1
|
Zwanenburg ES, El Klaver C, Wisselink DD, Punt CJA, Snaebjornsson P, Crezee J, Aalbers AGJ, Brandt-Kerkhof ARM, Bremers AJA, Burger PJWA, Fabry HFJ, Ferenschild FTJ, Festen S, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, de Hingh IHJT, Kok NFM, Kusters M, Musters GD, Schoonderwoerd L, Tuynman JB, van de Ven AWH, van Westreenen HL, Wiezer MJ, Zimmerman DDE, van Zweeden A, Dijkgraaf MGW, Tanis PJ. Adjuvant Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced Colon Cancer (COLOPEC): 5-Year Results of a Randomized Multicenter Trial. J Clin Oncol 2024; 42:140-145. [PMID: 37922442 DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.02644] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2022] [Revised: 03/14/2023] [Accepted: 09/01/2023] [Indexed: 11/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Whether adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) might prevent peritoneal metastases after curative surgery for high-risk colon cancer is an ongoing debate. This study aimed to determine 5-year oncologic outcomes of the randomized multicenter COLOPEC trial, which included patients with clinical or pathologic T4N0-2M0 or perforated colon cancer and randomly assigned (1:1) to either adjuvant systemic chemotherapy and HIPEC (n = 100) or adjuvant systemic chemotherapy alone (n = 102). HIPEC was performed using a one-time administration of oxaliplatin (460 mg/m2, 30 minutes, 42°C, concurrent fluorouracil/leucovorin intravenously), either simultaneously (9%) or within 5-8 weeks (91%) after primary tumor resection. Outcomes were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Long-term data were available of all 202 patients included in the COLOPEC trial, with a median follow-up of 59 months (IQR, 54.5-64.5). No significant difference was found in 5-year overall survival rate between patients assigned to adjuvant HIPEC followed by systemic chemotherapy or only adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (69.6% v 70.9%, log-rank; P = .692). Five-year peritoneal metastases rates were 63.9% and 63.2% (P = .907) and 5-year disease-free survival was 55.7% and 52.3% (log-rank; P = .875), respectively. No differences in quality-of-life outcomes were found. Our findings implicate that adjuvant HIPEC should still be performed in trial setting only.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Sophia Zwanenburg
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Charlotte El Klaver
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Daniel D Wisselink
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- UMC Utrecht, Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - P Snaebjornsson
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Pathology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland
| | - Johannes Crezee
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Andre J A Bremers
- Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Pim J W A Burger
- Catharina Hospital, Department of Surgery, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Hans F J Fabry
- Bravis Hospital, Department of Surgery, Roosendaal, the Netherlands
| | | | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwen Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Surgery, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Niels F M Kok
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Kusters
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G D Musters
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - J B Tuynman
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC Location Free University, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - M J Wiezer
- St Antonius Hospital, Department of Surgery, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - David D E Zimmerman
- Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Department of Surgery, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - Annette van Zweeden
- Amstelland Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine, Amstelveen, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam Public Health, Methodology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Erasmus Medical Center, Department of Oncological and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van de Vlasakker VCJ, Lurvink RJ, Wassenaar EC, Rauwerdink P, Bakkers C, Rovers KP, Bonhof CS, Burger JWA, Wiezer MJ, Boerma D, Nienhuijs SW, Mols F, de Hingh IHJT. Comparing patient reported abdominal pain between patients treated with oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC-OX) and primary colorectal cancer surgery. Sci Rep 2023; 13:20458. [PMID: 37993560 PMCID: PMC10665337 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-47510-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2023] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 11/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC-OX) is an emerging palliative treatment for patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases. Previously, our study group reported that patients experienced abdominal pain for several weeks after PIPAC-OX. However, it is unknown how this compares to abdominal pain after regular colorectal cancer surgery. To provide some perspective, this study compared the presence of abdominal pain after PIPAC-OX to the presence of abdominal pain after primary tumor surgery. Patient reported abdominal pain scores (EORTC QLQ-CR-29), from two prospective, Dutch cohorts were used in this study. Scores ranged from 0 to 100, a higher score represents more abdominal pain. Abdominal pain at baseline and at four weeks after treatment were compared between the two groups. Twenty patients who underwent PIPAC-OX and 322 patients who underwent primary tumor surgery were included in the analysis. At baseline, there were no differences in abdominal pain between both groups (mean 20 vs. 18, respectively; p = 0.688). Four weeks after treatment, abdominal pain was significantly worse in the PIPAC group (39 vs 15, respectively; p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.99). The differential effect over time for abdominal pain differed significantly between both groups (mean difference: 19 vs - 3, respectively; p = 0.004; Cohen's d = 0.88). PIPAC-OX resulted in significantly worse postoperative abdominal pain than primary tumor surgery. These results can be used for patient counseling and stress the need for adequate analgesia during and after PIPAC-OX. Further research is required to prevent or reduce abdominal pain after PIPAC-OX.Trial registration CRC-PIPAC: Clinicaltrails.gov NCT03246321 (01-10-2017).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vincent C J van de Vlasakker
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Robin J Lurvink
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- Department of Research, Netherlands Cancer Registry, IKNL, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Emma C Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Paulien Rauwerdink
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Checca Bakkers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Cynthia S Bonhof
- Department of Research, Netherlands Cancer Registry, IKNL, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, CoRPS - Centre of Research on Psychological Disorders and Somatic Diseases, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Floortje Mols
- Department of Research, Netherlands Cancer Registry, IKNL, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, CoRPS - Centre of Research on Psychological Disorders and Somatic Diseases, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
