The aim of this study was to explore the surgical, oncological and quality of life outcomes in the setting of radical resection of colorectal carcinoma involving major nerve resection.

A systematic review of the literature was registered with the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify papers relating to outcomes in radical resection of colorectal cancer where major nerve resection was undertaken. Papers were identified from OVID Medline, EMBASE Classic and Web of Science encompassing all publications in English from January 2010 to June 2023. A total of 1357 nonduplicate studies were identified and screened for relevance, with six studies included in the final review.

A total of 354 major nerve resections were undertaken across the six included studies. Overall postoperative morbidity was reported at rates of up to 82%. Two studies considered nerve-resection-specific oncological outcomes, with complete pathological resection achieved at rates comparable to the wider pelvic exenteration cohort (65-68%) and without any overall survival disadvantage being conveyed by major nerve resection (p = 0.78). Two studies considered functional outcomes and noted a transient decrease in physical quality of life over the first 6 months postoperatively (p = 0.041) with significant loss to follow-up. One study considered postoperative pain in nerve resection and noted no significant increase in patient-reported pain scores associated with nerve resection (p = 0.184-0.618).

Major nerve resections in locally advanced and recurrent colorectal cancer remain understudied but with encouraging initial oncological and functional outcomes. Multicentre collaborative prospective reviews are needed to better elucidate contributors to postoperative morbidity and functional deficits and further establish interventions to ameliorate them.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) involving the lateral pelvic sidewall requires a complex approach to maximize the likelihood of R0 resection, which is the only predictor of survival. The purpose of this report is to describe a novel technique to resect a localized lateral pelvic sidewall LRRC. A 63-year-old male patient was referred for a 15-mm LRRC near the right internal iliac vessels. Endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging excluded any involvement of the pelvic colon or residual rectum. A combined extraperitoneal antero-lateral approach and gluteal access were used to optimize vascular control on the internal iliac vessels, to promptly identify the ureter and to achieve a better posterior exposition of the sciatic notch. This technique allowed a controlled and tailored resection of pelvic sidewall without entering into the abdominal cavity. The postoperative course was uneventful. The pathologic report confirmed clear margins (R0), with one involving obturator lymph node. At 3 months, the patient is alive and free from local re-relapse. A right lung metastasis has occurred, and it was treated by stereotactic radiotherapy. The present report proposes a novel extraperitoneal pelvic sidewall excision to resect lateral LRRC with a colorectal-sparing approach, thus minimizing the risk of exenterative surgery-related complications. A proper selection of patients is mandatory, as the proposed technique could not be generalized as the standard of care in all lateral LRRCs.

Extended pelvic surgery with neurovascular or bony resections in gynecological oncology has significant impact on quality of life (QoL) and high morbidity. The objective of this systematic review was to provide an overview of QoL, morbidity and mortality following these procedures.

The registered PROSPERO protocol included database-specific search strategies. Studies from 1966 onwards reporting on QoL after extended pelvic surgery with neurovascular or bony resections for gynecological cancer were considered eligible. All others were excluded. Study selection (Rayyan), data extraction, rating of evidence (GRADE) and risk of bias (ROBINS-I) were performed independently by two reviewers.

Of 349 identified records, 121 patients from 11 studies were included-one prospective study, seven retrospective studies, and three case reports. All studies were of very low quality and with an overall serious risk of bias. Primary tumor location was the cervix (n = 78, 48.9%), vulva (n = 30, 18.4%), uterus (n = 21, 12.9%), endometrium (n = 15, 9.2%), ovary (n = 8, 4.9%), (neo)vagina (n = 3, 1.8%), Gartner duct/paracolpium (n = 1, 0.6%), or synchronous tumors (n = 3, 1.8%), or were not reported (n = 4, 2.5%). Bony resections included the pelvic bone (n = 36), sacrum (n = 2), and transverse process of L5 (n = 1). Margins were negative in 70 patients and positive in 13 patients. Thirty-day mortality was 1.7% (2/121). Three studies used validated QoL questionnaires and seven used non-validated measurements; all reported acceptable QoL postoperatively.

In this highly selected patient group, mortality and QoL seem to be acceptable, with a high morbidity rate. This comprehensive study will help to inform eligible patients about the outcomes of extended pelvic surgery with neurovascular or bony resections. Future collaborative studies can enable the collection of QoL data in a validated, uniform manner.

