Morbidity of multiple bowel resection compared to single bowel resection after debulking surgery for ovarian cancer

Peritonectomy and resection of mesentery during Visceral-Peritoneal Debulking (VPD) in patients with stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer: A phase I-II trial

OBJECTIVE

To describe the surgical technique, assess feasibility, efficacy, and safety of peritonectomy and/or resection of mesentery (P-Rme) during Visceral-Peritoneal Debulking (VPD) in patients with stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer (OC).

METHODS

In April 2009 we registered a protocol study on the safety and feasibility of P-Rme. In the period April 2009-December 2022, 687 patients with FIGO stage IIIC-IV ovarian cancer underwent VPD. One hundred and twenty-nine patients (18.7%) had extensive disease on the mesentery and underwent P-Rme. Feasibility was assessed as the number of procedures completed. Efficacy was measured as the rate of Complete Resection (CR). Safety was defined by the intra- and post-operative morbidity rate specifically associated with these procedures.

RESULTS

In all patients P-Rme was successfully completed. P-me was performed in 82 patients and R-me in 47, both procedures in 23 patients. CR was achieved in all 129 patients with an efficacy of 100%. Intra-operatively 5 patients out of 129 experienced small bowel loop surgical devascularization. They required small bowel resection and anastomosis. The procedure specific morbidity was 3.8%. No post-operative complication was related to P-Rme. At 64 months median follow-up, survival outcomes in the study group were similar to patients in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Overall, almost 20% of the VPD patients needed P-Rme to obtain a CR. P-Rme was a safe and effective step during VPD. The rate of CR in the study group was 100% achieved thanks to the addition of the P-Rme. No procedure specific post-operative complications occurred but 3.8% of the patients had unplanned additional surgery related to these procedures.

The role of minimally invasive surgery in epithelial ovarian cancer treatment: a narrative review

Objectives

The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the available evidence on the use of minimal invasive surgery (MIS) in the management of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

Background

MIS is currently performed to stage and treat EOC at different stage of presentation. We will evaluate risks and benefits of minimally invasive surgery for early stage EOC treatment, then potential advantages provided by staging laparoscopy in identifying patients suitable for primary cytoreductive surgery (PDS) will be discussed. Finally we will investigate the growing role of MIS in the treatment of advanced EOC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and in the treatment of EOC recurrence.

Methods

An electronic database search was performed on PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar for relevant studies up to December 2022.

Conclusion

LPS represents a feasible surgical procedure for the staging and treatment in early, advanced and EOC relapse in selected patients treated in high-volume oncological centers by surgeons with adequate experience in advanced surgical procedures. Despite the increasing use of MIS over the last few years, randomized clinical trials are still needed to prove its effectiveness.

Ostomy Does Not Lead to Worse Outcomes After Bowel Resection With Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

Background

Debulking cytoreduction surgery with bowel resection is a common intervention for ovarian cancer. It is controversial whether ostomy causes worse survival outcomes and how clinical physicians should choose which patients to undergo ostomy. During this study, we performed a systematic review to determine whether ostomy leads to worse outcomes after bowel resection compared to anastomosis. We also summarized the possible indications for ostomy.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for articles containing the phrase "ovarian cancer with bowel resection" that were published between 2016 and 2021. We included studies that compared primary anastomosis with ostomy. We mainly focused on differences in the anastomotic leakage rate, length of hospital stay, overall survival, and other survival outcomes associated with the two procedures.

Results and Conclusion

Of the 763 studies, three were ultimately included in the systematic review (N=1411). We found that ostomy did not contribute to worse survival outcomes, and that the stoma-related complications were acceptable. Indications for ostomy require further study. Bowel resection segment margins and the distance from the anastomosis to the anal verge require consideration.

Risks factors for anastomotic leakage in advanced ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarise the available evidence on the pre- and intra-operative risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) after bowel resection and anastomosis for ovarian cancer (OC).

STUDY DESIGN

We searched online databases from Pubmed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library from inception to October 2020. Pre- and intra-operative risk factors for AL were considered as the primary outcomes. Research heterogeneity and bias were evaluated by I² and by the Newcastle Ottawa scale, respectively. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018095225.

RESULTS

The overall AL rate after OC surgery (median ± SD) was 5.3 ± 12% (277 AL on 5178 anastomoses). Thirteen non-randomised studies were included in the meta-analysis enrolling a total of 3274 patients. Pre albumin level ≤ 3 gr/dl, multiple bowel resections and primary cytoreductive surgery were associated with a significantly high risk of AL with a pooled OR of 5.29 (95% CI: 1.51-18.59), OR = 4.4 (95% CI: 1.19-16.66) and OR = 1.71 (95% CI: 1.05-2.77), respectively. Optimal cytoreduction, ASA score, ascites, and protective stoma were not associated with an increased risk of AL.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best available evidence, preoperative albumin level <3 gr/dl, multiple bowel resections and primary cytoreductive surgery were associated with an increased risk for AL after bowel surgery for OC.

Critical Analysis of Stage IV Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Patients after Treatment with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy followed by Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC)

Background

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) showed promise as initial treatment for stage IIIC (SIII) epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC); however, stage IV (SIV) outcomes are rarely reported. We assessed our experience and outcomes treating newly diagnosed SIV EOC with NACT plus CRS/HIPEC compared to SIII patients.

Methods

Advanced EOC from 2015–2018 managed with NACT (carboplatin/paclitaxel) due to unresectable disease or poor performance status followed by interval CRS/HIPEC were reviewed. Perioperative factors were assessed. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed by stage.

Results

Twenty-seven FIGO stage IIIC (n = 12) and IV (n = 15) patients were reviewed. Median NACT cycles were 3 and 4, respectively. Post-NACT omental caking, ascites, and pleural effusions decreased/resolved in 91%, 91%, and 100% of SIII and 85%, 92%, and 71% of SIV. SIII/SIV median PCI was 21 and 20 obtaining 92% and 100% complete cytoreduction (≤0.25 cm), respectively. Median organ resections were 6 and 7, respectively. Grade III/IV surgical complications were 0% SIII and 23% SIV, without hospital mortality. Median time to adjuvant chemotherapy was 53 and 74 days, respectively (p=0.007). SIII OS at 1 and 2 years was 100% and 83% and 87% and 76% in SIV (p=0.269). SIII 1-year PFS was 54%; median PFS: 12 months. SIV 1- and 2- year PFS was 47% and 23%; median PFS: 12 months (p=0.944).

Conclusion

Outcomes in select initially diagnosed and unresectable SIV EOC are similar to SIII after NACT plus CRS/HIPEC. SIV EOC may benefit from CRS/HIPEC, and further studies should explore this treatment approach.