ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2021
Primary pelvic exenteration: Our experience with 23 patients from a single institution.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Historical Evolution of Pelvic Exenteration Surgery in Gynecologic Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Brunschwig's Era versus Contemporary Practice.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Review
- Review
- A novel classification of posterior pelvic exenteration to assess prognosis in female patients with locally advanced primary rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study from China PelvEx collaborative.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Article
- Review
- Laparoscopic posterior pelvic exenteration is safe and feasible for locally advanced primary rectal cancer in female patients: a comparative study from China PelvEx collaborative.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was designed with an aim to share our experience of primary pelvic exenterations. The study included 23 patients with different types of pelvic cancer enrolled at a single institution between November 2011 and July 2020. The patient mean age was 55 years (range, 43-72 years) and the oncological indications included: Stage IVa cervical cancer (11 cases, 48.9%), stage IVa endometrial cancer (1 case, 4.3%), stage IVa vaginal cancer (6 cases, 26%), stage IIIb bladder cancer (3 cases, 13%), stage IIIc rectal cancer (1 case, 4.3%) and undifferentiated pelvic sarcoma (1 case, 4.3%). Total, anterior, and posterior pelvic exenterations were performed on 34.4, 56.5 and 13% of cases, respectively. Related to levator ani muscle, 13 (56.5%) pelvic exenterations were supralevatorian, 10 (43.5%) infralevatorian, and 5 (21.7%) were infralevatorian with vulvectomy. No major intraoperative complications occurred. Seven patients (30.5%) developed early complications, 4 of them (17.4%) required reoperation and 1 (4.3%) perioperative death caused by a pulmonary embolism was recorded. Only 1 patient experienced a late complication, a urostomy stenosis. Over a median follow-up period of 35 months, 8 (34.8%) patients died. The median overall survival (OS) was 33 months (range, 1-96 months). The 2-year and 5-year survival rates were 72 and 66%, respectively. Primary pelvic exenteration may be related with various postoperative complications, without high perioperative morality and with long-term survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.