The PelvEx Collaborative collates global data on outcomes following exenterative surgery for locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LARC and LRRC, respectively). The aim of this study is to report contemporary data from within the collaborative and benchmark it against previous PelvEx publications.

Anonymized data from 45 units that performed pelvic exenteration for LARC or LRRC between 2017 and 2021 were reviewed. The primary endpoints were surgical outcomes, including resection margin status, radicality of surgery, rates of reconstruction and associated morbidity and/or mortality.

Of 2186 patients who underwent an exenteration for either LARC or LRRC, 1386 (63.4%) had LARC and 800 (36.6%) had LRRC. The proportion of males to females was 1232:954. Median age was 62 years (interquartile range 52-71 years) compared with a median age of 63 in both historical LARC and LRRC cohorts. Compared with the original reported PelvEx data (2004-2014), there has been an increase in negative margin (R0) rates from 79.8% to 84.8% and from 55.4% to 71.7% in the LARC and LRRC cohorts, respectively. Bone resection and flap reconstruction rates have increased accordingly in both cohorts (8.2%-19.6% and 22.6%-32% for LARC and 20.3%-41.9% and 17.4%-32.1% in LRRC, respectively). Despite this, major morbidity has not increased.

In the modern era, patients undergoing pelvic exenteration for advanced rectal cancer are undergoing more radical surgery and are more likely to achieve a negative resection margin (R0) with no increase in major morbidity.

Rectal tumors extending beyond the total mesorectal excision (TME) plane (beyond-TME) require particular multidisciplinary expertise and oncologic considerations when planning treatment. Imaging is used at all stages of the pathway, such as local tumor staging/restaging, creating an imaging-based "roadmap" to plan surgery for optimal tumor clearance, identifying treatment-related complications, which may be suitable for radiology-guided intervention, and to detect recurrent or metastatic disease, which may be suitable for radiology-guided ablative therapies. Beyond-TME and exenterative surgery have gained acceptance as potentially curative procedures for advanced tumors. Understanding the role, techniques, and pitfalls of current imaging techniques is important for both radiologists involved in the treatment of these patients and general radiologists who may encounter patients undergoing surveillance or patients presenting with surgical complications or intercurrent abdominal pathology. This review aims to outline the current and emerging roles of imaging in patients with beyond-TME and recurrent rectal malignancy, focusing on practical tips for image interpretation and surgical planning in the beyond-TME setting. Keywords: Abdomen/GI, Rectum, Oncology © RSNA, 2024.

Using standard anterior approaches, consistent R0 resection of locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancer involving the deep pelvic sidewall may be unattainable. Therefore, to improve R0 resection rates, we have used a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach to resection of tumors in this location.

To assess the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes of the first 10 patients operated on using this approach.

We conducted a retrospective case series review of our prospectively maintained surgical pathology and tumor registries.

This study was conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

Ten patients (6 female individuals, median age 53.5 years) with primary or recurrent anal or rectal cancer treated with a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach were identified.

The primary outcome measures were the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes.

An R0 resection was achieved in all 10 patients. Nine patients developed 1 or more 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade III complications. Nine patients developed gluteal wound complications ranging from superficial wound dehiscence to flap necrosis. During the follow-up period, 4 patients were found to have metastatic disease and 1 patient had local re-recurrence.

Small cohort with heterogeneous tumors and a short follow-up duration.

A posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach has allowed us to achieve consistent R0 resection margins in locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancers involving the deep pelvic sidewall. Poor wound healing of the posterior gluteal incision is a common complication. See Video Abstract.