- Department of Research, Netherlands Cancer Registry, IKNL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Brandsma HT, Hansson BM, Aufenacker TJ, de Jong N, V Engelenburg KC, Mahabier C, Donders R, Steenvoorde P, de Vries Reilingh TS, Leendert van Westreenen H, Wiezer MJ, de Wilt JHW, Rovers M, Rosman C. Prophylactic Mesh Placement During Formation of an End-colostomy: Long-term Randomized Controlled Trial on Effectiveness and Safety. Ann Surg 2023; 278:e440-e446. [PMID: 36727747 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005801] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine if prophylactic mesh placement is an effective, safe, and cost-effective procedure to prevent parastomal hernia (PSH) formation in the long term. BACKGROUND A PSH is the most frequent complication after stoma formation. Prophylactic placement of a mesh has been suggested to prevent PSH, but long-term evidence to support this approach is scarce. METHODS In this multicentre superiority trial patients undergoing the formation of a permanent colostomy were randomly assigned to either retromuscular polypropylene mesh reinforcement or conventional colostomy formation. Primary endpoint was the incidence of a PSH after 5 years. Secondary endpoints were morbidity, mortality, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS A total of 150 patients were randomly assigned to the mesh group (n = 72) or nonmesh group (n = 78). For the long-term follow-up, 113 patients were analyzed, and 37 patients were lost to follow-up. After a median follow-up of 60 months (interquartile range: 48.6-64.4), 49 patients developed a PSH, 20 (27.8%) in the mesh group and 29 (37.2%) in the nonmesh group ( P = 0.22; RD: -9.4%; 95% CI: -24, 5.5). The cost related to the meshing strategy was € 2.239 lower than the nonmesh strategy (95% CI: 491.18, 3985.49), and quality-adjusted life years did not differ significantly between groups ( P = 0.959; 95% CI: -0.066, 0.070). CONCLUSIONS Prophylactic mesh placement during the formation of an end-colostomy is a safe procedure but does not reduce the incidence of PSH after 5 years of follow-up. It does, however, delay the onset of PSH without a significant difference in morbidity, mortality, or quality of life, and seems to be cost-effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Birgitta Me Hansson
- Department of Surgery, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Nienke de Jong
- Department of Surgery, Bernhoven Hospital, Uden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Chander Mahabier
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital Dordrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Rogier Donders
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Pascal Steenvoorde
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Maroeska Rovers
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of operating rooms, Radboud university medical centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Camiel Rosman
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Makarawung DJS, Dijkhorst PJ, de Vries CEE, Monpellier VM, Wiezer MJ, van Veen RN, Geenen R, Mink van der Molen AB. Body Image and Weight Loss Outcome After Bariatric Metabolic Surgery: a Mixed Model Analysis. Obes Surg 2023; 33:2396-2404. [PMID: 37354307 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-023-06690-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2023] [Revised: 06/10/2023] [Accepted: 06/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/26/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE As in nonsurgical weight loss populations, body image may partly explain differences in weight loss outcomes after surgery. The aim of this study was to determine the prospective association between body image and weight loss in a longitudinal cohort of patients up to 3 years after bariatric metabolic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS The BODY-Q self-report questionnaire was used to assess body image. Linear mixed models evaluated associations of baseline body image with weight loss in the first year as well as associations of body image at 12 months and first-year change in body image with weight loss 12 to 36 months after surgery. RESULTS Available body image data included 400 (100%), 371 (93%), 306 (77%), 289 (72%), and 218 (55%) patients at baseline and 4, 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. Body image scores improved significantly until 12 months, followed by a gradual decline. Scores remained improved in comparison to baseline (β = 31.49, 95% CI [27.8, 35.2], p < .001). Higher baseline body image was associated with less weight loss during the first year, and the effect size was trivial (ß = -0.05, 95% CI [-0.09, -0.01], p = .009). Body image and change in body image were not associated with weight loss 12 to 36 months after surgery. CONCLUSION Body image improved after bariatric metabolic surgery. Although no clinically relevant associations of body image with weight loss were demonstrated, the gradual decline in body image scores underlines the importance of long-term follow-up with regular assessment of this aspect of quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dennis J S Makarawung
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435, CM, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435 CM, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
| | - Phillip J Dijkhorst
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Jan Tooropstraat 164, 1061 AE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Claire E E de Vries
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Jan Tooropstraat 164, 1061 AE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Valerie M Monpellier
- Dutch Obesity Clinic (Nederlandse Obesitas Kliniek), Amersfoortseweg 43, 3712 BA, Huis ter Heide, the Netherlands
| | - M J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435, CM, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Ruben N van Veen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Jan Tooropstraat 164, 1061 AE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rinie Geenen
- Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, 3584 CS, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Aebele B Mink van der Molen
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435 CM, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
de Beaufort HWL, Groot VP, Bollen TL, Berben KF, Wiezer MJ. [Acute abdominal pain due to internal herniation: a rare phenomenon in a patient without relevant medical history]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2023; 167. [PMID: 37235601] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The foramen of Winslow is the opening between the peritoneum and the omental bursa just caudal to the liver and dorsal to the lesser omentum. Internal herniation of the intestine through the foramen of Winslow can cause acute abdominal pain. CASE DESCRIPTION A 45-year old man without relevant medical history presented with acute abdominal pain. CT scan showed an internal herniation of the intestine through the foramen of Winslow, with signs of ischemia of the herniated intestine. Emergency laparoscopy was performed. The herniated intestine was decompressed with a needle before it could be repositioned, no resection was necessary. Postoperative course was characterized by a paralytic ileus, eventually the patient was discharged on postoperative day 8. CONCLUSION Internal herniation of the intestine through the foramen of Winslow is a rare cause of acute abdominal pain, which requires surgery to reposition the intestine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - M J Wiezer
- St. Antonius Ziekenhuis, afd. Chirurgie, Nieuwegein
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Ubels S, Matthée E, Verstegen M, Klarenbeek B, Bouwense S, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Daams F, Dekker JWT, van Det MJ, van Esser S, Griffiths EA, Haveman JW, Nieuwenhuijzen G, Siersema PD, Wijnhoven B, Hannink G, van Workum F, Rosman C, Heisterkamp J, Polat F, Schouten J, Singh P, Eshuis WJ, Kalff MC, Feenstra ML, van der Peet DL, Stam WT, Van Etten B, Poelmann F, Vuurberg N, Willem van den Berg J, Martijnse IS, Matthijsen RM, Luyer M, Curvers W, Nieuwenhuijzen T, Taselaar AE, Kouwenhoven EA, Lubbers M, Sosef M, Lecot F, Geraedts TC, van den Wildenberg F, Kelder W, Lubbers M, Baas PC, de Haas JW, Hartgrink HH, Bahadoer RR, van Sandick JW, Hartemink KJ, Veenhof X, Stockmann H, Gorgec B, Weeder P, Wiezer MJ, Genders CM, Belt E, Blomberg B, van Duijvendijk P, Claassen L, Reetz D, Steenvoorde P, Mastboom W, Klein Ganseij HJ, van Dalsen AD, Joldersma A, Zwakman M, Groenendijk RP, Montazeri M, Mercer S, Knight B, van Boxel G, McGregor RJ, Skipworth RJ, Frattini C, Bradley A, Nilsson M, Hayami M, Huang B, Bundred J, Evans R, Grimminger PP, van der Sluis PC, Eren U, Saunders J, Theophilidou E, Khanzada Z, Elliott JA, Ponten J, King S, Reynolds JV, Sgromo B, Akbari K, Shalaby S, Gutschow CA, Schmidt H, Vetter D, Moorthy K, Ibrahim MA, Christodoulidis G, Räsänen JV, Kauppi J, Söderström H, Koshy R, Manatakis DK, Korkolis DP, Balalis D, Rompu A, Alkhaffaf B, Alasmar M, Arebi M, Piessen G, Nuytens F, Degisors S, Ahmed A, Boddy A, Gandhi S, Fashina O, Van Daele E, Pattyn P, Robb WB, Arumugasamy M, Al Azzawi M, Whooley J, Colak E, Aybar E, Sari AC, Uyanik MS, Ciftci AB, Sayyed R, Ayub B, Murtaza G, Saeed A, Ramesh P, Charalabopoulos A, Liakakos T, Schizas D, Baili E, Kapelouzou A, Valmasoni M, Pierobon ES, Capovilla G, Merigliano S, Constantinoiu S, Birla R, Achim F, Rosianu CG, Hoara P, Castro RG, Salcedo AF, Negoi I, Negoita VM, Ciubotaru C, Stoica B, Hostiuc S, Colucci N, Mönig SP, Wassmer CH, Meyer J, Takeda FR, Aissar Sallum RA, Ribeiro U, Cecconello I, Toledo E, Trugeda MS, Fernández MJ, Gil C, Castanedo S, Isik A, Kurnaz E, Videira JF, Peyroteo M, Canotilho R, Weindelmayer J, Giacopuzzi S, De Pasqual CA, Bruna M, Mingol F, Vaque J, Pérez C, Phillips AW, Chmelo J, Brown J, Koshy R, Han LE, Gossage JA, Davies AR, Baker CR, Kelly M, Saad M, Bernardi D, Bonavina L, Asti E, Riva C, Scaramuzzo R, Elhadi M, Ahmed HA, Elhadi A, Elnagar FA, Msherghi AA, Wills V, Campbell C, Cerdeira MP, Whiting S, Merrett N, Das A, Apostolou C, Lorenzo A, Sousa F, Barbosa JA, Devezas V, Barbosa E, Fernandes C, Smith G, Li EY, Bhimani N, Chan P, Kotecha K, Hii MW, Ward SM, Johnson M, Read M, Chong L, Hollands MJ, Allaway M, Richardson A, Johnston E, Chen AZ, Kanhere H, Prasad S, McQuillan P, Surman T, Trochsler M, Schofield W, Ahmed SK, Reid JL, Harris MC, Gananadha S, Farrant J, Rodrigues N, Fergusson J, Hindmarsh A, Afzal Z, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Rooney S, Loureiro C, Fernández SL, Díez del Val I, Jaunoo S, Kennedy L, Hussain A, Theodorou D, Triantafyllou T, Theodoropoulos C, Palyvou T, Elhadi M, Ben Taher FA, Ekheel M, Msherghi AA. Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue. Eur J Surg Oncol 2023; 49:974-982. [PMID: 36732207 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.01.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2022] [Revised: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 01/11/2023] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Failure to rescue (FTR) is an important outcome measure after esophagectomy and reflects mortality after postoperative complications. Differences in FTR have been associated with hospital resection volume. However, insight into how centers manage complications and achieve their outcomes is lacking. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a main contributor to FTR. This study aimed to assess differences in FTR after AL between centers, and to identify factors that explain these differences. METHODS TENTACLE - Esophagus is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. Differences in FTR were assessed between low-volume (<20 resections), middle-volume (20-60 resections) and high-volume centers (≥60 resections). Mediation analysis was performed using logistic regression, including possible mediators for FTR: case-mix, hospital resources, leak severity and treatment. RESULTS FTR after AL was 11.7%. After adjustment for confounders, FTR was lower in high-volume vs. low-volume (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2-0.8), but not versus middle-volume centers (OR 0.67, 95%CI 0.5-1.0). After mediation analysis, differences in FTR were found to be explained by lower leak severity, lower secondary ICU readmission rate and higher availability of therapeutic modalities in high-volume centers. No statistically significant direct effect of hospital volume was found: high-volume vs. low-volume 0.86 (95%CI 0.4-1.7), high-volume vs. middle-volume OR 0.86 (95%CI 0.5-1.4). CONCLUSION Lower FTR in high-volume compared with low-volume centers was explained by lower leak severity, less secondary ICU readmissions and higher availability of therapeutic modalities. To reduce FTR after AL, future studies should investigate effective strategies to reduce leak severity and prevent secondary ICU readmission.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sander Ubels
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - Eric Matthée
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Moniek Verstegen
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Bastiaan Klarenbeek
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Stefan Bouwense
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Mark I van Berge Henegouwen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marc J van Det
- Department of Surgery, ZGT Hospital Group, Almelo, the Netherlands
| | - Stijn van Esser
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Ewen A Griffiths
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Jan Willem Haveman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Peter D Siersema
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Wijnhoven
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Gerjon Hannink
- Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Frans van Workum
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Camiel Rosman
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Fatih Polat
- Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Schouten
- Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Pritam Singh
- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kalff MC, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Baas PC, Bahadoer RR, Belt EJT, Brattinga B, Claassen L, Ćosović A, Crull D, Daams F, van Dalsen AD, Dekker JWT, van Det MJ, Drost M, van Duijvendijk P, Eshuis WJ, van Esser S, Gaspersz MP, Görgec B, Groenendijk RPR, Hartgrink HH, van der Harst E, Haveman JW, Heisterkamp J, van Hillegersberg R, Kelder W, Kingma BF, Koemans WJ, Kouwenhoven EA, Lagarde SM, Lecot F, van der Linden PP, Luyer MDP, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Olthof PB, van der Peet DL, Pierie JPEN, Pierik EGJMR, Plat VD, Polat F, Rosman C, Ruurda JP, van Sandick JW, Scheer R, Slootmans CAM, Sosef MN, Sosef OV, de Steur WO, Stockmann HBAC, Stoop FJ, Voeten DM, Vugts G, Vijgen GHEJ, Weeda VB, Wiezer MJ, van Oijen MGH, Gisbertz SS. Trends in Distal Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer Care: The Dutch Nationwide Ivory Study. Ann Surg 2023; 277:619-628. [PMID: 35129488 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005292] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the nationwide trends in care and accompanied postoperative outcomes for patients with distal esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA The introduction of transthoracic esophagectomy, minimally invasive surgery, and neo-adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy changed care for patients with esophageal cancer. METHODS Patients after elective transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy for distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma in the Netherlands between 2007-2016 were included. The primary aim was to evaluate trends in both care and postoperative outcomes for the included patients. Additionally, postoperative outcomes after transthoracic and tran-shiatal esophagectomy were compared, stratified by time periods. RESULTS Among 4712 patients included, 74% had distal esophageal tumors and 87% had adenocarcinomas. Between 2007 and 2016, the proportion of transthoracic esophagectomy increased from 41% to 81%, and neo-adjuvant treatment and minimally invasive esophagectomy increased from 31% to 96%, and from 7% to 80%, respectively. Over this 10-year period, postoperative outcomes improved: postoperative morbidity decreased from 66.6% to 61.8% ( P = 0.001), R0 resection rate increased from 90.0% to 96.5% (P <0.001), median lymph node harvest increased from 15 to 19 ( P <0.001), and median survival increased from 35 to 41 months ( P = 0.027). CONCLUSION In this nationwide cohort, a transition towards more neo-adju-vant treatment, transthoracic esophagectomy and minimally invasive surgery was observed over a 10-year period, accompanied by decreased postoperative morbidity, improved surgical radicality and lymph node harvest, and improved survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marianne C Kalff
