1
|
Hablase R, Steinke J, Aslam A, Jose R, Palaiologos K, Uwins C, Tailor A, Chatterjee J, Ellis P, Patel H, Scala A, Butler-Manuel S. Anastomotic leakage in colorectal and ovarian cancer resections: A comparative cohort study. Gynecol Oncol 2025; 196:121-128. [PMID: 40199196 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2025.03.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2025] [Revised: 03/18/2025] [Accepted: 03/19/2025] [Indexed: 04/10/2025]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare anastomotic leak (AL) rates after colorectal resections performed by colorectal surgeons in ovarian and colorectal cancer surgeries, examining predictive risk factors, short-term and survival outcomes, and early AL markers in ovarian cancer patients. METHODS Single-centre retrospective study comparing AL rates between 233 ovarian debulking surgeries from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2022, and 408 gender-matched colorectal cancer patients from January 2014 to December 2022 at the Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, UK. Predictive risk factors were assessed using logistic regression and the overall survival using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards model. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted for C-reactive protein (CRP) values from postoperative days one to five. RESULTS 19 % of ovarian cancer patients underwent colorectal resection, of which 90 % had primary anastomosis. AL rates were 4.7 % and 1.9 % (p = 0.08) for the ovarian and colorectal groups respectively. Covering stoma rates were 11.6 % in the ovarian and 15 % in the colorectal group. 80 % in the ovarian group had rectosigmoid resections. Delays in chemotherapy and residual disease were independent risk factors for increased risk of death in ovarian interval debulking surgery. HR 1.03 (95 % CI: 1.01-1.05, p = 0.008) and HR 2.02 (95 % CI: 1.11-3.68, p = 0.021). CRP on days three and four had a 98 % negative predictive value at a cut-off of 286 mg/L and 232 mg/L, respectively. CONCLUSION Ovarian cancer patients are at high risk of AL. Preventative measures should be considered. Low CRP on post-operative days three and four may be used exclude AL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Radwa Hablase
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK; College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB83PH, UK.
| | - Jacqueline Steinke
- Colorectal Surgery Department, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK; University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XP, UK
| | - Aqsa Aslam
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Rhea Jose
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Konstantinos Palaiologos
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Christina Uwins
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Anil Tailor
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Jayanta Chatterjee
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK; College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB83PH, UK
| | - Patricia Ellis
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Hersha Patel
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Andrea Scala
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| | - Simon Butler-Manuel
- Academic Department of Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford GU2 7XX, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Trillsch F, Czogalla B, Mahner S, Loidl V, Reuss A, du Bois A, Sehouli J, Raspagliesi F, Meier W, Cibula D, Mustea A, Runnebaum IB, Schmalfeldt B, Aletti G, Kimmig R, Scambia G, Hilpert F, Hasenburg A, Wagner U, Harter P. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage and its impact on survival outcomes in radical multivisceral surgery for advanced ovarian cancer: an AGO-OVAR.OP3/LION exploratory analysis. Int J Surg 2025; 111:2914-2922. [PMID: 39992106 DOI: 10.1097/js9.0000000000002306] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2024] [Accepted: 01/31/2025] [Indexed: 02/25/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Anastomotic leakage is a significant complication following bowel resection in cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. Previous studies have highlighted the detrimental effects of anastomotic leakage on patients' postoperative course. However, there is still a lack of precise identification of the high-risk population and established strategies for preventing its occurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients who underwent bowel resection within the surgical phase III trial AGO-OVAR.OP3/LION investigating the impact of systematic pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy in cytoreductive surgery for primary ovarian cancer were included in this analysis. All patients in the AGO-OVAR.OP3/LION trial had undergone complete cytoreduction with no macroscopic residual disease. We analyzed the occurrence of anastomotic leakage regarding surgical procedure (non-lymphadenectomy vs. lymphadenectomy and non-stoma vs. stoma) using the Fisher test. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage and its prognostic impact on survival were analyzed. RESULTS Overall rate of anastomotic leakage was 7.1%. Notably, the Non-lymphadenectomy subgroup had a lower anastomotic leakage rate of 3.0% compared to the lymphadenectomy subgroup (11.2%, P = 0.005). The use of protective stoma placement resulted in an anastomotic leakage rate of 5.5% regardless of lymphadenectomy compared to the Non-Stoma subgroup (7.5%, P = 0.78). Increased blood loss (odds ratio [OR] 1.04 per 100cc, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0001-1.09) and lymphadenectomy (OR 3.67, 95% CI 1.41-11.40) were associated with a higher risk of anastomotic leakage. Although anastomotic leakage demonstrated a numerical detrimental impact on median progression-free survival (PFS) (18 months with anastomotic leakage vs. 19 months with Non-anastomotic leakage, hazard ratio [HR] 0.86; 95% CI 0.5 to 1.4, P = 0.53) and median overall survival (OS) (31 months with anastomotic leakage vs. 58 months with Non-anastomotic leakage, HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.4 to 1.2, P = 0.17), the differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION Anastomotic leakage rates were lower in the Non-lymphadenectomy arm, the current standard of care. Blood loss and lymphadenectomy, as surrogate markers for extensive surgery, were associated with increased risk for anastomotic leakage. These findings highlight the importance of strategies to reduce surgical complexity and perioperative risk to improve clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabian Trillsch
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Bastian Czogalla
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Sven Mahner
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Verena Loidl
- Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology - IBE, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Alexander Reuss
- Coordinating Center for Clinical Trials, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Andreas du Bois
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Ev. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Department of Gynecology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Werner Meier
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - David Cibula
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatology, General University Hospital in Prague, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Czech Republic
| | - Alexander Mustea
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Bonn University Hospital, Bonn, Germany
| | - Ingo B Runnebaum
- Department of Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine and Center for Gynecologic Oncology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany
| | - Barbara Schmalfeldt
- Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Giovanni Aletti
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, European Institute of Oncology, University of Milan, Italy
| | - Rainer Kimmig
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del S. Cuore Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Felix Hilpert
- Oncologic Medical Center at the Jerusalem Hospital Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Annette Hasenburg
- University Medical Center Mainz, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Mainz, Germany
| | - Uwe Wagner
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| | - Philipp Harter
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Ev. Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Giessen and Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hunde D, Ekerstad N, Asp M, Kannisto P, Wedin M, Palmqvist C, Dahm-Kähler P, Brandberg Y, Abraham-Nordling M, Åhlund K, Mörlin V, Groes-Kofoed N, Salehi S. Determining the effect of frailty on survival in advanced ovarian cancer: study protocol for a prospective multicentre national cohort study (FOLERO). Acta Oncol 2025; 64:208-213. [PMID: 39907536 PMCID: PMC11816292 DOI: 10.2340/1651-226x.2025.42292] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2024] [Accepted: 01/22/2025] [Indexed: 02/06/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE There is an urgent need to improve patient-selection to surgical treatment in advanced ovarian cancer as our results showed that cytoreductive surgery was without effect or even detrimental in a yet unknown subgroup of women. With an ageing population, 30% of women with advanced ovarian cancer in Sweden are >75 years. Nevertheless, there are no recommendations on patient-selection, albeit treating an unselected population in a public and centralized health care setting. Little attention has been placed on frailty assessments in oncology, despite their potential to stratify the risk of adverse outcome and mortality. Consequently, we hypothesize that frailty is a predictor of poor survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this Swedish multi-centre prospective cohort study, where the exposure is frailty, consecutive women with advanced ovarian cancer scheduled for surgery with curative intent are eligible for inclusion. Three different frailty instruments are evaluated preoperatively, blinded to the caregiver. The primary outcome is 2-year overall survival. With a fixed sample size of 450 patients, a two-sided α of 0.05 and β of 0.20, the study is powered to detect a difference in 2-year survival of 12.5% by frailty, assuming a 20% prevalence of frailty. The result of the study will have a direct impact on clinical management and patient-selection as the results are expected to have a high external validity. Total study-time is 5 years, with 3 years of accrual. All participating centres started accrual by September 2024. Presentation of data on primary outcome is expected 2029. STUDY REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06298877.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Hunde
- Department of Women´s and Children´s Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Niklas Ekerstad
- Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Mihaela Asp
- Department of Clinical Science, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology Lund University, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Päivi Kannisto
- Department of Clinical Science, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology Lund University, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Madelene Wedin
- Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Linköping University, and, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Charlotte Palmqvist
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, and Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Pernilla Dahm-Kähler
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, and Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Yvonne Brandberg
- Department of Oncology and Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Mirna Abraham-Nordling
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Kristina Åhlund
- University West, Trollhättan, Sweden and NU Hospital Group, Trollhättan-Uddevalla, Sweden
| | - Vilhelm Mörlin
- Department of Women´s and Children´s Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Nina Groes-Kofoed
- Department of Women´s and Children´s Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Sahar Salehi
- Department of Women´s and Children´s Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Restaino S, Schierano S, Arcieri M, Costantini B, Poli A, Pregnolato S, Terrosu G, Calandra S, Petrillo M, Pellecchia G, Lucidi A, Klarić M, Driul L, Chiantera V, Ercoli A, Taliento C, Fanfani F, Fagotti A, Scambia G, Vizzielli G. Surgical management of anastomotic leakage related to ovarian cancer surgery: a narrative review. Front Surg 2024; 11:1434730. [PMID: 39323910 PMCID: PMC11422216 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1434730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2024] [Accepted: 08/29/2024] [Indexed: 09/27/2024] Open
Abstract
This narrative review describes the state of the art in the management of anastomotic leakage in ovarian cancer. Multiple surgical procedures, including bowel resection, are often required to achieve "optimal" cytoreduction in locally advanced ovarian cancer. Intestinal anastomosis is currently the most common way to restore bowel continuity. However, in some patients, a temporary protective stoma is indicated to prevent anastomotic leakage. This is an important issue to improve surgical outcomes and until recently there has been a lack of objective data to clarify the risk factors for anastomotic leakage. This review describes the risk factors for AL associated with surgery and compares the results of recent studies. We also review the current indications for placement of a protective ileostomy and treatment options for conservative management of AL. We present two examples of practical clinical AL risk calculators, in addition to the most assessed AL risk factor. To date, the decision-making processes that lead surgeons to perform a protective ileostomy are quite heterogeneous and based on the personal experience of the surgeon, mainly depending on individual training. Three different management options after colorectal anastomosis in OC are described: conservative management, diversion ileostomy and ghost ileostomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Restaino
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
- School in Biomedical Sciences, Gender Medicine, Child and Women Health, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
| | - Sofia Schierano
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Martina Arcieri
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Barbara Costantini
- Dipartimento per le Scienze Della Salute Della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblic, Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Alice Poli
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Sara Pregnolato
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Giovanni Terrosu
- Liver-Kidney Transplant Unit, Department of Medical Area (DMED), Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Sergio Calandra
- Liver-Kidney Transplant Unit, Department of Medical Area (DMED), Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Marco Petrillo
- Gynecologic and Obstetric Clinic, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Pharmacy, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
| | - Giulia Pellecchia
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Alessandro Lucidi
- Centre for Fetal Care and High-Risk Pregnancy, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy
| | - Marko Klarić
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Clinical Hospital Center of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia
| | - Lorenza Driul
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| | - Vito Chiantera
- Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Childcare, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (PROMISE), University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Alfredo Ercoli
- Unit of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Department of Human Pathology of Adults and Childhood, University Hospital “G.Martino”, Messina, Italy
| | - Cristina Taliento
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Francesco Fanfani
- Dipartimento per le Scienze Della Salute Della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblic, Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Anna Fagotti
- Dipartimento per le Scienze Della Salute Della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblic, Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- Dipartimento per le Scienze Della Salute Della Donna, del Bambino e di Sanità Pubblic, Unit of Gynecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Vizzielli
