Repeat Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC for Peritoneal Surface Malignancy and Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Repeat Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Recurrent Mucinous Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma: A Viable Treatment Strategy with Demonstrable Benefit

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma experience peritoneal recurrence despite complete cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Prior work has demonstrated that repeat CRS/HIPEC can prolong survival in select patients. We sought to validate these findings using outcomes from a high-volume center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma who underwent CRS/HIPEC at MD Anderson Cancer Center between 2004 and 2021 were stratified by whether they underwent CRS/HIPEC for recurrent disease or as part of initial treatment. Only patients who underwent complete CRS/HIPEC were included. Initial and recurrent groups were compared.

RESULTS

Of 437 CRS/HIPECs performed for mucinous appendiceal adenocarcinoma, 50 (11.4%) were for recurrent disease. Patients who underwent CRS/HIPEC for recurrent disease were more often treated with an oxaliplatin or cisplatin perfusion (35%/44% recurrent vs. 4%/1% initial, p < 0.001), had a longer operative time (median 629 min recurrent vs. 511 min initial, p = 0.002), and had a lower median length of stay (10 days repeat vs. 13 days initial, p < 0.001). Thirty-day complication and 90-day mortality rates did not differ between groups. Both cohorts enjoyed comparable recurrence free survival (p = 0.82). Compared with patients with recurrence treated with systemic chemotherapy alone, this select cohort of patients undergoing repeat CRS/HIPEC enjoyed better overall survival (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In appropriately selected patients with recurrent appendiceal mucinous adenocarcinoma, CRS/HIPEC can provide survival benefit equivalent to primary CRS/HIPEC and that may be superior to that conferred by systemic therapy alone in select patients. These patients should receive care at a high-volume center in the context of a multidisciplinary team.

Long-Term Survival in Patients Treated with Cytoreduction and Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Mesothelioma at a Single High-Volume Center

BACKGROUND

Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare diagnosis with a dismal prognosis if untreated. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is shown to significantly improve survival. Our institution is uniquely positioned to report long-term outcomes in MPM with CRS-HIPEC, due to our robust peritoneal surface disease program existing over the past three decades.

METHODS

Our prospectively maintained, single-institution database of CRS-HIPEC cases was reviewed, identifying 111 consecutive patients with MPM over 28 years (1993-2021). Prognostic, operative, and pathologic factors were reviewed. Overall survival (OS) and conditional survival (CS) analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The average age was 55.1 years; 58.6% of patients were male; 17 of 111 patients (15.3%) had a second CRS-HIPEC. At first CRS-HIPEC, the average PCI score was 18.7, and the perfusate drugs were platinum-based (72.1%) and mitomycin C (27.9%). The resection status at first CRS-HIPEC was R2a (46.4%), followed by R0-1 (29.1%), and R2b-c (24.5%). Median OS was 3.3 years for the entire cohort, with 75th and 25th percentiles at 10.7 months and 10.6 years. Median CS was improved if patients survived to the 1-year postoperative mark (4.9 years, p < 0.01) and trended toward further improvement with each passing year. If 3-year postoperative survival was achieved, the median CS improved to 6.1 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This represents one of the largest and lengthiest, single-center, longitudinal, case series of peritoneal mesothelioma treated with CRS-HIPEC. The OS suggests efficacy for CRS-HIPEC for MPM. Long-term survival improves significantly after patients achieve the 1-year, postoperative mark.

A case of pancreaticoduodenectomy and partial hepatic resection as repeat cytoreductive surgery for recurrent pseudomyxoma peritonei

Background

For recurrent pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP), repeat cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can provide survival benefits if patients are carefully selected. We describe a case of pancreaticoduodenectomy and partial liver resection (HPD) as the repeat CRS for a recurrent tumor that infiltrated the pancreatic head around the hepatic hilum. This is the first report of HPD for recurrent PMP.

