Continuing Education Activity

Pelvic exenteration is performed as a palliative or curative option for patients with recurrent or locally invasive pelvic cancer. Pelvic exenteration allows patients with significant tumor burden an option for improved quality of life, even though the morbidity of the procedure is high. A complete pelvic exenteration involves resection of the distal sigmoid colon, rectum, and anus along with the bladder, seminal vesicles, prostate, and urethra in males or the uterus, ovaries, vagina, bladder, and urethra in females. Most cases are performed via laparotomy. However, traditional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic approaches are becoming more common. The main indication is for en bloc removal of recurrent or locally invasive pelvic cancer. Complications of pelvic exenteration include anastomotic leaks, enteric fistulas, abscesses, fistulas, and urologic injury. This activity for healthcare professionals is designed to enhance the learner’s competence when recognizing the indications and contraindications for pelvic exenteration; the risks, benefits, and complications of the procedure; the technique used; and the role of the interprofessional team in caring for patients who undergo pelvic exenteration.

Objectives:

• Identify the indications for performing pelvic exenteration.
• Develop the technique for pelvic exenteration.
• Determine the clinical significance of pelvic exenteration.
• Implement interprofessional team strategies for improving care coordination and communication to advance pelvic exenteration and improve outcomes.

Introduction

Pelvic exenteration refers to an extended en bloc multi-visceral resection of pelvic structures. The visceral components of the pelvis include gastrointestinal and genitourinary structures. The sigmoid colon, rectum, and anus are the terminus aspects of the intestinal tract. The genitourinary viscera include the seminal vesicles and prostate in males; the uterus, ovaries, and vagina in females; and the urinary bladder and urethra in both genders.[1]

A complete pelvic exenteration involves resection of the distal sigmoid colon, rectum, and anus along with the bladder, seminal vesicles, prostate, and urethra in males or the uterus, ovaries, vagina, bladder, and urethra in females. In females, partial pelvic exenterations can be performed as a modified procedure consisting of anterior resection of the gynecologic and urologic structures with preservation of the rectum and anus or posterior resection of the gastrointestinal and gynecologic structures with preservation of the bladder and urethra when indicated.

Pelvic exenteration was initially described in 1948 for the palliative management of recurrent cervical carcinoma.[2][1] High surgical mortalities and poor survival outcomes in the 1940s and early 1950s limited the enthusiasm for these radical resections during the latter half of the 20th century. Medical advances involving anesthesia, transfusions, imaging, critical care, and surgical techniques have combined to allow pelvic exenteration to be performed with greater safety and improved outcomes.[3] In the 1950s and 1960s, the indications for pelvic exenteration were extended beyond palliative resections of cervical cancer and currently include curative resection of locally advanced cancers involving contiguous structures (eg, rectal, ovarian, vulvar, prostate, and pelvic sarcomas and melanomas).[4][5] A nonmalignant indication for pelvic exenteration includes radiation necrosis.[3][6][7] The primary contraindication for pelvic exenteration is the inability to achieve clear surgical margins free of malignancy (R0) in a well-informed patient. Because of the postoperative morbidity that may accompany the procedure, there is generally an unspoken consensus that exenteration should be offered only with resectable disease and with curative intent.[8]

Most cases are performed via laparotomy. However, traditional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic approaches are becoming more common.[9] Complications of pelvic exenteration include anastomotic leaks, enteric fistulas, abscesses, fistulas, and urologic injury. Pelvic exenteration is now performed more for recurrent disease than primary tumor resections.

Anatomy and Physiology

Embryologic studies by Hockel identified urinary, genital, and digestive tract components to have a common origin in the "morphogenetic unit" of the pelvis. The 3 units separate with their associated vascular supply, mesenteries, and lymphatic drainage. The rectum, anus, and mesorectum originate from the hindgut. The Mullerian morphogenetic unit forms the Fallopian tubes, mesosalpinx, uterine corpus and cervix, mesometrium, proximal vagina, and mesocolpium. The distal ureters, urinary bladder, urethra, and distal vagina arise from the urogenital sinus and Wolf ducts. Initially, these separate units provide a natural barrier for the extension of a neoplasm to adjacent structures. Current oncologic surgical guidelines identify the importance of removing the entire unit, including the meso-viscera. According to Hockel's studies, radical compartmentalized surgery requires an en-bloc resection of the unit with affected viscera. Removal of 2 or more morphogenetic units represents an ultraradical compartmentalized surgery or pelvic exenteration.[10]

Current radical surgery expands the posterior compartment to include the sacrum with the rectum when necessary to achieve a complete (R0) resection. Likewise, the extension of an anterior compartment neoplasm might incorporate the pubic bone. The lateral extension of a pelvic neoplasm can require excision of the lateral compartment involving the vascular, neurologic, and muscular structures of the pelvic sidewall.[11]

Indications

Symptoms related to advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancies include intractable pain, bleeding, sepsis, obstruction, and fistula formations. Some symptoms can also be related to prior radiation therapy. The primary indication for pelvic exenteration is locally advanced carcinoma, both primary and recurrent. These lesions involve the contiguous pelvic organs or adjacent anatomy, including the pelvic sidewall, neurovascular structures, or the bony sacral or pubic components of the pelvis. The goal is to achieve a complete oncologic (R0) resection indicated by the absence of malignancy involving the resection margins.[3] Radical resection is meant to afford the patient a reasonable chance of cure, up to 63%.[3][1] The most important factor in predicting survival and quality of life for these advanced malignancies is an R0 resection.[12]

Historically, the triad of unilateral hydronephrosis, leg edema, and sciatic leg pain was indicative of unresectable pelvic sidewall disease. Extra-anatomic resections are now being performed with advanced preoperative planning utilizing pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) angiograms, or CT venograms with R0 rates of 66.5%.[8]

Contraindications

The primary contraindication for pelvic exenteration is preoperative certainty that clear surgical margins free of malignancy (R0) will not be achievable in a patient well-informed of this risk. Because of the postoperative morbidity associated with pelvic exenteration, generally, exenteration should only be offered to patients with resectable disease and with a curative intent.[8] The palliative approach has not demonstrated improved quality of life but has modestly prolonged survival.[13] However, there is limited evidence on the quality of life following palliative pelvic exenteration. Therefore, it should be reserved for select individuals. Though the role of pelvic exenteration for palliative intent is not well defined, some consider patients with uncontrolled fistulas, fungating tumors, and intractable pain to be reasonable exceptions.[4][14]

The role of pelvic exenteration in patients with metastatic disease is also unknown. In general, pelvic exenteration should not be offered to patients who would not be candidates for adjuvant chemotherapy within conventional time frames following pelvic exenteration due to the anticipated prolonged recovery interval.[8]

Preparation

Pelvic exenteration is a major multi-visceral operative procedure with significant risks of morbidity and mortality. Preoperative evaluation of the patient should proceed with the gravity of the procedure as a guide. Cystoscopy, vaginal examination, and lower GI endoscopy are usually necessary to establish a diagnosis and to determine the extent of pelvic visceral involvement. For patients being considered for pelvic exenteration related to malignancy, histologic confirmation is imperative. The primary evaluation goals are to confirm the absence of metastatic disease and assess the patient's fitness to withstand an extended operative procedure with significant blood loss and fluid shifts.

CT scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis, along with positron emission tomography (PET) scans, are instrumental in searching for possible metastatic lesions. Open or directed biopsies are necessary for the pathologic review of suspicious abnormalities. High-resolution pelvic MRI is valuable to define the local extension of the lesion to adjacent pelvic structures.[8] Along with the MRI, CT arteriography and venogram are often beneficial to planning the pelvic resection to achieve R0 margins. Data has shown that PET/CT scans can alter treatment decisions in up to 40% of cases.[15][16][17]

Medical specialists are crucial in evaluating and optimizing the patient's cardiopulmonary reserve before undergoing pelvic exenteration. Potential extensive blood loss, fluid shifts, and surgical stress should be anticipated. Anesthesiology clinicians perform evaluations to determine the appropriate general and regional techniques to be employed. Adequate blood components should be secured and available for the procedure. Surgical specialists and critical care physicians continue to be responsible for different aspects of patient care during the postoperative phase.[18] With a multi-visceral resection, multiple surgical teams are frequently required and may remain on standby for all contingencies that can be anticipated. However, the lead surgeon develops the final surgery plan to resect the lesion with R0 margins completely.

