Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program: A Feasibility Study

Improved Postoperative Pain Management Outcomes After Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol for Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC)

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis is promising but has potential for significant morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a standardized protocol designed to optimize perioperative care. This study describes trends in epidural and opioid use after implementing ERAS for CRS-HIPEC at a tertiary academic center.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC from January 2020 to September 2023 was conducted. ERAS was implemented in February 2022. Medication and outcomes data were compared before and after ERAS initiation. All opioids were converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs).

RESULTS

A total of 136 patients underwent CRS-HIPEC: 73 (54%) pre- and 63 (46%) post-ERAS. Epidural usage increased from 63% pre-ERAS to 87% post-ERAS (p = 0.001). Compared with those without epidurals, patients with epidurals had decreased total 7-day oral and intravenous (IV) opioid requirements (45 MME vs. 316 MME; p < 0.001). There was no difference in 7-day opioid totals between pre- and post-ERAS groups. After ERAS, more patients achieved early ambulation (83% vs. 53%; p < 0.001), early diet initiation (81% vs. 25%; p < 0.001), and early return of bowel function (86% vs. 67%; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS implementation for CRS-HIPEC was associated with increased epidural use, decreased oral and IV opioid use, and earlier bowel function return. Our study demonstrates that epidural analgesia provides adequate pain control while significantly decreasing oral and IV opioid use, which may promote gastrointestinal recovery postoperatively. These findings support the implementation of an ERAS protocol for effective pain management in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Continuous Wound Irrigation and Intraoperative Methadone Decreases Opioid Use and Shortens Length of Stay After CRS/HIPEC

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia is resource and labor intense and may limit postoperative management options and delay discharge. This study compared postoperative outcomes after cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) with epidural analgesia versus continuous wound infusion system (CWIS) with/without intraoperative methadone.

METHODS

A single-institution, retrospective chart review was performed including all patients undergoing open CRS/HIPEC from 2018 to 2021. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, length of stay, and in-hospital analgesic use were reviewed. In-hospital opioid exposure in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) was calculated. Multivariate analysis (MVA) for mean total and daily opioid exposure was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 157 patients were included. Fifty-three (34%) had epidural analgesia, 96 (61%) had CWIS, and 79 (50%) received methadone. Length of stay was significantly shorter with CWIS + methadone versus epidural (7 vs. 8 days, p < 0.01). MVA showed significantly lower mean total and daily opioid exposure with CWIS+methadone versus epidural (total: 252.8 ± 17.7 MME vs. 486.8 ± 86.6 MME; odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-0.98, p = 0.04; Daily: 32.8 ± 2.0 MME vs. 51.9 ± 5.7 MME, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52-0.99, p ≤ 0.05). The CWIS-only group (n = 17) had a significantly lower median oral opioid exposure versus epidural (135 MME vs. 7.5 MME, p < 0.001) and longer length of stay versus CWIS + methadone (9 vs. 7 days, p = 0.04), There were no CWIS or methadone-associated complications and one epidural abscess.

CONCLUSIONS

CWIS + methadone safely offers better pain control with less in-hospital opioid use, shorter length of stay, and decreased resource utilization compared with epidural analgesia in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Impact of Successful Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) are complex operations for the treatment of peritoneal metastases. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are intended to standardize preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative pathways, with the goal of improving patient care. This study describes feasibility and outcomes after implementing an ERAS protocol for CRS/HIPEC at a tertiary academic center.

METHODS

A single-institution experience of CRS/HIPEC was reviewed from January 2020 to March 2023. Patients were categorized according to whether they underwent CRS/HIPEC before or after ERAS initiation. Outcomes and protocol adherence were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 115 CRS/HIPEC operations were included-74 before and 41 after ERAS implementation. Median age was younger in the post-ERAS group, whereas sex, comorbidities, peritoneal carcinomatosis index, operation performed, and operative time were similar between groups. The most common primary cancer sites were gynecologic (40%), appendiceal (24%), and colorectal (22%). Adherence to all postoperative ERAS components was 76%. More post-ERAS patients ambulated by postoperative day (POD) 1 (90% vs. 54%; p < 0.001), tolerated liquid diet by POD 2 (88% vs. 32%; p < 0.001), and had foley removed by POD 3 (86% vs. 43%; p < 0.001). There was a trend toward decreased length of stay in the post-ERAS cohort (7 vs. 8 days; p = 0.092), with no difference in major complications, intensive care unit admission, or 30-day readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the heterogeneity of CRS/HIPEC operations, implementing an ERAS protocol for our patients was feasible and resulted in postoperative outcomes and adherence comparable with that of other major abdominal surgeries. This supports the potential for success in ERAS programs for CRS/HIPEC patients.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Program for Patients with Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery with or without HIPEC: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program refers to a multimodal intervention to reduce the length of stay and postoperative complications; it has been effective in different kinds of major surgery including colorectal, gynaecologic and gastric cancer surgery. Its impact in terms of safety and efficacy in the treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies is still unclear. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the effect of ERAS after cytoreductive surgery with or without HIPEC for peritoneal metastases. MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Database were searched from January 2010 and December 2021. Single and double-cohort studies about ERAS application in the treatment of peritoneal cancer were considered. Outcomes included the postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative morbidity and mortality rates and the early readmission rate. Twenty-four studies involving 5131 patients were considered, 7 about ERAS in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) + HIPEC and 17 about cytoreductive alone; the case histories of two Italian referral centers in the management of peritoneal cancer were included. ERAS adoption reduced the LOS (-3.17, 95% CrI -4.68 to -1.69 in CRS + HIPEC and -1.65, 95% CrI -2.32 to -1.06 in CRS alone in the meta-analysis including 6 and 17 studies respectively. Non negligible lower postoperative morbidity was also in the meta-analysis including the case histories of two Italian referral centers. Implementation of an ERAS protocol may reduce LOS, postoperative complications after CRS with or without HIPEC compared to conventional recovery.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for complete cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in a referral center: a case control prospective study

Objectives

Current recommendations regarding enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) after complete cytoreductive surgery (CCRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are based on a low level of evidence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of implementing an adapted ERP for CCRS and HIPEC in a referral center.

Methods

We conducted a study with a prospective group of 44 patients (post-ERP group) who underwent CCRS with HIPEC between July 2016 and June 2018, the period during which ERP was implemented. This group was compared to a second retrospective group of 21 patients who underwent CCRS with HIPEC between June 2015 and June 2016, during which ERP was not yet implemented (pre-ERP group).

Results

The ERP compliance rate was 65% in the post-ERP group. The hospital length of stay (HLS) was shorter in the post-ERP group: 24.9 days (IQR 11–68, pre-ERP group) vs. 16.1 days (IQR 6–45, post-ERP group), as was the major morbidity rate (pre-ERP group=33.3% vs. post-ERP group=20.5%). The nasogastric tube, urinary catheter and abdominal drains were all retrieved faster in the post-ERP group.

Conclusions

The implementation of an adapted ERP after CCRS with HIPEC procedures reduces morbidity and shortens the HLS.

Rethinking Routine Intensive Care After Cytoreductive Surgery With Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: The Fiscal Argument

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are frequently admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for mitigation of potential complications, although ICU length of stay (LOS) is a significant driver of cost. This study asked whether a fiscal argument could be made for the selective avoidance of ICU admission after CRS/HIPEC.

METHODS

Prospective data for select low-risk patients (e.g., lower peritoneal cancer index [PCI]) admitted to the intermediate care unit (IMC) instead of the ICU after CRS/HIPEC were matched with a historic cohort routinely admitted to the ICU. Cohort comparisons and the impact of the intervention on cost were assessed.

RESULTS

The study matched 81 CRS/HIPEC procedures to form a cohort of 49 pre- and 15 post-intervention procedures for patients with similar disease burdens (mean PCI, 8 ± 6.7 vs. 7 ± 5.1). The pre-intervention patients stayed a median of 1 day longer in the ICU (1 day [IQR, 1-1 day] vs. 0 days [IQR, 0-0 days]) and had a longer LOS (8 days [IQR, 7-11 days] vs. 6 days [IQR, 5.5-9 days]). Complications and complication severity did not differ statistically. The median total hospital cost was lower after intervention ($30,845 [IQR, $30,181-$37,725] vs. $41,477 [IQR, $33,303-$51,838]), driven by decreased indirect fixed cost ($8984 [IQR, $8643-$11,286] vs. $14,314 [IQR, $12,206-$18,266]). In a weighted multiple variable linear regression analysis, the intervention was associated with a savings of $2208.68 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective admission to the IMC after CRS/HIPEC was associated with $2208.68 in savings per patient without added risk. In this era of cost-conscious practice of medicine, these data highlight an opportunity to decrease cost by more than 5% for patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC.

