies. Surgery was performed between February 2019 and May 2023. The median follow-up period was 27 months (5-46 months). RESULTS: Fifteen consecutive patients were included in this analysis. The diagnoses were as follows: recurrent rectal cancer, n = 11 (73%); primary rectal cancer, n = 3 (20%); and recurrent ovarian cancer, n = 1 (7%). Seven patients (47%) underwent pelvic exenteration with sacrectomy, six patients (40%) underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR) with sacrectomy, and two patients (13%) underwent tumor resection with sacrectomy. The median intraoperative blood loss was 235 ml (range 45-1320 ml). The postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3a) were graded as follows: 3a, n = 6 (40%); 3b, n = 1 (7%); and ≥ 4, n = 0 (0%). Pathological examinations demonstrated that R0 was achieved in 13 patients (87%). During the follow-up period, two patients (13%) developed local re-recurrence due to recurrent cancer. The remaining 13 patients (87%) had no local disease. Fourteen patients (93%) survived. CONCLUSIONS: Although the patient cohort in this study is heterogeneous, MIS with tpMIS was associated with a very small amount of blood loss, a low incidence of severe postoperative complications, and an acceptable R0 resection rate. Further studies are needed to clarify the long-term oncological feasibility.

Outcomes Post Beyond Total Mesorectal Excision Plane Resections Following Setting up Complex Colorectal Cancer Service in a District General Hospital.

Background: This study aims to validate the feasibility of a hub-and-spoke model for pelvic exenteration (PE) surgery while upholding favorable patient outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing PE at our trust October 2017 and December 2023 was conducted. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were employed. Results: Sixty-seven patients underwent PE during the study period, mainly for locally advanced colorectal cancer (n=61, 91.04%). Minimally invasive surgery was performed in 16 cases (Robotic 3, 4.47% / Laparoscopic 13, 19.40) while the rest of patients 51 had open surgery (75.11%). Median hospital stay was 12 days (range:8-20). While 24 patients (35.82%) developed major complications (CD III-IV) post-surgery, there were no mortalities associated with pelvic exenteration in this study. Of the 67 patients undergoing surgery with curative intent, negative margins (R0 resection) were achieved in 57 patients (85.12%). This is comparable to outcomes reported by the PelvEx collaborative (85.07% versus 79.8%). At a median follow-up of 22 months, 15 patient (22.38%) recurred with 10.44% local recurrence rate. The 2 years overall and disease-free survival were 85.31% and 77.0.36%, respectively. Conclusion: Our study suggests that a nascent PE service, supported by specialist expertise and resources, can achieve good surgical outcomes within a district general hospital.

Eureka: objective assessment of the empty pelvis syndrome to measure volumetric changes in pelvic dead space following pelvic exenteration.

BACKGROUND: Large tissue defects following pelvic exenteration (PE) fill with fluid and small bowel, leading to the empty pelvis syndrome (EPS). EPS causes a constellation of complications including pelvic sepsis and reduced quality of life. EPS remains poorly defined and cannot be objectively measured. Pathophysiology of EPS is multifactorial, with increased pelvic dead space potentially important. This study aims to describe methodology to objectively measure volumetric changes relating to EPS. METHODS: The true pelvis is defined by the pelvic inlet and outlet. Within the true pelvis there is physiological pelvic dead space (PDS) between the peritoneal reflection and the inlet. This dead space is increased following PE and is defined as the exenteration pelvic dead space (EPD). EPD may be reduced with pelvic filling and the volume of filling is defined as the pelvic filling volume (PFV). PDS, EPD, and PFV were measured intraoperatively using a bladder syringe, and Archimedes' water displacement principle. RESULTS: A patient undergoing total infralevator PE had a PDS of 50 ml. A rectus flap rendered the pelvic outlet watertight. EPD was then measured as 540 ml. Therefore there was a 10.8-fold increase in true pelvis dead space. An omentoplasty was placed into the EPD, displacing 130 ml; therefore, PFV as a percentage of EPD was 24.1%. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first reported quantitative assessment of pathophysiological volumetric changes of pelvic dead space; these measurements may correlate to severity of EPS. PDS, EPD, and PFV should be amendable to assessment based on perioperative cross-sectional imaging, allowing for potential prediction of EPS-related outcomes.

Pelvic Exenteration - Past, Present and Future.

Background: Bearing in mind that the open procedure is already validated by multiple studies, the article aims to prove that pelvic exenteration performed in a minimally invasive fashion might offer better survival and to potentially identify prognostic factors for the outcome of these patients. Material and Methods: Data regarding past and present classifications and surgical indications are presented. Patient data were collected retrospectively. Results: The most frequent diseases treated with pelvic exenteration, in terms of the hystological type, were gynecological malignancy and squamous cell carcinoma. Recurrent pelvic disease was found in 68.2% of patients. R0 resection was achieved in 72.7% of patients in the MI group, and in 73.7% of patients in the OP group. Peri-operative morbidity was reported to be 56.6% for open surgery, and 18.1% for minimally invasive. Average DFS was 20.15 months, ranging from 1.5 to 70.3 months, while the OS was calculated to be 38.1 months (0.33 1508) up until November 2023. Conclusion: Pelvic exenteration is a continuously improving surgical procedure, open approach being favored to minimally invasive one. On the other hand, hospitalization and morbidity are reduced when choosing the latter. R0 and lymph node status are important predictors for overall survival, as well as major early postoperative complications. All in all, pelvic exenteration is still a promising surgical procedure to extend cancer patients lives.

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.

Impact of Intraoperative Decision-Making on Pathological Margin Status in Patients Undergoing Pelvic Exenteration for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: A key component of preoperative preparation for pelvic exenteration surgery is the development of an operative plan in a multidisciplinary setting based on the extent of local tumor invasion on preoperative imaging. Changes to the extent of resection or operative plan may occur intraoperatively based on intraoperative findings. OBJECTIVE: To report the frequency and extent of intraoperative deviation from the planned extent of resection during pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer and determine whether this resulted in a more or less radical resection. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTINGS: A high-volume pelvic exenteration center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer between January 2015 and December 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency and extent of intraoperative deviation from the planned extent of resection, R0 resection rate. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six patients underwent pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer, of whom 110 (81%) had R0 resection margins. Twelve patients were excluded because of missing information, and 49 patients (40%) had a change to the operative plan. Operative changes were major in 30 patients (61%), more radical in 40 patients (82%), and margin relevant in 24 patients (49%). In patients in whom there was a change to the operative plan and R0 resection was achieved, the median distance to a relevant margin was 2.5 mm (range, 0.1-10 mm). Of 8 patients with a change in operative plan and R1 resection, 3 were margin relevant, of whom all were considered major, and 2 were more radical and 1 was less radical. LIMITATIONS: Generalizability outside of specialist units may be limited. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative changes to the planned extent of resection occur commonly and most often result in an unanticipated major or more radical resection. Such changes may contribute to high rates of R0 resection margins in specialist pelvic exenteration units that use an ultraradical approach in these patients. See Video Abstract . IMPACTO DE LA TOMA DE DECISIONES INTRAOPERATORIA SOBRE EL ESTADO DEL MARGEN PATOLGICO EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A EXENTERACIN PLVICA POR RECURRENCIA LOCAL EN CNCER DE RECTO: ANTECEDENTES:Un componente clave de la preparación preoperatoria para exenteración pélvica es el desarrollo de un plan quirúrgico en un entorno multidisciplinario, basado en el grado de invasión tumoral local en las imágenes preoperatorias. Es posible que se produzcan cambios intraoperatorios en la extensión de la resección o en el plan quirúrgico según los hallazgos intraoperatorios.OBJETIVO:Informar la frecuencia y la extensión de la desviación intraoperatoria de la extensión planificada de la resección durante la exenteración pélvica para el cáncer de recto localmente recurrente, y si esto resultó en una resección más o menos radical.DISEÑO:Estudio observacional retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Un centro de exenteración pélvica de alto volumen.PACIENTES:Pacientes sometidos a exenteración pélvica por cáncer de recto localmente recurrente entre enero de 2015 y diciembre de 2020.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Frecuencia y extensión de desviación intraoperatoria de la extensión planeada de resección, tasa de resección R0.RESULTADOS:136 pacientes fueron sometidos a exenteración pélvica por cáncer de recto localmente recurrente, de los cuales 110 (81%) tuvieron márgenes de resección R0. 12 pacientes fueron excluidos por falta de información y 49 pacientes (40%) tuvieron un cambio en el plan quirúrgico. Los cambios operatorios fueron mayores en 30 pacientes (61%), más radicales en 40 pacientes (82%) y con relevancia sobre márgenes en 24 pacientes (49%). En los pacientes en los que hubo un cambio en el plan quirúrgico y se logró la resección R0, la distancia mediana hasta un margen relevante fue de 2.5 mm (rango 0.1-10 mm). De ocho pacientes con un cambio en el plan quirúrgico y resección R1, tres tuvieron relevancia sobre márgenes de los cuales todos se consideraron mayores, dos fueron más radicales y uno fue menos radical.LIMITACIONES:La generalización fuera de las unidades especializadas puede ser limitada.CONCLUSIONES:Los cambios intraoperatorios en la extensión planificada de la resección ocurren comúnmente y con mayor frecuencia resultan en una resección mayor imprevista y más radical. Dichos cambios pueden contribuir a altas tasas de márgenes de resección R0 en unidades especializadas en EP que emplean un enfoque ultrarradical en estos pacientes. (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).