- Department of Medical Area (DMED), Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, Santa Maria Della Misericordia Hospital, Azienda Sanitaria Friuli Centrale, Udine, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lago V, Albert MM, Cruz MA, Guijarro Campillo RA, Padilla-Iserte P, Matute L, Gurrea M, Flor B, Domingo S. A restrictive stoma policy after colorectal anastomosis in ovarian cancer based on ghost ileostomy use. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2024; 50:108325. [PMID: 38636248 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2024] [Revised: 03/31/2024] [Accepted: 04/06/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The incidence of anastomotic leak after colorectal anastomosis in ovarian cancer has been reported to be much lower than that in colorectal cancer patients. Regarding the use of protective manoeuvres (diverting ileostomy) as suggested by clinical guidelines, the goal should be the implementation of a restrictive stoma policy for ovarian cancer patients, given the low rate of anastomotic leakage in this population. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients who underwent cytoreduction surgery in a single centre (University Hospital La Fe, Valencia Spain) due to ovarian cancer between January 2010 and June 2023 were classified according to two groups: a non-restrictive stoma policy group (Group A) and a restrictive stoma policy group (Group B). RESULTS A total of 256 patients were included in the analysis (group A 52 % vs group B 48 %). The use of protective diverting ileostomy was lower in the restrictive stoma policy group (14 % vs 6.6 %), and the use of ghost ileostomy was 32 % vs 87 % in groups A and B, respectively (p < 0.00001). No differences were found in the anastomotic leak rate, which was 5.2 % in the non-restrictive group and 3.2 % in the restrictive stoma policy group (p = 0.54). CONCLUSION The use of a restrictive stoma policy based on the use of ghost ileostomy reduces the rate of diverting ileostomy in patients with ovarian cancer after colorectal resection and anastomosis. Furthermore, this policy is not associated with an increased rate of anastomotic leakage nor with an increased rate of morbi-mortality related to the leak.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Víctor Lago
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain; CEU Cardenal Herrera University, Valencia, Spain.
| | | | - Marta Arnaez Cruz
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | | | | | - Luis Matute
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Marta Gurrea
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Blas Flor
- Colorectal Surgery Unit, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Santiago Domingo
- Gynecologic Oncology Unit, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Navarro Santana B, Garcia-Torralba E, Viveros-Carreño D, Rodriguez J, Pareja R, Martin A, Forte S, Krause KJ, González-Martín JM, Ramirez PT. Complications of HIPEC for ovarian cancer surgery: evaluation over two time periods. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2024; 34:1-9. [PMID: 37669829 DOI: 10.1136/ijgc-2023-004658] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/07/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - David Viveros-Carreño
- Gynecologic Oncology, Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Bogota, Colombia
- Gynecologic Oncology, Clínica Universitaria Colombia and Centro de Tratamiento e Investigación sobre Cáncer Luis Carlos Sarmiento Angulo-CTIC, Bogotá, Colombia
| | | | - Rene Pareja
- Gynecologic Oncology, Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Bogota, Colombia
| | - Alicia Martin
- Insular University Hospital of Gran Canaria, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canarias, Spain
| | - Sara Forte
- Azienda USL Toscana centro, Prato, Italy
| | - Kate J Krause
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Research Medical Library, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - J M González-Martín
- Insular University Hospital of Gran Canaria, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canarias, Spain
| | - Pedro T Ramirez
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kofoed NG, Falconer H, Vanky H, Johansson H, Abraham-Nordling M, Salehi S. Survival and chance of reversal after intestinal stoma formation during cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer; a population-based cohort study. Gynecol Oncol 2023; 170:259-265. [PMID: 36738484 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.01.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2022] [Revised: 01/23/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2023] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Our objective was to examine oncologic outcome in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (aEOC) receiving an intestinal stoma (IS) at the time of cytoreductive surgery (CRS), probability of stoma reversal (SR) and variables affecting odds of SR. METHODS This population-based cohort study included all women diagnosed with aEOC between 2009 and 2018 in the Stockholm/Gotland Region of Sweden. The association between IS formation at CRS and survival was analyzed with proportional hazards regression yielding hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for predefined confounders. Cumulative incidence functions, with death or recurrence as competing risk, were used to estimate chance of SR. The association between clinical factors and SR was analyzed with logistic regression yielding odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI. RESULTS The final analysis included 888 women undergoing CRS for aEOC. Of these, 129 (14,5%) received an IS of which 74% (n = 95) were defunctioning and 26% (n = 34) permanent. IS was associated with an increased hazard of death (HR 1.30, CI 95%, 1.05-1.61; p = 0.02) in the univariate analysis, however not in the adjusted analysis. The probability of SR of defunctioning IS within 2 years was 48% (95% CI, 38-58). Median time to SR was 10 months. High surgical complexity score (SCS) was associated with increased odds of reversal (OR 3.43, 95% CI, 1.06-11.05; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS IS formation does not seem to affect prognosis in women with aEOC. We could not identify any factor, known at time of CRS, that may predict the odds of SR except a high SCS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nina Groes Kofoed