Case presentation

The patient was a 58-year-old male without comorbidities. In 2001, he was diagnosed with PMP at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In 2004, CRS, including total peritoneal resection, pyloric gastrectomy, splenectomy, and right hemicolectomy with HIPEC was performed (peritoneal cancer index (PCI) = 28). In 2008, the first repeat CRS with HIPEC was performed (PCI = 14). In 2016, fourth repeat CRS, including partial hepatectomy with HIPEC for recurrence of the round ligament of the liver, was performed. In 2017, a tumor of 5 cm in size was observed from the hepatic hilum to the pancreatic head, which infiltrated the main pancreatic duct. Other tumors 2 cm in size were observed (PCI = 7). We performed the fifth repeat CRS, including HPD. The adhesions of the small intestine from around the liver to the lower abdomen were detached for the reconstruction of pancreatojejunostomy and cholangiojejunostomy. The uncinate approach was applied for the pancreatic head resection because it was difficult to identify the cranial part of the pancreas due to adhesions in the hepatoduodenal ligament and the omental bursa. We approached to the origin of the extrahepatic Glissonean pedicle by resecting a part of the liver around the hepatic hilum using transhepatic hilar approach. A complete cytoreduction was achieved. The postoperative pathological diagnosis was a recurrence of PMP, which is equivalent to peritoneal mucinous carcinomatosis. He was discharged on the 22nd postoperative day without major postoperative complications. The patient survived without recurrence four years after HPD.

Conclusions

Even for recurrence around the hepatic hilum and the pancreatic head, repeat CRS can be safely performed by applying the techniques of hepatobiliary pancreatic surgery.

Repeat Cytoreductive Surgery and Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Colorectal Cancer Peritoneal Recurrences is Safe and Efficacious

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRPM) is associated with improved survival in patients with historically dismal prognosis. Nonetheless, peritoneal recurrences remain common and represent a difficult challenge in these patients' management. Repeat CRS/HIPEC is associated with even greater morbidity and its survival benefit has not yet been clearly demonstrated.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively maintained database and aimed to assess the safety and oncological efficacy of repeat CRS/HIPEC.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-two patients underwent an initial CRS/HIPEC, whereas 30 subsequently had repeat CRS/HIPEC for CRPM. Groups were similar in demographics, comorbidities, and peritoneal cancer index (PCI). No significant difference in morbidity, hospital stay, or reoperation rate was noted between initial and repeat procedures. Patients who underwent repeat CRS/HIPEC had a median overall survival of 68 months versus 51 months in patients who did not undergo repeat procedure for their peritoneal recurrence (p = 0.03). Disease-free survival (DFS) in patients after repeat and after initial procedure were similar with median of 9.6 versus 12 months, respectively (p = 0.083). Univariate analysis demonstrated that PCI, DFS, and repeat procedure displayed significant factors on outcomes in patients with peritoneal recurrences, whereas PCI > 16 and DFS remained independent predictors on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis, which represents the largest series to date of repeat CRS/HIPEC for CRPM, indicates that this approach as a part of multimodal therapy is both safe and efficacious in appropriately selected patients.

Novel prognostic score for outcomes after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal cancer with metachronous peritoneal carcinomatosis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine pre- and peri-operative parameters with significant predictive value for post-operative outcomes in patients with recurrent colorectal cancer presenting as peritoneal carcinomatosis undergoing cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC), and to develop a novel prognostic scoring system for prediction of survival outcomes.

METHODS

A single-institution review of prospectively collected data from all patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC between October 2005 and October 2017 was conducted. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify significant parameters for prediction of post-CRS-HIPEC disease-free survival and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 278 patients underwent CRS-HIPEC, of whom 72 were for peritoneal carcinomatosis from recurrent colorectal cancer. Disease-free interval (DFI; P = 0.006), peritoneal cancer index (PCI; P = 0.001) and left upper quadrant disease (P = 0.023) were significant independent predictors of 3-year OS. DFI (0.007), PCI (P < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss (BL; P = 0.001) were significant independent predictors of 5-year OS. PCI and BL were significant independent predictors of both 3-year (P = 0.026, PCI; P = 0.009, BL) and 5-year (P = 0.002, PCI; P = 0.011, BL) disease-free survival. Predictive models were developed for risk stratification of OS.

CONCLUSION

PCI, DFI, left upper quadrant disease and BL have significant predictive value for post-CRS-HIPEC outcomes. Risk stratification models allow for more prudent patient selection and ultimately more accurate prognostication of post-operative outcomes.