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mark I van Berge Henegouwen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Peter C Baas
- Department of Surgery, Martini Ziekenhuis, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Renu R Bahadoer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Eric J T Belt
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Baukje Brattinga
- Department of Surgery, MC Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - Linda Claassen
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Ziekenhuis, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| | - Admira Ćosović
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - David Crull
- Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, the Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marc J van Det
- Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, the Netherlands
| | - Manon Drost
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Wietse J Eshuis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Stijn van Esser
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the Netherlands
| | | | - Burak Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Ziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Henk H Hartgrink
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan Willem Haveman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Joos Heisterkamp
- Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | | | - Wendy Kelder
- Department of Surgery, Martini Ziekenhuis, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - B Feike Kingma
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Willem J Koemans
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Frederik Lecot
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland, Heerlen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Misha D P Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Pim B Olthof
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Victor D Plat
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Fatih Polat
- Department of Surgery, Canisius Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Camiel Rosman
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Jelle P Ruurda
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Johanna W van Sandick
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rene Scheer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Odin V Sosef
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland, Heerlen, the Netherlands
| | - Wobbe O de Steur
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Fanny J Stoop
- Department of Surgery, Canisius Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Daan M Voeten
- Department of Surgery, Spaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem, the Netherlands
| | - Guusje Vugts
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Víola B Weeda
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn G H van Oijen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Suzanne S Gisbertz
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bakkers C, Rovers KP, Rijken A, Simkens GAAM, Bonhof CS, Nienhuijs SW, Burger JWA, Creemers GJM, Brandt-Kerkhof ARM, Tuynman JB, Aalbers AGJ, Wiezer MJ, de Reuver PR, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, Punt CJA, Tanis PJ, Mols F, de Hingh IHJT. Perioperative Systemic Therapy Versus Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC Alone for Resectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: Patient-Reported Outcomes of a Randomized Phase II Trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:2678-2688. [PMID: 36754943 PMCID: PMC10085918 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13116-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2021] [Accepted: 01/02/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As part of a randomized phase II trial in patients with isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPMs), the present study compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients treated with perioperative systemic therapy versus cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone. Also, PROs of patients receiving perioperative systemic therapy were explored. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients were randomized to perioperative systemic therapy (experimental) or CRS-HIPEC alone (control). PROs were assessed using EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29, and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires at baseline, after neoadjuvant treatment (experimental), and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Linear mixed modeling was used to compare five predefined PROs (visual analog scale, global health status, physical functioning, fatigue, C30 summary score) between arms and to longitudinally analyze PROs in the experimental arm. RESULTS Of 79 analyzed patients, 37 (47%) received perioperative systemic therapy. All predefined PROs were comparable between arms at all timepoints and returned to baseline at 3 or 6 months postoperatively. The experimental arm had worsening of fatigue [mean difference (MD) + 14, p = 0.001], loss of appetite (MD + 15, p = 0.003), hair loss (MD + 18, p < 0.001), and loss of taste (MD + 27, p < 0.001) after neoadjuvant treatment. Except for loss of appetite, these PROs returned to baseline at 3 or 6 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS In patients with resectable CPM randomized to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone, PROs were comparable between arms and returned to baseline postoperatively. Together with the trial's previously reported feasibility and safety data, these findings show acceptable tolerability of perioperative systemic therapy in this setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Bakkers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - K P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - A Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - G A A M Simkens
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - C S Bonhof
- Center of Research on Psychological and Somatic Disorders, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.,Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - S W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - J W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - G J M Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - A R M Brandt-Kerkhof
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VUMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - P R de Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - P H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - C J A Punt
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - F Mols
- Center of Research on Psychological and Somatic Disorders, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.,Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. .,GROW - School for Oncology and Development Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Jacobsen AL, DeVries CEE, Poulsen L, Mou D, Klassen AF, Pusic AL, Makarawung DJS, Wiezer MJ, van Veen RN, Sørensen JA. The impact of body mass index (BMI) on satisfaction with work life: An international BODY-Q study. Clin Obes 2022; 12:e12527. [PMID: 35575285 PMCID: PMC9539700 DOI: 10.1111/cob.12527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2021] [Revised: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 04/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022]
Abstract
