Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Defining Standard Data Reporting in Pelvic Exenterations for Non-Rectal Cancers: A Systematic Review of Current Data Reporting
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Defining Standard Data Reporting in Pelvic Exenterations for Non-Rectal Cancers: A Systematic Review of Current Data Reporting
Do you wish to request the book?
Defining Standard Data Reporting in Pelvic Exenterations for Non-Rectal Cancers: A Systematic Review of Current Data Reporting
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Defining Standard Data Reporting in Pelvic Exenterations for Non-Rectal Cancers: A Systematic Review of Current Data Reporting
2025
Overview
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.
Publisher
MDPI AG,Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)
Subject