Repeat cytoreductive surgery with or without intraperitoneal chemotherapy for recurrent epithelial appendiceal neoplasms

Background

With recurrence rates after primary cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in excess of 50 per cent, repeat CRS is being performed increasingly, but survival outcomes have not been reported widely. This study examined the outcomes following repeat CRS for appendiceal cancer with peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM), and evaluated its feasibility and safety.

Methods

A retrospective cohort of patients who had surgery between 1996 and 2018 were analysed. Patients who underwent a single CRS procedure with or without heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) were compared with those who had multiple procedures with or without HIPEC. Perioperative morbidity and survival outcomes were analysed.

Results

Some 462 patients were reviewed, 102 of whom had repeat procedures. For high‐grade tumours, patients who had a single CRS procedure had significantly reduced overall survival (OS) compared with those who had repeat CRS (55·6 versus 90·7 months respectively; P = 0·016). For low‐grade tumours, there was no difference in OS (P = 0·153). When patients who had a single procedure were compared with those who had multiple procedures, there was no significant difference in major morbidity (P = 0·441) or in‐hospital mortality (P = 0·080). For multiple procedures, no differences were found in major morbidity (P = 0·262) or in‐hospital mortality (P = 0·502) when the first procedure was compared with the second. For low‐grade cancers, the peritoneal carcinomatosis index was a significant prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio (HR) 1·11, 95 per cent c.i. 1·05 to 1·17; P < 0·001), whereas for high‐grade cancers repeat CRS (HR 0·57, 0·33 to 0·95; P = 0·033), complete cytoreduction score (HR 1·55, 1·01 to 2·40; P = 0·046) and presence of signet ring cells (HR 2·77, 1·78 to 4·30; P < 0·001) were all significant indicators of long‐term survival.

Conclusion

In selected patients presenting with PSM from epithelial appendiceal neoplasms, repeat CRS performed in high‐volume centres could provide survival benefits.

Multicenter Observational Study of Adhesion Formation After Open-and Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare adhesion formation after laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer resection.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

After colorectal surgery, most patients develop adhesions, with a high burden of complications. Laparoscopy seems to reduce adhesion formation, but evidence is poor. Trials comparing open- and laparoscopic colorectal surgery have never assessed adhesion formation.

METHODS

Data on adhesions were gathered during resection of colorectal liver metastases. Incidence of adhesions adjacent to the original incision was compared between patients with previous laparoscopic- and open colorectal resection. Secondary outcomes were incidence of any adhesions, extent and severity of adhesions, and morbidity related to adhesions or adhesiolysis.

RESULTS

Between March 2013 and December 2015, 151 patients were included. Ninety patients (59.6%) underwent open colorectal resection and 61 patients (40.4%) received laparoscopic colorectal resection. Adhesions to the incision were present in 78.9% after open and 37.7% after laparoscopic resection (P < 0.001). The incidence of abdominal wall adhesions and of any adhesion was significantly higher after open resection; the incidence of visceral adhesions did not significantly differ. The extent of abdominal wall and visceral adhesions and the median highest Zühlke score at the incision were significantly higher after open resection. There were no differences in incidence of small bowel obstruction during the interval between the colorectal and liver operations, the incidence of serious adverse events, and length of stay after liver surgery.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection is associated with a lower incidence, extent, and severity of adhesions to parietal surfaces. Laparoscopy does not reduce the incidence of visceral adhesions.

Repeat Cytoreductive Surgery-Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemoperfusion is Feasible and Offers Survival Benefit in Select Patients with Peritoneal Metastases

INTRODUCTION

We hypothesized that repeat cytoreductive surgery-hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion (CRS-HIPEC) for peritoneal metastases (PM) may be associated with suboptimal resection, more frequent postoperative complications, and worse oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

Using a prospectively maintained database, we compared clinicopathologic, perioperative, and oncologic outcome data in patients undergoing single or repeat CRS-HIPEC procedures. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival. Multivariate analyses identified associations with perioperative and oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 1294 patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC procedures at our institution, only one CRS-HIPEC procedure (single HIPEC cohort) was performed in 1169 patients (90.3%), whereas 125 patients (9.7%) underwent repeat CRS-HIPEC procedures (repeat HIPEC cohort). Of the 1440 CRS-HIPEC procedures at our institution, a first CRS-HIPEC procedure was performed in 1294 patients (89.9%), whereas subsequent second, third, and fourth CRS-HIPEC procedures were performed in 125 patients (8.7%), 18 patients (1.3%), and 3 patients (0.2%), respectively. Progression-free survival (PFS) following the second CRS-HIPEC procedure was negatively impacted by shorter PFS following the first CRS-HIPEC procedure, independent of other significant variables related to the second procedure, including completeness of cytoreduction and postoperative complications. Patients undergoing multiple CRS-HIPEC procedures were not at higher risk for suboptimal resection or postoperative complications and demonstrated equivalent PFS following each successive procedure compared to the first procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat CRS-HIPEC procedures for PM were not associated with suboptimal perioperative and oncologic outcomes. Our data confirmed our ability to select patients appropriately for repeat CRS-HIPEC procedures.

Peritoneal Surface Oncology in Singapore

Peritoneal surface malignancy is now an established indication for cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. The landscape of treatment in Singapore has evolved through the years, with expanded indications as the experience in the management of this disease improves.

Factors Associated with 60-Day Readmission Following Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Readmission rates following surgery are subject to scrutiny in efforts to control health care costs. This study was designed to define the 60-day readmission rate following cytoreduction and HIPEC at a high-volume center and to identify factors associated with readmission.

METHODS

Patients who underwent complete cytoreduction and HIPEC at a single institution from August 2007 through June 2014 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Multiple preoperative and operative factors were analyzed for their ability to predict 60-day readmission following surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 250 patients were identified. Forty patients (17%) experienced readmission within 60 days of surgery. The most common reasons for readmission were ileus/dehydration (12, 31%), deep space infection (8, 21%), and DVT/PE (6, 15%). Initial postoperative length of stay was longer for patients readmitted within 60 days (median 12 vs. 9 days, p = 0.013). Of categorical variables analyzed, including gender, histology, HIPEC agent, intraoperative transfusion, and individual procedures performed during cytoreduction, adjuvant systemic therapy, and postoperative morbidity, only Charlson comorbidity index CCI (odds ratio (OR) = 3.80 [1.68-8.60]) and stoma creation (OR = 6.04 [1.56-12.14]) were associated with 60-day readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Few measurable variables are associated with readmission following cytoreduction and HIPEC. Patients with high CCI and those with stomas created at the time of CRS/HIPEC may be at increased risk of readmission within 60 days. Earlier or more frequent follow-up for high-risk patients should be considered as a strategy to reduce readmissions.

Interval between cytoreductions as a marker of tumor biology in selecting patients for repeat cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Repeat cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for recurrence of peritoneal surface malignancies is safe and effective. Patient selection and factors associated with a favorable outcome are still evolving.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained institutional database consisting of 1314 CRS/HIPEC procedures performed between February 1993 and December 2015 was reviewed. Clinicopathologic data from 103 patients and 112 (8.5%) repeat CRS/HIPEC procedures were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Primary tumors were appendiceal for 60 patients (58.3%), mesothelioma for 14 (13.6%), colorectal for 9 (8.7%), ovarian for 8 (7.8%). R0/R1 resection was achieved in 46 (46.5%) patients. The time interval between the initial and the repeat CRS/HIPEC was <1 year for 21 (20.4%), 1-2 years for 40 (38.8%), and >2 years for 42 patients (40.8%). Overall median survival was 4.3 years and correlated with the time interval (1.3 years for <1 years, 3.7 years for 1-2 years, and 7 years for >2 years; P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, the R status (P = 0.005) and a time interval of more than 2 years (P = 0.0002) were strongly associated with survival with each additional month between the surgeries conferring a 2.6% reduction in the risk of death.

CONCLUSIONS

The current series validates time interval between cytoreductions as a major surrogate of tumor biology in selection of patients with recurrent peritoneal surface malignancies for repeat CRS/HIPEC. Complete repeat cytoreduction more than 2 years from the initial surgery is associated with a favorable outcome.

Surgical Management of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Single-Centre Experience on Oncological Outcomes of Pulmonary Resection vs Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC

PURPOSE

Metastasectomy is accepted as standard of care for selected patients with colorectal pulmonary metastases (CLM); however, the role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) is not universally accepted. We aim to compare oncological outcomes of patients with CLM and CPM after pulmonary resection and CRS-HIPEC, respectively, by comparing overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

METHODS

A retrospective review of 49 CLM patients who underwent pulmonary resection, and 52 CPM patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC in a single institution from January 2003 to March 2015, was performed.