Obesity is a global health issue known to have a major influence on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). HR-QOL is a concept evaluating physical and psychological health. Work life can impact HR-QOL in people with obesity. The aim of this study was to measure the association between body mass index (BMI) and satisfaction with work life. This study included participants from an international multicenter field-test study of BODY-Q scales. Recruitment took place at hospitals in Denmark, The Netherlands and USA between June 2019 and January 2020. The BODY-Q Work Life scale was used to measure work life satisfaction. The difference between BMI groups and work life satisfaction was examined using one-way analysis of variance. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to examine the association between BMI and work life satisfaction, adjusted for significant confounders. Of 4123 participants, 2515 completed the BODY-Q Work Life scale. BMI groups showed significant difference in work life satisfaction (p < .0001). The Work Life scale mean score was 77.6 for the normal BMI group, 78.5 for the overweight group and 75.0, 68.9 and 63.8 for Class 1, 2 and 3 obesity, respectively. Furthermore, BMI was significantly associated with satisfaction with work life (adjusted regression coefficient -.962, p < .0001). Higher BMI was associated with lower work life satisfaction. This finding suggests that a reduction in BMI may have a positive influence on work life satisfaction in people with obesity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amalie L. Jacobsen
- Research Unit for Plastic SurgeryOdense University HospitalOdenseDenmark
- OPEN, Open Patient data Explorative NetworkOdense University HospitalOdenseDenmark
| | - Claire E. E. DeVries
- Department of SurgeryBrigham and Women's HospitalBostonMassachusettsUSA
- Department of SurgeryOLVG WestAmsterdamThe Netherlands
| | - Lotte Poulsen
- Research Unit for Plastic SurgeryOdense University HospitalOdenseDenmark
- OPEN, Open Patient data Explorative NetworkOdense University HospitalOdenseDenmark
| | - Danny Mou
- Department of SurgeryBrigham and Women's HospitalBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | - Anne F. Klassen
- Department of PediatricsMcMaster UniversityHamiltonOntarioCanada
| | - Andrea L. Pusic
- Department of SurgeryBrigham and Women's HospitalBostonMassachusettsUSA
| | | | | | | | - Jens A. Sørensen
- Research Unit for Plastic SurgeryOdense University HospitalOdenseDenmark
- Department of Plastic SurgeryUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Chen L, van Rhee KP, Wasmann RE, Krekels EHJ, Wiezer MJ, van Dongen EPA, Verweij PE, van der Linden PD, Brüggemann RJ, Knibbe CAJ. Total bodyweight and sex both drive pharmacokinetic variability of fluconazole in obese adults. J Antimicrob Chemother 2022; 77:2217-2226. [PMID: 35613035 DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkac160] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2021] [Accepted: 04/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fluconazole is commonly used to treat or prevent fungal infections. It is typically used orally but in critical situations, IV administration is needed. Obesity may influence the pharmacokinetics and therapeutic efficacy of a drug. In this study, we aim to assess the impact of obesity on fluconazole pharmacokinetics given orally or IV to guide dose adjustments for the obese population. METHODS We performed a prospective pharmacokinetic study with intensive sampling in obese subjects undergoing bariatric surgery (n = 17, BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2) and non-obese healthy controls (n = 8, 18.5 ≤ BMI < 30.0 kg/m2). Participants received a semi-simultaneous oral dose of 400 mg fluconazole capsules, followed after 2 h by 400 mg IV. Population pharmacokinetic modelling and simulation were performed using NONMEM 7.3. RESULTS A total of 421 fluconazole concentrations in 25 participants (total bodyweight 61.0-174 kg) until 48 h after dosing were obtained. An estimated bioavailability of 87.5% was found for both obese and non-obese subjects, with a 95% distribution interval of 43.9%-98.4%. With increasing total bodyweight, both higher CL and Vd were found. Sex also significantly impacted Vd, being 27% larger in male compared with female participants. CONCLUSIONS In our population of obese but otherwise healthy individuals, obesity clearly alters the pharmacokinetics of fluconazole, which puts severely obese adults, particularly if male, at risk of suboptimal exposure, for which adjusted doses are proposed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lu Chen
- Division of Systems Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Leiden Academic Centre of Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koen P van Rhee
- Division of Systems Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Leiden Academic Centre of Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Tergooi Medical Centre, Hilversum, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland E Wasmann
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Elke H J Krekels
- Division of Systems Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Leiden Academic Centre of Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Eric P A van Dongen
- Department of Anesthesiology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Paul E Verweij
- Department of Medical Microbiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.,Radboudumc Center for Infectious Diseases and Center of Expertise in Mycology Radboudumc/CWZ, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Roger J Brüggemann
- Radboudumc Center for Infectious Diseases and Center of Expertise in Mycology Radboudumc/CWZ, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.,Department of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Catherijne A J Knibbe
- Division of Systems Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Leiden Academic Centre of Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Hoek VT, Edomskis PP, Stark PW, Lambrichts DPV, Draaisma WA, Consten ECJ, Lange JF, Bemelman WA, Hop WC, Opmeer BC, Reitsma JB, Scholte RA, Waltmann EWH, Legemate A, Bartelsman JF, Meijer DW, de Brouwer M, van Dalen J, Durbridge M, Geerdink M, Ilbrink GJ, Mehmedovic S, Middelhoek P, Boom MJ, Consten ECJ, van der Bilt JDW, van Olden GDJ, Stam MAW, Verweij MS, Vennix S, Musters GD, Swank HA, Boermeester MA, Busch ORC, Buskens CJ, El-Massoudi Y, Kluit AB, van Rossem CC, Schijven MP, Tanis PJ, Unlu C, van Dieren S, Gerhards MF, Karsten TM, de Nes LC, Rijna H, van Wagensveld BA, Koff eman GI, Steller EP, Tuynman JB, Bruin SC, van der Peet DL, Blanken-Peeters CFJM, Cense HA, Jutte E, Crolla RMPH, van der Schelling GP, van Zeeland M, de Graaf EJR, Groenendijk RPR, Karsten TM, Vermaas M, Schouten O, de Vries MR, Prins HA, Lips DJ, Bosker RJI, van der Hoeven JAB, Diks J, Plaisier PW, Kruyt PM, Sietses C, Stommel MWJ, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IHJT, Luyer MDP, van Montfort G, Ponten EH, Smulders JF, van Duyn EB, Klaase JM, Swank DJ, Ottow RT, Stockmann HBAC, Vermeulen J, Vuylsteke RJCLM, Belgers HJ, Fransen S, von Meijenfeldt EM, Sosef MN, van Geloven AAW, Hendriks ER, ter Horst B, Leeuwenburgh MMN, van Ruler O, Vogten JM, Vriens EJC, Westerterp M, Eijsbouts QAJ, Bentohami A, Bijlsma TS, de Korte N, Nio D, Govaert MJPM, Joosten JJA, Tollenaar RAEM, Stassen LPS, Wiezer MJ, Hazebroek EJ, Smits AB, van Westreenen HL, Lange JF, Brandt A, Nijboer WN, Mulder IM, Toorenvliet BR, Weidema WF, Coene PPLO, Mannaerts GHH, den Hartog D, de Vos RJ, Zengerink JF, Hoofwijk AGM, Hulsewé KWE, Melenhorst J, Stoot JHMB, Steup WH, Huijstee PJ, Merkus JWS, Wever JJ, Maring JK, Heisterkamp J, van Grevenstein WMU, Vriens MR, Besselink MGH, Borel Rinkes IHM, Witkamp AJ, Slooter GD, Konsten JLM, Engel AF, Pierik EGJM, Frakking TG, van Geldere D, Patijn GA, D’Hoore BAJL, de Buck AVO, Miserez M, Terrasson I, Wolthuis A, di Saverio S, de Blasiis MG. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage versus sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: three-year follow-up of the randomised LOLA trial. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:7764-7774. [PMID: 35606544 PMCID: PMC9485102 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09326-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Accepted: 05/01/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study aimed to compare laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy as treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis during a 36 month follow-up of the LOLA trial.