Once a surgical plan is finalized, the enterostomal therapist must educate and mark the patient for needed ostomies. Physical therapists are involved with preconditioning therapy and planning postoperative recovery. Furthermore, patients needing pelvic exenteration are frequently malnourished. Therefore, total parenteral nutrition may be initiated before surgery and continued postoperatively after the return of adequate bowel function.[19] Attention should also be directed toward evaluating the patient's physical condition to tolerate pelvic exenteration. Determining the potential for a curative resection is also central to the planning. The healthcare team members must also assess the patient's psychosocial ability to tolerate pelvic exenteration, a prolonged recovery, and changes in self-image.

Patients undergoing pelvic exenteration are at high risk for pulmonary embolism. Mechanical compression devices are frequently utilized for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis without the increased risk of bleeding that anticoagulants have. However, chemical prophylaxis should be individualized, with surgeons weighing the risks of intraoperative bleeding against the risk of a significant pulmonary embolism.[17]

Technique or Treatment

The patient is situated on the operating room table in a semi-lithotomy position, most commonly elevating and spreading the legs with Allen stirrups, which allow the abdomen and perineum to be prepped and accessed. Visualization of the pelvis is facilitated by placing the operating room table in the head-down (ie, Trendelenburg) position. Surgical exploration is performed through a midline incision. A thorough exploration of the abdominal cavity is performed to exclude any metastasis beyond the anticipated extent of pelvic resection, including evaluation of the liver, spleen, gastrointestinal viscera, omentum, and peritoneal surfaces.

Dissection is initiated by incising the peritoneum overlying the iliac vessels and mobilizing the node-bearing tissue medially to include it with the specimen. The arterial iliac branches to the specimen are ligated along with the cardinal ligament in females. The peritoneum of the anterior bladder is incised to mobilize the bladder posterior with the specimen. Each ureter is ligated proximal to the tumor and preserved to reestablish urinary outflow. In males, the anterior dissection is carried to the pelvic floor to mobilize the prostate, and the urethra is ligated. In females, the dissection is also carried down to the pelvic floor and terminated at the urethra and vagina. Posteriorly, the inferior mesenteric pedicle is ligated at or above the aortic bifurcation. The sigmoid mesentery is divided, preserving the remaining blood supply, and the sigmoid colon is transected in preparation for a colostomy. The rectum is mobilized from the presacral fascia posteriorly to ensure a total mesorectal excision beyond the tip of the coccyx. The dissection is continued bilaterally along the fascia of the pelvic sidewalls until the rectum and vagina or prostate are fully mobilized to the pelvic floor. To complete the resection, the remaining perineal attachments are excised. An elliptical incision is made on each side of the anus, beginning just anterior to the coccyx. The anterior extent of the incision is carried across the perineum at the base of the scrotum in males or incorporating the vaginal introitus up to the clitoris in females. The soft tissues are then divided down to the pelvic floor musculature. The pelvic floor is divided from the coccyx to the ischial tuberosities at the lateral extent and anterior to the urethral hiatus. The specimen, including the rectum, anus, vagina or prostate, and bladder, can be passed from the operative field as an en-bloc resection.