Contemporary Management of Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Views from the

Pelvic exenteration is a complex operation performed for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic cancers. The goal of surgery is to achieve clear margins, therefore identifying adjacent or involved organs, bone, muscle, nerves and/or vascular structures that may need resection. While these extensive resections are potentially curative, they can be associated with substantial morbidity. Recently, there has been a move to centralize care to specialized units, as this facilitates better multidisciplinary care input. Advancements in pelvic oncology and surgical innovation have redefined the boundaries of pelvic exenterative surgery. Combined with improved neoadjuvant therapies, advances in diagnostics, and better reconstructive techniques have provided quicker recovery and better quality of life outcomes, with improved survival This article provides highlights of the current management of advanced pelvic cancers in terms of surgical strategy and potential future developments.

Implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion

Aim of the study

To investigate the feasibility of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for patients with primary peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion (HIPEC) based on the length of hospital stay (LOS), return of bowel function, the incidence of postoperative complications, and quality of life (QLQ) analysis.

Material and methods

The study included a total of 37 patients with primary PC of different origin, who underwent cytoreductive surgery plus HIPEC. Patients were divided into 2 groups: Group I (nonERAS) – 20 patients and Group II (ERAS) – 17 patients.

Results

The median LOS in Group I (nonERAS) (12.35 ± 3.9) was longer than in Group II (ERAS) (6.8 ± 1.9) (p < 0.01). The use of the ERAS protocol significantly contributed to the faster return of bowel function (peristalsis and stool) in the postoperative period (p < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the ERAS and nonERAS groups, which supports its clinical safety. Improved QLQ according to the obtained data has also been achieved due to the introduction of the principles of the ERAS protocol.

Conclusions

The obtained results prove the expediency and feasibility of the implementation of the ERAS protocol among patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery in combination with HIPEC.

Sodium Thiosulfate Reduces Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery Plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy with Cisplatin: A Single-Center Observational Study

Background

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) represents a multimodal treatment concept for patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. The use of intraperitoneal cisplatin (CDDP) is associated with a risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). The aim of this study is to evaluate the protective effect of perioperative sodium thiosulfate (STS) administration on kidney function in patients undergoing CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of all patients who underwent CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC at our hospital between March 2017 and August 2020. Patients were stratified according to the use of sodium thiosulfate (STS vs. no STS). We compared kidney function and clinical outcome parameters between both groups and determined risk factors for postoperative AKI on univariate and multivariate analysis. AKI was classified according to acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria.

Results

Of 238 patients who underwent CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC, 46 patients received STS and 192 patients did not. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. In patients who received STS, a lower incidence (6.5% vs. 30.7%; p = 0.001) and severity of AKI (p = 0.009) were observed. On multivariate analysis, the use of STS (OR 0.089, p = 0.001) remained an independent kidney-protective factor, while arterial hypertension (OR 5.283, p < 0.001) and elevated preoperative urea serum level (OR 5.278, p = 0.032) were predictors for postoperative AKI.

Conclusions

The present data suggest that STS protects patients from AKI caused by CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC. Further prospective studies are needed to validate the benefit of STS among kidney-protective strategies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10508-x.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a promising approach for the management of peritoneal carcinomatosis, but is associated with significant morbidity and prolonged hospital stay. Herein, we review the impact of Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol on length of stay (LOS) and early complications in patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC for peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched for studies comparing ERAS protocol with control for CRS + HIPEC. Mean difference (MD) and risk ratios (RR) were calculated for LOS and complications respectively.

Results: Six retrospective studies were included. Meta-analysis indicated statistically significant reduction in LOS with ERAS (MD: −2.82 95% CI: −3.79, −1.85 I² = 29% p < 0.00001). Our results demonstrated significantly reduced risk of Calvien Dindo grade III/IV complications with the use of ERAS protocol as compared to the control group (RR: 0.60 95% CI: 0.41, 0.87 I² = 0% p = 0.007). Pooled analysis of limited studies demonstrated no statistically significant difference in the risk of reoperation (RR: 1.04 95% CI: 0.54, 2.03 I² = 50% p = 0.90) readmission (RR: 0.55 95% CI: 0.21, 1.49 I² = 0% p = 0.24), acute kidney injury (RR: 0.55 95% CI: 0.28, 1.10 I² = 0% p = 0.09) or mortality (RR: 0.62 95% CI: 0.17, 2.26 I² = 0% p = 0.46) between the study groups.

Conclusion: For CRS + HIPEC, ERAS is associated with significantly reduced LOS along with lower incidence of complications. Limited data suggest that use of ERAS protocol is not associated with increased readmission, reoperation, and mortality rates in these patients. There is a need for randomized controlled trials to corroborate the current evidence.

