Literature DB >> 25461683

Minimally invasive secondary cytoreduction plus HIPEC versus open surgery plus HIPEC in isolated relapse from ovarian cancer: a retrospective cohort study on perioperative outcomes.

Anna Fagotti1, Barbara Costantini2, Valerio Gallotta2, Stefano Cianci3, Carlo Ronsini2, Marco Petrillo2, Mara Pacciani4, Giovanni Scambia2, Francesco Fanfani2.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive secondary cytoreduction surgery (SCS) plus hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) versus open surgery plus HIPEC in a group of platinum-sensitive patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) with isolated relapse.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. PATIENTS: We selected 22 patients with a peritoneal cancer index value of 2. The laparoscopic group consisted of 11 patients who underwent laparoscopic and/or robotic complete cytoreduction plus HIPEC, whereas the laparotomic group consisted of 11 patients who underwent complete laparotomic cytoreduction plus HIPEC.
INTERVENTIONS: The minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group were platinum-sensitive single recurrent ovarian cancer patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robotic complete secondary cytoreduction plus HIPEC, whereas the open group were women with similar clinical characteristics who underwent complete secondary cytoreduction plus HIPEC by laparotomy.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The median operative time, calculated from the skin incision to the end of SCS (i.e., excluding HIPEC phase) was 125 min (range 95-150 min) in the MIS group and 295 min (range 180-420) in the open group (p = .001), with a median estimated blood loss of 50 mL (range 50-100) and 500 mL (range 50-1300), respectively (p = .025). The median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range 3-17) in the MIS group and 8.5 days (range 4-30) in the open group (p = .002). No statistically significant differences were registered in terms of intra- and postoperative complications between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION: The minimally invasive approach for SCS plus HIPEC is safe and efficient in terms of toxicity and postoperative outcomes for single isolated relapse. HIPEC should not be considered a major contraindication to a minimally invasive approach.
Copyright © 2015 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  HIPEC; Isolated platinum-sensitive relapse; Laparoscopy; Minimally invasive surgery; Ovarian cancer; Robotic

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25461683     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.11.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  19 in total

1.  Robotic-assisted cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC).

Authors:  Emmanuel Gabriel; Enrique Elli; Sanjay Bagaria; Nabil Wasif; Travis Grotz; John Stauffer; Pashtoon M Kasi; Horacio Asbun
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-05-05

2.  A novel HIPEC technique using hybrid CO2 recirculation system: intra-abdominal diffusion test in a porcine model.

Authors:  Stefano Cianci; Giuseppe Vizzielli; Anna Fagotti; Fabio Pacelli; Andrea Di Giorgio; Alessandro Tropea; Antonio Biondi; Giovanni Scambia
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2018-06-25

3.  Ovarian cancer recurrence update.

Authors:  Stefano Cianci
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 4.  Laparotomy vs. minimally invasive surgery for ovarian cancer recurrence: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stefano Uccella; Massimo P Franchi; Stefano Cianci; Pier Carlo Zorzato; Francesca Bertoli; Salvatore Gueli Alletti; Fabio Ghezzi; Giovanni Scambia
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 5.  The robotic single-port platform for gynecologic surgery: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Vito Andrea Capozzi; Giulia Armano; Andrea Rosati; Alessandro Tropea; Antonio Biondi
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2020-05-29

Review 6.  Surgery vs. chemotherapy for ovarian cancer recurrence: what is the best treatment option.

Authors:  Vito Andrea Capozzi; Andrea Rosati; Luigi Carlo Turco; Giulio Sozzi; Matteo Riccò; Benito Chiofalo; Giuseppe Vizzielli
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 7.  Secondary and tertiary ovarian cancer recurrence: what is the best management?

Authors:  Simone Garzon; Antonio Simone Laganà; Jvan Casarin; Ricciarda Raffaelli; Antonella Cromi; Massimo Franchi; Fabio Barra; Ibrahim Alkatout; Simone Ferrero; Fabio Ghezzi
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 8.  Development of new medical treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer recurrence.

Authors:  Rosanna Mancari; Giuseppe Cutillo; Valentina Bruno; Cristina Vincenzoni; Emanuela Mancini; Ermelinda Baiocco; Simone Bruni; Giuseppe Vocaturo; Benito Chiofalo; Enrico Vizza
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 9.  Role of ultrasound in the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Andrea Rosati; Salvatore Gueli Alletti; Vito Andrea Capozzi; Mariateresa Mirandola; Virginia Vargiu; Camilla Fedele; Stefano Uccella; Carmine Vascone
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-08

Review 10.  Current Recommendations for Minimally Invasive Surgical Staging in Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Anna Fagotti; Federica Perelli; Luigi Pedone; Giovanni Scambia
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2016-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.