ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2022
Posterior pelvic exenteration for ovarian cancer: surgical and oncological outcomes.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic Factors and a Predictive Nomogram of Cancer-Specific Survival of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Patients with Pelvic Exenteration Treatment.International journal of clinical practice · 2023Trial
- 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
- 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
- Application of depithelized gracilis adipofascial flap for pelvic floor reconstruction after pelvic exenteration.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Posterior pelvic exenteration, a crucial component in the surgeon's toolbox for optimizing surgical cytoreduction for advanced ovarian cancer.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePosterior pelvic exenteration (PPE) can be required to achieve complete resection in ovarian cancer (OC) patients with large pelvic disease. This study aimed to analyze morbidity, complete resection rate, and survival of PPE.
methodsNinety patients who underwent PPE in our Comprehensive Cancer Center between January 2010 and February 2021 were retrospectively identified. To analyze practice evolution, 2 periods were determined: P1 from 2010 to 2017 and P2 from 2018 to 2021.
resultsA 82.2% complete resection rate after PPE was obtained, with rectal anastomosis in 96.7% of patients. Complication rate was at 30% (grade 3 in 9 patients), without significant difference according to periods or quality of resection. In a binary logistic regression adjusted on age and stoma, only age of 51-74 years old was associated with a lower rate of complication (odds ratio=0.223; p=0.026). Median overall and disease-free survivals (OS and DFS) from initial diagnosis were 75.21 and 29.84 months, respectively. A negative impact on OS and DFS was observed in case of incomplete resection, and on DFS in case of final cytoreductive surgery (FCS: after ≥6 chemotherapy cycles). Age ≥75-years had a negative impact on DFS for new OC surgery. For patients with complete resection, OS and DFS were decreased in case of interval cytoreductive surgery and FCS in comparison with primary cytoreductive surgery.
conclusionPPE is an effective surgical measure to achieve complete resection for a majority of patients. High rate of colorectal anastomosis was achieved without any mortality, with acceptable morbidity and high protective stoma rate.
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.