Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 20, 2026
An Orthotopic Endometrial Cancer Model with Retroperitoneal Lymphadenopathy Made From In Vivo Propagated and Cultured VX2 Cells
Published on: September 12, 2019
Prognostic factors in pelvic exenteration for gynecological malignancies
G Baiocchi1, G C Guimaraes, R A Rosa Oliveira
1Department of Gynecologic Oncology, AC Camargo Cancer Hospital, Sao Paulo, Brazil. glbaiocchi@yahoo.com.br
Objectives:
Analyze morbidity, mortality and prognostic factors after pelvic exenteration (PE) for gynecological malignancies.
Methods:
We reviewed a series of 107 individuals who underwent PE at A.C. Camargo Cancer Hospital from August 1982 to September 2010.
Results:
Median age was 56.4 years. Primary tumor sites were uterine cervix in 73 cases (68.2%); vaginal, 10 (9.3%); endometrial, 14 (13.1%); vulvar, 7 (6.5%); and uterine sarcomas, 3 (2.8%). Median tumor size was 5.5 cm. Total PE was performed in 56 cases (52.3%), anterior in 31 (29.9%), posterior in 10 (9.3%) and lateral extended in 10. Median operation time, blood transfusion and hospital stay length were 420 min (range: 180-780), 900 ml (range: 300-4500) and 13 days (range: 4-79), respectively. There was no intra-operative death. Fifty-seven (53.3%) and 48 (44.8%) patients had early and late complications, respectively. Five-year progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and cancer specific survival (CSS) were 35.8%, 27.4% and 41.1%, respectively. Endometrial cancer had better 5-year OS (64.3%) than cervical cancer (23.1%). Lymph node metastasis negatively impacted PFS, CSS and OS. Presence of perineural invasion negatively impacted PFS and CSS. No variable retained the risk of recurrence or death in the multivariate analysis.
Conclusions:
PE has acceptable morbidity and mortality and may be the only method that can offer long-term survival in highly selected patients.
