More than 20% of patients with extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) may be deemed as nonshuntable due to lack of a suitable vein. The role of "makeshift shunts" or "lesser shunts" assumes importance in such cases. In this report, the authors have shared their experience with the makeshift shunts in the management of portal hypertension in children with emphasis upon anatomic considerations, resolution of symptoms, outcomes after surgery, and shunt patency.

During the period 1983-2018, 138 children with portal hypertension were managed under the care of a single surgeon (VB). Of them, 134 were EHPVO. Children with EHPVO were treated with splenectomy and proximal lienorenal shunt (n = 107), splenectomy and devascularization (n = 21), and makeshift shunts (n = 6). Makeshift shunts comprised (i) side-to-side right gastroepiploic vein (Rt-GEV) to left renal vein (LRV) shunt (n = 1), (ii) superior mesenteric vein (SMV) to inferior vena cava (IVC) shunt using a spiral saphenous venous graft (n = 1), (iii) side-to-side inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) to LRV shunt (n = 2), (iv) side-to-side IMV to IVC shunt (n = 1), (v) end-to-side IMV to IVC shunt (n = 1), and (vi) side-to-side IMV to LRV shunt (n = 1) in a case of crossed fused renal ectopia.

Following the creation of portosystemic shunt, a decline in portal pressure was demonstrated in all six patients. There was resolution of symptoms including hematemesis, melena, and anorectal variceal bleed. None of the patients demonstrated the features of hepatic encephalopathy. The associated portal cavernoma cholangiopathy (n = 1) also resolved following Rt-GEV to LRV shunt. Shunt patency was documented for the entire duration of follow-up (1.5-4 years) in five of six patients; the sixth patient demonstrated shunt block at 6-month follow-up but without recurrence of symptoms.

Makeshift shunts offer a viable alternative to standard portosystemic shunting in pediatric patients with a nonshuntable vein. The selection of such shunts is, however, subject to surgeon's preferences and has to be individualized to local anatomy.

Pelvic exenteration offers potentially curative treatment for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic tumours. Laterally infiltrating tumours involving the pelvic sidewall have historically been considered unresectable. Highly specialised exenteration units have accumulated experience with en bloc resection of part or all of the iliac vascular system for tumours with major vessel involvement. These approaches involve complex vascular dissection and reconstructive techniques requiring collaboration with the vascular surgery unit. Adding to the complexity is the paucity of evidence on oncovascular techniques in the pelvis given its developing nature. An algorithm for the workup to determine resectability and the vascular reconstruction approach for advanced pelvic tumours involving the aortoiliac axis is suggested based on current literature and personal experience from the authors' unit.

The number of units with experience in extended radical resections for advanced pelvic tumours has grown substantially in recent years. The use of complex vascular resections and reconstructive techniques in these units is expected to increase with experience. This review aimed to provide a cutting-edge overview of this evolving surgical approach to complex pelvic tumours with vascular involvement.

This was a narrative review of published data on major vascular resection and reconstruction for advanced pelvic tumours, including preoperative evaluation, techniques used, and outcomes. Advice for treatment decisions is provided, and based on current literature and the personal experience of the authors. Current controversies and future directions are discussed.

Major vascular resection and reconstruction during surgery for advanced pelvic tumours is associated with prolonged operating time (510-678 min) and significant blood loss (median 2-5 l). R0 resection can be achieved in 58-82 per cent at contemporary specialist units. The risk of major complications is similar to that of extended pelvic resection without vascular involvement (30-40 per cent) and perioperative mortality is acceptable (0-4 per cent). Long-term survival is achievable in approximately 50 per cent of patients.

En bloc resection of the common or external iliac vessels during exenterative pelvic surgery is a feasible strategy for patients with advanced tumours which infiltrate major pelvic vascular structures. Oncological, morbidity, and survival outcomes appear comparable to more central pelvic tumours. These encouraging outcomes, combined with an increasing interest in extended pelvic resections globally, will likely lead to more exenteration units developing oncovascular experience.

