BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has gained acceptance in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis with reported morbidity and mortality rates of 27-56 and 0-11 %, respectively. The safety and oncologic outcome of genitourinary repair at the time of CRS and HIPEC remains unclear. METHODS: We identified 170 patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC at our institution between July 2007 and August 2011 with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Thirty-four (20 %) underwent concomitant urologic reconstruction at the time of CRS-HIPEC and were matched by disease burden (intraoperative peritoneal cancer index [PCI]) and extent of surgery (ΔPCI) with a cohort of 38 (22.3 %) subjects without genitourinary involvement. The primary end points considered for this analysis included the development of major surgical (Clavien-Dindo Class III-V) complications and overall survival. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 9.4 months. The most commonly performed urologic interventions included partial cystectomy with primary repair in 23 (65.7 %) and segmental ureteral resection and repair in 11 (31.4 %). Patients with genitourinary reconstruction had more total organ involvement (6.5 vs. 4.3, p < 0.001) and more commonly underwent enteric anastomoses (82.4 vs. 57.9 %, p = 0.025). No significant differences were observed with regard to major morbidity, need for transfusion, operative time, intensive care unit admission, or length of stay. Among patients with appendiceal or colonic tumors (n = 46), overall survival was similar between genitourinary reconstruction and matched cohorts: 22.5 versus 15.1 months, respectively (p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Genitourinary reconstruction at the time of CRS-HIPEC occurs more commonly in patients with extensive disease burden undergoing radical debulking, yet does not adversely influence surgical morbidity or survival.
BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has gained acceptance in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis with reported morbidity and mortality rates of 27-56 and 0-11 %, respectively. The safety and oncologic outcome of genitourinary repair at the time of CRS and HIPEC remains unclear. METHODS: We identified 170 patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC at our institution between July 2007 and August 2011 with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Thirty-four (20 %) underwent concomitant urologic reconstruction at the time of CRS-HIPEC and were matched by disease burden (intraoperative peritoneal cancer index [PCI]) and extent of surgery (ΔPCI) with a cohort of 38 (22.3 %) subjects without genitourinary involvement. The primary end points considered for this analysis included the development of major surgical (Clavien-Dindo Class III-V) complications and overall survival. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 9.4 months. The most commonly performed urologic interventions included partial cystectomy with primary repair in 23 (65.7 %) and segmental ureteral resection and repair in 11 (31.4 %). Patients with genitourinary reconstruction had more total organ involvement (6.5 vs. 4.3, p < 0.001) and more commonly underwent enteric anastomoses (82.4 vs. 57.9 %, p = 0.025). No significant differences were observed with regard to major morbidity, need for transfusion, operative time, intensive care unit admission, or length of stay. Among patients with appendiceal or colonic tumors (n = 46), overall survival was similar between genitourinary reconstruction and matched cohorts: 22.5 versus 15.1 months, respectively (p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: Genitourinary reconstruction at the time of CRS-HIPEC occurs more commonly in patients with extensive disease burden undergoing radical debulking, yet does not adversely influence surgical morbidity or survival.