ANTECEDENTES:Utilizando abordajes anteriores estándares, la resección R0 consistente del cáncer de recto y ano primario y recurrente localmente avanzado involucrando la pared lateral pélvica profunda puede ser inalcanzable. Por lo tanto, para mejorar las tasas de resección R0, hemos empleado un abordaje de 2 etapas primero posterior y luego anterior para la resección de tumores en esta ubicación.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos de los primeros 10 pacientes operados con este abordaje.DISEÑO:Realizamos una revisión retrospectiva de series de casos de nuestros registros de patología quirúrgica y tumores mantenidos prospectivamente.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en la Clínica Mayo en Rochester, Minnesota, EE. UU.PACIENTES:Se identificaron diez pacientes (6 mujeres, mediana de edad 53.5 años) con cáncer anal o rectal primario o recurrente tratados con un abordaje de dos etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las medidas de resultado primarias fueron la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos.RESULTADOS:Se logró una resección R0 en los 10 pacientes. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron una o más complicaciones de grado III de Clavien-Dindo a los 30 días. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron complicaciones de la herida del glúteo que variaron desde dehiscencia superficial de la herida hasta necrosis del colgajo. Durante el período de seguimiento, se encontró que 4 pacientes tenían enfermedad metastásica y un paciente tuvo recurrencia local.LIMITACIONES:Cohorte pequeño con tumores heterogéneos y corta duración de seguimiento.CONCLUSIÓN:Un abordaje en 2 etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior, nos ha permitido lograr márgenes de resección R0 consistentes en cánceres de recto y anal primarios y recurrentes localmente avanzados que afectan la pared lateral pélvica profunda. La mala cicatrización de la incisión glútea posterior es una complicación común. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez).

Pathological factors that influence and predict survival following pelvic exenteration (PE) for locally advanced (LARC) or locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), especially LRRC, remain poorly understood. A clear resection margin has previously been demonstrated to be of most significance.

A retrospective cohort study was performed for all patients undergoing a curative PE for LARC or LRRC between 2008 and 2021 at a tertiary referral UK specialist colorectal hospital. Cox regression analysis was planned to identify pathological factors associated with overall (OS), disease free (DFS) and local recurrence free survival (LRFS).

388 patients were included in the analysis with 256 resections for LARC and 132 for LRRC. 62.4% of patients were male with a median age of 59 years (IQR 49-67). 247 (64%) partial pelvic exenterations and 141 (36%) total pelvic exenterations performed. Overall R0 rate 86.6%. Poorly differentiated tumours and a positive resection margin independently influenced OS, DFS and LRFS on multivariate analysis in LARC. On multivariate analysis venous invasion negatively influenced DFS and poorly differentiated lesions negatively influenced LRFS in LRRC.

A positive resection margin and poorly differentiated tumours are significant negative prognostic markers for survival and recurrence in LARC. The results of this study support the need to look for alternative prognostic markers beyond that in the existing standard reporting dataset for rectal cancers. With increasing R0 rates, novel prognostic pathological markers are required to help guide treatment and surveillance for patients with LRRC.

Magnetic resonance imaging-based subdivision of the pelvis into 7 compartments has been proposed for pelvic exenteration. The aim of the present anatomical study was to describe the topographic anatomy of these compartments and define relevant landmarks and surgical dissection planes.

Pelvic anatomy as it relates to exenterative surgery is complex. Demonstration of the topographic peculiarities of the pelvis based on the operative situs is hindered by the inaccessibility of the small pelvis and the tumor bulk itself.

Thirteen formalin-fixed pelvic specimens were meticulously dissected according to predefined pelvic compartments. Pelvic exenteration was simulated and illustrated in a stepwise manner. Different access routes were used for optimal demonstration of the regions of interest.

All the 7 compartments (peritoneal reflection, anterior above peritoneal reflection, anterior below peritoneal reflection, central, posterior, lateral, inferior) were investigated systematically. The topography of the pelvic fasciae and ligaments; vessels and nerves of the bladder, prostate, uterus, and vagina; the internal iliac artery and vein; the course of the ureter, somatic (obturator nerve, sacral plexus), and autonomic pelvic nerves (inferior hypogastric plexus); pelvic sidewall and floor, ischioanal fossa; and relevant structures for sacrectomy were demonstrated.

A systematic approach to pelvic anatomy according to the 7 magnetic resonance imaging-defined compartments clearly revealed crucial anatomical landmarks and key structures facilitating pelvic exenterative surgery. Compartment-based pelvic anatomy proved to be a sound concept for beyond TME surgery and provides a basis for tailored resection procedures.

The term 'out-of-the-box surgery' in gynecologic oncology was recently coined to describe the resection of tumor growing out of the endopelvic cavity. In the specific case of pelvic sidewall involvement, a laterally extended pelvic resection may be required. As previously defined by Höckel, this resection requires the en bloc removal of structures including the pelvic sidewall muscles, bones, nerves, and/or major vessels. This complex radical procedure leads to tumor-free margins in more than 75% of the patients, with reliable functional results. The rate of recurrence and overall survival are directly correlated with clear resection margins. Progress in imaging, surgical techniques, and perioperative care currently offer the opportunity to attempt surgical curative resection in selected patients for whom palliative therapy was the only alternative. However, the procedure is associated with a high rate of major postoperative complications affecting up to 60% of patients. Multidisciplinary expert centers are the most likely to achieve this complex surgery with favorable oncological outcomes. The aim of this review is to summarize the key issues of out-of-the-box surgery in gynecologic cancer.