Reconstruction following the resection is extensive. The pelvic floor defect can be closed with either a polypropylene mesh and covered with local soft tissue mobilization (eg, the omentum), or the defect can be closed with a rectus abdominus myocutaneous flap. Occasionally, gracilis myocutaneous flaps can be used to reconstruct the pelvic floor or create a neovagina. Vaginal reconstruction is also performed with skin grafts or an isolated segment of the bowel. For urinary outflow, a segment of vascularized ileum is isolated from the distal small bowel. Bowel continuity is restored with a proximal to distal segment enteroenterostomy. The ureters are implanted into the isolated segment of the ileum. The resulting ileal conduit (ie, Bricker pouch) is "matured" by everting the right lower quadrant abdominal wall defect and suturing the edges to the skin, creating a urostomy. A continent urostomy has been popularized using the transverse colon and ileocecum. The transverse colon is fashioned as a pouch, and the ureters are implanted. Either the residual terminal ileum or appendix is matured to the skin. The patient periodically catheterizes the stoma to evacuate urine. An additional advantage of the continent conduit is that the transverse colon is relatively spared from radiation, reducing the risk of urinary fistulas.[20] The reconstruction is completed by maturing the proximal sigmoid colon to the skin via a left lower quadrant abdominal wall defect.

The urinary structures are preserved in a partial or posterior pelvic exenteration in a female. The uterus and vagina are mobilized from the bladder in the anterior plane. The anterior dissection is carried to the pelvic floor, and the perineal excision preserves a cuff of the vagina at the urethral orifice to facilitate urinary outflow. For a partial or anterior pelvic exenteration in a female, the bladder and gynecologic structures are resected en bloc while preserving the rectum and anus. The perineal excision is carried out anterior to the anus with complete excision of the vaginal introitus.

For locally advanced tumors involving the pelvic sidewalls, the internal iliac artery, and vein can be ligated and divided to access the extra-fascial plane lateral to these structures.[21] The locally advanced disease might also necessitate resection of an involved sacrum or pubis. Additional variations of pelvic exenteration involve the preservation of the pelvic floor. When adequate tumor margins can be obtained without resecting the pelvic floor musculature, the rectum and the vagina can be divided and closed above the pelvic floor. When the anal sphincter can be preserved, bowel continuity can be restored with either a low anterior or coloanal anastomosis with a temporary diverting loop ileostomy for protection. 

Complex multi-visceral and extended resections during a pelvic exenteration are associated with prolonged operative times ranging from 5 to 14 hours and substantial blood loss.[3] The technique for robotic pelvic exenteration procedures has been described, and the goals are the same as an open procedure.[9][22][23]

Complications

Currently, morbidity related to pelvic exenteration ranges from 20% to 80%.[8] In a pooled study, the median in-hospital morbidity was 53.6%; the median hospital stay was 22 days, ranging from 8 to 51 days; and the in-hospital mortality was 6.3% on average, ranging from 0% to 66.7%.[4]

In preoperative radiation and revision surgery, urologic morbidity is high, between 9% and 24%, with urinary leak rates of 7% to 16%.[3] The anastomotic leak rate has been reported as 6% for patients with gastrointestinal anastomosis of all types.[24] The leak rate for low anterior colon anastomoses is as high as 54%.[25] Pelvic abscesses and enteric fistulas have been noted in up to 15% of patients with an empty, irradiated pelvis.[26] Techniques using the omentum to suspend the bowel and ileal conduit out of the pelvis or fill the pelvis have reduced the abscesses and fistulas.[27][28] Up to one-third of pelvic exenteration patients require further interventions to manage complications.[29] [30][31] To address the complications related to sepsis and malnutrition, policies to include 5 days of post-operative antibiotics and total parenteral nutrition until the return of gastrointestinal function have been adopted.[8]

Clinical Significance

Since the mid-1900s, when the mortality for pelvic exenteration was approximately 23%, mortalities are now as low as 1% to 2% in specialized centers.[8] The most critical factor for long-term survival following pelvic exenteration is achieving an R0 resection.[29] For patients with advanced primary or recurrent pelvic malignancies, surgical resection is the only potentially curative intervention. Across various primary pathologies, a 3-year survival of ≥50% was achieved with R0 resections. R0 resections can be achieved in approximately 70% of appropriately selected patients.[29] In a 30-year review, pelvic exenteration is now being performed more for recurrent disease as opposed to primary tumor resections.[24]

