Outcome of Patients with Cervical and Vaginal Stump Carcinomas Treated with More Conservative Surgical Approaches: a 9-Year Experience of a Tertiary Oncology Center

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 8 - Trang 267-273 - 2017
Mohamed Hegazy1, Ashraf Khater1, Mohamed Awad2, Sherif Kotb1, Waleed Elnahas1, Sameh Roshdy1, Osama Eldamshety1, Fayez Shahatto1, Omar Farouk1, Emadeldeen Hamed1, Refaat Hegazi3, Ola T. Abdel Dayem4, Anas M. Gamal5
1Department of Surgical Oncology, Oncology Center- Mansoura University, Egypt (OCMU), Mansoura, Egypt
2Department of Medical Oncology, Oncology Center- Mansoura University, Egypt (OCMU), Mansoura, Egypt
3Department of Preventive Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
4Departments of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Tóm tắt

The surgical management of stump carcinoma includes the gold standard pelvic exenteration and more conservative approaches. This study aimed to investigate the outcome among a cohort of vaginal and cervical stump carcinomas that were treated with an intent of organ preservation. This is a prospective study of 60 patients with a biopsy confirmed stump carcinomas at a tertiary care oncology center in Egypt. The demographic, surgical, and pathological data were collected and patients underwent radical surgery with an intent of organ preservation guided by margin negativity. The pathologic data were correlated with the postoperative mortality. Correlation coefficients were calculated for simple correlation and regression analysis was used to investigate the independent predictors of survival. Pelvic exenteration was conducted in 30/60 (50%), while wide local excision with safety margins was possible in 26/60 (43%) and in two cases, resection was precluded. Mean hospital stay in days was 19 ± 9 (range 4–61). Overall operative morbidity was 83.3% (50/60). Perioperative mortality was 6.7% (4/60). Five-year disease-free survival was 40% (24/60). Five-year overall survival was 50% (30/60). The resection margin status and the perioperative therapy were independent prognostic factors of DFS (p = 0.003 and 0.02, respectively. Only the resection margin status was significantly associated with overall survival (p = 0.009). There was no increased mortality with introduction of more conservative surgical approaches. The resection margin status is the most important determinant of recurrence free and overall survivals.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Boyd SC, Look KY (2001) Prognostic factors for carcinoma of the cervical stump and cervical carcinoma associated with pregnancy. CME Journal of Gynecologic Oncology 6:347–356 Gibbons SK, Keys HM (1996) Special situations in the management of early cervical cancer. In: Rubin SC, Hoskins WJ (eds) Cervical cancer and preinvasive neoplasia. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 259–260 Brunschwig A (1948) Complete excision of pelvic viscera for advanced carcinoma. Cancer 1:177–183 Berek JS, Howe C, Lagasse LD, Hacker NF (2005) Pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic malignancy: survival and morbidity analysis of the 45-year experience at UCLA. Gynecol Oncol 99:153–159 Bramhall SR, Harrison JD, Burton A, Wallace DMA, Chan KK, Harrison G et al (1999) Phase II trial of radical surgery for locally advanced pelvic neoplasia. Br J Surg 86(6):805–812 Moore DH, Blessing JA, McQuellon RP, Thaler HT, Cella D, Benda J et al (2004) Phase III study of cisplatin with or without paclitaxel in stage IVB, recurrent, or persistent squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 22(15):3113–3119 McQuellon RP, Thaler HT, Cella D, Moore DH (2006) Quality of life (QOL) outcomes from a randomized trial of cisplatin versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel in advanced cervical cancer: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol 101(2):296–304 Hatch KD, Berek JS (2005) Pelvic exenteration. In: Berek JS, Hacker NF, editors. Practical gynecologic oncology. 4th ed. Philadelphia’ Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, p 801–16 Ungar L, Palfalvi L, Novak Z (2008) Primary pelvic exenteration in cervical cancer patients. Gynecol Oncol 111:S9–S12 Fleisch MC, Pantke P, Beckmann MW, Schnuerch HG, Ackermann R, Grimm MO, Bender HG, Dall P (2007) Predictors for long-term survival after interdisciplinary salvage surgery for advanced or recurrent gynecologic cancers. J Surg Oncol 95(6):476–484 Maggioni A, Roviglione G, Landoni F, Zanagnolo V, Peiretti M, Colombo N, Bocciolone L, Biffi R, Minig L, Morrow CP (2009) Pelvic exenteration: ten-year experience at the European Institute of Oncology in Milan. Gynecol Oncol 114(1):64–68 Kaur M, Joniau S, D'Hoore A, Van Calster B, Van Limbergen E, Leunen K, Penninckx F, Van Poppel H, Amant F, Vergote I (2012) Pelvic exenterations for gynecological malignancies: a study of 36 cases. Int J Gynecol Cancer 22(5):889–896 Ferenschild FT, Vermaas M, Verhoef C, Ansink AC, Kirkels WJ, Eggermont AM, de Wilt JH (2009) Total pelvic exenteration for primary and recurrent malignancies. World J Surg 33(7):1502–1508 Marnitz S, Köhler C, Müller M, Behrens K, Hasenbein K, Schneider A (2006) Indications for primary and secondary exenterations in patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 103:1023–1030 Roos EJ, Van Eijkeren MA, Boon TA, Heintz AP (2005) Pelvic exenteration as treatment of recurrent or advanced gynecologic and urologic cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 15:624–629 Sharma S, Odunsi K, Driscoll D, Lele S (2005) Pelvic exenterations for gynecological malignancies: twenty-year experience at Roswell Park Cancer Institute. Int J Gynecol Cancer 15:475–482 Yoo HJ, Lim MC, Seo SS, Kang S, Yoo CW, Kim JY, Park SY (2012) Pelvic exenteration for recurrent cervical cancer: ten-year experience at National Cancer Center in Korea. J Gynecol Oncol 23(4):242–250 Jäger L, Nilsson PJ, Rådestad AF (2013) Pelvic exenteration for recurrent gynecologic malignancy: a study of 28 consecutive patients at a single institution. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23(Issue 4):755–762