Systematic review identifies discrepancies in data reporting for pelvic exenteration, suggesting a core information set for standardization.
Introduction: Pelvic exenteration (PEx) was first described in the 1940s as a palliative procedure in managing cervical cancer. Since then, advancements in perioperative care have transformed the options available to patients. This highly morbid procedure now offers a “cure” in a select cohort of patients with locally advanced and recurrent pelvic cancers. The large volume of literature in this field has resulted in a heterogeneity of data reporting, making comparative analysis extremely difficult. As such, we set out to examine the current literature and identify currently reported outcomes to guide development of a core information set (CIS) for data reporting for PEx in non-rectal cancers. Methods: A systematic review was carried out. Studies reporting on outcomes following PEx for advanced and recurrent gynecological, urological, and other non-rectal malignancies were included. Standardized outcomes were extracted and mapped to pre-determined domains. Results: Forty-four studies were found to meet our inclusion criteria. A total of 1735 data elements (DEs) were extracted verbatim, and these were assimilated into 111 standard DEs across nine domains. A wide range of reporting frequencies was observed, with the pathological domain containing the highest overall frequencies of DE reporting. Conversely, patient-reported and functional outcomes were noted to be the domain with the lowest frequency. Conclusions: This review highlights recent trends of increased reporting in the field of PEx and how this had invariably resulted in heterogeneous data reporting. We aim to guide the development of a CIS for reporting in non-rectal pelvic malignancies to help standardize future reporting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2025 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: