Assessing feasibility and perioperative outcomes with minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy for interval debulking surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

Laparoscopic versus open approach for interval cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a matched comparative study

BACKGROUND

The use of the laparoscopic approach for the treatment of carcinomatosis from epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of both laparoscopic and open approach for interval CRS+HIPEC in a matched cohort of patients with advanced EOC.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database including 254 patients treated with interval CRS-HIPEC between January 2016 and December 2021 was performed. Patients with primary disease and limited carcinomatosis (PCI ≤ 10) were selected. A comparative analysis of patients treated by either open (O-CRS-HIPEC) or the laparoscopic (L-CRS-HIPEC) approach was conducted. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and perioperative outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were finally selected and enrolled into two comparable groups in this study. Of these, 14 patients were treated by interval L-CRS-HIPEC and 39 by interval O-CRS-HIPEC. The L-CRS-HIPEC group had a shorter hospital stay (5.6 ± 1.9 vs. 9.7 ± 9.8 days; p < 0.001) and a shorter time to return to systemic chemotherapy (4.3 ± 1.9 vs. 10.3 ± 16.8 weeks; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications between both groups. The 2-year OS and DFS was 100% and 62% in the L-CRS-HIPEC group versus 92% and 60% in the O-CRS-HIPEC group, respectively (p = 0.96; p = 0.786).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that the use of interval L-CRS-HIPEC for primary advanced EOC is associated with shorter hospital stay and return to systemic treatment while obtaining similar oncological results compared to the open approach. Further prospective research is needed to recommend this new approach for these strictly selected patients.

Complications of HIPEC for ovarian cancer surgery: evaluation over two time periods

OBJECTIVE

Cytoreductive surgery in conjunction with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is being explored in the upfront, interval, and recurrent setting in patients with ovarian cancer. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the rate of complications associated with HIPEC in epithelial ovarian cancer surgery over two time periods.

METHODS

This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022328928). A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Ovid/Medline, Ovid/Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 2004 to April 2022. We included studies reporting on patients with advanced primary or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer who underwent cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC. We evaluated two different time periods: 2004-2013 and 2014-2022. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to produce an overall summary. Subgroup analyses were planned according to recruited period for each specific complication type. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 4928 patients were included from 69 studies for this systematic review; 19 published from 2004-2013, and 50 published from 2014-2022. No significant differences were found between the two time periods in terms of blood transfusions (33% vs 51%; p=0.46; I2=95%) overall gastrointestinal complications (15% vs 21%; p=0.36; I2=98%), infectious diseases (16% vs 13%; p=0.62; I2=93%), overall respiratory complications (12% vs 12%; p=0.88; I2=91%), overall urinary complications (6% vs 12%; p=0.06; I2=94%), or thromboembolic events (5% vs 3%; p=0.25; I2=63%). Also, no differences were found in intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (89% vs 28%; p=0.06; I2=99%), reoperations (8% vs 7%; p=0.50; I2=37%), or deaths (3% vs 3%; p=0.77; I2=57%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review showed that overall complications have not changed over time for patients undergoing HIPEC in the setting of primary or recurrent ovarian cancer. There was no decrease in the rates of ICU admissions, reoperations, or deaths.

Learning curve for minimal invasive cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) procedures

PURPOSE

The benefits of the minimally invasive approach for performing cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (L-CRS + HIPEC) have been described previously, associating an early recovery with similar oncologic outcomes in patients with limited peritoneal carcinomatosis. Currently, no studies are focusing on the learning curve for this emerging procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the L-CRS + HIPEC learning curve and its knock-on effect on the perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

We identified all consecutive unselected patients who underwent L-CRS + HIPEC by a single surgeon between April 2016 and January 2022 (n = 51). Patients who underwent risk-reducing CRS + HIPEC (PCI = 0) or initial conversion due to an intraoperative PCI > 10 were excluded from the final analysis. To evaluate the learning curve, perioperative data were analysed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were included in the final analysis. Major morbidity occurred in one patient (3.8%). The difficulty of the L-CRS + HIPEC procedures was categorised as low in 23.1% (n = 6), intermediate in 19.2% (n = 5), and advanced in 57.7% (n = 15). The mean length of hospital stay was 5.4 ± 1.5 days. No patient had a conversion to open surgery. The learning curve was divided into two distinct phases: the learning phase (1-14) and the consolidation phase (15-26). A significant decrease in the operative time (375 ± 103.1 vs 239.2 ± 63.6 min) was observed with no differences in complexity, the number of peritonectomy procedures, or morbidity.

CONCLUSION

L-CRS + HIPEC is a complex procedure that must be performed in a high-volume and experienced oncologic unit, requiring a learning curve to achieve the consolidation condition, which could be established after 14 procedures.

Mininvasive Cytoreduction Surgery plus HIPEC for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

Background and objectives: The Gold-Standard treatment for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer remains cytoreductive surgery followed by systemic chemotherapy. Surgery can be performed either by an open or minimally invasive approach (MIS), although the former remains the most widely used approach. Recently, Van Driel et al. proved that adding 100 mg/m2 of Cisplatin in Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) at Interval Debulking Surgery (IDS) gives a disease-free survival (DFS) advantage. Similarly, Gueli-Alletti et al. demonstrated how the MIS approach is feasible and safe in IDS. Moreover, Petrillo et al. reported pharmacokinetic profiles with a higher chemotherapy concentration in patients undergoing HIPEC after MIS compared with the open approach. Therefore, the following review investigates the oncological and clinical safety consequences of the association between MIS and HIPEC. Methods: Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the PubMed and Scopus databases in April 2022. Studies containing data about oncological and safety outcomes were included. We registered the Review to the PROSPERO site for meta-analysis with protocol number CRD42022329503. Results: Five studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 42 patients were included in the review from three different Gynecological Oncological referral centers. The systematic review highlighted a Recurrence Rate ranging between 0 and 100%, with a 3-year Platinum-Free Survival between 10 and 70%. The most common HIPEC drug was Cisplatin, used at concentrations between 75 and 100 mg/m2 and at an average temperature of 42 °C, for 60 to 90 min. Only 1 Acute Kidney Insufficiency has been reported. Conclusions: The scarcity of clinical trials focusing on a direct comparison between MIS and the open approach followed by HIPEC in EOC treatment does not make it possible to identify an oncological advantage between these two techniques. However, the safety profiles shown are highly reassuring.

Can fluorescence-guided surgery improve optimal surgical treatment for ovarian cancer? A systematic scoping review of clinical studies

BACKGROUND

The predicament of achieving optimal surgical intervention faced by surgeons in treating ovarian cancer has driven research into improving intra-operative detection of cancer using fluorescent materials.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a literature overview on the clinical use of intra-operative fluorescence-guided surgery for ovarian cancer, either for cytoreductive surgery or sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy.

METHODS

The systematic review included studies from June 2002 until October 2021 from PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus as well as those from a search of related literature. Studies were included if they investigated the use of fluorescence-guided surgery in patients with a diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Authors charted variables related to study characteristics, patient demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, fluorescence-guided surgery material, and treatment details, and surgical, oncological, and survival outcome variables. After screening 2817 potential studies, 24 studies were included.

RESULTS

Studies investigating the role of fluorescence-guided surgery to visualize tumor deposits or SLN biopsy included the data of 410 and 118 patients, respectively. Six studies used indocyanine green tracer with a mean SLN detection rate of 92.3% with a pelvic and para-aortic detection rate of 94.8% and 96.7%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value for micrometastases detection of OTL38 and 5-aminolevulinc acid at time of cytoreduction were 92.2% vs 79.8%, 67.3% vs 94.8%, and 55.8% vs 95.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Fluorescence -guided surgery is a technique that may improve the detection rate of micrometastases and SLN identification in ovarian cancer. Further research is needed to establish whether this will lead to improved patient outcomes.

Risk factors of temperature increase after cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

Background

Cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is the standard treatment for patients with peritoneal cancer (PC). Following CRS-HIPEC, patients may also face risks caused by whole body hyperthermia. This study analyzed the incidence of temperature increases following CRS-HIPEC and identified the attendant risk factors.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was carried out among 458 patients who received CRS-HIPEC at the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University between August 2018 and January 2021. The patients were divided into two groups according to post-HIPEC axillary temperature (≥38°C), with the demographics and the laboratory test results subsequently analyzed and compared, and the risk factors pertaining to temperature increases analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

Results

During CRS-HIPEC, 32.5% (149/458) of the patients with a temperature increase had an axillary temperature of not lower than 38°C, and 8.5% (39/458) of the patients with hyperpyrexia had an axillary temperature of not lower than 39°C. Female gender, gynecological malignancies, type of chemotherapy drug, increased postoperative neutrophil percentage, and a sharp drop in postoperative prealbumin were associated with the incidence of a temperature increase and axillary temperatures of >38°C. Among these factors, the type of chemotherapy drug was identified as an independent risk factor for a temperature increase during CRS-HIPEC.