The use of pelvic exenteration for advanced cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancers has diminished secondary to improved primary malignancy responsiveness to current chemoradiation techniques.[20] For palliative pelvic exenteration, the in-hospital mortality has been demonstrated to be 6.3%, with a median overall survival of 14 months.[4] Due to high morbidity rates and limited overall survival, pelvic exenteration for palliative intent remains controversial. Studies have also only demonstrated limited evidence of symptom control and improved quality of life. Controversial data has shown the quality of life with palliative pelvic exenteration compared to patients with rapidly enhanced quality of life over 2 to 9 months following curative surgery.[4] Minimally invasive techniques associated with pelvic exenteration are continuing to develop. Studies have demonstrated that minimally invasive approaches are feasible for pelvic exenteration, resulting in less intraoperative blood loss and shorter hospital stays; however, extensive studies are unavailable.[32]

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes

Specialized tertiary care centers that perform pelvic exenteration have been demonstrated to achieve improved long-term survival and surgical outcomes.[29] Pelvic exenteration is a major surgical undertaking for the patient and surgical team. Specialized support is required from radiology, anesthesia, chronic pain specialists, oncologists, and critical care physicians. Allied health specialty support is needed for physical therapy and enterostomal therapy. To prepare for the prolonged recovery with home health or rehabilitation medicine, coordination with the hospital administration and social services is paramount. Physicians who perform pelvic exenterations either alone or as members of a team include general surgeons, oncologic surgeons, colon and rectal surgeons, gynecologists, gynecologic oncology surgeons, urologists, plastic surgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and neurosurgeons.

Pelvic exenteration is a complex operative procedure for patients with advanced primary or recurrent malignancies or complications related to the prior treatment for pelvic malignancies. These complex and varied procedures are individualized for each patient’s special needs. Thus, pelvic exenteration does not lend itself to standard controlled trials for the evaluation of management and outcomes. The PelvEx Collaborative has been established to provide a large volume of “real world” data that allows studies to improve outcomes related to exenterative surgery.[29] Over 100 international specialized units across 5 continents are contributing standardized data for ongoing studies. To date, the PelvEx Collaborative is responsible for 8 publications.[33][34][35][36][37]

Review Questions

• Access free multiple choice questions on this topic.
• Comment on this article.

References

1.

Lampe B, Luengas-Würzinger V, Weitz J, Roth S, Rawert F, Schuler E, Classen-von Spee S, Fix N, Baransi S, Dizdar A, Mallmann P, Schaser KD, Bogner A. Opportunities and Limitations of Pelvic Exenteration Surgery. Cancers (Basel). 2021 Dec 07;13(24) [PMC free article: PMC8699210] [PubMed: 34944783]

2.

Harris CA, Solomon MJ, Heriot AG, Sagar PM, Tekkis PP, Dixon L, Pascoe R, Dobbs BR, Frampton CM, Harji DP, Kontovounisios C, Austin KK, Koh CE, Lee PJ, Lynch AC, Warrier SK, Frizelle FA. The Outcomes and Patterns of Treatment Failure After Surgery for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer. Ann Surg. 2016 Aug;264(2):323-9. [PubMed: 26692078]

3.

Brown KGM, Solomon MJ, Koh CE. Pelvic Exenteration Surgery: The Evolution of Radical Surgical Techniques for Advanced and Recurrent Pelvic Malignancy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017 Jul;60(7):745-754. [PubMed: 28594725]

4.

PelvEx Collaborative. Palliative pelvic exenteration: A systematic review of patient-centered outcomes. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019 Oct;45(10):1787-1795. [PubMed: 31255441]

5.

Lee PJ, Meshkat B, Sasidharan P, Zahid A, Coker DJ, Solomon MJ. Survival and morbidity outcomes after pelvic exenteration for pelvic sarcoma: an institutional series. ANZ J Surg. 2022 May;92(5):1038-1043. [PubMed: 34661958]

6.

He YJ, Zhou ZL, Qin QY, Huang BJ, Huang XY, Li JM, Zhu MM, Yao B, Wang DJ, Qiu JG, Wang H, Ma TH. [Pelvic exenteration for late complications of radiation-induced pelvic injury: a preliminary study]. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2023 Oct 25;26(10):940-946. [PubMed: 37849264]

7.

