ArticleThe British journal of surgery2025
Long-term survival and quality of life in patients more than 10 years after pelvic exenteration.
Article in The British journal of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exenterative Surgery in Advanced Pelvic Cancer: Survival Outcomes and an Exploratory Predictive Modeling Framework for Surgical Decision Support.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Patient experience after pelvic exenteration: chronic pain and quality of life.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Resecting Beyond the Central Pelvic Compartment in Pelvic Exenterations for Gynaecological Malignancies: Outcomes From a Tertiary Unit.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Article
- Living After Pelvic Exenteration: A Mixed-Methods Synthesis of Quality-of-Life Outcomes and Patient Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPelvic exenteration is a curative treatment option for selected patients with advanced primary or recurrent pelvic cancer. This study aimed to evaluate survival and quality-of-life outcomes beyond 10 and up to 17 years following pelvic exenteration.
methodThis longitudinal study included patients who underwent pelvic exenteration between 2008 and 2014. Quality of life was assessed using Short-Form Survey (SF-36v2) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Cancer (FACT-C) questionnaires at 10 different time points from baseline up to 17 years following pelvic exenteration. Survival data were obtained through registry linkage, with outcomes analysed using Kaplan-Meier methods.
resultsOf the 273 patients included (median age 61.0 years, 59.3% male), 91 (33%) survived beyond 10 years. Median overall survival was 4.8 years (95% c.i. = 3.6 to 6.0), with survival rates of 48.4%, 35.1%, and 31.5% at 5, 10, and 15 years respectively. In the 216/273 (79.1%) patients who consented to participate in quality-of-life surveys, 32 (15%) completed surveys beyond 10 years. FACT-C scores showed steady improvement over the first 18 months, maintaining thereafter. Mental Component Summary scores approached population norms after initial improvement, while Physical Component Summary scores stayed within the population norm and remained stable throughout the follow-up period.
conclusionIn a specialized setting, pelvic exenteration shows promising long-term outcomes with one-third of patients surviving beyond 10 years. Quality-of-life measures demonstrate sustained improvement and are comparable to population norms in several domains, supporting its use as a curative treatment for selected patients with advanced and recurrent pelvic malignancies.
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.