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.

Laparoscopic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for refractory malignant ascites in patients unsuitable for cytoreductive surgery

INTRODUCTION

Malignant ascites (MA) is the abnormal accumulation of fluid in the peritoneal cavity of patients with intraperitoneal dissemination of their disease and is associated with a short life expectancy. The most common clinical feature is a progressive increase of abdominal distention resulting in pain, discomfort, anorexia and dyspnoea. Currently, no treatment is established standard of care due to limited efficacy or considerable toxicity. The objective was to examine the efficacy of laparoscopic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the palliation of refractory MA in patients who were unsuitable for cytoreductive surgery.

METHODS

From May 2009 to June 2015, 12 patients with MA due to their peritoneal malignancy were treated with laparoscopic HIPEC. The time between operation and repeat paracentesis, in-hospital data, and the proportion of patients that did not require repeat paracentesis was analyzed.

RESULTS

One patient (8%) was admitted to ICU for 1 day. The mean operating time and hospital stay was 149.3 min (range 79-185) and 4.6 days (range 2-11) respectively. Neither high-grade morbidity nor mortality was observed. The median OS was 57 days. In our experience, a complete and definitive disappearance of MA was observed in 83% of patients. Two patients (17%) developed recurrent MA 124 days and 283 days post-HIPEC.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic HIPEC is a beneficial treatment for the management and palliation of refractory MA and results in an excellent clinical and radiological resolution in patients with a complete resolution observed in selected patients.

Repeat cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for recurrent diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma

INTRODUCTION

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown to improve survival outcomes for patients with diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (DMPM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of prospectively collected data of 44 consecutive patients with DMPM who underwent CRS and HIPEC by the same surgical team at St George Hospital in Sydney, Australia. A total of 58 operations were performed. Clinical data were divided according to the number of operation and HIPEC the patient had undergone (Group 1 = initial CRS and HIPEC; Group 2 = 2nd CRS and HIPEC; Group 3 included 3rd CRS and HIPEC; Group 4 = 4th CRS and HIPEC). A significant difference was defined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in mortality and morbidity results among the four groups. The median survival for those who only had one operation was 22 months (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0-47.2), whereas the median survival for those who had a second operation was 62 months (95% CI = 22.9-101.1). However, such a difference did not translate into a statistical significance (p = 0.141).

CONCLUSION

We report an encouraging median survival of 62 months in patients who had recurrence of disease and had repeat CRS and HIPEC with similar morbidity and mortality with the initial operation. Due to the learning curve of this technique, patients with recurrent mesothelioma should be referred to specialised tertiary care centres for evaluation. Selected patients may experience prolonged survival after repeat CRS and HIPEC.

Repeat cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for recurrent colorectal peritoneal metastases: yes or no?

PURPOSE

To clarify the role of repeat CRS for recurrent colorectal carcinoma (CRC) through: (i) Systematic review of the literature (ii) Analysis of survival outcomes in a prospective cohort.

METHODS

(i) Pubmed and MEDLINE from 1980 to July 2013 searched using terms: colorectal carcinoma, peritonectomy, cytoreductive surgery, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), redo, repeat, and iterative. (ii) Kaplan-Meier Survival analysis of consecutive patients undergoing repeat CRS at St George Hospital between Jan 2000 and July 2013.

RESULTS

(i) The search strategy yielded 309 articles, 5 meeting inclusion criteria, reporting on 91 patients. Median overall survival from first CRS ranged from 39 to 57.6 months with 3-yr survival of 50%, and 5-year survival of 30%. Median survival from second CRS was 20-months with 1-yr survivals of 72% and 66% and 2-year survivals of 50% and 44%. (ii) Repeat CRS performed on 18 patients found median survival from first CRS was 59 months, with 1, 3, and 5-year survival of 100%, 52% and 26% respectively. Median survival from repeat CRS was 22.6 months with 1, 2, and 3-year survival of 94%, 48% and 12% respectively.

CONCLUSION

The current data on repeat CRS in CRC is relatively immature and more data is required before drawing clear conclusions. Patient selection should be on a case by case basis conducted through a MDT process with emphasis on surrogate markers for favourable outcomes.