AIM: To systematically review the available evidence regarding cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC) for colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). METHODS: An electronic literature search was carried out to identify publications reporting oncological outcome data (overall survival and/or disease free survival and/or recurrence rates) following CRS and IPC for treatment of CPM. Studies reporting outcomes following CRS and IPC for cancer subtypes other than colorectal were only included if data were reported independently for colorectal cancer-associated cases; in addition studies reporting outcomes for peritoneal carcinomatosis of appendiceal origin were excluded. RESULTS: Twenty seven studies, published between 1999 and 2013 with a combined population of 2838 patients met the predefined inclusion criteria. Included studies comprised 21 case series, 5 case-control studies and 1 randomised controlled trial. Four studies provided comparative oncological outcome data for patients undergoing CRS in combination with IPC vs systemic chemotherapy alone. The primary indication for treatment was CPM in 96% of cases (2714/2838) and recurrent CPM (rCPM) in the remaining 4% (124/2838). In the majority of included studies (20/27) CRS was combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). In 3 studies HIPEC was used in combination with early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), and 2 studies used EPIC only, following CRS. Two studies evaluated comparative outcomes with CRS + HIPEC vs CRS + EPIC for treatment of CPM. The delivery of IPC was performed using an "open" or "closed" abdomen approach in the included studies. CONCLUSION: The available evidence presented in this review indicates that enhanced survival times can be achieved for CPM after combined treatment with CRS and IPC.
AIM: To systematically review the available evidence regarding cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC) for colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). METHODS: An electronic literature search was carried out to identify publications reporting oncological outcome data (overall survival and/or disease free survival and/or recurrence rates) following CRS and IPC for treatment of CPM. Studies reporting outcomes following CRS and IPC for cancer subtypes other than colorectal were only included if data were reported independently for colorectal cancer-associated cases; in addition studies reporting outcomes for peritoneal carcinomatosis of appendiceal origin were excluded. RESULTS: Twenty seven studies, published between 1999 and 2013 with a combined population of 2838 patients met the predefined inclusion criteria. Included studies comprised 21 case series, 5 case-control studies and 1 randomised controlled trial. Four studies provided comparative oncological outcome data for patients undergoing CRS in combination with IPC vs systemic chemotherapy alone. The primary indication for treatment was CPM in 96% of cases (2714/2838) and recurrent CPM (rCPM) in the remaining 4% (124/2838). In the majority of included studies (20/27) CRS was combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). In 3 studies HIPEC was used in combination with early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), and 2 studies used EPIC only, following CRS. Two studies evaluated comparative outcomes with CRS + HIPEC vs CRS + EPIC for treatment of CPM. The delivery of IPC was performed using an "open" or "closed" abdomen approach in the included studies. CONCLUSION: The available evidence presented in this review indicates that enhanced survival times can be achieved for CPM after combined treatment with CRS and IPC.
Authors: M A Poon; M J O'Connell; C G Moertel; H S Wieand; S A Cullinan; L K Everson; J E Krook; J A Mailliard; J A Laurie; L K Tschetter Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1989-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David Cunningham; Wendy Atkin; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Henry T Lynch; Bruce Minsky; Bernard Nordlinger; Naureen Starling Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-03-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Vic J Verwaal; Henk Boot; Berthe M P Aleman; Harm van Tinteren; Frans A N Zoetmulder Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2004-03-15 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Arja Gerritsen; Thijs de Rooij; Marcel G Dijkgraaf; Olivier R Busch; Jacques J Bergman; Dirk T Ubbink; Peter van Duijvendijk; G Willemien Erkelens; Mariël Klos; Philip M Kruyt; Dirk Jan Bac; Camiel Rosman; Adriaan C Tan; I Quintus Molenaar; Jan F Monkelbaan; Elisabeth M Mathus-Vliegent; Marc G Besselink Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Emily K Elizabeth McCracken; Gregory P Samsa; Deborah A Fisher; Norma E Farrow; Karenia Landa; Kevin N Shah; Dan G Blazer; Sabino Zani Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2019-05-30 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Adriana C Gamboa; Mohammad Y Zaidi; Rachel M Lee; Shelby Speegle; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Joseph Lipscomb; Jordan M Cloyd; Ahmed Ahmed; Travis Grotz; Jennifer Leiting; Keith Fournier; Andrew J Lee; Sean Dineen; Benjamin D Powers; Andrew M Lowy; Nikhil V Kotha; Callisia Clarke; T Clark Gamblin; Sameer H Patel; Tiffany C Lee; Laura Lambert; Ryan J Hendrix; Daniel E Abbott; Kara Vande Walle; Kelly Lafaro; Byrne Lee; Fabian M Johnston; Jonathan Greer; Maria C Russell; Charles A Staley; Shishir K Maithel Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-06-26 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Seon Jeong Jeong; Yong Sik Yoon; Jung Bok Lee; Jong Lyul Lee; Chan Wook Kim; In Ja Park; Seok Byung Lim; Chang Sik Yu; Jin Cheon Kim Journal: Surg Today Date: 2016-08-22 Impact factor: 2.549