The pre-operative phase in planning a pelvic exenteration or extended resections is critical to optimising patient outcomes. This review summarises the key components of preoperative assessment and planning in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LLRC) being considered for potential curative resection. The preoperative period can be considered in 5 key phases: 1) Multidisciplinary meeting (MDT) review and recommendation for neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, 2) Anaesthetic preoperative assessment of fitness for surgery and quantification of risk, 3) Shared decision making with the patient and the process of informed consent, 4) Prehabilitation and physiological optimisation 5) Technical aspects of surgical planning. This review will focus on patients who have been recommended for surgery by the MDT and have completed neoadjuvant therapy. Other important considerations beyond the scope of this review are the various neoadjuvant strategies employed which in this patient group include Total Neo-adjuvant Therapy and reirradiation. Critical to improving perioperative outcomes is the dual aim of achieving a negative resection margin in a patient fit enough for extended surgery. Advanced, realistic communication is required pre-operatively and should be maintained throughout recovery. Optimising patient's physiological and psychological reserve with a preoperative prehabilitation programme is important, with physiotherapy, psychological and nutritional input. From a surgical perspective, image based technical preoperative planning is important to identify risk points and ensure correct surgical strategy. Careful attention to the entire patient journey through these 5 preoperative phases can optimise outcomes with the accumulation of marginal gains at multiple timepoints.

Retrorectal masses are abnormalities located anatomically in the retrorectal space. A significant proportion are asymptomatic with no malignant potential while others cause symptoms due to mechanical pressure or malignant infiltration. We reviewed and categorised the retrorectal masses encountered over a 30-year time period in a specialist colorectal hospital and describe our management algorithm for consideration by other multidisciplinary teams (MDT).

This was a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients referred between 1984-2019. A detailed review of clinical presentation, imaging features, postoperative histology and impact on morbidity and anorectal function is reported.

A total of 143 patients with median age of 46 years and female preponderance (74%) were reviewed. The commonest presenting symptom was pain (46%) and all malignant cases had symptoms (n = 17). Over the last decade, more asymptomatic patients have presented with a retrorectal mass (33%, p = 0.04) and more patients are opting for surveillance rather than resection (33%, p = 0.013). Increasing age and lesion size were associated with malignancy (p < 0.05). Radiological features associated with malignancy included: solid/heterogeneous component, lobulated borders or locally invasive. Following surgery, complications included chronic pain (40%), poor wound healing (23%) and bowel dysfunction (10%).

The management of retrorectal masses remains complex. There are features, both clinical and radiological, that can help determine the best management strategy. Management should be in a high-volume tertiary centre and preferably through a complex rectal cancer MDT. Long-term sequelae such as chronic pain must be highlighted to patients. We advocate the establishment of an international registry to further record and characterise these rare, potentially troublesome lesions.

Reporting of pelvic exenteration specimens for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) can be challenging for structured pathological analysis and currently, there is a lack of specific guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of pathology reporting in a cohort of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC in a high-volume tertiary unit.

In a retrospective analysis of histopathology reports of consecutive patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC from 1996 to 2018, the quality of pathology reporting was assessed using the Structure Reporting Protocol for Colorectal Cancer. The primary endpoint was the completeness of pathology reporting, secondary endpoints were the association between the reporting style (narrative versus synoptic), reporting period (the first half versus the second half), as well as the activity of the pathologists with the completeness of pathology reporting.

221 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration for LRRC were included into the study. There was a high variability in completeness of pathology reporting within the cohort, ranging from 9.5% to 100%. Notably, microscopic clearance was reported in only 92.4% of the reports. Overall, a significantly higher rate of completeness was observed in synoptic reports when compared to narrative reports and in more recent compared to earlier reports. There was no significant association between the activity of pathologists and the completeness of reporting.

This study shows a significant variability in the quality of reporting in pelvic exenteration for LRRC. The use of synoptic reporting clearly resulted in more complete reports.

