Objective: Pelvic exenteration is a radical surgery for advanced or recurrent pelvic tumors, requiring careful patient selection and a multi-disciplinary approach. Despite advancements, it remains high-risk, with limited data on outcomes. The present meta-analysis evaluates survival, mortality, and trends to clarify its role in gynecologic oncology. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in January 2025 to identify studies on pelvic exenteration outcomes for gynecologic malignancies. Studies with at least 10 patients reporting 5-year overall survival or 30-day mortality were included. Data extracted included patient and surgical characteristics, and a scoring system based on study design, sample size, and center volume was used to include high-quality studies (score ≥3). Poisson regression models were used to analyze the associations between predictors and outcomes, with results expressed as incidence rate ratios and a 95% CI. Results: A total of 46 studies involving 4417 patients met the inclusion criteria. Most patients underwent pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer (N = 3183). Positive pelvic and aortic nodal involvement were key predictors of reduced 5-year overall survival, decreasing by 3.9% and 5.9% per 1% increase in nodal positivity, respectively. Pelvic wall involvement also significantly reduced survival by 15.9%. The 30-day mortality rate was 5.1%, with sepsis (27.2%) being the leading cause of death. Peri-operative mortality decreased significantly over time, with each year of publication associated with a 2.6% decrease in incidence rate. However, pelvic sidewall involvement and total exenteration increased 30-day mortality by 11.5% and 0.7%, respectively. Conclusions: Pelvic exenteration remains a viable but high-risk option for select patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies. Pre-operative assessment and multi-disciplinary planning are essential for optimizing outcomes.

Evaluation of survival and mortality in pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies: a systematic review, meta-analyses, and meta-regression study / Di Donato, Violante; Kontopantelis, Evangelos; De Angelis, Emanuele; Arseni, Roberta Maria; Santangelo, Giusi; Cibula, David; Angioli, Roberto; Plotti, Francesco; Muzii, Ludovico; Vizzielli, Giuseppe; Tozzi, Roberto; Chiantera, Vito; Caruso, Giuseppe; Giannini, Andrea; Scambia, Giovanni; Abu-Rustum, Nadeem R; Benedetti Panici, Pierluigi; Bogani, Giorgio. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER. - ISSN 1525-1438. - 35:6(2025). [10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.101829]

Evaluation of survival and mortality in pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies: a systematic review, meta-analyses, and meta-regression study

Di Donato, Violante
;
De Angelis, Emanuele;Arseni, Roberta Maria;Santangelo, Giusi;Muzii, Ludovico;Tozzi, Roberto;Caruso, Giuseppe;Giannini, Andrea;Benedetti Panici, Pierluigi;Bogani, Giorgio
2025

Abstract

Objective: Pelvic exenteration is a radical surgery for advanced or recurrent pelvic tumors, requiring careful patient selection and a multi-disciplinary approach. Despite advancements, it remains high-risk, with limited data on outcomes. The present meta-analysis evaluates survival, mortality, and trends to clarify its role in gynecologic oncology. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in January 2025 to identify studies on pelvic exenteration outcomes for gynecologic malignancies. Studies with at least 10 patients reporting 5-year overall survival or 30-day mortality were included. Data extracted included patient and surgical characteristics, and a scoring system based on study design, sample size, and center volume was used to include high-quality studies (score ≥3). Poisson regression models were used to analyze the associations between predictors and outcomes, with results expressed as incidence rate ratios and a 95% CI. Results: A total of 46 studies involving 4417 patients met the inclusion criteria. Most patients underwent pelvic exenteration for cervical cancer (N = 3183). Positive pelvic and aortic nodal involvement were key predictors of reduced 5-year overall survival, decreasing by 3.9% and 5.9% per 1% increase in nodal positivity, respectively. Pelvic wall involvement also significantly reduced survival by 15.9%. The 30-day mortality rate was 5.1%, with sepsis (27.2%) being the leading cause of death. Peri-operative mortality decreased significantly over time, with each year of publication associated with a 2.6% decrease in incidence rate. However, pelvic sidewall involvement and total exenteration increased 30-day mortality by 11.5% and 0.7%, respectively. Conclusions: Pelvic exenteration remains a viable but high-risk option for select patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies. Pre-operative assessment and multi-disciplinary planning are essential for optimizing outcomes.
2025
cervical cancer; endometrial cancer; gynecologic; pelvic exenteration; vulvar cancer
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Evaluation of survival and mortality in pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancies: a systematic review, meta-analyses, and meta-regression study / Di Donato, Violante; Kontopantelis, Evangelos; De Angelis, Emanuele; Arseni, Roberta Maria; Santangelo, Giusi; Cibula, David; Angioli, Roberto; Plotti, Francesco; Muzii, Ludovico; Vizzielli, Giuseppe; Tozzi, Roberto; Chiantera, Vito; Caruso, Giuseppe; Giannini, Andrea; Scambia, Giovanni; Abu-Rustum, Nadeem R; Benedetti Panici, Pierluigi; Bogani, Giorgio. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER. - ISSN 1525-1438. - 35:6(2025). [10.1016/j.ijgc.2025.101829]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
DiDonato_Evaluation_2025.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 507.13 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
507.13 kB Adobe PDF

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/11573/1741437
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact