Background Pelvic exenteration is the only radical treatment for locally advanced (ARC) or recurrent (RRC) rectal cancers. The long-term results of the procedure are variably reported in the literature, with recent series suggesting similar survival between ARC and RRC. The study aimed to analyze and compare the long-term survival and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for ARC and RRC in a tertiary center. Materials and methods This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Comparison of variables was performed using Chi-square, Fisher's exact or Wilcoxon rank sum test as appropriate. The Kaplan Meier method was used to analyze the disease-free survival (DFS) and the log-rank test to compare the two groups. Results Since 2002, 46 patients underwent pelvic exenteration for ARC (28, 60.9%) and RRC (18, 39.1%). The groups had comparable characteristics, perioperative results, including postoperative complications, and rate of adjuvant chemotherapy. A R0 resection was obtained in 71.4% and 55.6% (p 0.41) and a T4 stage was diagnosed in 75% and 94.4% (p 0.22) of ARC and RRC patients, respectively. After a median follow-up time of 32.5 and 56.6 months (p 0.01), the 5-year DFS was significantly lower in the RRC group (23.6 vs 46.2%, p 0.006), even after exclusion of R1 cases (30 vs 54.5%, p 0.044). Conclusion The long-term disease free survival of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration is significantly worse when the procedure is performed for RRC, regardless of the tumor involvement of the resection margins.

Rottoli, M., Vallicelli, C., Boschi, L., Poggioli, G. (2017). Outcomes of pelvic exenteration for recurrent and primary locally advanced rectal cancer. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 48, 69-73 [10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.09.069].

Outcomes of pelvic exenteration for recurrent and primary locally advanced rectal cancer

Rottoli, Matteo;Vallicelli, Carlo;Boschi, Luca;Poggioli, Gilberto
2017

Abstract

Background Pelvic exenteration is the only radical treatment for locally advanced (ARC) or recurrent (RRC) rectal cancers. The long-term results of the procedure are variably reported in the literature, with recent series suggesting similar survival between ARC and RRC. The study aimed to analyze and compare the long-term survival and perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for ARC and RRC in a tertiary center. Materials and methods This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Comparison of variables was performed using Chi-square, Fisher's exact or Wilcoxon rank sum test as appropriate. The Kaplan Meier method was used to analyze the disease-free survival (DFS) and the log-rank test to compare the two groups. Results Since 2002, 46 patients underwent pelvic exenteration for ARC (28, 60.9%) and RRC (18, 39.1%). The groups had comparable characteristics, perioperative results, including postoperative complications, and rate of adjuvant chemotherapy. A R0 resection was obtained in 71.4% and 55.6% (p 0.41) and a T4 stage was diagnosed in 75% and 94.4% (p 0.22) of ARC and RRC patients, respectively. After a median follow-up time of 32.5 and 56.6 months (p 0.01), the 5-year DFS was significantly lower in the RRC group (23.6 vs 46.2%, p 0.006), even after exclusion of R1 cases (30 vs 54.5%, p 0.044). Conclusion The long-term disease free survival of patients undergoing pelvic exenteration is significantly worse when the procedure is performed for RRC, regardless of the tumor involvement of the resection margins.
2017
Rottoli, M., Vallicelli, C., Boschi, L., Poggioli, G. (2017). Outcomes of pelvic exenteration for recurrent and primary locally advanced rectal cancer. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 48, 69-73 [10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.09.069].
Rottoli, Matteo; Vallicelli, Carlo; Boschi, Luca; Poggioli, Gilberto
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/612241
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 12
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact