Literature DB >> 22312509

Gastrointestinal complications in 147 consecutive patients with peritoneal surface malignancy treated by cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Angela Casado-Adam1, Robert Alderman, O Anthony Stuart, David Chang, Paul H Sugarbaker.   

Abstract

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is increasingly used in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastrointestinal malignancies. The purpose of this study is to reevaluate the incidence of gastrointestinal events and identify risk factors associated with this treatment approach. Between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009, 147 patients with appendiceal and colorectal carcinomatosis were treated. Gastrointestinal events were analyzed. The overall incidence of grade I-IV gastrointestinal events was 17%. There were 4 grade III gastrointestinal events that occurred in 4 patients and 11 grade IV gastrointestinal events that occurred in 8 patients. On univariate analysis of grade I-IV events a statistically significant association was observed with the following variables: histological grade, peritoneal cancer index (PCI), small bowel resection, colorectal anastomosis, and the number of anastomoses performed per patient. By multivariate analysis, PCI was identified as the only independent risk factor for gastrointestinal complications. CRS combined with a uniform HIPEC regimen is associated with a 17% gastrointestinal morbidity rate (grade I-IV). The frequency of gastrointestinal complications was associated with a large extent of disease measured by PCI (>30).

Entities:  

Year:  2011        PMID: 22312509      PMCID: PMC3263671          DOI: 10.1155/2011/468698

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 2090-1402


1. Introduction

In the past, peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) was considered as a final stage of unresectable cancer with a short duration of survival [1-3]. Since the mid 1990s, studies on CRS combined with perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (PIC), hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and/or early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) are considered a new treatment options for selected patients with PC and peritoneal mesothelioma [4-12]. As the surgical technology has improved and the regimens for administering chemotherapy have become safer, the complications associated with this treatment approach have decreased [13-18]. In a systematic review, Chua reviewed all the relevant studies reported before August 2008 and concluded that the morbidity and mortality of CRS and HIPEC were similar to other major gastrointestinal interventions [19]. An important concept, “the learning curve,” has been demonstrated to operate in the expanded application of CRS and HIPEC [20-22]. Smeenk et al. reported the results of 323 procedures over a 10-year time period; they showed a decrease in major morbidity from 71% to 34% [22]. Yan et al. demonstrated a reduction in the rate of severe morbidity, transfusion requirement, duration of operation, and length of intensive care unit stay over a similar period of time in 140 patients [21]. In recent publications overall grade III-IV morbidity rates are shown to be between 7 and 41% [23-26]. For gastrointestinal events, small bowel perforations and anastomotic leaks are the most common and clinically significant complications after CRS and PIC [23-27]. The aim of this study was to report the incidence of gastrointestinal events and identify the associated risk factors.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Patient Characteristics

All patients with appendiceal and colorectal carcinomatosis treated in a uniform manner at Washington Hospital Center, between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009 constituted the basis of the present study. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained to collect and analyze these data. All patients with appendiceal and colorectal malignancy who received CRS combined with a standardized treatment with PIC were included (Table 1). Patients who had an incomplete CRS combined with PIC were included in the study, patients who had an open and close procedure or palliative debulking were not included. The quantitative prognostic indicators were the histological grade, the prior surgical score (PSS), the peritoneal cancer index (PCI), and the completeness of cytoreduction score (CC) [28].
Table 1

Patients characteristics, quantitative prognosis indicators, peritonectomies, visceral resections, and intraoperative treatments.

Variable n
Total Patients147
 Gender
 Male68 (46%)
 Female79 (54%)
Age at the time of surgery (years)
 Mean ± 1 Standard Deviation49.9 (±8.7)
 Median51
 Range23–64
Primary cancer diagnosis
 Appendiceal cancer135 (92%)
 Colorectal cancer12 (8%)
Histological grade
 Grade 161 (41.6%)
 Grade 212 (8%)
 Grade 374 (50.4%)
Prior surgical score
 0–2133 (90.5%)
 314 (9.5%)
Peritoneal cancer index
 0–1031 (21%)
 11–2040 (27%)
 21–3053 (36%)
 31–3923 (16%)
Completeness of cytoreduction
 Complete125 (85%)
 Incomplete22 (15%)
Peritonectomy procedures
 Pelvic123 (84%)
 Right upper quadrant109 (74%)
 Left upper quadrant72 (49%)
 Omental bursa70 (48%)
 Anterior abdominal wall50 (34%)
Peritonectomy procedures per patient
 zero18 (12%)
 one21 (14%)
 two16 (11%)
 three29 (20%)
 four31 (21%)
 five32 (22%)
Visceral resections performed
 Greater omentectomy144 (98%)
 Splenectomy84 (57%)
 Rectosigmoid colon resection70 (48%)
 Right colon resection57 (39%)
 Hysterectomy47 (32%)
 Small bowel resection29 (20%)
 Transverse colon resection20 (14%)
 Gastrectomy4 (3%)
Visceral resections per patient
 Zero2 (1.4%)
 One20 (13.6%)
 Two34 (23.1%)
 Three34 (23.1%)
 Four32 (21.8%)
 Five15 (10.2%)
 Six8 (5.4%)
 Seven2 (1.4%)
Anastomoses performed
 Esophageal2 (1.4%)
 Small bowel22 (15.0%)
 Ileocolic29 (19.7%)
 Colocolic3 (2.0%)
 Colorectal56 (38.1%)
Anastomoses performed per patient
 Zero74 (50.3%)
 One44 (29.9%)
 Two21 (14.3%)
 Three6 (4.1%)
 Four2 (1.4%)
Ostomies performed
 Diverting ileostomy30 (20.4%)
 End ileostomy13 (8.8%)
 None67 (70.8%)
Blood replacement
 None39 (26.5%)
 Blood 1–368 (46.3%)
 Blood 4–635 (23.8%)
 Blood > 65 (3.4%)
Fresh frozen plasma replacement
 None80 (54.4%)
 Plasma 1–451 (34.7%)
 Plasma >416 (10.9%)
Time in operating room (hours)
 0–610 (6.89%)
 6–12124 (84.4%)
 > 1213 (8.8%)
Chemotherapy treatments
 HIPEC only82 (55.8%)
 HIPEC plus EPIC65 (44.2%)

2.2. Cytoreductive Surgery and Perioperative Intraperitoneal and Systemic Chemotherapy

The goal of surgery in these patients was to visibly clear the abdomen and pelvis of cancer nodules. This required a series of peritonectomy procedures and visceral resections (Table 1). Normal peritoneum or normal visceral structures were not resected. A mechanical bowel preparation was used in all patients. Within one hour prior to the abdominal incision, patients received antibiotic prophylaxis. Prophylaxis for venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolus during the cytoreductive surgery was limited to sequential compression devices (SCD Response, Kendall Co., Mansfield, MA). All patients received HIPEC in the operating room immediately after the CRS but before intestinal anastomoses or repair of seromuscular tears. A combination of two drugs was administered intraperitoneally: mitomycin C (15 mg/m2) and doxorubicin (15 mg/m2). The target temperature for the entire abdomen during HIPEC was 41.5°C. Simultaneously, intravenous 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2) and leucovorin (20 mg/m2) were administered as a rapid infusion over 6–8 minutes. HIPEC was given using the Coliseum technique [29]. A heater circulator (Belmont Instruments Corporation, Billerica, MA) was used to maintain moderate hyperthermia within the abdomen and pelvis (41–43°C). During the first 45 minutes, only manual distribution of the chemotherapy solution occurred. In the second 45 minutes of the 90-minute treatment, seromuscular tears were repaired, the anterior and posterior rectus sheath were brought together with a running 2-0 Vicryl suture (Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH), and chest tubes were positioned. Esophago-jejunal and colorectal anastomoses were performed with a 28 mm or 33 mm diameter circular stapler, respectively (Ethicon, Cincinnati, OH). Esophago-jejunal anastomoses were reinforced with a layer of silk sutures. If the colorectal stapled anastomoses could be well visualized, a second layer of 3–0 silk sutures was used to plicate the anastomosis. If this double layer anastomosis was performed, no diverting ostomy was constructed. If the colorectal anastomosis was too low to place a second layer of silk sutures over the circular stapled anastomosis, a diverting ostomy was constructed. All small bowel, colo-colic and ileocolic anastomoses were double-layer hand sewn with an inner layer of running 3-0 Maxon (Davis and Geck, Danbury, CT) and interrupted outer layer of 3-0 silk.

2.3. Early Postoperative Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (EPIC)

The EPIC 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) was withheld in patients, who had a full course of oxaliplatin-based FOLFOX chemotherapy prior to CRS. The dose of EPIC 5-FU was 400 mg/m2/day for women and 600 mg/m2/day for men. It was infused via a Tenckhoff catheter over approximately 15 minutes with a 23-hour dwell time. After one hour of drainage, another administration of 5-FU occurred for 4 days after surgery

2.4. Postoperative Management

Patients were transferred directly to a surgical intensive care unit for monitoring and extubation. An 18 French nasogastric tube (Silicone Salem Sump Tube, Kendall Co., Mansfield, MA) was placed intraoperatively in all patients and remained until the drainage of bile from the stomach has ceased and some enteric function per rectum or per ostomy had occurred. All patients received postoperative intravenous feeding through the intrajugular vein for the five postoperative days and then through a percutaneous central catheter (Vaxcel, Glen Falls, NY) until gastrointestinal function returned. Closed suction drains remained in place after surgery in all patients until drainage was below 50 mL per 24 hours from a single drain.

2.5. Database for Morbidity Assessment

The database was specially constructed to evaluate gastrointestinal complications in patients with peritoneal surface malignancy. The morbidity variables were prospectively recorded according to the Common Toxicity Criteria (version 3.0) of the National Cancer Institute [30]. It consisted of 11 gastrointestinal adverse events (anastomotic failure, fistula, pancreatic fistula, pancreatitis, bile leak, chyle leak, prolonged ileus, small bowel obstruction, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea and ascites). Types of gastrointestinal adverse events observed and the grade are listed in Table 2.
Table 2

The total number of gastrointestinal adverse events grade I through grade IV.

Organ SystemGrade I-Asymptomatic and self-limitingGrade II-Symptomatic and medical treatmentGrade III-Invasive interventionGrade IV-ICU care or return to operating room
Gastrointestinal System N = 5 N   = 15 N = 4 N = 11
Anastomotic failureSub-clinical, afebrile, radiologic diagnosis (0)Antibiotics, febrile (0)Percutaneous drainage (0)Reoperation (3)
FistulaSub-clinical, afebrile, radiologic diagnosis (0)Antibiotics, febrile (0)Percutaneous drainage (0)Reoperation (3)
Pancreatic fistulaElevated enzymes in drains (0)TPN and somatostatin (0)Percutaneous drainage (0)Reoperation (1)
PancreatitisElevated enzymes (4)≤3 Ranson's score (4)4–6 Ranson's score (0)Reoperation/ICU (1)
Bile leakBile only in drain (0)Bile in drain, febrile (2)Percutaneous drainage (0)Reoperation (1)
Chyle leakTransient (1)Prolonged 1 week (0)Cease prior to discharge (0)Persist past hospital discharge (0)
Prolonged ileusN/G (0)N/G > 2 weeks (1)N/G >3 weeks (0)Persist past hospital discharge (0)
Small bowel obstructionAbdominal pain (0)Abdominal pain, N/G reinsertion (0)Repeat radiologic studies (0)Reoperation (1)
Nausea/vomitingTransient vomiting (0)Vomiting, anti-emetics (7)Vomiting, IV therapy (4)Vomiting with surgical intervention or ICU (1)
DiarrheaTransient <2 days (0)Tolerable, but >2 days (1)Intolerable, IV therapy (0)Dehydration prolonged IV therapy (0)
AscitesMild (0)Fluid restriction (0)Symptomatic, percutaneous tap (0)Compromising vital function, ICU care (0)
The following clinical variables were analyzed to asses factors predictive of gastrointestinal complications: gender, age (≤50 versus >51), primary cancer location, grade (grade 1 versus grade 2-3), prior surgical score (0–2 versus 3–5), peritoneal cancer index (0–10, 11–20, 21–30, 31–39, and 0-20 versus 31–39), completeness of cytoreduction (complete versus incomplete), peritonectomy procedures (pelvic, right upper quadrant, left upper quadrant, omental bursa, and anterior abdominal wall), number of peritonectomy procedures per patient (0–2 versus 3–5), visceral resections performed (omentectomy, splenectomy, rectosigmoid colon resection, right colon resection, hysterectomy, small bowel resection, transverse colon resection, and gastrectomy), visceral resections performed per patient (0–2 versus 3–7), types of anastomoses performed (esophago-jejunal, small bowel, ileocolic, colocolic, and colorectal), number of anastomoses performed per patient (0–2 versus 3–5), ostomies performed (none, diverting ileostomy and end ileostomy), blood replacement (none, 1–3 units, 4–6 units, >6 units), fresh frozen plasma replacement (none, 1–4 units, >4 units), time in the operating room in hours (0–6, 7–12, >12), and chemotherapy treatment (HIPEC only versus HIPEC plus EPIC).

2.6. Statistical Methods

For univariate methods to assess the association between gastrointestinal complications and pre- and perioperative clinical characteristics, the Pearson Chi-square was used, or the Fisher's exact test was used if there was sparse distribution. Those clinical characteristics that were significantly correlated to the outcome by univariate analysis (P-value < 0.05) were then fitted into the logistic regression model for multivariate analysis of variances to assess the strength of the risk factors. All statistical analyses were conducted using SAS (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USA. SAS (r) Proprietary Software 9.2 (TS2M3)).

3. Results

3.1. Preoperative and Intraoperative Data

Between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009, a total of 147 patients (135 appendiceal cancer, 12 colorectal cancer) were treated. There were 68 men and 79 women. The mean age was 49.9 years (range, 23–64). Data on patient characteristics, quantitative prognosis indicators, peritonectomies, visceral resections, and intraoperative treatments are summarized in Table 1. In these 147 patients, 424 peritonectomy procedures were performed with a mean of 3 peritonectomies per patient (range 0 to 5). In 18 patients (12%), no peritonectomy procedures were performed and 32 patients (22%) had all 5 peritonectomy procedures. A total of 455 visceral resections were performed. The mean number per patient was 3.1 with a range of 0 to 7. Greater omentectomy was performed in 144 patients (98%) and 4 (3%) had a total or partial gastrectomy. In two patients (1%), there were no visceral resections. Thirty-four (23%) had 2 visceral resections and an additional 34 patients (23%) had 3 visceral resections. The total number of anastomoses in all patients was 112 with a mean of 0.76 per patient (range 0–4). The most common anastomosis was a colorectal anastomosis performed in 56 patients (38%). There was a total of 43 ostomies (29%) performed. Thirty (20%) were diverting ileostomies to protect a colorectal anastomosis and, 13 (9%) were permanent-end ileostomies following total abdominal colectomy. In 39 patients (27%), no blood replacement in the operating room occurred. Only 5 patients had more than six units transfused. Sixty-seven patients (46%) received fresh frozen plasma and, 16 (11%) patients had more than four units. All 147 patients were treated with HIPEC and intravenous 5-FU in the operating room. In 65 patients (44%), EPIC was used in the postoperative period (Table 1).

3.2. Adverse Events

In these 147 patients, there was a single postoperative death (0.7%). This patient developed a profound neutropenia followed by systemic inflammatory response syndrome and multiorgan failure. The overall incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events was 17%. Thirty-five gastrointestinal events occurred in 25 patients. Nine patients had more than one gastrointestinal event. All the gastrointestinal events observed grade I through IV are summarized in Table 2. The incidence of grade III and IV events was 8% with 15 events observed in 12 patients. There were 5 grade I gastrointestinal events (4 pancreatitis and 1 chyle leak) that occurred in 5 patients. There were 15 grade II gastrointestinal events (4 pancreatitis, 1 prolonged ileus, 7 nausea/vomiting, and 1 diarrhea) that occurred in 11 patients. Four grade III gastrointestinal events (4 nausea/vomiting) occurred in 4 patients. Eleven grade IV gastrointestinal events (3 anastomotic failures, 3 fistulas, 1 pancreatic fistula, 1 pancreatitis, 1 bile leak, 1 small bowel obstruction, and 1 nausea/vomiting) occurred in 8 patients and all but two required a return to the operating room. By univariate analysis, the following variables were proven to have a statistically significant correlation with gastrointestinal morbidity (Table 3): histological grade (P = 0.0166), PCI (P = 0.0049), small bowel resection (P = 0.0493), performance of a colorectal anastomosis (P = 0.0430) and the number of anastomoses performed per patient (P = 0.0288).
Table 3

Univariate and multivariate analysis (gastrointestinal events).

Gastrointestinal events I–IV univariate analysisGastrointestinal events I–IV multivariate analysis
Yes N = 25No N = 122 P Value*/OR (95% CI)Odds Ratio P Value
Gender
 Male12560.8480 NT**
 Female13660.9 (0.4,2.2)
Age
 ≤50 year14580.4408 NT
 >50 year11640.7 (0.3,1.7)
Location
 Appendix221130.4297 NT
 Colorectal391.7 (0.4,6.8)
Grade
 Grade 15560.0166 0.4(0.1, 1.3) 0.1345
 Grades 2-320660.3 (0.1,0.8)
Prior Surgical Score
 0–2231101.0000 NT
 3–52120.8 (0.2,3.8)
Peritoneal Cancer Index (4 groups)
 0–10328Reference NT
 11–206340.72201.6 (0.4,7.2)
 21–307460.73841.4 (0.3,5.9)
 31–399140.01006.0 (1.4,25.7)
Peritoneal Cancer Index (2 groups B)
 0–30161080.0049 2.8 (0.9,8.4)  0.0586
 31+9144.3 (1.6,11.7)
Completeness of Cytoreduction
 Complete181070.0625 NT
 Incomplete7152.8 (1.0,7.7)
Peritonectomy Procedure
 Pelvic211021.00001.0 (0.3,3.3)NT
 Right Upper Quardrant19900.81661.1 (0.4,3.1)NT
 Left Upper Quardrant11610.58460.8 (0.3,1.9)NT
 Omental Bursa12580.96661.0 (0.4,2.4)NT
 Anterior Abdominal  Wall11390.24731.7 (0.7,4.0)NT
Peritonectomy Procedure per patient
 0–28470.5391 NT
 3–517751.3 (0.5,3.3)
Visceral Resections Performed
 Omentectomy241200.43080.4 (0.03,4.6)NT
 Splenectomy15690.75131.2 (0.5,2.8)NT
 Rectosigmoid colon14430.05242.3 (0.98,5.6)NT
 Right colon resection15550.17361.8 (0.8,4.4)NT
 Hysterectomy4430.06010.3 (0.1,1.1)NT
 Small bowel resection9200.04932.9 (1.1,7.4)1.3 (0.4,4.2)0.6202
 Transverse colon5150.33771.8 (0.6,5.5)NT
 Gastrectomy220.13435.2 (0.7,38.9)NT
Visceral Resections Performed per patient
 0–27490.2539NT
 3–718731.7 (0.7,4.4)
Anastomoses performed
 Esophago-jejunal110.31225.0 (0.3,83.4)NT
 Small bowel7150.06052.8 (1.0,7.7)NT
 Ileocolic7220.27411.8 (0.7,4.7)NT
 Colocolic120.43082.5 (0.2,28.7)NT
 Colorectal14420.04302.4 (1.0,5.8)1.4 (0.5,3.8)0.4986
Anastomoses performed per patient
 0–2211180.0288 1.9 (0.3,11.8) 0.4616
 3–5445.6 (1.3,24.2)
Ostomies performed
 None1589reference
 Diverting ileostomy8220.11722.2 (0.8,5.7)NT
 End ileostomy2111.00001.1 (0.2,5.4)NT
Blood replacement
 None732reference
 Blood 1–38600.37520.6 (0.2,1.8)NT
 Blood 4–69260.41781.6 (0.5,4.8)NT
 Blood > 6141.00001.1 (0.1,11.8)NT
Fresh frozen plasma replacement
 None1367reference
 Plasma 1–47440.69530.8 (0.3,2.2)NT
 Plasma > 45110.17242.3 (0.7,7.9)NT
Time in operating room (hours)
 0–628reference
 7–12181060.64450.7 (0.1,3.5)NT
 >12580.4502.3 (0.4,16.9)NT
Chemotherapy treatment
 HIPEC only10690.2314 NT
 HIPEC plus EPIC13521.7 (0.7,4.2)
 Unknown21

*: Pearson Chi-square, or Fisher's exact test if sparse distribution. **: NT means Not Tested in multivariate modeling due to non significant univariate test.

On multivariate analysis using the logistic regression model, the PCI was shown to be the only independent risk factor for gastrointestinal complications (P = 0.0586). In patients who had HIPEC plus EPIC, an additional four treatments with intraperitoneal 5-fluorouracil were given on postoperative days 1–4. Thirteen of 52 patients (25%) had a grade I–IV complication. Ten of 69 patients (14%) who had HIPEC only were observed to have a grade I–IV complication. As shown in Table 3, this was not significant by a univariate (P = 0.2314) or by the multivariate analysis.

4. Discussion

At our institution the management of peritoneal surface malignancy requires an integration of extensive surgery combined with intraperitoneal chemotherapy administered as a planed part of the surgical procedures [31]. The aim of this combined treatment modality is to remove all macroscopic tumor nodules and any adhesions between the bowel loops, in order to allow chemotherapeutic agents to be uniformly distributed within the peritoneal cavity to eradicate any microscopic tumor deposits. The potential advantages of using HIPEC compared to standard intravenous chemotherapy include an increased exposure to chemotherapeutic drugs at the peritoneal surface, an increase of drug penetration into the tissues, a synergistic effect of hyperthermia with systemic chemotherapy, and an independent cytotoxic effect of hyperthermia [32]. It is clear, however, that the effects of this regional chemotherapy are not limited to the peritoneal space. The profound effect that these treatments have on wound healing is shown by the increased incidence of gastrointestinal events. This paper represents the effort of our group to identify gastrointestinal events in patients with peritoneal surface malignancy and begin to understand their causes. We found that our overall incidence of gastrointestinal events was 17% (grade I–IV), in that 35 gastrointestinal events occurred in 25 of the 147 patients. There was often more than one gastrointestinal event per patient. The incidence of grade III and IV gastrointestinal events was 8%. Our data is compared to those reported by other authors in Table 4. We have calculated the incidence of gastrointestinal events (grades III-IV) in Glehen, Kusamura, and Hansson's manuscripts by dividing the total number of events by the total number of patients. In Youssef manuscript and in our data, we were able to calculate the incidence of events per patient (Table 4). Glehen et al. conducted a study of 207 patients treated by CRS and HIPEC with the closed abdominal technique [23]. The overall postoperative morbidity rate including all grades III-IV was 24.5%. They had 14 digestive fistulas, 11 cases of prolonged ileus, and 5 intraperitoneal abscesses. The presence of digestive fistula was significantly associated with the duration of surgery and the number of anastomoses in the univariate analysis. Kusamura et al. conducted a study of 205 patients treated by CRS and HIPEC with the closed abdominal technique [24]. The overall postoperative morbidity rate including all grade III-IV was 12%. They had 17 anastomotic leaks, 6 digestive perforations, 1 biliary fistula, 2 pancreatic fistulas, and 4 ileus/gastric stasis. The most severe complications in their series were intestinal leakage due to anastomotic insufficiency and/or intestinal perforation. This morbidity constituted approximately 70% of all cases with major morbidity. The rate of fistula in the series was 11%. They found in the multivariate analysis that the extent of cytoreduction (levels 1 and 2 versus 3) and CDDP for IPHP dose ≥ 240 mg were independent risk factors for major morbidity.
Table 4

Comparison with other series with more than 100 patients.

AuthorInstitutionYearPatient revisedHistologyGI Events RevisedGI Morbidity Grades III-IVRisk Factor for GI EventsStatistical Analysis
Glehen et al. [23]Lyon2003207Colon, PMP, ovarianDigestive fistula (14) Prolonged ileus (11) Intraperitoneal abscess (5) *15%30 eventsCarcinomatosis stageDuration of surgeryNumber of anastomosisUnivariate
Kusamura et al. [24]Milan2006205PM, PMP, ovarianAnastomotic leak (17) Digestive perforations (6) Biliary fistula (1) pancreatic fistula (2) Ileus/gastric stasis (4) *15%30 eventsExtent of cytoreductionCDDP IPHP doseMultivariate
Hansson et al. [25]Uppsala2009123Colorectal, PMP, PM, ovarianAnastomotic leak (7) Digestive perforation (11) Pancreatitis (1) Bile leak (1) Ileus (3) *19%23 eventsStoma formationDuration of surgeryPerioperative blood lossPCIMultivariate
Youssef et al. [26]BasingstokeNP456 Just 441 had resectionsPMP (appendix)Anastomotic leak (7) Pancreatic complicate (5) Intestinal fistula (8) 4.5%20 eventsNA
Present seriesWashington2011147Colon, PMP (appendix)Anastomotic failure (2) Fistula (4) Pancreatic fistula (1) Pancreatitis (1) Bile leak (1) Chyle leak (0) Prolonged ileus (0) Small bowel obst (1) Vomiting (5) Diarrhea (0) Ascites (0) 8%15 eventsGradePCISmall bowel resectionColorectal anastomosesNumber of anastomosis per patient Multivariate

* Percentage calculated from total number of events/total number of patients.

NP: Not published. NA: Not available. CDDP: cisplatin, IPHP: intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion. PM: peritoneal mesothelioma. PMP: pseudomyxoma peritonei

Hansson et al. conducted a study of 123 patients treated by CRS and HIPEC and observed grade III-IV adverse events in 51 patients (41%) [25]. In multivariate analyses, grade III-IV adverse events were associated with stoma formation, duration of surgery, perioperative blood loss, and peritoneal cancer index. Among the gastrointestinal events, 7 anastomotic leaks, 11 digestive tract perforations, 1 pancreatitis, 1 bile leak, and 3 prolonged ileus occurred. Youssef et al. conducted a study of 456 patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei syndrome of appendiceal origin [26]; grade III-IV morbidity was 7%. Seven anastomotic leaks, 5 pancreatic complications, and 8 intestinal fistulas were reported. An analysis of prognosis risk factors was not provided. In our study, we found that the histological grade, PCI, small bowel resection, colorectal anastomoses performed, and the number of anastomoses performed per patient had a statistically significant correlation with gastrointestinal morbidity; by multivariate analysis only, the PCI was an independent risk factor for gastrointestinal complications. These data suggest that CRS combined with a standardized treatment with perioperative chemotherapy is a reasonable safe treatment for selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancy. There is an acceptable gastrointestinal morbidity as compared with modern series of pancreatic-duodenectomy, gastrectomy for cancer, or other multiorgan resections.
  30 in total

1.  Intraperitoneal chemohyperthermia using a closed abdominal procedure and cytoreductive surgery for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis: morbidity and mortality analysis of 216 consecutive procedures.

Authors:  O Glehen; D Osinsky; E Cotte; F Kwiatkowski; G Freyer; S Isaac; V Trillet-Lenoir; A C Sayag-Beaujard; Y François; J Vignal; F N Gilly
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Decision-making and technical factors account for the learning curve in complex surgery.

Authors:  B J Moran
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2006-07-26       Impact factor: 2.341

Review 3.  It's what the surgeon doesn't see that kills the patient.

Authors:  P H Sugarbaker
Journal:  J Nippon Med Sch       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 0.920

4.  Cytoreductive surgery followed by intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion: analysis of morbidity and mortality in 209 peritoneal surface malignancies treated with closed abdomen technique.

Authors:  Shigeki Kusamura; Rami Younan; Dario Baratti; Pasqualina Costanzo; Myriam Favaro; Cecilia Gavazzi; Marcello Deraco
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Operative findings, early complications, and long-term survival in 456 patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei syndrome of appendiceal origin.

Authors:  Haney Youssef; Christopher Newman; Kandiah Chandrakumaran; Faheez Mohamed; Tom D Cecil; Brendan J Moran
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer: first report of the HYPER-O registry.

Authors:  Cyril William Helm; Scott D Richard; Jianmin Pan; David Bartlett; Martin D Goodman; Rick Hoefer; Sam S Lentz; Edward A Levine; Brian W Loggie; Daniel S Metzinger; Brigitte Miller; Lynn Parker; James E Spellman; Paul H Sugarbaker; Robert P Edwards; Shesh N Rai
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.437

7.  Prognostic features of 51 colorectal and 130 appendiceal cancer patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis treated by cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Authors:  P H Sugarbaker; K A Jablonski
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Complete cytoreductive surgery plus intraperitoneal chemohyperthermia with oxaliplatin for peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin.

Authors:  Dominique Elias; Jérémie H Lefevre; Julie Chevalier; Antoine Brouquet; Frédéric Marchal; Jean-Marc Classe; Gwenaël Ferron; Jean-Marc Guilloit; Pierre Meeus; Diane Goéré; Julia Bonastre
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-12-22       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  The role of hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in recurrent ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Francisco C Muñoz-Casares; Sebastián Rufián; María J Rubio; Carlos J Díaz; Rafael Díaz; Angela Casado; Alvaro Arjona; María C Muñoz-Villanueva; Jordi Muntané
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.405

10.  Learning curve of combined modality treatment in peritoneal surface disease.

Authors:  R M Smeenk; V J Verwaal; F A N Zoetmulder
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  20 in total

1.  The use of carbon dioxide insufflation to facilitate identification of intestinal injuries in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Authors:  M A Kozman; O M Fisher; S J Valle; N Alzahrani; D L Morris
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.781

2.  The effects of platelet-rich-plasma gel application to the colonic anastomosis in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: An experimental rat model.

Authors:  Sonmez Ocak; Omer F Buk; Bugra Genc; Bahattin Avcı; Hatice O Uzuner; Salih B Gundogdu
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2019-08-25       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 3.  Complications of Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC in the Treatment of Peritoneal Metastases.

Authors:  Sanket S Mehta; Maxilliano Gelli; Deepesh Agarwal; Diane Goéré
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-02-10

4.  Implications of Stoma Formation as Part of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.

Authors:  H Jacoby; Y Berger; L Barda; N Sharif; Y Zager; A Lebedyev; M Gutman; A Hoffman
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 5.  Cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy for treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal origin.

Authors:  F Losa; P Barrios; R Salazar; J Torres-Melero; M Benavides; T Massuti; I Ramos; E Aranda
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 3.405

6.  The Impact of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Four Quadrant Transversus Abdominis Plane Block on Quality of Recovery After Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Surgery: A Single-Center, Noninferiority, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Juan P Cata; Keith Fournier; German Corrales; Pascal Owusu-Agyemang; Joseph Soliz; Mauro Bravo; Jonathan Wilks; Antoinette Van Meter; Mike Hernandez; Vijay Gottumukkala
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Role of CRS and HIPEC in appendiceal and colorectal malignancies: Indian experience.

Authors:  Nikhil Gupta; Syed Asif; Jatin Gandhi; Sajjan Rajpurohit; Shivendra Singh
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-04-10

8.  Bowel Anastomosis After or Before HIPEC: A Comparative Study in Patients Undergoing CRS+HIPEC for Peritoneal Surface Malignancy.

Authors:  S P Somashekhar; Kumar C Rohit; Yethadka Ramya; Shabber S Zaveri; Vijay Ahuja; Arun Kumar Namachivayam; K R Ashwin
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-08-30       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Rare diaphragmatic complications following cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC: report of two cases.

Authors:  Benedikt Lampl; Hubert Leebmann; Max Mayr; Pompiliu Piso
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 10.  Status of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Seung Yoon Yang; Jae Hyun Kang; Ho Seung Kim; Yoon Dae Han; Byung Soh Min; Kang Young Lee
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2019-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.