Saqib SU, Raza MZ, Twigg J, Altan O, Bajwa AA. Feasibility of robotic platform to perform R0 resection for locally advanced multi-visceral pelvic malignancy: an institutional experience on outcomes of robotic pelvic exenteration. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 Dec 16;409(1):9. [PubMed: 38102305]

8.

Koh CE, Solomon MJ, Brown KG, Austin K, Byrne CM, Lee P, Young JM. The Evolution of Pelvic Exenteration Practice at a Single Center: Lessons Learned from over 500 Cases. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017 Jun;60(6):627-635. [PubMed: 28481857]

9.

Cianci S, Arcieri M, Vizzielli G, Martinelli C, Granese R, La Verde M, Fagotti A, Fanfani F, Scambia G, Ercoli A. Robotic Pelvic Exenteration for Gynecologic Malignancies, Anatomic Landmarks, and Surgical Steps: A Systematic Review. Front Surg. 2021;8:790152. [PMC free article: PMC8669266] [PubMed: 34917648]

10.

Bacalbasa N, Balescu I. Pelvic exenteration--reconsidering the procedure. J Med Life. 2015 Apr-Jun;8(2):146-9. [PMC free article: PMC4392106] [PubMed: 25866569]

11.

Lau YC, Jongerius K, Wakeman C, Heriot AG, Solomon MJ, Sagar PM, Tekkis PP, Frizelle FA. Influence of the level of sacrectomy on survival in patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2019 Mar;106(4):484-490. [PubMed: 30648734]

12.

Young JM, Badgery-Parker T, Masya LM, King M, Koh C, Lynch AC, Heriot AG, Solomon MJ. Quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes following exenteration for pelvic malignancy. Br J Surg. 2014 Feb;101(3):277-87. [PubMed: 24420909]

13.

Quyn AJ, Solomon MJ, Lee PM, Badgery-Parker T, Masya LM, Young JM. Palliative Pelvic Exenteration: Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Life. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016 Nov;59(11):1005-1010. [PubMed: 27749474]

14.

Beyond TME Collaborative. Consensus statement on the multidisciplinary management of patients with recurrent and primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes. Br J Surg. 2013 Jul;100(8):E1-33. [PubMed: 23901427]

15.

Kim SR, Lee YY, Brar H, Albert A, Covens A, Metser U, May T. Utility of 18F-FDG-PET/CT imaging in patients with recurrent gynecological malignancies prior to pelvic exenteration. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2019 Mar 28; [PubMed: 30923081]

16.

Johnstone CSH, Roberts D, Mathieson S, Steffens D, Koh CE, Solomon MJ, McLachlan AJ. Pain, pain management and related outcomes following pelvic exenteration surgery: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis. 2023 Apr;25(4):562-572. [PubMed: 36572393]

17.

Persson P, Chong P, Steele CW, Quinn M. Prevention and management of complications in pelvic exenteration. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2022 Nov;48(11):2277-2283. [PubMed: 35101315]

18.

Drami I, Lord AC, Sarmah P, Baker RP, Daniels IR, Boyle K, Griffiths B, Mohan HM, Jenkins JT. Preoperative assessment and optimisation for pelvic exenteration in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer: A review. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2022 Nov;48(11):2250-2257. [PubMed: 34922810]

19.

Lyell NJ, Kitano M, Smith B, Gleisner AL, Backes FJ, Cheng G, McCarter MD, Abdel-Misih S, Jones EL. The effect of preoperative nutritional status on postoperative complications and overall survival in patients undergoing pelvic exenteration: A multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional cohort study. Am J Surg. 2019 Aug;218(2):275-280. [PubMed: 30982571]

20.

Sevin BU, Koechli OR. Pelvic exenteration. Surg Clin North Am. 2001 Aug;81(4):771-9. [PubMed: 11551124]

21.