Methods
Within the LOLA arm of the international, multicentre LADIES trial, patients with perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis were randomised between laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy. Outcomes were collected up to 36 months. The primary outcome of the present study was cumulative morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included reoperations (including stoma reversals), stoma rates, and sigmoidectomy rates in the lavage group.
Results
Long-term follow-up was recorded in 77 of the 88 originally included patients, 39 were randomised to sigmoidectomy (51%) and 38 to laparoscopic lavage (49%). After 36 months, overall cumulative morbidity (sigmoidectomy 28/39 (72%) versus lavage 32/38 (84%), p = 0·272) and mortality (sigmoidectomy 7/39 (18%) versus lavage 6/38 (16%), p = 1·000) did not differ. The number of patients who underwent a reoperation was significantly lower for lavage compared to sigmoidectomy (sigmoidectomy 27/39 (69%) versus lavage 17/38 (45%), p = 0·039). After 36 months, patients alive with stoma in situ was lower in the lavage group (proportion calculated from the Kaplan–Meier life table, sigmoidectomy 17% vs lavage 11%, log-rank p = 0·0268). Eventually, 17 of 38 (45%) patients allocated to lavage underwent sigmoidectomy.
Conclusion
Long-term outcomes showed that laparoscopic lavage was associated with less patients who underwent reoperations and lower stoma rates in patients alive after 36 months compared to sigmoidectomy. No differences were found in terms of cumulative morbidity or mortality. Patient selection should be improved to reduce risk for short-term complications after which lavage could still be a valuable treatment option.
Graphical abstract
Collapse
|
12
|
Mou D, de Vries CEE, Pater N, Poulsen L, Makarawung DJS, Wiezer MJ, van Veen RN, Hoogbergen MM, Sorensen JA, Klassen AF, Pusic AL, Tavakkoli A. Correction to: BODY-Q patient-reported outcomes measure (PROM) to assess sleeve gastrectomy vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: eating behavior, eating-related distress, and eating-related symptoms. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:2721. [PMID: 35194668 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09077-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Danny Mou
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| | - Claire E E de Vries
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Nena Pater
- Maastricht University Medical School, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Lotte Poulsen
- Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jens A Sorensen
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Anne F Klassen
- Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Andrea L Pusic
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Ali Tavakkoli
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Lurvink RJ, Rovers KP, Wassenaar ECE, Bakkers C, Burger JWA, Creemers GJM, Los M, Mols F, Wiezer MJ, Nienhuijs SW, Boerma D, de Hingh IHJT. Patient-reported outcomes during repetitive oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy for isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases in a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial (CRC-PIPAC). Surg Endosc 2022; 36:4486-4498. [PMID: 34757489 PMCID: PMC9085665 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08802-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2021] [Accepted: 10/17/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CRC-PIPAC prospectively assessed repetitive oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC-OX) as a palliative monotherapy (i.e., without concomitant systemic therapy in between subsequent procedures) for unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). The present study explored patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during trial treatment. METHODS In this single-arm phase 2 trial in two tertiary centers, patients with isolated unresectable CPM received 6-weekly PIPAC-OX (92 mg/m2). PROs (calculated from EQ-5D-5L, and EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29) were compared between baseline and 1 and 4 weeks after the first three procedures using linear mixed modeling with determination of clinical relevance (Cohen's D ≥ 0.50) of statistically significant differences. RESULTS Twenty patients underwent 59 procedures (median 3 [range 1-6]). Several PROs solely worsened 1 week after the first procedure (index value - 0.10, p < 0.001; physical functioning - 20, p < 0.001; role functioning - 27, p < 0.001; social functioning - 18, p < 0.001; C30 summary score - 16, p < 0.001; appetite loss + 15, p = 0.007; diarrhea + 15, p = 0.002; urinary frequency + 13, p = 0.004; flatulence + 13, p = 0.001). These PROs returned to baseline at subsequent time points. Other PROs worsened 1 week after the first procedure (fatigue + 23, p < 0.001; pain + 29, p < 0.001; abdominal pain + 32, p < 0.001), second procedure (fatigue + 20, p < 0.001; pain + 21, p < 0.001; abdominal pain + 20, p = 0.002), and third procedure (pain + 22, p < 0.001; abdominal pain + 22, p = 0.002). Except for appetite loss, all changes were clinically relevant. All analyzed PROs returned to baseline 4 weeks after the third procedure. CONCLUSIONS Patients receiving repetitive PIPAC-OX monotherapy for unresectable CPM had clinically relevant but reversible worsening of several PROs, mainly 1 week after the first procedure. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03246321; Netherlands trial register: NL6426.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robin J. Lurvink
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands ,Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Koen P. Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Emma C. E. Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430 EM Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Checca Bakkers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W. A. Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Geert-Jan M. Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430 EM Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Floortje Mols
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands ,Center of Research on Psychology in Somatic Disorders, Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J. Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430 EM Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W. Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430 EM Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H. J. T. de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA Eindhoven, The Netherlands ,Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands ,GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
de Vries CEE, Mou D, Poulsen L, Breitkopf T, Makarawung DJS, Wiezer MJ, van Veen RN, Hoogbergen MM, Sorensen JA, Liem RSL, Nienhuijs SW, Tavakkoli A, Pusic AL, Klassen AF. Development and Validation of New BODY-Q Scales Measuring Expectations, Eating Behavior, Distress, Symptoms, and Work Life in 4004 Adults From 4 Countries. Obes Surg 2021; 31:3637-3645. [PMID: 34041700 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-021-05462-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2020] [Revised: 04/28/2021] [Accepted: 05/05/2021] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The BODY-Q is a rigorously developed patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for patients seeking treatment for obesity and body contouring surgery. A limitation of the uptake of the BODY-Q in weight management treatments is the absence of scales designed to measure eating-specific concerns. We aimed to develop and validate 5 new BODY-Q scales measuring weight loss expectations, eating behaviors, distress, symptoms, and work life. MATERIAL AND METHODS In phase 1 (qualitative), patient and expert input was used to develop and refine the new BODY-Q scales. In phase 2 (quantitative), the scales were field-tested in bariatric and weight management clinics in the United States (US), The Netherlands, and Denmark between June 2019 and January 2020. Data were also collected in the US and Canada in September 2019 through a crowdworking platform. Rasch measurement theory (RMT) analysis was used for item reduction and to examine reliability and validity. RESULTS The new BODY-Q scales were refined through qualitative input from 17 patients and 20 experts (phase 1) and field-tested in 4004 participants (phase 2). All items showed ordered thresholds and good fit to the Rasch model. The RMT analysis provided evidence of reliability, with PSI values ≥0.72, Cronbach alpha values ≥0.83, and test-retest values ≥0.79. Better scores on 4 scales (exception expectations scale) correlated with lower BMI, with the strongest correlation between the eating-related distress scale scores and BMI (r= -0.249, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION The new BODY-Q scales can be used in research and clinical practice to assess weight loss treatments from the patient perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire E E de Vries