This review outlines the role of pelvic exenteration (PE) in the management of certain locally-advanced primary and recurrent rectal cancers. PE has undergone significant evolution over the past decades. Advances in pre-, intra-, and post-operative care have been directed towards achieving the 'holy grail' of an R0 resection, which remains the most important predictor of survival, quality of life, morbidity, and cost effectiveness following PE. Patient selection for surgery is largely determined by assessment of resectability. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging determines the extent of local disease, while positron emission tomography remains the most accurate tool for exclusion of distant metastases. PE in the setting of metastatic disease or with palliative intent remains controversial. The intra-operative approach is based on the anatomical division of the pelvis into five compartments (anterior, central, posterior, and two lateral). Within each compartment are various possible dissection planes which are elected depending on the extent of tumour involvement. Innovations in surgical technique have allowed 'higher and wider' dissection planes with resultant en bloc excision of major vessels, major nerves, and bone. Evidence of improved R0 resection and survival rates with these techniques justifies the radicality of these novel approaches. Post-operative care for PE patients is technically demanding with a substantial hospital resource burden. Unique considerations for PE patients include the 'empty pelvis syndrome', urological complications, and management of post-operative malnutrition. While undeniably a morbid procedure, quality of life largely returns to baseline at six months, and for long-term survivors is sustained for up to five years.

A widely adopted classification system for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is currently missing, and the indication for surgery is not standardized. To evaluate all the published classification systems in a large monocentric cohort of LRRC patients, assessing their capability to predict a radical (R0) resection. A total of 152 consecutive LRRC patients treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan (NCIM) from 2009 to 2017 were classified according to Pilipshen, Mayo Clinic, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), Wanebo, Yamada, Boyle, Dutch TME Trial, Royal Marsden and National Cancer Institute of Milan (NCIM) classification systems. Central location of LRRC was significantly predictive of R0 resection across all classification systems. R + resection was predicted by the "anterior" category of MSKCC (OR 2.66, p = 0.007), the "S2b" (OR 3.50, p = 0.04) and the "S3" (OR 2.70, p = 0.01) categories of NCIM, "pelvic disease through anastomosis" of Pilipshen (OR 2.89, p = 0.002), "fixed at 2 sites" of Mayo Clinic (OR 2.68, p = 0.019), and "TR4" of Wanebo (OR 3.39, p = 0.002). The NCIM was the most predictive classification for R0 surgery. The NCIM classification seems to be superior among the others in predicting R0 surgery. Generally, lateral invasive and high sacral invasive relapses are associated with reduced probability of R0 surgery and unfavorable outcomes.

Selection of patients affected by pelvic recurrence of rectal cancer (PRRC) who are likely to achieve a R0 resection is mandatory. The aim of this study was to propose a classification for PRRC to predict both radical surgery and disease-free survival (DFS).

PRRC patients treated at the National Cancer Institute of Milan (Italy) were included in the study. PRRC were classified as S1, if located centrally (S1a-S1b) or anteriorly (S1c) within the pelvis; S2, in case of sacral involvement below (S2a) or above (S2b) the second sacral vertebra; S3, in case of lateral pelvic involvement.

Of 280 reviewed PRRC patients, 152 (54.3%) were evaluated for curative surgery. The strongest predictor of R+ resection was the S3 category (OR, 6.37; P = .011). Abdominosacral resection (P = .012), anterior exenteration (P = .012) and extended rectal re-excision (P = .003) were predictive of R0 resection. S3 category was highly predictive of poor DFS (HR 2.53; P = .038). DFS was significantly improved after R0 surgery for S1 (P < .0001) and S2 (P = .015) patients but not for S3 cases (P = .525).

The proposed classification allows selection of subjects candidates to curative surgery, emphasizing that lateral pelvic involvement is the main predictor of R+ resection and independently affects the DFS.

To evaluate morbidity and oncological outcome in a multicentre series of women with gynaecological malignancies infiltrating pelvic side wall (PSW) that received laterally extended pelvic resection (LEPR).

Patients operated between 2007 and 2017 at three institutions were included. LEPR was defined as an en bloc lateral resection of a pelvic tumour involving sidewall muscle, and/or bone, and/or major nerve, and/or major vascular structure. Postsurgical complications and survivals were evaluated.

