Laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with colorectal cancer peritoneal carcinomatosis: initial results from a single center. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1555-1562. [PMID: 24368743 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-013-3351-3]

Comparison of EPIC Versus HIPEC in the Treatment of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases and Appendix Tumors Using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting

BACKGROUND

The selection of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) or early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) for peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer or appendiceal neoplasms following cytoreductive surgery (CRS) depends on the surgeon's discretion. This study was designed to compare postoperative and oncologic outcomes of HIPEC and EPIC using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).

METHODS

This study included 175 patients who received HIPEC or EPIC following CRS at a single tertiary university hospital between December 1999 and December 2020. Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis was performed to control for pretreatment characteristics between the two groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine factors associated with postoperative and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

After IPTW, no significant differences in baseline demographics and tumor characteristics were observed between the two groups. The HIPEC group had a significantly longer operation time than the EPIC group. The EPIC group showed a significantly higher postoperative mortality rate than the HIPEC group. Operation time (odds ratio [OR] 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.02; p < 0.001), bowel anastomosis (OR 7.25; 95% CI 1.16-45.2; p = 0.034), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 7.62; 95% CI 1.85-31.4; p = 0.005), and EPIC (OR 8.76; 95% CI 2.16-35.5; p = 0.002) were independent risk factors for major surgical complications. No association was observed between intraperitoneal chemotherapy type and major hematologic toxicity, overall survival, progression-free survival, or peritoneal progression-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

EPIC was a risk factor for major surgical complications. Survival outcomes were similar between the two types of intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Outcomes of minimal access cytoreductive surgery (M-CRS) and HIPEC/EPIC vs. open cytoreductive surgery (O-CRS) and HIPEC/EPIC in patients with peritoneal surface malignancies: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Minimal Access Surgery (MAS) has shown better peri-operative outcomes with equivalent oncological outcomes in gastrointestinal and thoracic oncology. Open CRS (O-CRS) procedure accompanies inevitable and significant surgical morbidity in patients. The aim of the review article is to compare outcomes of M-CRS and HIPEC/EPIC with open procedure in peritoneal surface malignancies.

Content

Comprehensive search of databases was done and total 2,807 articles were found (2793-PubMed and 14-Cochrane review). PRISMA flow chart was prepared and 14 articles were selected. Meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines using random-effects model (DerSimonian Laird) and fixed effect model. Publication bias was tested with Funnel plot and Egger's regression test. Quality of studies was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Summary and Outlook

Patients in both groups [total (732), M-CRS(319), O-CRS(413)] were similar in demographic characteristics. Peri-operative outcomes were significantly better in M-CRS group in terms of blood loss SMD=-2.379, p<0.001 (95 % CI -2.952 to -1.805), blood transfusion RR=0.598, p=0.011 (95 % CI 0.402 to 0.889), bowel recovery SMD=-0.843, p=0.01 (95 % CI -1.487 to -0.2), hospital stay SMD=-2.348, p<0.001 (95 % CI -3.178 to -1.519) and total morbidity RR=0.538, p<0.001 (95 % CI 0.395 to 0.731). Duration of surgery SMD=-0.0643 (95 % CI -0.993 to 0.865, p=0.892) and CC0 score RR=1.064 (95 % CI 0.992 to 1.140, p=0.083) had no significant difference. Limited studies which evaluated survival showed similar outcomes. This meta-analysis shows that M-CRS and HIPEC/EPIC is feasible and has better peri-operative outcomes compared to open procedure in patients with limited peritoneal carcinoma index (PCI) peritoneal surface malignancies. Survival outcomes were not calculated. Further studies are warranted in this regard.

Minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer, a look back to look forward: a personal history

While laparoscopic colonoscopy was reported by several surgeons in the early 1990s, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has been attempted sporadically since 1992 in Korea. Then, in 2000, the Korean Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group was established. Didactic lectures, videos, and live surgery by the early pioneers of this group inspired and helped many surgeons initiate the laparoscopic approach to the treatment of colorectal disease. As a result, the penetration rate of minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery nationwide is increasing to 80% in 2018. As a witness on this journey, I would like to share my personal minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery history and perspectives on future surgery in this field.

Lobaplatin hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy plus cytoreduction and rechallenge using cetuximab for wild-type RAS peritoneal metastatic colon cancer: a case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Synchronous peritoneal metastasis of colorectal cancer usually predicts a bleak prognosis. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and cytoreductive surgery (CRS) have brought a glimmer of hope to the treatment of peritoneal cancer. Few cases treated with lobaplatin have been reported in the literature and the regimen is controversial. In this case, the comprehensive treatment scheme of lobaplatin-based HIPEC plus CRS and rechallenge using cetuximab plus systemic chemotherapy is effective, especially for the patients with left colon cancer (wild-type RAS).

CASE PRESENTATION

A 49 year-old man with signet ring cell carcinoma of sigmoid colon with extensive abdominal metastasis (wild-type RAS) was hospitalized with prolonged abdominal pain, distention and abdominal mass. After receiving HIPEC with lobaplatin and XELOX regimen combined with cetuximab for eight cycles, the patient had been treated with the FOLFIRI regimen and cetuximab for 24 cycles, which discontinued due to myelosuppression. Because the disease recurred unfortunately 4 months later, the FOLFIRI + cetuximab regimen was initiated again and stopped after two cycles. Intestinal obstruction occurred 1 month later, so open total colectomy, CRS + HIPEC and ileorectal anastomosis were performed. Capecitabine adjuvant chemotherapy was administered, followed by the maintenance therapy with FOLFIRI + cetuximab regimen. After that, the patient has been in relatively stable condition. By August 2021, the overall survival is more than 45 months, which displays significant curative effect.

CONCLUSION

For peritoneal metastasis from left colon cancer, the management with CRS + lobaplatin HIPEC and rechallenge of systemic chemotherapy plus targeted medicine based on gene detection can dramatically improve prognosis and extend the overall survival.

Colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases: Biology, treatment and next steps

The presence of peritoneal metastases in patients with advanced colorectal cancer is associated with poor prognosis but the mechanisms for this are unclear. This review summarises the current knowledge of the pathophysiology, clinical features, prevalence, prognosis, and molecular biology of peritoneal metastases and the risk factors for the development of peritoneal metastases following resection of a primary colorectal tumour. Furthermore, the evidence for treatment strategies are described including cytoreductive surgery, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, early post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy, sequential post-operative intraperitoneal chemotherapy and emerging novel strategies. Active areas of research should include the identification of individuals at high risk of peritoneal metastases after curative resection of primary tumour, development of a surveillance program for high-risk patients, optimisation of systematic therapies and further investigation of the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for perforated low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms

Introduction

Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is an established treatment for pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) from perforated low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMN II). In a selected group of LAMN II patients without established PMP, CRS/HIPEC can be performed laparoscopically (L-CRS/HIPEC); however the short-term benefits and safety of this approach have yet to be determined. This study aims to determine the short-term outcomes from a series of L-CRS/HIPEC LAMN II patients compared to those who have undergone a similar open operation (O-CRS/HIPEC) for low-volume PMP.

Methods

LAMN II patients undergoing L-CRS/HIPEC at a UK national peritoneal tumour centre were compared to O-CRS/HIPEC patients (peritoneal cancer index ≤ 7). Outcomes of interest included Clavien–Dindo complication grade, operative time, blood transfusions, high dependency unit (HDU) admission, length of hospital stay, and histopathological findings.

Results

55 L-CRS/HIPEC were compared to 29 O-CRS/HIPEC patients (2003–2017). Groups were matched for age, sex, and procedures. Median operative time was 8.8 (IQR 8.1–9.5) h for L-CRS/HIPEC versus 7.3 (IQR 6.7–8) h for O-CRS/HIPEC (Mann–Whitney test p < 0.001). Post-operative HDU admission was 56% versus 97% (OR 0.04 95% CI 0.01–0.34) and median length of stay = 6 (IQR 5–8) versus 10 (IQR 8–11) days (p < 0.001) for L- versus O-CRS/HIPEC. Despite a normal pre-operative CT scan, 13/55 (23.6%) L-CRS/HIPEC patients had acellular mucin and 2/55 (3.5%) had mucin with epithelium present in their specimens. Residual appendix tumour was identified in 2/55 patients (3.6%). Clavien–Dindo Grade 1–4 complications were similar in both groups with no mortality.

Conclusion

L-CRS/HIPEC for LAMN II takes longer; however patients have significantly reduced length of HDU and overall stay, without increased post-operative complications. A significant proportion of LAMN II patients undergoing L-CRS/HIPEC have extra-appendiceal acellular mucin with some cases demonstrating residual cellular epithelium from the LAMN II. The risk of these patients developing PMP without surgery is under current review.

Cytoreductive Surgery and Intraperitoneal Hyperthermic Chemotherapy (HIPEC) by Minimally Invasive Approach, an Initial Experience

BACKGROUND

The cytoreductive surgery (CRS) associated with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has become the standard treatment in patients with carcinomatosis peritoneal from different origins. The use of a minimally invasive approach for this high complex procedure might be an alternative that provides them less morbidity and faster recovery with similar oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

We describe the initial experience of CRS and HIPEC done via the laparoscopic route in patients with minimal peritoneal metastases in our Unit from March 2016 to January 2018.