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. .,Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Danny Mou
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Lotte Poulsen
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Trisia Breitkopf
- Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Maarten M Hoogbergen
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Jens A Sorensen
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Ronald S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Groene Hart Hospital, Gouda, The Netherlands.,Dutch Obesity Clinic, The Hague, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Ali Tavakkoli
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Andrea L Pusic
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Anne F Klassen
- Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Rovers KP, Bakkers C, Nienhuijs SW, Burger JWA, Creemers GJM, Thijs AMJ, Brandt-Kerkhof ARM, Madsen EVE, van Meerten E, Tuynman JB, Kusters M, Versteeg KS, Aalbers AGJ, Kok NFM, Buffart TE, Wiezer MJ, Boerma D, Los M, de Reuver PR, Bremers AJA, Verheul HMW, Kruijff S, de Groot DJA, Witkamp AJ, van Grevenstein WMU, Koopman M, Nederend J, Lahaye MJ, Kranenburg O, Fijneman RJA, van 't Erve I, Snaebjornsson P, Hemmer PHJ, Dijkgraaf MGW, Punt CJA, Tanis PJ, de Hingh IHJT. Perioperative Systemic Therapy vs Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Alone for Resectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surg 2021; 156:710-720. [PMID: 34009291 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.1642] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Importance To date, no randomized clinical trials have investigated perioperative systemic therapy relative to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) alone for resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). Objective To assess the feasibility and safety of perioperative systemic therapy in patients with resectable CPM and the response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants An open-label, parallel-group phase 2 randomized clinical trial in all 9 Dutch tertiary centers for the surgical treatment of CPM enrolled participants between June 15, 2017, and January 9, 2019. Participants were patients with pathologically proven isolated resectable CPM who did not receive systemic therapy within 6 months before enrollment. Interventions Randomization to perioperative systemic therapy or CRS-HIPEC alone. Perioperative systemic therapy comprised either four 3-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin), six 2-week neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of FOLFOX (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin), or six 2-week neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRI (fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan) and either four 3-week adjuvant cycles of capecitabine or six 2-week adjuvant cycles of fluorouracil with leucovorin. Bevacizumab was added to the first 3 (CAPOX) or 4 (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. Main Outcomes and Measures Proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity. Key secondary outcomes were centrally assessed rates of objective radiologic and major pathologic response of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment. Analyses were done modified intention-to-treat in patients starting neoadjuvant treatment (experimental arm) or undergoing upfront surgery (control arm). Results In 79 patients included in the analysis (43 [54%] men; mean [SD] age, 62 [10] years), experimental (n = 37) and control (n = 42) arms did not differ significantly regarding the proportions of macroscopic complete CRS-HIPEC (33 of 37 [89%] vs 36 of 42 [86%] patients; risk ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.23; P = .74) and Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative morbidity (8 of 37 [22%] vs 14 of 42 [33%] patients; risk ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31-1.37; P = .25). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Objective radiologic and major pathologic response rates of CPM to neoadjuvant treatment were 28% (9 of 32 evaluable patients) and 38% (13 of 34 evaluable patients), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized phase 2 trial in patients diagnosed with resectable CPM, perioperative systemic therapy seemed feasible, safe, and able to induce response of CPM, justifying a phase 3 trial. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02758951.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Checca Bakkers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Geert-Jan M Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Anna M J Thijs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther van Meerten
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kathelijn S Versteeg
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Tineke E Buffart
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Philip R de Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Andreas J A Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Henk M W Verheul
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Schelto Kruijff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Derk Jan A de Groot
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Arjen J Witkamp
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Onno Kranenburg
- Cancer Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Remond J A Fijneman
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Iris van 't Erve
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.,GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Kingma JS, Burgers DMT, Monpellier VM, Wiezer MJ, Blussé van Oud-Alblas HJ, Vaughns JD, Sherwin CMT, Knibbe CAJ. Oral drug dosing following bariatric surgery: General concepts and specific dosing advice. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2021; 87:4560-4576. [PMID: 33990981 PMCID: PMC9291886 DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14913] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2020] [Revised: 04/06/2021] [Accepted: 05/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Bariatric or weight‐loss surgery is a popular option for weight reduction. Depending on the surgical procedure, gastric changes like decreased transit time and volume and increased pH, decreased absorption surface in the small intestine, decreased exposure to bile acids and enterohepatic circulation, and decreased gastrointestinal transit time may be expected. In the years after bariatric surgery, patients will also substantially lose weight. As a result of these changes, the absorption, distribution, metabolism and/or elimination of drugs may be altered. The purpose of this article is to report the general influence of bariatric surgery on oral drug absorption, and to provide guidance for dosing of commonly used drugs in this special population. Upon oral drug administration, the time to maximum concentration is often earlier and this concentration may be higher with less consistent effects on trough concentrations and exposure. Additionally, prescription of liquid formulations to bariatric patients is supported by some reports, even though the high sugar load of these suspensions may be of concern. Studies on extended‐release medications result in an unaltered exposure for a substantial number of drugs. Also, studies evaluating the influence of timing after surgery show dynamic absorption profiles. Although for this group specific advice can be proposed for many drugs, we conclude that there is insufficient evidence for general advice for oral drug therapy after bariatric surgery, implying that a risk assessment on a case‐by‐case basis is required for each drug.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jurjen S Kingma
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.,Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Division of Laboratories, Pharmacy, and Biomedical Genetics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Desirée M T Burgers
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Valerie M Monpellier
- Nederlandse Obesitas Kliniek (Dutch Obesity Clinic), Huis ter Heide, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Janelle D Vaughns
- Department of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, Children's National Health System, Washington, DC, USA.,Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Children's National Health System, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Catherine M T Sherwin
- Department of Pediatrics, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, Dayton Children's Hospital, Dayton, Ohio, USA
| | - Catherijne A J Knibbe