Outcomes Following Pelvic Exenteration for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer With and Without En Bloc Sacrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Extended radical resection is often the only chance of cure for locally recurrent rectal cancer. Recurrence in the posterior compartment often necessitates en bloc sacrectomy as part of pelvic exenteration to obtain clear resection margins and provide survival benefit. OBJECTIVE: To compare oncological outcomes, morbidity, and quality-of-life outcomes following pelvic exenteration with and without en bloc sacrectomy for recurrent rectal cancer. DESIGN: Comparative cohort study with retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. SETTING: This study was conducted at a high-volume pelvic exenteration center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer between 1994 and 2022. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival, postoperative morbidity, R0 resection margin, and quality-of-life outcomes. RESULTS: Of 965 patients, 305 (31.6%) underwent pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer. Among these patients, 64.3% were men and the median age was 62 years (range, 29-86). One hundred eighty-five patients (60.7%) underwent en bloc sacrectomy, 65 (35.1%) underwent high transection, and 119 (64.3%) had sacrectomy below S2. R0 resection was achieved in 80% of patients with sacrectomy and 72.5% of patients without sacrectomy. Sacrectomy patients experienced more postoperative complications without increased mortality. The median overall survival was 52 months; median survival was 47 months with sacrectomy and 73 months without ( p = 0.059). Quality-of-life scores were not significantly different across physical component ( p = 0.346), mental component ( p = 0.787), or Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal ( p = 0.679) scores at 24-month follow-up. LIMITATIONS: The generalizability of these findings may be limited outside of subspecialist exenteration units. Selection bias exists in a retrospective analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing pelvic exenteration with and without en bloc sacrectomy for locally recurrent rectal cancer experience similar rates of R0 resection, survival, and quality-of-life outcomes. As R0 remains the most important predictor of survival, the requirement of sacral resection should prompt referral to a subspecialist center that performs sacrectomy routinely. See Video Abstract . RESULTADOS DESPUS DE LA EXENTERACIN PLVICA PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO CON RECURRENCIA LOCAL, CON Y SIN SACRECTOMA EN BLOQUE: ANTECEDENTES:La resección radical ampliada es generalmente la única posibilidad de curación para el cáncer de recto con recurrencia local. La recurrencia en el compartimento posterior generalmente requiere sacrectomía en bloque como parte de la exenteración pélvica para obtener márgenes de resección claros y proporcionar un beneficio de supervivencia.OBJETIVO:Comparar los resultados oncológicos, de morbilidad y de calidad de vida después de la exenteración pélvica con y sin sacrectomía en bloque para el cáncer de recto recurrente.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte comparativo con análisis retrospectivo de datos recopilados prospectivamente.AMBIENTE AJUSTE:Estudio realizado en un centro de exenteración pélvica de alto volumen.PACIENTES:Aquellos sometidos a exenteración pélvica por cáncer de recto con recurrencia local entre 1994 y 2022.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Supervivencia general, morbilidad posoperatoria, margen de resección R0 y resultados de calidad de vida.RESULTADOS:305 (31,6%) de 965 pacientes se sometieron a exenteración pélvica por cáncer de recto con recurrencia local. El 64,3% de los pacientes eran hombres con una mediana de edad de 62 años (rango 29-86). 185 pacientes (60,7%) fueron sometidos a sacrectomía en bloque, 65 (35,1%) fueron sometidos a transección alta, 119 (64,3%) tuvieron sacrectomía por debajo de S2. La resección R0 se logró en el 80% de los pacientes con sacrectomía y en el 72,5% sin ella. Los pacientes de sacrectomía experimentaron más complicaciones postoperatorias sin aumento de la mortalidad. La mediana de supervivencia global fue de 52 meses, 47 meses con sacrectomía y 73 meses sin sacrectomía ( p = 0,059). Las puntuaciones de calidad de vida no fueron significativamente diferentes entre las puntuaciones del componente físico ( p = 0,346), componente mental ( p = 0,787) o la evaluación funcional de la terapia contra el cáncer - colorrectal ( p = 0,679) a los 24 meses de seguimiento.LIMITACIONES:La generalización de estos hallazgos puede estar limitada fuera de las unidades de exenteración de subespecialistas. Existe un sesgo de selección en un análisis retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes sometidos a exenteración pélvica con y sin sacrectomía en bloque por cáncer de recto con recurrencia local experimentan tasas similares de resección R0, supervivencia y resultados de calidad de vida. Como R0 sigue siendo el predictor más importante de supervivencia, la necesidad de resección sacra debe provocar la derivación a un centro subespecialista que realice sacrectomía de forma rutinaria. (Traducción-Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Minimally invasive total pelvic exenteration for symptomatic locally advanced prostate cancer with rectal invasion: Indications and technical considerations.