Conclusion

By determining the risk factors pertaining to temperature increases during CRS-HIPEC, medical staff can identify the attendant risks among the patients and thus take preventive measures in a timely manner to maintain the patient's body temperature at a stable level. This suggests that further clinical research should be conducted to build a risk-prediction model for temperature increases following CRS-HIPEC.

Laparoscopic Cytoreduction Combined with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) in Peritoneal Surface Malignancies (PSM): Italian PSM Oncoteam Evidence and Literature Review

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has gained increasing acceptance in clinical practice. Performing CRS and HIPEC laparoscopically represents a challenging and intriguing technical evolution. However, the experiences are limited, and the evidence is low. This retrospective analysis was performed on patients treated with laparoscopic CRS-HIPEC within the Italian Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Oncoteam. Clinical, perioperative, and follow-up data were extracted and collected on prospectively maintained databases. We added a systematic review according to the PRISMA method for English-language articles through April 2022 using the keywords laparoscopic, hyperthermic, HIPEC, and chemotherapy. From 2016 to 2022, fourteen patients were treated with Lap-CRS-HIPEC with curative intent within the Italian centers. No conversion to open was observed. The median duration of surgery was 487.5 min. The median Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) was 3, and complete cytoreduction was achieved in all patients. Two patients (14.3%) had major postoperative complications, one requiring reintervention. After a median follow-up of 16.9 months, eleven patients were alive without disease (78.6%), two patients developed recurrence (14.3%), and one patient died for unrelated causes (7.1%). The literature review confirmed these results. In conclusion, current evidence shows that Lap-CRS-HIPEC is feasible, safe, and associated with a favorable outcome in selected patients. An accurate patient selection will continue to be paramount in choosing this treatment.

Does MIS Play a Role in the Treatment of Advanced Ovarian Cancer?

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy allows a minimally invasive approach for interval debulking in patients with ovarian cancer considered unresectable to no residual disease by laparotomy at diagnosis. The aim of the study was to evaluate the type of surgical approach at interval debulking (ID) after three courses of carboplatin and taxol in patients with unresectable ovarian cancer at diagnosis compared with the type of surgical approach at primary debulking (PD). A secondary objective was to compare the perioperative outcomes of MIS vs. laparotomy at ID. A retrospective review of the type of surgical approach at ID following three courses of carboplatin and taxol was compared with the surgical approach at PD, and a review of the perioperative outcomes of MIS vs. open at ID was performed during the period from 21 January 2012, through 21 February 2013, for stage IIIC > 2 cm or IV epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) unresectable at diagnosis and the surgical approach at PD. During the study period, 127 patients with stage IIIC or IV EOC met the inclusion criteria. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), laparoscopic or robotic, was used in 21.6% of patients at ID and in 23.3% of patients at PD. At ID, MIS patients had a shorter hospital stay as compared to laparotomy (2 vs. 8 days; p < 0.001). At 5 year follow-up, 31.5% of EOC patients were alive (ID MIS: 47.5% vs. ID open: 30%; PD MIS: 41% vs. PD open: 28%), while 24.4% had no evidence of disease (ID MIS: 39% vs. ID open: 19.5%; PD MIS: 32% vs. PD open: 22%). Among living patients, 22% had evidence of disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a form of chemo-debulking and allows a minimally invasive approach at interval debulking in about one-fifth of the patients, with initial disease deemed unresectable to no residual tumor at initial diagnosis.

Assessment of Travel Distance for Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Women with Ovarian Cancer

•

The median travel distance in women with EOC undergoing CRS with HIPEC was 57.0 miles in women with EOC.

•

Over 20% of patients treated at our institution traveled more than 100 miles for HIPEC procedures.

•

No differences were observed in post-operative complications or oncologic outcomes based upon travel distance.

Objective (s)

To evaluate travel distance in women with advanced or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (OC) undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and the subsequent impact upon outcomes.

Methods

An IRB-approved single-institution prospective registry was queried for women with OC who underwent HIPEC from 1/1/2009–12/1/2020. Demographic, oncologic, and surgical data were recorded. The patient's home zip code was compared to the institutional zip code to determine travel distance using Google Maps. Patients were divided into three strata for analysis: 1) local: ≤50 miles, 2) regional: 51–99 miles, and 3) distant: ≥100 miles and univariate analysis was performed.