Management of advanced or recurrent pelvic cancer has evolved dramatically over the past few decades. Patients who were previously considered inoperable are now candidates for potentially curative surgery and avoid suffering with intractable symptoms. Up to 10% of primary rectal cancers present with isolated advanced local disease and between 10% and 15% of patients develop localized recurrence following proctectomy. Advances in surgical technique, reconstruction and multidisciplinary involvement have led to a reduction in mortality and morbidity and culminated in higher R0 resection rates with superior longer-term survival outcomes. Recent studies boast over 50% 5-year survival for rectal with an R0 resection. Exenteration has cemented itself as an important treatment option for advanced primary/recurrent pelvic tumours, however, there are still a few controversies. This review will discuss some of these issues, including: limitations of resection and the approach to high/wide tumours; the role of acute exenteration; re-exenteration; exenteration in the setting of metastatic disease and palliation; the role of radiotherapy (including intra-operative and re-irradiation); management of the empty pelvis; and the impact on quality of life and function.

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 practice of exenterative surgery is sometimes controversial and has garnered a certain scepticism. Surgical studies are difficult to conduct due to insufficient data. The aim of this review is to present the current standing of pelvic exenteration from a surgical, gynaecological and urological point of view.

This review is based upon a literature review (MEDLINE (PubMed), CENTRAL (Cochrane) and EMBASE (Elsevier)) of retrospective studies on exenterative surgery from 1993-2020. Using MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) search terms, 1572 publications were found. These were evaluated and screened with respect to their eligibility using algorithms and well-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Therefore, the guidelines for systematic reviews (PRISMA) were used.

A complete tumour resection (R0) often represents the only curative option for advanced pelvic carcinomas and their recurrences. A recent systematic review showed significant symptom relief in 80% of palliative patients after pelvic exenteration. Surgical limitations (distant metastases, involvement of the pelvic wall, etc.) are diminished by adequate surgical expertise and close interdisciplinary cooperation. While the mortality rate is low (2-5%), the still relatively high morbidity rate (32-84%) can be minimized by optimizing the perioperative setting. Following exenterations, roughly 79-82% of patients report satisfying results according to PROs (patient-reported outcomes).

Due to multimodality treatment strategies combined with extended surgical expertise and patients' preferences, pelvic exenteration can be offered nowadays with low mortality and acceptable postoperative quality of life. The possibilities of surgical treatment are often underestimated. A multi-centre database (PelvEx Collaborative) was established to collect data and experiences to optimize the research in this field.

Spiral saphenous vein grafts (SSVG) or paneled vein grafts (PVG) can be used when the diameter of the autologous great saphenous vein does not match the vessel that needs to be repaired. This study aimed to present early results of complex vascular reconstruction with SSVGs and PVGs in the lower extremities.

From May 2019 through January 2021, 6 SSVGs and 3 PVGs were used for vascular reconstruction in 9 patients. Patient data were collected retrospectively, including age, gender, cause of vascular pathology, target vessels, concomitant injury, surgical method, additional surgical methods, and hemodynamic status. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the rate of freedom from reintervention.

Among these patients, 7 had trauma, 1 had graft infection, and 1 had vascular reconstruction after tumor excision. The mean duration of follow-up was 6 ± 6.6 months (range 1-19 months). The rate of freedom from reintervention for any reason was 77.8% at 1 year. Two patients underwent amputation after vascular reconstruction with patent vascular reconstructions. One of the 2 amputations was performed because of infection, and the other was due to ischemia >24 hr. The success rate of reconstruction was 100%, and the primary patency rate was 100%. The rate of limb salvage was 77.8%. There was no death, bleeding, embolism, skin ulcers, graft-related complication, or aneurysmal dilation during follow-up.

SSVG and PVG were associated with low infection rates and satisfactory short-term patency rates. Both 2 grafts may be good choices when there is a diameter mismatch in vascular reconstructions.

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.

Achieving a negative resection through a pelvic exenteration for a recurrent or an advanced pelvic malignancy offers the potential for cure. Exenterative surgical units have expanded the boundaries and redefined what constitutes resectable disease through improved surgical technique. In selected cases, contiguous tumor involvement of the aortoiliac axis requires en bloc resection and subsequent vessel reconstruction. However, vascular reconstruction can be challenging in a contaminated field during an extended radical resection.