In cases of rectal invasion by locally invasive prostate cancer (LAPC) leading to severe pain or bleeding, total pelvic exenteration (TPE) is necessary. Here, we present two cases of successful minimally invasive TPE: one performed laparoscopically for local recurrence with rectal bleeding after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and another done robotically for LAPC (clinical T4N1M0) accompanied by rectal bleeding. Medical treatments were ineffective in the latter case, and the tumor occupied a significant portion of the pelvis. We adopted a simultaneous transperineal approach and performed intracorporeal ileal conduit formation. Our cases highlight the challenging nature of minimally invasive TPE for symptomatic LAPC. Despite its complexity, these techniques prove viable and valuable in managing LAPC-related symptoms, emphasizing their practical utility in clinical settings.

A single centre experience on the formation of double barrelled uro-colostomy in pelvic exenteration surgery: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Double barrelled uro-colostomy (DBUC) is an alternative to traditional ileal conduit (IC) and separate colostomy in patients requiring simultaneous urinary and faecal diversion for reconstruction in pelvic exenteration surgery (PES). METHODS: This cohort study evaluated short- and long-term morbidity and mortality associated with DBUC formation in 20 consecutive adult patients undergoing PES in an Australian Complex Pelvic Surgical Unit. Data were obtained from a prospective database. RESULTS: Mean age 59 years (range 27-76 years). PES was performed for malignant disease in 18 patients (curative intent in 17). Mean operative duration 11.8 h (range 7-17 h). Mean follow-up duration 29.1 months (range 2.6-90.1 months). Early DBUC-related complications occurred in four patients (20.0%): urinary tract infection (UTI)/urosepsis (n = 4) and early ureteric stenosis requiring intervention (n = 1). Late DBUC-related complications occurred in five patients (25.0%): recurrent UTI/urosepsis (n = 4), chronic kidney disease (n = 4), ureteric stenosis (n = 2) and parastomal hernia (n = 4). No mortality occurred secondary to a DBUC complication. CONCLUSION: DBUC is a safe reconstructive option with acceptable morbidity profile in patients requiring simultaneous urinary and faecal diversion.

Long-term outcomes of pelvic exenterations for gynecological malignancies: a single-center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Recently, with the advancement of medical technology, the postoperative morbidity of pelvic exenteration (PE) has gradually decreased, and it has become a curative treatment option for some patients with recurrent gynecological malignancies. However, more evidence is still needed to support its efficacy. This study aimed to explore the safety and long-term survival outcome of PE and the feasibility of umbilical single-port laparoscopic PE for gynecologic malignancies in a single medical center in China. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PE for gynecological cancers except for ovarian cancer conducted by a single surgical team in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between July 2014 and December 2019 were included and the data were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Forty-one cases were included and median age at diagnosis was 53 years. Cervical cancer accounted for 87.8% of all cases, and most of them received prior treatment (95.1%). Sixteen procedures were performed in 2016 and before, and 25 after 2016. Three anterior PE were performed by umbilical single-site laparoscopy. The median operation time was 460 min, and the median estimated blood loss was 600 ml. There was no perioperative death. The years of the operations was significantly associated with the length of the operation time (P = 0.0018). The overall morbidity was 52.4%, while the severe complications rate was 19.0%. The most common complication was pelvic and abdominal infection. The years of surgery was also significantly associated with the occurrence of severe complication (P = 0.040). The median follow-up time was 55.8 months. The median disease-free survival (DFS) was 17.9 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 25.3 months. The 5-year DFS was 28.5%, and the 5-year OS was 30.8%. CONCLUSION: PE is safe for patient who is selected by a multi-disciplinary treatment, and can be a curative treatment for some patients. PE demands a high level of experience from the surgical team. Umbilical single-port laparoscopy was a technically feasible approach for APE, meriting further investigation.