Austin KK, Solomon MJ. Pelvic exenteration with en bloc iliac vessel resection for lateral pelvic wall involvement. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009 Jul;52(7):1223-33. [PubMed: 19571697]

22.

Williams M, Perera M, Nouhaud FX, Coughlin G. Robotic pelvic exenteration and extended pelvic resections for locally advanced or synchronous rectal and urological malignancy. Investig Clin Urol. 2021 Jan;62(1):111-120. [PMC free article: PMC7801165] [PubMed: 33381928]

23.

Chang TP, Chok AY, Tan D, Rogers A, Rasheed S, Tekkis P, Kontovounisios C. The Emerging Role of Robotics in Pelvic Exenteration Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review. J Clin Med. 2021 Apr 05;10(7) [PMC free article: PMC8038538] [PubMed: 33916490]

24.

Waters PS, Peacock O, Warrier SK, Wakeman C, Eglinton T, Lynch AC, Frizelle FA, Heriot AG, McCormick J. Evolution of pelvic exenteration surgery- resectional trends and survival outcomes over three decades. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019 Dec;45(12):2325-2333. [PubMed: 31303376]

25.

Husain A, Curtin J, Brown C, Chi D, Hoskins W, Poynor E, Alektiar K, Barakat R. Continent urinary diversion and low-rectal anastomosis in patients undergoing exenterative procedures for recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2000 Aug;78(2):208-11. [PubMed: 10926804]

26.

CLARK DG, DANIEL WW, BRUNSCHWIG A. Intestinal fistulas following pelvic exenteration. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1962 Jul 15;84:187-91. [PubMed: 13879675]

27.

Valle G, Ferraris G. Use of the omentum to contain the intestines in pelvic exenteration. Obstet Gynecol. 1969 Jun;33(6):772-5. [PubMed: 5770549]

28.

Schoenberg HW, Mikuta JJ. Technique for preventing urinary fistulas following pelvic exenteration and ureteroileostomy. J Urol. 1973 Sep;110(3):294-5. [PubMed: 4725729]

29.

PelvExCollaborative. Pelvic Exenteration for Advanced Nonrectal Pelvic Malignancy. Ann Surg. 2019 Nov;270(5):899-905. [PubMed: 31634184]

30.

Vigneswaran HT, Schwarzman LS, Madueke IC, David SM, Nordenstam J, Moreira D, Abern MR. Morbidity and Mortality of Total Pelvic Exenteration for Malignancy in the US. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 May;28(5):2790-2800. [PubMed: 33105501]

31.

Kazi M, Rohila J, Kumar NA, Bankar S, Engineer R, Desouza A, Saklani A. Urinary reconstruction following total pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer: complications and factors affecting outcomes. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021 Mar;406(2):329-337. [PubMed: 33527204]

32.

PelvEx Collaborative. Minimally invasive surgery techniques in pelvic exenteration: a systematic and meta-analysis review. Surg Endosc. 2018 Dec;32(12):4707-4715. [PubMed: 30019221]

33.

PelvEx Collaborative. Surgical and Survival Outcomes Following Pelvic Exenteration for Locally Advanced Primary Rectal Cancer: Results From an International Collaboration. Ann Surg. 2019 Feb;269(2):315-321. [PubMed: 28938268]

34.

PelvEx Collaborative. Factors affecting outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2018 May;105(6):650-657. [PubMed: 29529336]

35.

PelvEx Collaborative. Changing outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. BJS Open. 2019 Aug;3(4):516-520. [PMC free article: PMC6677093] [PubMed: 31388644]

36.

PelvEx Collaborative. Management strategies for patients with advanced rectal cancer and liver metastases using modified Delphi methodology: results from the PelvEx Collaborative. Colorectal Dis. 2020 Sep;22(9):1184-1188. [PubMed: 32043753]

37.

PelvEx Collaborative. Simultaneous pelvic exenteration and liver resection for primary rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: results from the PelvEx Collaborative. Colorectal Dis. 2020 Oct;22(10):1258-1262. [PubMed: 32294308]

Disclosure: W Grimes declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Charles Dunton declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Michael Stratton declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.