Practice patterns, attitudes, and knowledge among clinicians regarding hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy: a national survey by Indian society of peritoneal surface malignancies (ISPSM)

Building an Efficient Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Program Despite the Lower-Middle-Income Barriers: Ukraine Experience

PURPOSE

Cytoreductive surgery/hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) programs are often limited to centers in developed countries because of extensive requirements. We aimed to analyze efficacy and challenges of CRS/HIPEC centers in lower-middle-income settings in the Ukraine example.

METHODS

A multicenter descriptive study was conducted using data sets (2008-2022) from Kyiv, Lviv, and Odesa centers. Patients with appendiceal neoplasm (AN); colorectal cancer (CRC); malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM); and epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer (EOC) treated with CRS ± HIPEC were included. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed for N ≥ 20 cohorts using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

We included 596 patients. At Kyiv and Lviv centers, 37 and 28 patients with AN had completeness of cytoreduction (CC-0/1) rates of 84% and 71%, respectively. Thirty-day major morbidity stood at 24% and 18%, respectively. Median OS was not reached (NR) at both centers. Nineteen patients with CRC from Kyiv, 11 from Lviv, and 156 from Odesa had CC-0/1 rates of 84%, 91%, and 86%, respectively. Thirty-day major complications occurred in 16%, 18%, and 8%, respectively. Median OS in the Odesa cohort was 35 (95% CI, 32 to 38) months. Among 15 Kyiv, five Lviv, and six Odesa patients with MPM, CC-0/1 rates were 67%, 80%, and 100%, respectively, while major complications occurred in 13%, 0%, and 17%, respectively. OS was not analyzed because of small MPM cohorts. At Kyiv, Lviv, and Odesa centers, 91, 40, and 89 patients, respectively, had primary EOC. CC-0/1 rates were 79%, 100%, and 80%, and 30-day major morbidity rates were 23%, 5%, and 6%, respectively. Median OS was NR, 71 (95% CI, 32 to 110), and 67 (95% CI, 61 to 73) months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

CRS/HIPEC programs in lower-middle-income environment can achieve safety and survival that meet global standards. Our discussion highlights common obstacles in such settings and proposes effective overcoming strategies.

Enhanced recovery after surgery in cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: national survey of peri-operative practice by Indian society of peritoneal surface malignancies

Objectives

The Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program is designed to achieve faster recovery by maintaining pre-operative organ function and reducing stress response following surgery. A two part ERAS guidelines specific for Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) was recently published with intent of extending the benefit to patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. This survey was performed to examine clinicians' knowledge, practice and obstacles about ERAS implementation in patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC.

Methods

Requests to participate in survey of ERAS practices were sent to 238 members of Indian Society of Peritoneal Surface malignancies (ISPSM) via email. They were requested to answer a 37-item questionnaire on elements of preoperative (n=7), intraoperative (n=10) and postoperative (n=11) practices. It also queried demographic information and individual attitudes to ERAS.

Results

Data from 164 respondents were analysed. 27.4 % were aware of the formal ERAS protocol for CRS and HIPEC. 88.4 % of respondents reported implementing ERAS practices for CRS and HIPEC either, completely (20.7 %) or partially (67.7 %). The adherence to the protocol among the respondents were as follows: pre operative (55.5-97.6 %), intra operative (32.6-84.8 %) and post operative (25.6-89 %). While most respondents considered implementation of ERAS for CRS and HIPEC in the present format, 34.1 % felt certain aspects of perioperative practice have potential for improvement. The main barriers to implementation were difficulty in adhering to all elements (65.2 %), insufficient evidence to apply in clinical practice (32.4 %), safety concerns (50.6 %) and administrative issues (47.6 %).

Conclusions

Majority agreed the implementation of ERAS guidelines is beneficial but are followed by HIPEC centres partially. Efforts are required to overcome barriers like improving certain aspects of perioperative practice to increase the adherence, confirming the benefit and safety of protocol with level I evidence and solving administrative issues by setting up dedicated multi-disciplinary ERAS teams.