The impact of staple transection of the dorsal venous complex and urethra on intraoperative blood loss in cooperative laparoscopic and transperineal endoscopic pelvic exenteration.

PURPOSE: While laparoscopic pelvic exenteration reduces intraoperative blood loss, dorsal venous complex bleeding during this procedure causes issues. We previously introduced a method to transect the dorsal venous complex and urethra using a linear stapler during cooperative laparoscopic and transperineal endoscopic (two-team) pelvic exenteration. The present study assessed its effectiveness in reducing intraoperative blood loss by comparing it with conventional laparoscopic pelvic exenteration. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a Japanese tertiary referral center. Eleven cases of two-team laparoscopic pelvic exenteration with staple transection of the dorsal venous complex (T-PE group) were compared to 25 cases of conventional laparoscopic pelvic exenteration (C-PE group). The primary outcome measure was intraoperative blood loss. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in patient background. The mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the T-PE group than in the C-PE group (200 vs. 850 mL, p = 0.01). The respective mean operation time, postoperative complication rate, and R0 resection rate were similar between the T-PE and C-PE groups (636 min vs. 688 min, p = 0.36; 36% vs. 44%, p = 0.65; 100% vs. 100%, p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Two-team laparoscopic pelvic exenteration with staple transection of the dorsal venous complex reduced intraoperative blood loss from the dorsal venous complex in a technically safe and oncologically feasible manner.

Primary flap closure of perineal defects to avoid empty pelvis syndrome after pelvic exenteration in gynecologic malignancies: An old question to explore a new answer.

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a radical oncological surgical procedure proposed in patients with recurrent or persistent gynecological cancers. The radical alteration of pelvic anatomy and of pelvic floor integrity can cause major postoperative complications. Fortunately, PE can be combined with reconstructive procedures to decrease complications and functional and support problems of pelvic floor, reducing morbility and mortality and increasing quality of life. Many options for reconstructive surgery have been described, especially a wide spectrum of surgical flaps. Different selection criteria have been proposed to select patients for primary perineal defect flap closure without achieving any strict indication of the best option. The aim of this review is to focus on technical aspects and the advantages and disadvantages of each technique, providing an overview of those most frequently used for the treatment of pelvic floor defects after PE. Flaps based on the deep inferior epigastric artery, especially vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (VRAM) flaps, and gracilis flaps, based on the gracilis muscle, are the most common reconstructive techniques used for pelvic floor and vaginal reconstruction. In our opinion, reconstructive surgery may be considered in case of total PE or type II/III PE and in patients submitted to prior pelvic irradiation. VRAM could be used to close extended defects at the time of PE, while gracilis flaps can be used in case of VRAM complications. Fortunately, numerous choices for reconstructive surgery have been devised. As these techniques continue to evolve, it is advisable to adopt an integrated, multi-disciplinary approach within a tertiary medical center.

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

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.

Feasibility of robotic platform to perform R0 resection for locally advanced multi-visceral pelvic malignancy: an institutional experience on outcomes of robotic pelvic exenteration.

BACKGROUND: Exenteration surgery for multi-visceral pelvic malignancy is a complex life-changing operation with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. Traditional open surgery has long been the standard approach for pelvic exenteration for achieving Ro resection which is the main aim of surgery. In the current era of minimally invasive surgery, robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration has provided a promising alternative, offering potential advantages in terms of improved oncological outcomes and enhanced postoperative recovery. This study aims to explore the feasibility of a robotic platform for locally advanced multi-visceral pelvic malignancy. METHODS: A retrospective review from the prospectively maintained robotic colorectal surgery database at University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) Trust was performed. Demographic details and clinical and surgical details were documented from the case records. Data was analysed using SPSS version 22. RESULTS: Thirteen female patients diagnosed with primary or recurrent pelvic malignancy who underwent robotic pelvic exenteration at UHCW between February 2019 and April 2023 at UHCW were included. The mean age of our patients was 60.4 (± 10.1) years. Complete Ro resection was achieved in all 13 (100%) cases on final histopathology. The median length of hospital stay was 15 days after this extensive surgery. Grade 3 morbidity on Clavien-Dindo classification was observed in four (30.7%) patients, while zero percent 30-day mortality was experienced in this study. At a median follow-up of 21 (3-53) months, we observed tumor recurrence in three (23.7%) patients, while death in four (30.7%) patients. Only few studies have highlighted outcomes of robotic pelvic exenteration, and our results were quite comparable to them. CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration for primary or recurrent pelvic malignancy is feasible with improved oncological and acceptable postoperative outcomes.