RESULTS

The 5-year OS for CLM patients and CPM patients were 59.6 and 40.5%, respectively (p = 0.100), while the 5-year DFS were 24.0 and 14.2%, respectively (p = 0.173). CPM patients had longer median operative time (8.38 vs. 1.75 h, p < 0.001), median hospital stay (13 vs. 5 days, p < 0.001), a higher rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (67.3 vs. 8.2%, p < 0.001), and a higher rate of high-grade complications (17.3 vs. 4.1%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that recurrent lung metastasis after metastasectomy was an independent prognostic factor for OS of CLM patients (OR = 0.045, 95%, CL 0.003-0.622, p = 0.021). There were no independent prognostic factors for OS in CPM patients by multivariate analysis. There were no independent prognostic factors for DFS in CLM patients by multivariate analysis, but peritoneal cancer index score, bladder involvement, and higher nodal stage at presentation of the initial malignancy were independent prognostic factors for DFS in CPM patients.

CONCLUSIONS

OS and DFS for CPM patients after CRS and HIPEC are comparable to CLM patients after lung resection, although morbidity appears higher. The prognostic factors affecting survival after surgery are different between CPM and CLM patients and must be considered when selecting patients for metastasectomy.

Repeat cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: review of indications and outcomes

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is an established treatment option in selected patients with peritoneal dissemination from a variety of epithelial primaries. Even though a small proportion will be alive and potentially cured at 10 years, the majority will eventually develop recurrent disease. Repeat CRS/HIPEC is a valid consideration in a selected subpopulation of patients with isolated peritoneal recurrence. This review summarizes the data on patient selection, feasibility, limitations and outcomes of repeat CRS/HIPEC.

Repeated cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with recurrent peritoneal carcinomatosis

Background

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has become the treatment of choice for resectable peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) and improved the survival of these patients. The situation changes if PC recurs and repeated CRS with HIPEC is considered. The patient selection and outcome of the repeated approach has not been well described. We analyzed our cohort and share the experiences.

Methods

Ninety-three CRS/HIPEC procedures, performed in 85 patients during the period 2001–2013, were examined in a retrospective analysis. Type of primary, ECOG status, peritoneal cancer index (PCI), completeness of cytoreduction (CC), duration of hospitalization, postoperative morbidity, mortality, and disease-free/overall survival were reviewed.

Results

Six patients (7 %) underwent a second CRS/HIPEC (median interval between the two procedures: 26 months, range 8–61) including two patients with mesotheliomas, one patient with ovarian adenocarcinoma, one patient with leiomyosarcoma of uterus, one patient with colon adenocarcinoma, and one patient with appendiceal adenocarcinoma. The last two patients underwent a third CRS/HIPEC, 25 and 36 months, after the second procedure. The median PCI was 14 (range, 4–26) during the first and 20 (range, 7–39) during the second CRS/HIPEC of these patients. Completeness of cytoreduction score of 0 (CC-0) was achieved in all first procedures and in 67 % of second procedures (CC-0; n = 4 and CC-1; n = 2). A CC-0 score was possible in both of the third procedures. The mean operating time was 444 min (range, 198–642) and 427 min (range, 239–617) during the first and the second procedure. Median intensive care unit (ICU) was 2 days, and hospital stay after second CRS/HIPEC was 17 days (range, 7–50). The 30-day morbidity after repeated CRS/HIPEC was 33 % (16 % for grade III–IV complications), and there was no 30-day mortality neither after the second nor after the third CRS/HIPEC. Median disease-free interval between first CRS/HIPEC and peritoneal recurrence was 17 months (range, 8–30). Median disease-free survival of 18 months (range, 4–33) was achieved after the second CRS/HIPEC. After a median follow-up of 74 months (range, 39–151), all patients are alive with disease (n = 5) or disease free (n = 1) under chemotherapy.

Conclusions

In experienced centers, repeated CRS/HIPEC can be performed with safety. Patient selection and correct timing is of particular importance in achieving control of the disease. Repeated CRS/HIPEC should be considered as treatment option for selected patients with recurrent PC.