Safety of extraperitoneal rectal resection and ileo- or colorectal anastomosis without loop ileostomy in patients with peritoneal metastases treated with CRS and HIPEC

Morbidity and Mortality after Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC in a National Reference Center: A Six-Year Experience under Independent Evaluation

Introduction: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) coupled with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a potentially curative approach to peritoneal disease (PD) and corresponds to the needs of patients with dire survival rates. However, the oncological community remains cautious toward this procedure because of its significant morbidity and mortality rates. This evolving evidence around CRS and HIPEC and its impact suggests a need for more standardized procedures in existing centers. Because of its complexity and potential for high morbidity and mortality, critical observation of our center's complication rates using complication management documentation tools were crucial to further develop our standard operating procedures (SOP) and maximize patient safety. Methods: Our prospectively maintained institutional database was queried to identify all patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC and had a filled-out quality management (QM) and complication management documentation tool at discharge at the surgical department of the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Berlin, Germany, between January 2018 and December 2023. Results: A total of 155 patients had a surgical and/or medical complication recorded. In total, 305 surgeries were surveyed. Some patients had more than one postoperative complication; hence, 344 events in 50 categories were recorded, of which 267 were graded 3a or higher in 92 patients. The most common medical complications were of pulmonary and renal origin. On the surgical side, surgical site infections (SSI) were most common. The incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) was 5% (n = 8), with no events between 2021 and the present. Patients with longer surgery duration times were at higher risk for developing postoperative complications. Conclusions: Major abdominal surgeries like CRS and HIPEC are associated with significant patient morbidity despite achieving optimal oncological outcomes. Postoperative complications are managed through strict surveillance and transparency, particularly in our large reference centers, to minimize patient risk. Quality management programs in our department have successfully maintained high standards of care without compromising patient safety.

Safe Anastomoses without Ostomies in Cytoreductive Surgery with Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: Technical Considerations and Modifications

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal complications, predominantly anastomotic leak (AL), are the most frequent source of severe morbidity after cytoreductive surgery (CRS).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to present the technical standards for colorectal anastomoses developed and systematically applied to all patients undergoing CRS in a high-volume tertiary center, and the associated AL rates.

METHODS

This was a descriptive study reporting the technical characteristics of a standardized protocol for three types of colorectal anastomoses (colorectal, ileorectal, and ileocolic) in CRS with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), and a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on anastomotic outcomes. All patients (1172) undergoing CRS with HIPEC from September 2006 to September 2020 were included. The anastomotic complications were classified according to the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer Surgery (ISGRCS) classification.

RESULTS

Overall, 1172 patients underwent 1300 procedures and 1359 gastrointestinal anastomoses. An ileocolic anastomosis was performed in 408 patients, colorectal anastomosis in 469 patients, and ileorectal anastomosis in 16 patients, none with diverting ileostomy; 345 other gastrointestinal reconstructions and 82 urinary reconstructions were performed in these patients. The AL rate was 1% (4/408) for the ileocolic anastomosis, 0.85% (4/469) for the colorectal anastomosis, and 0% (0/16) for the ileorectal anastomosis. One patient died postoperatively due to AL.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic application of standardized techniques adapted to ensure optimal tissue healing (stapled anastomoses avoiding overlap, accurate staple deployment, and hand-sewn reinforcement) are associated with a very high level of anastomotic safety in a large cohort of patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC.

Pelvic Anastomosis Without Protective Ileostomy is Safe in Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

During cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC), surgeons are reluctant to perform unprotected pelvic anastomosis despite lack of supporting data. We analyzed pelvic anastomosis outcomes and factors that influence ostomy creation in CRS/HIPEC patients.

METHODS

A single-center, descriptive study of patients with rectal resection during CRS/HIPEC was conducted using a prospective database. Surgical variables were reviewed. Multinomial logistic regression of outcomes (end or protective ostomy) was performed with pre- and intraoperative factors as predictors.

RESULTS

Overall, 274 of 789 CRS/HIPEC patients underwent rectal resection, including 243 (89%) with pelvic anastomosis [232 (85%) without ostomy, 11 (4%) with protective ileostomy] and 31 (11%) with no anastomosis [16 (6%) with end colostomy, 15 (5%) with end ileostomy]. The median age was 57 and 29% (79) were male. Of 243 pelvic anastomosis patients, 3 (1.2%) had rectal anastomotic leaks, including 1 with a protective ileostomy. Other anastomotic leaks occurred in 3.6%. Overall, 13% had Clavien-Dindo complications ≥ IIIB and the readmission rate was 30%. Mortality at 30 days and 100 days was 0.4% and 2.2%, respectively. Male gender and primary rectal cancer were associated with protective ileostomy [odds ratio (OR) = 7.01, 95% CI: 1.6-31.5, p = 0.011, and OR = 16.4, 95% CI: 3-88.4, p = 0.001, respectively). Male gender and prior pelvic surgery were associated with end colostomy (OR = 13.9, 95% CI: 3.7-53, p < 0.0001, and OR = 17.2, 95% CI: 3.8-78.6, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic bowel reconstruction without protective or end ostomy during CRS/HIPEC is safe. Protective ileostomy is associated with male gender and primary rectal cancer. End colostomy is associated with male gender and prior pelvic surgery.