Modular Pelvic Exenteration for Advanced Rectal Cancer in Frozen Pelvis.

BACKGROUND Surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer with frozen pelvis is challenging. Therefore, we designed the "modular pelvic exenteration" surgical strategy to achieve better radical resection. CASE REPORT A 51-year-old man with rectal cancer refused surgery and received chemotherapy and radiotherapy. He was intolerant to chemotherapy and did not respond well to radiotherapy. With cancer progression, he presented at our hospital with emaciation, fatigue, dysuria, bloody urine, bloody stool, and anal pain. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging revealed the rectal tumor involved multiple adjacent organs and caused rectovesical fistula, bilateral hydronephrosis, hydroureterosis, and local pelvic infection. The rectal tumor was fixed in the pelvic cavity, presenting a frozen pelvis pattern. There was no distant metastasis. As the patient could not tolerate chemotherapy, was unsuitable for immune-check point inhibitor because the tumor had microsatellite stability, and did not respond well to radiotherapy, surgical resection seemed the most suitable treatment option. After the patient's anemia and malnutrition improved, our designed modular pelvic exenteration surgery was performed. In this strategy, we divided pelvic organs and tissues into 4 independent modules. After combining the modules planned to be resected, we delineated the pre-resection margin. By this strategy, the tumor was removed en bloc, with a clear resection margin. The patient was discharged 13 days after the operation, without complications. Follow-up for 24 months revealed no signs of tumor recurrence. CONCLUSIONS For locally advanced rectal cancer with frozen pelvis, the modular pelvic exenteration strategy may help to achieve satisfactory surgical effects in selected patients.

Delivering complex surgical services: lessons learned from the evolution of a specialised pelvic exenteration centre.

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a potentially curative, ultra-radical surgical procedure for the treatment of advanced pelvic tumours, which involves surgical resection of multiple pelvic organs. Delivering such a complex low-volume, high-cost surgical program presents a number of unique health management challenges, and requires an organisation-wide approach involving both clinical and administrative teams. In contrast to the United Kingdom and France, where PE services have been historically decentralised, a centralised approach was developed early on in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) with referral of these complex patients to a small number of quaternary centres. The PE program at the authors' institution was established in 1994 and has since evolved into the highest volume PE centre in the ANZ region and the largest single institution experience globally. These achievements have required navigation of specific funding and management issues, supported from inception by a proactive and collaborative relationship with hospital administration and management. The comprehensive state-wide quaternary referral model that has been developed has subsequently been successfully applied to other complex surgical services at the authors' institution, as well as by more recently established PE centres in Australia. This article aims to summarise the authors' experience with establishing and expanding this service and the lessons learned from a health management perspective.

Feasibility of transanal minimally invasive surgery for total pelvic exenteration for advanced primary and recurrent pelvic malignancies.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to clarify the efficacy and safety of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) for total pelvic exenteration (TPE) in advanced primary and recurrent pelvic malignancies. METHODS: Using a prospectively collected database, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical, surgical, and pathological outcomes of TAMIS for TPE. Surgery was performed between September 2019 and April 2023. The median follow-up period was 22 months (2-45 months). RESULTS: Fifteen consecutive patients were included in this analysis M:F = 14:1 and median (range) age was 63 (36-74). Their diagnoses were as follows: primary rectal cancer (n = 5; 33%), recurrent rectal cancer (n = 4; 27%), primary anorectal cancer (n = 5; 33%), and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (n = 1; 7%). Bladder-sparing TPE was selected for two patients (13%). In nine of 15 patients (60%) the anal sphincter could be successfully preserved, five patients (33%) required combined resection of the internal iliac vessels, and two (13%) required rectus muscle flap reconstruction. The median operative time was 723 min (561-1082), and the median intraoperative blood loss was 195 ml (30-1520). The Clavien-Dindo classifications of the postoperative complications were as follows: grade 0-2 (n = 11; 73%); 3a (n = 3; 20%); 3b (n = 1; 7%); and ≥ 4 (n = 0; 0%). No cases of conversion to laparotomy or mortality were observed. The pathological results demonstrated that R0 was achieved in 14 patients (93%). CONCLUSIONS: The short-term outcomes of this initial experience proved that this novel approach is feasible for TPE, with low blood loss, acceptable postoperative complications, and a satisfactory R0 resection rate.