Tali Shaltiel1, Daniel Solomon1, Eric R Pletcher1, Benjamin J Golas1, Deepa R Magge1, Umut Sarpel1, Daniel M Labow1, Noah A Cohen2. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology Division, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Medical Center, E. 98th Street. Suite 7A, Box 1103, New York, NY, 10029, USA. 2. Division of Surgical Oncology Division, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Medical Center, E. 98th Street. Suite 7A, Box 1103, New York, NY, 10029, USA. Noah.Cohen@mountsinai.org.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The role of laparoscopy in cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is not well established. Herein, we describe our early experience of laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC in patients with low-volume peritoneal disease compared to patients who underwent open CRS/HIPEC during the same time period. METHODS: Using a prospectively maintained database, patients who underwent laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC were compared to a control cohort of patients who underwent open CRS/HIPEC, matched for peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI), completeness of cytoreduction, and tumor histology. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2017, 16 patients underwent laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC and were compared to a matched control cohort of 32 patients who underwent open CRS/HIPEC. Clinical and demographic data were similar between the groups. PCI, number of resected organs, and optimal cytoreduction rates were comparable. Patients who underwent laparoscopic experienced a lower estimated blood loss, (median, [IQR 1-3]); 150 mL, [50-300] vs. 100 mL, [50-125], p = 0.04, shorter length of stay (median [IQR 1-3]; 4 days [3-6] vs. 6 days [5-8], p < 0.01, and a lower 30-day complication rate (6.3% vs. 56.3%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in progression-free survival (p = 0.577) and overall survival (p = 0.472) between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study demonstrates that laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC is feasible and safe for curative treatment in selected patients with low tumor volume. Minimally invasive CRS/HIPEC is associated with fewer postoperative complications and shorter length of stay. There was no difference in long-term oncological outcomes between the groups.
INTRODUCTION: The role of laparoscopy in cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is not well established. Herein, we describe our early experience of laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC in patients with low-volume peritoneal disease compared to patients who underwent open CRS/HIPEC during the same time period. METHODS: Using a prospectively maintained database, patients who underwent laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC were compared to a control cohort of patients who underwent open CRS/HIPEC, matched for peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI), completeness of cytoreduction, and tumor histology. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2017, 16 patients underwent laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC and were compared to a matched control cohort of 32 patients who underwent open CRS/HIPEC. Clinical and demographic data were similar between the groups. PCI, number of resected organs, and optimal cytoreduction rates were comparable. Patients who underwent laparoscopic experienced a lower estimated blood loss, (median, [IQR 1-3]); 150 mL, [50-300] vs. 100 mL, [50-125], p = 0.04, shorter length of stay (median [IQR 1-3]; 4 days [3-6] vs. 6 days [5-8], p < 0.01, and a lower 30-day complication rate (6.3% vs. 56.3%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in progression-free survival (p = 0.577) and overall survival (p = 0.472) between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study demonstrates that laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC is feasible and safe for curative treatment in selected patients with low tumor volume. Minimally invasive CRS/HIPEC is associated with fewer postoperative complications and shorter length of stay. There was no difference in long-term oncological outcomes between the groups.
Authors: S Bonvalot; A Cavalcanti; C Le Péchoux; P Terrier; D Vanel; J Y Blay; A Le Cesne; D Elias Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Vic J Verwaal; Serge van Ruth; Eeclo de Bree; Gooike W van Sloothen; Harm van Tinteren; Henk Boot; Frans A N Zoetmulder Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-10-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Dominique Elias; Jean-Robert Delperro; Lucas Sideris; Ellen Benhamou; Marc Pocard; Olivier Baton; Marc Giovannini; Philippe Lasser Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: N Bakrin; F N Gilly; D Baratti; J M Bereder; F Quenet; G Lorimier; F Mohamed; D Elias; O Glehen Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2013-03-16 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Willemien J van Driel; Simone N Koole; Karolina Sikorska; Jules H Schagen van Leeuwen; Henk W R Schreuder; Ralph H M Hermans; Ignace H J T de Hingh; Jacobus van der Velden; Henriëtte J Arts; Leon F A G Massuger; Arend G J Aalbers; Victor J Verwaal; Jacobien M Kieffer; Koen K Van de Vijver; Harm van Tinteren; Neil K Aaronson; Gabe S Sonke Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-01-18 Impact factor: 91.245