Sixty-three women with gynaecological tumours involving PSW were treated with LEPR. Five women underwent primary LEPR, whereas 58 (92%) patients needed LEPR because of recurrence. Twenty-four women (38%) received previous radiation therapy before the surgery. R0 resection was achieved in 54 patients (85.7%), whereas the pathologic margins were microscopically and macroscopically positive in 8 (12.7%) patients and 1 (1.6%) patient, respectively. There was one perioperative death, whereas major postoperative complications occurred in 17 patients (27.7%). Thirty (47.5%) women experienced recurrences: 24/54 (44.4%) were in the R0 group, and 6/9 (66.6%) were in the R1 group, with a median PFS of 15 months and 7 months, respectively (p = 0.024). In total, 11 of 54 (20.3%) patients died of disease in the R0 group and 5 of 9 (55.5%) in the R1 group; a median OS was not reached and was 32 months for R0 and R1 groups, respectively (p = 0.033).

Involvement of the PSW should not prevent obtaining R0 resection. Although the LEPR is associated with considerable morbidity (≈ 30%), a long-term survival seems to be achieved in those women with complete resection.

Complete pathological resection of locally advanced and recurrent anorectal cancer is considered the most important determinant of survival outcome. Involvement of the retropubic space with cancer threatening or involving the penile base poses specific challenges due to the potential for margin involvement and blood loss from the dorsal venous plexus. In the present study we evaluate a new transperineal surgical approach to excision of anterior compartment organs involved or threatened by cancer which facilitates exposure and visualisation of the bulbar urethra and the deep vein of the penis caudal to the retropubic space and penile base.

A retrospective study was performed on male patients with tumour extension into the penile base treated at our institution using the transperineal surgical approach. Descriptive data for patient demographics, radiology, operative details, postoperative histology, complications and outcomes were collated.

Ten male patients with tumour extension into the penile base were identified. Two patients had recurrent anal cancer, 6 had locally advanced primary rectal cancer and 2 had recurrent rectal cancer. All patients had exenterative surgery with excision of the penile base utilising the transperineal approach. All patients had R0 resection. No local recurrence developed after a median follow up period of 15 months.

The transperineal approach to the penile base and retropubic space allows for high rates of R0 resection margin status with direct visualisation of the dorsal venous plexus, thereby minimising blood loss. In our experience, this technique is the preferred approach to excision of cancers threatening and involving the penile base and also for most male patients requiring total pelvic exenteration.

A curative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) can only be achieved with a complete resection and microscopically tumor-free surgical margins (R0). Imaging techniques are the most important investigations for the preoperative staging of local and systemic diseases. Due to substantial improvements in surgical strategies and techniques, previously unresectable tumors can now be excised. Several publications have demonstrated the oncological benefits of high sacral resection for LRRC. High subcortical sacrectomy (HiSS), extended lateral resection and extended lateral pelvic sidewall excision (ELSiE) belong to the newer surgical options. Biological meshes, various myocutaneous flaps, titanium and bone allografts can be used for reconstruction. Specialized centers provide an efficient management of complications and postoperative treatment.

Pelvic exenteration was first described by Alexander Brunschwig in 1948 in New York as a palliative procedure for recurrent carcinoma of the cervix. Because of initially high rates of morbidity and mortality, the practice of this ultraradical operation was largely confined to a small number of American centers for most of the 20 century. The post-World War II era saw advances in anaesthesia, blood transfusion, and intensive care medicine that would facilitate the evolution of more radical and heroic abdominal and pelvic surgery. In the last 3 decades, pelvic exenteration has continued to evolve into one of the most important treatments for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. This review aimed to explore the evolution of pelvic exenteration surgery and to identify the pioneering surgeons, seminal articles, and novel techniques that have led to its current status as the procedure of choice for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is a complex disease with far-reaching implications for the patient. Until recently, research was limited regarding surgical techniques that can increase the ability to perform an en bloc resection with negative margins. This has changed in recent years and therefore outcomes for these patients have improved. Novel radical techniques and adjuncts allow for more radical resections thereby improving the chance of negative resection margins and outcomes. In the past contraindications to surgery included anterior involvement of the pubic bone, sacral invasions above the level of S2/S3 and lateral pelvic wall involvement. However, current data suggests that previously unresectable cases may now be feasible with novel techniques, surgical approaches and reconstructive surgery. The publications to date have only reported small patient pools with the research conducted by highly specialised units. Moreover, the short and long-term oncological outcomes are currently under review. Therefore although surgical options for LRRC have expanded significantly, one should balance the treatment choices available against the morbidity associated with the procedure and select the right patient for it.

Between 5% and 10% of patients with rectal cancer present with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), and 10% of rectal cancers recur after surgery, of which half are limited to locoregional disease only (locally recurrent rectal cancer). Exenterative surgery offers the best long-term outcomes for patients with LARC and locally recurrent rectal cancer so long as a complete (R0) resection is achieved. Accurate preoperative multimodal staging is crucial in assessing the potential operability of advanced rectal tumors, and resectability may be enhanced with neoadjuvant therapies. Unfortunately, surgical options are limited when the tumor involves the lateral pelvic sidewall or high sacrum due to the technical challenges of achieving histological clearance, and must be balanced against the high morbidity associated with resection of the bony pelvis and significant lymphovascular structures. This group of patients is usually treated palliatively and subsequently survival is poor, which has led surgeons to seek innovative new solutions, as well as revisit previously discarded radical approaches. A small number of centers are pioneering new techniques for resection of beyond-total mesorectal excision tumors, including en bloc resections of the sciatic notch and composite resections of the first two sacral vertebrae. Despite limited experience, these new techniques offer the potential for radical treatment of previously inoperable tumors. This narrative review sets out the challenges facing the management of LARCs and discusses evolving management options.

Rectal cancer can recur locally in up to 10% of the patients who undergo definitive resection for their primary cancer. Surgical salvage is considered appropriate in the curative setting as well as select cases with palliative intent. Disease-free survival following salvage resection is dependent upon achieving an R0 resection margin. A clear understanding of applied surgical anatomy, appropriate preoperative planning, and a multidisciplinary approach to aggressive soft tissue, bony, and vascular resection with appropriate reconstruction is necessary. Technical tips, tricks, and pitfalls that may assist in managing these cancers are discussed and the roles of additional boost radiation and intraoperative radiation therapy in the management of such cancers are also discussed.

R0 resection of locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer is the key determinant of outcome. Disease extension high on the sacrum has been considered a contraindication to surgery because of associated morbidity and difficulty in achieving complete pathological resection. Total sacrectomy has a high morbidity with poor function.

We describe a novel technique of high subcortical sacrectomy (HiSS) to facilitate complete resection of disease extending to the upper sacrum at S1 and S2 to avoid high or total sacrectomy or a nonoperative approach to management. Details of patient demographics, radiology, operative details, postoperative histology, length of hospital stay and complications were entered into a prospectively maintained electronic patient database. All patients had had preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

During 2013-2014, five patients, including three with advanced primary cancer and two with recurrent rectal cancer, underwent excision using this approach. All patients had an R0 resection. Four patients had a minor postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo Grades I and II) and one had a major complication (Clavien-Dindo Grade IIIb). There was no mortality at 90 days, and four patients were disease free at a median of 18 months.

Patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer involving the upper sacrum may be rendered suitable for potentially curative radical resection with a modified approach to sacral resection. This pilot series suggests that this novel technique results in a high rate of complete pathological resection with acceptable morbidity in patients for whom the alternatives would have been an incomplete resection, a total sacrectomy or nonoperative management.

Involvement of the lateral compartment remains a relative or absolute contraindication to pelvic exenteration in most units. Initial experience with exenteration in the authors' unit produced a 21 per cent clear margin rate (R0), which improved to 53 per cent by adopting a novel technique for en bloc resection of the iliac vessels and other side-wall structures. The objective of this study was to report morbidity and oncological outcomes in consecutive exenterations involving the lateral compartment.

Patients undergoing pelvic exenteration between 1994 and 2014 were eligible for review.

Two hundred consecutive patients who had en bloc resection of the lateral compartment were included. R0 resection was achieved in 66·5 per cent of 197 patients undergoing surgery for cancer and 68·9 per cent of planned curative resections. For patients with colorectal cancer, a clear resection margin was associated with a significant overall survival benefit (P = 0·030). Median overall and disease-free survival in this group was 41 and 27 months respectively. Overall 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were 86, 46 and 35 per cent respectively. No predictors of survival were identified on univariable analysis other than margin status and operative intent. Excision of the common or external iliac vessels or sciatic nerve did not confer a survival disadvantage.

The continuing evolution of radical pelvic exenteration techniques has seen an improvement in R0 margin status from 21 to 66·5 per cent over a 20-year interval by routine adoption of a more lateral anatomical plane. Five-year overall survival rates are comparable with those for more centrally based tumours.