Comparison of Pelvic Peritonectomy vs. Rectosigmoid Resection During Hudson Procedure for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: 6-Year Experience of an ESGO-Certified Center

(1) Background: Hudson first described the procedure that includes en-block removal of an ovarian tumor fixed in the pelvis with the whole pelvic peritoneum and invaded surrounding structures. However, sometimes pelvic peritonectomy (PP) with or without shaving of the bowel serosa is not enough to achieve complete cytoreduction, and en-block rectosigmoid resection (RR) is necessary. This study aims to investigate the impact of bowel surgery on survival rates and morbidity of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with advanced ovarian cancer with cul-de-sac involvement that underwent debulking surgery at the 1st Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology of "Papageorgiou" General Hospital, from 2017-2022. The primary outcomes were the survival rates and morbidity between PP and RR. (3) Results: A total of 93 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group A (34 patients) with RR and Group B (59 patients) with PP. There was no statistically significant difference in the majority of patients' characteristics and oncological outcomes. On the other hand, patients with RR had a significantly higher surgical complexity score (SCS), peritoneal cancer index (PCI), ICU admission, rate of postoperative complications, longer surgery duration and hospital stay. When comparing the duration of surgery, the RR group has significantly higher operation time during primary compared to interval debulking surgery. Concerning survival rates, there was no significant difference in progression-free (PFS) (<i>p</i> = 0.22) and overall survival (OS) (<i>p</i> = 0.85) between the two groups, while residual disease and postoperative complications were identified as independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS; (4) Conclusions: The modified Hudson procedure with RR is a safe and reproductible technique, but when complete gross resection can be achieved with PP, this technique is preferred in order to avoid increased patient's morbidity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cancers
Published
2026-02-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18030519
Primary Topic
Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Pelvic Peritonectomy vs. Rectosigmoid Resection During Hudson Procedure for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: 6-Year Experience of an ESGO-Certified Center

Dimitrios Zouzoulas, G Grimbizis, Eleni T. Timotheadou, Katerina Tzika et al.
Cancers
Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
article

Comparison of Pelvic Peritonectomy vs. Rectosigmoid Resection During Hudson Procedure for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: 6-Year Experience of an ESGO-Certified Center

Dimitrios Zouzoulas, G Grimbizis, Eleni T. Timotheadou, Katerina Tzika, Panagiotis M Tzitzis, Iliana Sofianou, Vasilis Theodoulidis
article en

Abstract

(1) Background: Hudson first described the procedure that includes en-block removal of an ovarian tumor fixed in the pelvis with the whole pelvic peritoneum and invaded surrounding structures. However, sometimes pelvic peritonectomy (PP) with or without shaving of the bowel serosa is not enough to achieve complete cytoreduction, and en-block rectosigmoid resection (RR) is necessary. This study aims to investigate the impact of bowel surgery on survival rates and morbidity of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with advanced ovarian cancer with cul-de-sac involvement that underwent debulking surgery at the 1st Department of Obstetrics-Gynecology of "Papageorgiou" General Hospital, from 2017-2022. The primary outcomes were the survival rates and morbidity between PP and RR. (3) Results: A total of 93 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group A (34 patients) with RR and Group B (59 patients) with PP. There was no statistically significant difference in the majority of patients' characteristics and oncological outcomes. On the other hand, patients with RR had a significantly higher surgical complexity score (SCS), peritoneal cancer index (PCI), ICU admission, rate of postoperative complications, longer surgery duration and hospital stay. When comparing the duration of surgery, the RR group has significantly higher operation time during primary compared to interval debulking surgery. Concerning survival rates, there was no significant difference in progression-free (PFS) (<i>p</i> = 0.22) and overall survival (OS) (<i>p</i> = 0.85) between the two groups, while residual disease and postoperative complications were identified as independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS; (4) Conclusions: The modified Hudson procedure with RR is a safe and reproductible technique, but when complete gross resection can be achieved with PP, this technique is preferred in order to avoid increased patient's morbidity.

CancersVol. 18(3)
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR), Papageorgiou General Hospital (GR)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.