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Theme Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
| | - Henrik Falconer
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Theme Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Hanna Vanky
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Theme Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Hemming Johansson
- Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Mirna Abraham-Nordling
- Department of Molecular medicine and Surgery Karolinska Institutet and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Theme Cancer Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Sahar Salehi
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet, and Department of Pelvic Cancer, Theme Cancer, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Microbiology Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Fornasiero M, Geropoulos G, Kechagias KS, Psarras K, Katsikas Triantafyllidis K, Giannos P, Koimtzis G, Petrou NA, Lucocq J, Kontovounisios C, Giannis D. Anastomotic Leak in Ovarian Cancer Cytoreduction Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14215464. [PMID: 36358882 PMCID: PMC9653973 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14215464] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2022] [Revised: 10/28/2022] [Accepted: 10/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Bowel resection is often required to obtain complete removal of ovarian cancer. A major complication of this operation is anastomotic leakage, which has been shown to increase morbidity and mortality in this population. Numerous original research studies have assessed the risk factors for anastomotic leaks. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify statistically significant risk factors. This meta-analysis identified multiple bowel resections as the only significant risk factor. With further research to identify additional risk factors, new management guidelines could be implemented to minimize the risk of anastomotic leaks and improve patient outcomes. Abstract Introduction: Anastomotic leaks (AL) following ovarian cytoreduction surgery could be detrimental, leading to significant delays in commencing adjuvant chemotherapy, prolonged hospital stays and increased morbidity. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors associated with anastomotic leaks after ovarian cytoreduction surgery. Material and methods: The MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Scopus bibliographical databases were searched. Original clinical studies investigating risk factors for AL in ovarian cytoreduction surgery were included. Results: Eighteen studies with non-overlapping populations reporting on patients undergoing cytoreduction surgery for ovarian cancer (n = 4622, including 344 cases complicated by AL) were included in our analysis. Patients undergoing ovarian cytoreduction surgery complicated by AL had a significantly higher rate of 30-day mortality but no difference in 60-day mortality. Multiple bowel resections were associated with an increased risk of postoperative AL, while no association was observed with body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, age, smoking, operative approach (primary versus interval cytoreductive, stapled versus hand-sewn anastomoses and formation of diverting stoma), neoadjuvant chemotherapy and use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Discussion: Multiple bowel resections were the only clinical risk factor associated with increased risk for AL after bowel surgery in the ovarian cancer population. The increased 30-day mortality rate in patients undergoing ovarian cytoreduction complicated by AL highlights the need to minimize the number of bowel resections in this population. Further studies are required to clarify any association between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and decreased AL rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Georgios Geropoulos
- 2nd Propaedeutic Department of Surgery, Aristotle University School of Medicine, Hippokration General Hospital, 546 42 Thessaloniki, Greece
- Department of General and Upper GI Surgery, Victoria Hospital Kirkcaldy, Kirkcaldy KY2 5AH, UK
- Correspondence:
| | - Konstantinos S. Kechagias
- Society of Meta-Research and Biomedical Innovation, London W12 0FD, UK
- Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
| | - Kyriakos Psarras
- 2nd Propaedeutic Department of Surgery, Aristotle University School of Medicine, Hippokration General Hospital, 546 42 Thessaloniki, Greece
| | | | - Panagiotis Giannos
- Society of Meta-Research and Biomedical Innovation, London W12 0FD, UK
- Department of Life Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
| | | | - Nikoletta A. Petrou
- Department of General Surgery, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London SW3 6JJ, UK
| | - James Lucocq
- Department of Hepaticopancreaticobiliary Surgery, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9YL, UK
| | | | - Dimitrios Giannis
- Department of Surgery, North Shore University Hospital/Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, Manhasset, NY 11030, USA
- Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY 11549, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lago V, Segarra-Vidal B, Cappucio S, Angeles MA, Fotopoulou C, Muallem MZ, Manzanedo I, Iglesias JLS, Chacón E, Padilla-Iserte P, Fagotti A, Ferron G, Kluge L, Vargiu V, Del M, Scambia G, Minig L, Tejerizo Á, Segovia MG, Cascales-Campos PA, Hervás D, Domingo S. OVA-LEAK: Prognostic score for colo-rectal anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing ovarian cancer surgery. Gynecol Oncol 2022; 167:22-27. [PMID: 36058743 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2022.08.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Revised: 07/31/2022] [Accepted: 08/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of the present study was to define and validate an anastomotic leak prognostic score based on previously described and reported anastomotic leak risk factors (OVA-LEAK: https://n9.cl/ova-leakscore) and to establish if the use of OVA-LEAK score is better than clinical criteria (surgeon's choice) selecting anastomosis to be protected with a diverting ileostomy. MATERIAL & METHODS This is a retrospective, multicentre cohort study that included patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery for primary advanced or relapsed ovarian cancer with colorectal resection and anastomosis between January 2011 and June 2021. Data from patients already included in the previous predictive model were not considered in the present analysis. To validate the performance of our logistic regression model, we used the OVA-LEAK formula (Annex I: https://n9.cl/ova-leakscore) for estimating leakage probabilities in a new independent cohort. Then, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed and area under the curve (AUC) was used to measure the performance of the model. Additionally, the Brier score was also estimated. 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each of the estimated performance measures were also calculated. RESULTS 848 out of 1159 recruited patients were finally included in the multivariable logistic regression model validation. The AUC of the new cohort was 0.63 for predicting anastomotic leak. Considering a cut-off point of 22.1% to be 'positive' (to get a leak) this would provide a sensitivity of 0.45, specificity of 0.80, positive predictive value of 0.09 and negative predictive value of 0.97 for anastomotic leak. If we consider this cut-off point to select patients at risk of leak for bowel diversion, up to 22.5% of the sampled patients would undergo a diverting ileostomy and 47% (18/40) of the anastomotic leaks would be 'protected' with the stoma. Nevertheless, if we consider only the 'clinical criteria' for performing or not a diverting ileostomy, only 12.5% (5/40) of the leaks would be 'protected' with a stoma, with a rate of diverting ileostomy of up to 24.3%. CONCLUSIONS Compared with subjective clinical criteria, the use of a predictive model for anastomotic leak improves the selection of patients who would benefit from a diverting ileostomy without increasing the rate of stoma use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Víctor Lago
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology Department, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain; CEU Cardenal Herrera, Spain.
| | - Blanca Segarra-Vidal
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology Department, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Serena Cappucio
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS and Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Martina Aida Angeles
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud - Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse - Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Christina Fotopoulou
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mustafa Zelal Muallem
- Department of Gynecology with Centre for Oncological Surgery, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Virchow Campus Clinic, Charité Medical University, Berlin, Germany
| | - Israel Manzanedo
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Unit, Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Enrique Chacón
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Clinic of Navarra, Madrid, Navarre, Spain
| | - Pablo Padilla-Iserte
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology Department, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Anna Fagotti
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS and Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Gwenael Ferron
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud - Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse - Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Luisa Kluge
- Department of Gynecology with Centre for Oncological Surgery, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Virchow Campus Clinic, Charité Medical University, Berlin, Germany
| | - Virginia Vargiu
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS and Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Mathilde Del
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Institut Claudius Regaud - Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse - Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Giovanni Scambia
- Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS and Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Lucas Minig
- Department of Gynecology, IMED Hospitales, Valencia, Spain
| | - Álvaro Tejerizo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | | | - David Hervás
- Department of Applied Statistics and Operational Research and Quality, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain
| | - Santiago Domingo
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology Department, University Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|