Robotic low anterior resection with total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and en bloc pelvic peritonectomy followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the multi-modal treatment of rectosigmoid cancer with peritoneal seeding - A video vignette

Robotic cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: is there a benefit?

BACKGROUND

Open cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a therapeutic option for the management of malignancies with peritoneal carcinomatosis and of peritoneal origin. Robotic surgery shows promise as a minimally invasive approach for select patients. We aimed to evaluate the differences in outcomes between robotic versus open CRS/HIPEC and hypothesized less morbidity and faster recovery in the robotic approach group.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study from our HIPEC database including all tumor origins. We included patients aged 18-89 years who underwent CRS/HIPEC for curative intent at a single institution between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2023. Patients were stratified by open versus robotic-assisted surgery. Mann-Whitney U and Fisher Exact tests were used to compare differences in patient characteristics and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients underwent CRS/HIPEC for curative intent, with 95 (85.6%) cases performed open and 16 (14.4%) robotically. The groups were demographically similar, except patients undergoing robotic CRS/HIPEC had a significantly higher median income ($83,845 vs. $70,519, p < 0.001). Rate of comorbidities and cancer type, including appendiceal, colorectal, and ovarian, were the same. The peritoneal carcinomatosis index and completion of cytoreduction score were similar between groups. Robotic approach was associated with statistically significant lower estimated blood loss (113 vs. 400 mL, p < 0.001) and postoperative transfusions (6.3% vs. 23.2%, p = 0.036). Total complications, readmission rates, and 30-day mortality were similar among groups, but the robotic group had a significantly shorter length of stay (5.5 vs. 9 d., p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Robotic CRS/HIPEC holds promise to decrease intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusions, and hospital stay while providing similar immediate postoperative outcomes in select patients. These results should be validated in the setting of a prospective trial and effects on long-term oncologic outcomes should be investigated.

Robotic and Laparoscopic Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy, Multicenter Study From Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal metastasis (PM) is a common evolution of abdominal tumors. Without aggressive multimodal treatment, it is associated with a poor prognosis. The aim of this study is to present a multicenter results from Saudi Arabia on minimally invasive CRS and HIIPEC.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective maintained multicenter database was queried for all patients treated with laparoscopic or robotic CRS and HIPEC between 2019 and 2024 in Saudi Arabia. Surgical and oncological outcome was analyzed.

RESULTS

Eleven consecutive patients underwent minimally invasive CRS and HIPEC between 2019 and 2024. Eight patients (72.7%) were operated by laparoscopy, one of them by single port access and three patients (27.3%) were operated robotically. Six patients (54.5%) were female. Median age was 42 (29-64). Primary tumor was PMP from the appendix, colon, and MCM in 6 (54.5%), 4 (36.4%), and 1 (9.1%) respectively. The median duration to complete the surgical procedure for all patients was 330 (230-580) min and for robotic CRS the median docking time was 570 (330-580) min. Median PCI was 2 (1-7) and completeness Cytoreduction (CC score 0) was achieved in the all patients (100%). Median hospital stay was 8 days (3-20). Four patients had one night postoperative ICU stay. Major morbidity (CTCAE) 3 and 4 occurred in three patients (27.3%) (Port site hernia, bleeding, and wound infection). No readmission to the hospital and no 90 days mortalities.

CONCLUSION

The minimally invasive approach by laparoscopy or robot is a feasible and promising option for CRS and HIPEC. It reduces the hospital stay, early return to intended oncological treatment (RIOT). Further prospective clinical studies are needed to evaluate this approach.

Pelvic Peritonectomy Poorly Affects Outcomes in Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Colorectal Metastases

BACKGROUND

Constraints of pelvic anatomy render complete cytoreduction (CRS) challenging. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of pelvic peritonectomy during CRS/HIPEC on colorectal peritoneal metastasis (CRPM) patients' outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained CRS/hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) database. The analysis included 217 patients with CRPM who had a CRS/HIPEC between 2014 and 2021. We compared perioperative and oncological outcomes of patients with pelvic peritonectomy (PP) (n = 63) to no pelvic peritonectomy (non-PP) (n = 154).

RESULTS

No differences in demographics were identified. The peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was higher in the PP group with a median PCI of 12 vs. 6 in the non-PP group (p < 0.001). Operative time was 4.9 vs. 4.3 h in the PP and non-PP groups, respectively (p = 0.63). Median hospitalization was longer in the PP group at 12 vs. 10 days (p = 0.007), and the rate of complications were higher in the PP group at 57.1% vs. 39.6% (p = 0.018). Pelvic peritonectomy was associated with worse disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) with 3-year DFS and OS of 7.3 and 46.3% in the PP group vs. 28.2 and 87.8% in the non-PP group (p = 0.028, p .> 0.001). The univariate OS analysis identified higher PCI (p = 0.05), longer surgery duration (p = 0.02), and pelvic peritonectomy (p < 0.001) with worse OS. Pelvic peritonectomy remained an independent prognostic variable, irrespective of PCI, on the multivariate analysis (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic peritonectomy at the time of CRS/HIPEC is associated with higher morbidity and worse oncological outcomes. These findings should be taken into consideration in the management of patients with pelvic involvement.

Primary and metastatic peritoneal surface malignancies

Peritoneal surface malignancies comprise a heterogeneous group of primary tumours, including peritoneal mesothelioma, and peritoneal metastases of other tumours, including ovarian, gastric, colorectal, appendicular or pancreatic cancers. The pathophysiology of peritoneal malignancy is complex and not fully understood. The two main hypotheses are the transformation of mesothelial cells (peritoneal primary tumour) and shedding of cells from a primary tumour with implantation of cells in the peritoneal cavity (peritoneal metastasis). Diagnosis is challenging and often requires modern imaging and interventional techniques, including surgical exploration. In the past decade, new treatments and multimodal strategies helped to improve patient survival and quality of life and the premise that peritoneal malignancies are fatal diseases has been dismissed as management strategies, including complete cytoreductive surgery embedded in perioperative systemic chemotherapy, can provide cure in selected patients. Furthermore, intraperitoneal chemotherapy has become an important part of combination treatments. Improving locoregional treatment delivery to enhance penetration to tumour nodules and reduce systemic uptake is one of the most active research areas. The current main challenges involve not only offering the best treatment option and developing intraperitoneal therapies that are equivalent to current systemic therapies but also defining the optimal treatment sequence according to primary tumour, disease extent and patient preferences. New imaging modalities, less invasive surgery, nanomedicines and targeted therapies are the basis for a new era of intraperitoneal therapy and are beginning to show encouraging outcomes.