RESULTS

A total of eight patients were operated by this minimally invasive approach. The different diagnoses were low-grade pseudomyxoma peritonei (2), benign multicystic mesothelioma (2), primary epithelial ovarian carcinomatosis (2) and locally advanced colon carcinoma T4 (2). The median age was 54 (20-62) years, the median PCI was 3 (2-4), the median operative time was 287 min (240-360), complete cytoreduction CC0 was achieved in all the patients, and no major morbidity was observed. The median length of stay was 4.75 days (4-5). After a median follow-up of 9.5 months, no relapse has been observed.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that this minimally invasive approach for CRS and HIPEC is feasible and safe in a highly selected group of patients with peritoneal surface malignancies.

Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery in patients with limited peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety of laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery versus open surgery for patients with limited peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Laparoscopic surgery for patients with colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases has been performed at our institution since December 2004. We retrospectively evaluated data from patients with colorectal cancer metastatic to the peritoneum, with a peritoneal cancer index ≤10. We compared short-term operative and survival outcomes in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group and open cytoreductive surgery group.

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients underwent open cytoreductive surgery and 42 underwent laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery, of whom 6 (14%) required open conversion. Clinicopathologic characteristics and operative outcomes were comparable between the groups. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in all patients in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group and in 19 patients (91%) in the open cytoreductive surgery group (P = .042). Both the mean hospital stay and use of postoperative narcotics were significantly less in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group than in the open cytoreductive surgery group. The type of operation (open cytoreductive surgery versus laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery) was not related to survival outcomes.

CONCLUSION

With careful selection by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery was technically feasible and safe to treat colorectal cancer patients with limited peritoneal metastases.

A minimally invasive approach for peritonectomy procedures and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in limited peritoneal carcinomatosis: The American Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (ASPSM) multi-institution analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is playing an increasing role in the treatment of patients with gastrointestinal and gynaecological malignancies as the data show reduced morbidity, faster recovery and similar oncological outcome when compared to open procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The American Society of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (ASPSM) conducted a retrospective study to analyse peritonectomy procedures and HIPEC done via the laparoscopic route. A database with standard clinical and pathological parameters was set up and distributed amongst ASPSM members. Rate of relapse, morbidity and mortality were the primary endpoints of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients from 7 centres around the world were identified. Sixty percent were female. Mean age was 50 years. Peritoneal carcinomatosis from appendiceal origin was the most common diagnosis in a 64.9% of patients and colon origin was diagnosed in 16.5% of patients. Mean peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 4.1 (0-10). Forty-one percent of patients had a bowel resection. Mean operative time was 4.7 h (2.5-8). All patients had a complete cytoreduction and HIPEC. Grade 3 and 4 morbidity was 3.0 and 6.5%, respectively. The most common reason for re-operation was an internal hernia in 2 out of 5 cases. Operative mortality and re-admission rates were 0 and 5%, respectively. Mean hospital stay was 7.4 days (1-18). At a mean follow-up of 31.6 months, 15/90 patients have a disease relapse but loco-regional relapse was identified in only five patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of these data suggests that minimally invasive approach for peritonectomy procedures and HIPEC is feasible, safe and should be considered as part of the armamentarium for highly selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies with limited tumour burden, defined as PCI of 10 or less and borderline tumours as low-grade pseudomyxoma and benign multicystic mesothelioma.

Outcome following incomplete surgical cytoreduction combined with intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases

Cytoreductive surgery combined with intraperitoneal chemotherapy can improve survival in appropriately selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases. Outcomes are best in those patients in whom a complete cytoreduction can be achieved. Unresectable disease is however encountered in approximately one-quarter of patients at laparotomy. The merits, or otherwise, of proceeding with an incomplete cytoreduction in this setting are unclear. We performed a review of published outcomes following incomplete cytoreduction for colorectal peritoneal metastases. Using the electronic databases, PubMed and MEDLINE, a systematic search of available literature published during the period January 1997 to September 2014 was conducted. Following application of exclusion criteria, 19 papers were identified and included in this review. These comprised fifteen case series, 3 case control studies and one randomised control trial. In the nineteen studies included in this review, 2790 patients underwent cytoreductive surgery with or without intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal metastases of colorectal origin. Of these, 1732 (62%) underwent a complete cytoreduction while 986 (35%) patients underwent an incomplete cytoreduction. Median survival in the complete cytoreduction group ranged from 11 to 62 mo while survival in the latter group ranged from 2.4 to 32 mo. Of the 986 patients with an incomplete cytoreduction, 331 patients received intraperitoneal chemotherapy and survival in this cohort ranged from 4.5 to 32 mo. An incomplete cytoreduction, with or without intraperitoneal chemotherapy, does not appear to confer a survival benefit. The limited available data points to a palliative benefit in a subset of patients. In the absence of high quality data, the decision as to whether or not to proceed with surgery should be made on an individual patient basis.