This is one of those things that certainly sounds correct, but isn't. Pelvic exenteration was first done in the 1940s as a palliative procedure. Even now, PPE (palliative pelvic exenteration) is still done. It's mostly for recurrent pelvic cancers like colorectal and gynecological cancers. I guess if someone has blockages and widespread (but localized) cancer, they've exhausted the chemo and radiation route, and they want to live a little longer, it's the only option.
Here's the (edited to be shorter) text of a 2019 study on PPE: "Twenty-three historical cohorts and case series were included, comprising 509 patients. Most malignancies were of colorectal, gynaecological and urological origin. Common indications for PPE were pain, symptomatic
fistula, bleeding, malodour, obstruction and pelvic sepsis. ...the median in-hospital mortality was 6.3%, and median overall survival rate was 14 months. Some symptom relief was reported in a median of 79% of the patients, although the magnitude of effect was poorly measured. Data for
QoL measures were inconclusive. Five studies discouraged performing PPE in any patient, while 18 studies concluded that the procedure can be considered in highly selected patients."
I'm not saying Tiffany's surgery is palliative. There's no indication of that. Just that some people are willing to do anything for a little more time and some surgeons are willing to do it.