The aim of this Technical Note is to describe a novel method in the management of patients with recurrent or advanced pelvic malignancy involving the aortoiliac axis by performing preemptive femoral-femoral arterial and venous crossover grafts, with adjunctive arteriovenous loop fistula formation before undergoing an extended radical pelvic resection 4 weeks later.

Four patients have undergone preemptive femoral-femoral arterial and venous crossover grafts at our institution (median age = 60 y (range, 47-66 y); 2 women). There were no early complications, and all of the patients subsequently underwent extended radical pelvic resections for a pelvic malignancy.

Preemptive vascular reconstruction before major pelvic surgery reduces the risk of graft infection because this method avoids the wounds being contaminated by GI or genitourinary organisms. Other advantages to this technique include a reduction in the overall operating time for the pelvic exenteration, a significant reduction in the ischemia time to the lower limbs, and ensuring that the grafts are patent before embarking on major intra-abdominal surgery.

The spiral saphenous vein graft is an excellent choice for venous reconstruction after periphery vein injury, but only few cases have been reported. We implanted a segment of a single saphenous vein into both the popliteal vein as a venous vein graft and into the popliteal artery as an arterial vein graft at the same time in a trauma patient; we then had an extraordinary opportunity to harvest and examine both patent venous and arterial vein grafts at 2 weeks after implantation.

A spiral saphenous vein graft was made as previously described and implanted into the popliteal vein and artery as interposition grafts; because of the patient's serious injuries, an amputation was performed at day 18 after vascular reconstruction. The grafts were harvested, fixed, and examined using histology and immunohistochemistry.

Both grafts were patent, and there was a larger neointimal area in the venous graft compared to the arterial graft. There were CD31- and vWF-positive cells on both neointimal endothelia, with subendothelial deposition of α-actin-, CD3-, CD45-, and CD68-positive cells. There were fewer cells in the venous graft neointima compared to the arterial graft neointima; however, there were more inflammatory cells in the neointima of the venous graft. Some of the neointimal cells were PCNA-positive, whereas very few cells were cleaved caspase-3 positive. The venous graft neointimal endothelial cells were Eph-B4 and COUP-TFII positive, while the arterial graft neointimal endothelial cells were dll-4 and Ephrin-B2 positive.

The spiral saphenous vein graft remains a reasonable choice for vessel reconstruction, especially in the presence of diameter mismatch. Both the venous and arterial grafts showed similar re-endothelialization and cellular deposition; the venous graft had more neointimal hyperplasia and inflammation. At an early time, endothelial cells showed venous identity in the venous graft, whereas endothelial cells showed arterial identity in the arterial graft.

Veins can be used as venous or arterial vein grafts but venous grafts have more neointimal hyperplasia and inflammation; vein grafts acquire different vessel identity depending on the environment into which they are implanted.

There have been significant advances in the surgical management of locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer in recent decades. Patient with advanced pelvic tumours involving adjacent organs and neurovascular structures, beyond the traditional mesorectal planes, who would have traditionally been considered irresectable at many centres, now undergo surgery routinely at specialised units. While high rates of morbidity and mortality were reported by the pioneers of pelvic exenteration (PE) in early literature, this is now considered historical data. In 2019, patients who undergo PE for advanced or recurrent rectal cancer can expect reasonable rates of long-term survival (up to 60% at 5 years) and acceptable morbidity and quality of life. This article describes the surgical techniques that have been developed for radical multivisceral pelvic resections and reviews contemporary outcomes.

Pelvic exenteration (PE) provides a potentially curative option for advanced or recurrent malignancy confined to the pelvis. A clear (R0) resection margin is the strongest prognostic factor predicting long-term survival, driving most technical advances in PE surgery. The aim of this cohort study was to describe changing trends in extent of resection, postoperative complications, mortality and overall survival after PE surgery.

Consecutive patients who underwent PE for advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancy at a single institution in Sydney, Australia, were identified. The cohort was divided into three groups based on time periods reflecting annual surgical volume: 1994-2006 (20 or fewer procedures per year), 2007-2013 (21-50 procedures per year) and 2014-2017 (over 50 procedures per year). Primary outcomes were extent of resection, postoperative complications, 60-day mortality and 3-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes were patient characteristics, receipt of neoadjuvant therapy and duration of hospital stay.

There were increases over time in rates of lateral and posterior compartment resections (P < 0·001), and bony pelvis (P = 0·002) and neurovascular (P < 0·001) excision. For patients undergoing reconstruction, the proportion receiving vertical rectus abdominus myocutaneous flaps increased significantly (P = 0·005). Rates of wound infection, dehiscence, and abdominal and pelvic collections increased over the study interval. Short-term mortality decreased, and 1- and 3-year survival rates improved.

Technical and surgical advancements have led to more complex PE resections, with R0 and mortality rates improving with higher annual volume. There were associated increases in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity.

Recent advancements in multimodal therapy can provide oncologic benefits for patients with recurrent colorectal cancer. This report presents a case of locoregionally recurrent appendiceal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection with vascular reconstruction. A 68-year-old Japanese woman was diagnosed with appendiceal cancer and underwent ileocecal resection. The pathological evaluation revealed KRAS-mutant adenocarcinoma with the final stage of T4bN1M0. She received oral fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy. One year later, she was found to have peritoneal dissemination in the pelvic cavity and vaginal metastasis. She received an oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy followed by surgical resection. One year after the second surgery, she developed a locoregional recurrence involving the right external iliac vessels and small intestine. She received an irinotecan-based regimen with bevacizumab as neoadjuvant chemotherapy, followed by surgical resection. At first, a femoro-femoral bypass was made to secure the blood supply to the right lower extremities. Subsequently, an en bloc resection including the recurrent tumor and the external iliac vessels was completed. Surgical resection for recurrent colorectal cancer is often technically challenging because of the tumor location and invasion to adjacent organs. In this case, a surgical approach with persistent chemotherapy achieved oncologic resection of locoregionally recurrent appendiceal cancer.

This study aims to present early and midterm results of vascular reconstruction with saphenous vein panel graft.

Between August 2014 and August 2017, 11 saphenous vein panel grafts were used for vascular reconstruction in 10 patients. Patient data including age, gender, etiology of the vascular pathology, concomitant injury, site of injury, surgical procedure, additional surgical procedure, and hemodynamic status were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the reintervention and patency rates.

Mean duration of follow-up was 16.5 ± 13.2 months (ranged, 2-39 months). The freedom from reintervention for any reason was 82% at 1 and 2 years. There was no evidence of arterial claudication or venous insufficiency in all patients. The primary patency rates were 82% at 1 and 2 years. There was no mortality, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, graft thrombosis, anastomotic stenosis, diameter discrepancy, and aneurysm formation during late follow-up.

The autologous saphenous panel vein graft enables the surgeon to prepare suitable conduits easily with an appropriate diameter and length for vascular reconstruction. Although long-term results are unknown, this technique provides high patency rates in midterm follow-up, resistance to infection, and low reintervention rates. In conclusion, autologous saphenous vein panel grafts may well be preferred in various vascular disorders that require surgical reconstruction.

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.

Considerable progress has been made in the management of patients with locally advanced or recurrent cancers of the pelvis over the past 60 years since the inception of pelvic exenteration. Early progress in pelvic exenteration was marred by the high surgical mortality and morbidity, which drew scepticism from the broader surgical community. Subsequent evolution in the procedure hinged on establishing surgical safety and a better understanding of outcome predictors. Surgical mortality from pelvic exenteration is now comparable to that of elective resection for primary colorectal cancers. The importance of a clear resection margin is also now well established in providing durable local control and predicting long-term survival that, in turn, has driven the development of novel surgical techniques for pelvic side wall resection, en bloc sacrectomy, and pubic bone resection. A tailored surgical approach depending on the location of the tumor with resection of contiguously involved organs, yet preserving uninvolved organs to minimize unnecessary surgical morbidity, is paramount. Despite improved surgical and oncological outcomes, surgical morbidity following pelvic exenteration remains high with reported complication rates ranging between 20% and 80%. Extended antibiotic prophylaxis and preemptive parenteral nutrition in the immediate postoperative period may reduce septic and nutritional complications. A high index of suspicion is needed in the early diagnosis and management of complications that may avoid prolonged duration of hospitalization. An acceptable quality of life has been reported among patients after pelvic exenteration. Further research into novel chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and reconstructive options are currently underway and are needed to further improve outcomes.

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.