The feasibility of implementing an enhanced recovery programme in patients undergoing pelvic exenteration

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a complex operative procedure, reserved for patients with locally advanced and recurrent pelvic malignancies. PE is associated with a high index of post-operative morbidity. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programmes have been successful in improving postoperative outcomes, however, its application in PE has not been studied. The aim of our study is to assess the feasibility and short-term impact of ERAS on PE.

METHODS

A dedicated PE ERAS programme was developed reflecting the complexity of differing subtypes of PE. A prospective cohort study was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility of implementing our PE ERAS between 2016 and 2020. The primary endpoint of this study was overall compliance with the ERAS programme.

RESULTS

145 patients were enrolled into our PE ERAS programme, with 86 (56.2%) patients undergoing a soft tissue PE, 27 (17.6%) a vascular PE and 32 (20.9%) a bony PE. The median overall compliance to the PE ERAS programme was 70% (IQR 55.5-88.8). There were no observed differences between overall compliance to the PE ERAS programme between different subtypes of PE (p = 0.60). Patients with higher compliance with the PE ERAS programme had a shorter LoS (p < 0.001), less post-operative morbidity (p < 0.001), reduced severity of Clavien-Dindo grade of morbidity (p < 0.001) and fewer readmissions (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The principles of ERAS can be readily applied to patients undergoing PE, with high adherence to the ERAS programme associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol versus standard of care on postoperative Acute Kidney Injury (AKI): A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common postoperative complication with an incidence of nearly 15%. Relatively balanced fluid management, flexible use of vasoactive drugs, multimodal analgesia containing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are fundamental to ERAS protocols. However, these basic tenants may lead to an increased incidence of postoperative AKI.

METHODS

A search was done in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and reference lists to identify relevant studies from inception until May 2020 to be included in this study. Effects were summarized using pooled risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (Cls) with random effect model. Heterogeneity assessment, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were performed.

RESULTS

A systematic review of nineteen cohort studies covering 17,205 patients, comparing impact of ERAS with conventional care on postoperative AKI was performed. Notably, the ERAS regimen did not increase the incidence of postoperative AKI compared with standard care (RR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.52; I2 = 53%). Both goal-directed fluid therapy (RR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.99-1.61; I2 = 55%) and restrictive fluid management (RR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.57-1.98; I2 = 60%) had no significant effect on the incidence of postoperative AKI. There was no significant statistical difference between different AKI diagnostic criteria (P = 0.43; I2 = 0%). ERAS group had significantly shorter hospital stay (MD: -1.54; 95% CI: -1.91 to -1.17; I2 = 66%). There was no statistical difference in 30-day readmission rate (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.20; I2 = 42%), 30-day reoperation rate (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.34; I2 = 42%) and mortality (RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that ERAS protocols do not increase readmission or reoperation rates and mortality while significantly reducing LOS. Most importantly, the ERAS protocol was shown to have no promoting effect on the incidence of postoperative AKI. Even GDFT and restrictive fluid management cannot avoid the occurrence of postoperative AKI, and the ERAS protocol is still worth recommending and its safety is further confirmed.

Guide to Enhanced Recovery for Cancer Patients Undergoing Surgery: ERAS for Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery with or Without HIPEC

ERAS protocols may reduce length of stay and return to full functional recovery after cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC. Prehabilitation programs and post-operative goal directed pathways, along with other essential components of ERAS are discussed with supporting evidence.

The Impact of Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Versus Four Quadrant Transversus Abdominis Plane Block on Quality of Recovery After Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Surgery: A Single-Center, Noninferiority, Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Recovery after CRS-HIPEC influenced by several factors, including pain and opioid consumption. We hypothesized that 4Q-TAP blocks provide not inferior quality of recovery compared with TEA after CRS-HIPEC. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to determine whether 4-quadrant transversus abdominis plane (4Q-TAP) block analgesia was noninferior to thoracic epidural (TEA) among patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS HIPEC).

METHODS

Patients 18 years or older who underwent a CRS-HIPEC surgery were randomly assigned to have either TEA or 4Q-TAP blocks. The primary outcome of this study was the change in quality of recovery 2 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included quality of recovery on Days 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 30 postoperatively, opioid consumption, pain intensity, length of stay, and postoperative complications. Analyses were performed on a per-protocol basis.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients were included in the analysis. The difference between 4Q-TAP and TEA in the mean QoR-15 change from surgery at postoperative Days 1, 2, and 3 was 0.80 (P = 0.004), -4.5 (P = 0.134), and 3.4 (P = 0.003), respectively. All differences through postoperative day 30 were significantly within the noninferiority boundary of -10 except at postoperative Day 2 (P = 0.134). Length of stay, opioid-related adverse events, and frequency and grade of complications were not significantly different between TEA and 4Q-TAP patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the significantly higher use of opioids after CRS-HIPEC in patients with 4Q-TAP blocks, their short-term quality of recovery was not inferior to those treated with TEA. Patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC can be effectively managed with 4Q-TAP blocks.

Impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery on Postoperative Outcomes for Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been associated with significant morbidity and increased hospital length of stay (LOS). The authors report their experience after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program for CRS-HIPEC.

METHODS

Outcomes were analyzed before and after ERAS implementation. The components of ERAS included preoperative carbohydrate loading, goal-directed fluid management, multimodal pain management, minimization of narcotic use, avoidance of nasogastric tubes, and early mobilization and feeding.

RESULTS

Of 168 procedures, 88 (52%) were in the pre-ERAS group and 80 (48%) were in the post-ERAS group. The two groups did not differ in terms of age, sex, comorbidities, peritoneal carcinomatosis index scores, completeness of cytoreduction, or operative time. The ERAS patients received fewer fluids intraoperatively (mean, 4.2 vs 6.4 L; p < 0.01). The mean LOS was 7.9 days post-ERAS compared with 10.0 days pre-ERAS (p = 0.015). Clavien-Dindo complications classified as grade ≥ 3 were lower after ERAS (23.7% vs 38.6%; p = 0.04). Moreover, the readmission rates remained the same (16.2% vs 13.6%; p = 0.635).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an ERAS program for patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC is feasible and not associated with an increase in overall major complications or readmissions. These data support incorporation of ERAS protocols for CRS-HIPEC procedures.

Evidence-Based Strategies for the Treatment of Peritoneal Malignancies during Health Care Resource Restriction: The COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has put enormous pressure on hospital resources, and has affected all aspects of patient care. As operative volumes decrease, cancer surgeries must be triaged and prioritized with careful thought and attention to ensure maximal benefit for the maximum number of patients. Peritoneal malignancies present a unique challenge, as surgical management can be resource intensive, but patients have limited non-surgical treatment options. This review summarizes current data on outcomes and resource utilization to help inform decision-making and case prioritization in times of constrained health care resources. Methods: A rapid literature review was performed, examining surgical and non-surgical outcomes data for peritoneal malignancies. Narrative data synthesis was cross-referenced with relevant societal guidelines. Peritoneal malignancy surgeons and medical oncologists reviewed recommendations to establish a national perspective on case triage and mitigating treatment strategies. Results and Conclusions: Triage of peritoneal malignancies during this time of restricted health care resource is nuanced and requires multidisciplinary discussion with consideration of individual patient factors. Prioritization should be given to patients where delay may compromise resectability of disease, and where alternative treatment options are lacking. Mitigating strategies such as systemic chemotherapy and/or surgical deferral may be utilized with close surveillance for disease stability or progression, which may affect surgical urgency. Unique hospital capacity, and ability to manage the complex post-operative course for these patients must also be considered to ensure patient and system needs are aligned.

What Drives High Costs of Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC: Patient, Provider or Tumor?

INTRODUCTION

Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is utilized for peritoneal malignancies and is associated with significant resource use. To address potentially modifiable factors contributing to excessive cost, we sought to determine predictors of high cost of care for patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC.

METHODS

An institutional CRS/HIPEC database was queried for adult patients from 2014 to 2018. Cost was defined as cost for the index hospitalization, and high-cost cases were defined as > 75th percentile for cost. Bivariate analyses for cost were performed, and all significant tumor, patient, and surgeon-specific variables were entered in a linear regression for cost. A separate linear regression was performed for length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

In total, 59 patients underwent 61 CRS/HIPEC procedures. The median direct variable cost was $20,509 (16,395-25,240). Median length of stay (LOS) was 8 (7-11.5) days and ICU stay was 1 (1-1.5) day. LOS, length of ICU stay and operative time were predictive of cost. Factors associated with increased LOS were Clavien-Dindo grade II complications and ostomy creation. Patient-related factors, including age and BMI, tumor-related factors, such as PCI and CCR, and surgeon were not predictive of cost nor LOS.

DISCUSSION

Our results, the first to identify predictors of high cost of CRS/HIPEC-related care in the US, reveal cost was largely related to length and intensity of care. In turn, these drivers were influenced by complications and operative factors. Future work will focus on identifying an appropriate ERAS protocol following CRS/HIPEC and selection of those patients that may avoid routine ICU admission.