Results

Of 127 women, the median distance travelled was 57.0 miles (IQR: 20.6, 84.6). There were no significant differences in mild (28.3% vs. 26.3 vs. 24.1%), moderate (21.7% vs. 15.8% vs. 17.2%) or severe postoperative complications (11.7% vs. 5.3% vs. 17.2%) (p = 0.75) for local, regional and distant patients, respectively. There was no difference in progression-free survival (17.4 vs. 22.2 vs. 12.8 months, p > 0.05) or overall survival (57.3 vs. 61.6 vs. 29.2 months, p > 0.05) for local, regional or distant patients, respectively.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that women with OC are willing to travel for HIPEC, with over 50% traveling > 50 miles. Our results suggest that women who travel for HIPEC procedures are not at increased risk for perioperative complications or worse oncologic outcomes than those local to HIPEC centers.

Anastomotic leak following interval debulking surgery with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in women with advanced epithelial ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVE(S)

To evaluate the incidence and associated risk factors for anastomotic failure following interval debulking surgery (IDS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in women with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study in women with stage III/IV high-grade ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by IDS with colorectal resection and HIPEC from 2017 to 2020. These patients were compared to a historical control cohort who underwent IDS with colorectal resection without HIPEC from 2009 to 2016. Data was collected for demographics, surgical variables, and perioperative outcomes. The univariate analysis compared progression-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

61 women were identified; 21 (34.4%) underwent IDS with HIPEC from 2017 to 2020, and 40 underwent IDS alone from 2009 to 2016. None of the patients who had IDS with HIPEC had protective ileostomy, compared to 10.0% of those who received had IDS alone (n = 4)(p = 0.29). The cumulative incidence of anastomotic leak rate was 8.2% (n = 5). There was no significant difference in anastomotic leak rate for women who underwent IDS with HIPEC (9.5%, n = 2) versus without HIPEC (7.5%, n = 3) (p = 0.99). While there was no difference in PFS (12.2 vs. 13.3 months, log-rank p = 0.31), OS (9.4 vs. 40.6 months, log-rank p = 0.013) was significantly decreased following postoperative anastomotic leak.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective series of women with advanced ovarian cancer, HIPEC was not associated with increased risk for anastomotic leak at the time of IDS with colorectal resection and reanastomosis. While further study is needed, HIPEC alone should not preclude colorectal resection or dictate practices for colonic diversion in IDS.

Modified frailty index predicts postoperative complications in women with gynecologic cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE(S)

To evaluate the impact of frailty on postoperative complications following cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intra-peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in women with advanced or recurrent gynecologic cancer.

METHODS

An IRB-approved single-institution prospective registry was queried for women who underwent CRS with HIPEC for advanced or recurrent gynecologic cancer from 1/1/2014-12/31/2020. Frailty was defined as a modified Frailty Index (mFI) score of ≥2. Logistic regression was used to assess the impact of mFI upon the rate of moderate or higher (≥ grade 2) Accordion postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Of 141 women, 81.6% (n = 115) were non-frail with mFI of 0-1 and 18.4% (n = 26) were frail with mFI ≥2. The incidence of ≥ grade 2 complications was 21.2% (n = 14) for mFI = 0, 26.5% (n = 13) for mFI = 1, 64.7% (n = 11) for mFI = 2 and 100.0% (n = 9) for patients with mFI ≥3. The incidence of re-operation (1.7% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.044), ICU admission (13.2% vs. 34.6%, p = 0.018), acute kidney injury (6.3% vs. 30.8%, p = 0.001), and respiratory failure (0.9% vs. 19.2%, p < 0.001) were significantly lower amongst non-frail vs. frail women. On multivariable analysis, mFI ≥2 was associated with significantly increased ≥ grade 2 complications versus mFI of 0-1 (OR 9.4, 95% CI 3.3, 26.4, p < 0.001). Age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00, 1.09, p = 0.07), surgical indication (recurrent vs. primary) (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.30, 1.7, p = 0.44) and Surgical Complexity Score of Intermediate or High vs. Low (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.67, 3.5, p = 0.31) were not associated with ≥grade 2 complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty, defined by the modified frailty index, is predictive of ≥grade 2 postoperative complications following CRS with HIPEC in women with gynecologic cancer. Frailty screening before CRS with HIPEC may assist patient selection and improve postoperative outcomes.