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.,Division of Systems Biomedicine & Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Engbersen MP, Rijsemus CJV, Nederend J, Aalbers AGJ, de Hingh IHJT, Retel V, Lambregts DMJ, Van der Hoeven EJRJ, Boerma D, Wiezer MJ, De Vries M, Madsen EVE, Brandt-Kerkhof ARM, Van Koeverden S, De Reuver PR, Beets-Tan RGH, Kok NFM, Lahaye MJ. Dedicated MRI staging versus surgical staging of peritoneal metastases in colorectal cancer patients considered for CRS-HIPEC; the DISCO randomized multicenter trial. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:464. [PMID: 33902498 PMCID: PMC8077799 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08168-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2020] [Accepted: 04/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Selecting patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer (CRCPM) who might benefit from cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is challenging. Computed tomography generally underestimates the peritoneal tumor load. Diagnostic laparoscopy is often used to determine whether patients are amenable for surgery. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown to be accurate in predicting completeness of CRS. The aim of this study is to determine whether MRI can effectively reduce the need for surgical staging. Methods The study is designed as a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) of colorectal cancer patients who are deemed eligible for CRS-HIPEC after conventional CT staging. Patients are randomly assigned to either MRI based staging (arm A) or to standard surgical staging with or without laparoscopy (arm B). In arm A, MRI assessment will determine whether patients are eligible for CRS-HIPEC. In borderline cases, an additional diagnostic laparoscopy is advised. The primary outcome is the number of unnecessary surgical procedures in both arms defined as: all surgeries in patients with definitely inoperable disease (PCI > 24) or explorative surgeries in patients with limited disease (PCI < 15). Secondary outcomes include correlations between surgical findings and MRI findings, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life (QOL) analysis. Conclusion This randomized trial determines whether MRI can effectively replace surgical staging in patients with CRCPM considered for CRS-HIPEC. Trial registration Registered in the clinical trials registry of U.S. National Library of Medicine under NCT04231175.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M P Engbersen
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,GROW, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - C J V Rijsemus
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - A G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Michelangelolaan 2, 5623 EJ, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - V Retel
- Department of Psychosocial research and Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department Health Technology and Services Research (HTSR), University of Twente, Drienerlolaan 5, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - D M J Lambregts
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E J R J Van der Hoeven
- Department of Radiology, St. Antonius Hospital, Soestwetering 1, 3543 AZ, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - D Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Soestwetering 1, 3543 AZ, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Soestwetering 1, 3543 AZ, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M De Vries
- Department of Radiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E V E Madsen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A R M Brandt-Kerkhof
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Van Koeverden
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - P R De Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - R G H Beets-Tan
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,GROW, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - N F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Lurvink RJ, Rauwerdink P, Rovers KP, Wassenaar ECE, Deenen MJ, Nederend J, Huysentruyt CJR, van 't Erve I, Fijneman RJA, van der Hoeven EJRJ, Seldenrijk CA, Constantinides A, Kranenburg O, Los M, Herbschleb KH, Thijs AMJ, Creemers GJM, Burger JWA, Wiezer MJ, Nienhuijs SW, Boerma D, de Hingh IHJT. First-line palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (oxaliplatin) for isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of a multicentre, single-arm, phase II study (CRC-PIPAC-II). BMJ Open 2021; 11:e044811. [PMID: 33785492 PMCID: PMC8011718 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044811] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Despite its increasing use, first-line palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX), hereinafter referred to as first-line bidirectional therapy, has never been prospectively investigated in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). As a first step to address this evidence gap, the present study aims to assess the safety, feasibility, antitumour activity, patient-reported outcomes, costs and systemic pharmacokinetics of first-line bidirectional therapy in patients with isolated unresectable CPM. METHODS AND ANALYSIS In this single-arm, phase II study in two Dutch tertiary referral centres, 20 patients are enrolled. Key eligibility criteria are a good performance status, pathologically proven isolated unresectable CPM, no previous palliative systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, no (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy ≤6 months prior to enrolment and no previous pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Patients receive three cycles of bidirectional therapy. Each cycle consists of 6 weeks first-line palliative systemic therapy at the medical oncologists' decision (CAPOX-bevacizumab, FOLFOX-bevacizumab, FOLFIRI-bevacizumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab) followed by ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m2) with an intraoperative bolus of intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2). Study treatment ends after the third ePIPAC-OX. The primary outcome is the number of patients with-and procedures leading to-grade ≥3 adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0) up to 4 weeks after the last procedure. Key secondary outcomes include the number of bidirectional cycles in each patient, treatment-related characteristics, grade ≤2 adverse events, tumour response (histopathological, cytological, radiological, biochemical, macroscopic and ascites), patient-reported outcomes, systemic pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, costs, progression-free survival and overall survival. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study is approved by the Dutch competent authority, a medical ethics committee and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented to patients and healthcare professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NL8303.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robin J Lurvink
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Paulien Rauwerdink
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Emma C E Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten J Deenen
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | | | - Iris van 't Erve
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Remond J A Fijneman
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Onno Kranenburg
- Department of Imaging and Cancer, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Karin H Herbschleb
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Anna M J Thijs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, GROW, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Rovers KP, Wassenaar ECE, Lurvink RJ, Creemers GJM, Burger JWA, Los M, Huysentruyt CJR, van Lijnschoten G, Nederend J, Lahaye MJ, Deenen MJ, Wiezer MJ, Nienhuijs SW, Boerma D, de Hingh IHJT. Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (Oxaliplatin) for Unresectable Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Multicenter, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial (CRC-PIPAC). Ann Surg Oncol 2021; 28:5311-5326. [PMID: 33544279 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09558-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite its increasing use, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (PIPAC-OX) has never been prospectively investigated as a palliative monotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases in clinical trials. This trial aimed to assess the safety (primary aim) and antitumor activity (key secondary aim) of PIPAC-OX monotherapy in patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases. METHODS In this two-center, single-arm, phase II trial, patients with isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases in any line of palliative treatment underwent 6-weekly PIPAC-OX (92 mg/m2). Key outcomes were major treatment-related adverse events (primary outcome), minor treatment-related adverse events, hospital stay, tumor response (radiological, biochemical, pathological, ascites), progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS Twenty enrolled patients underwent 59 (median 3, range 1-6) PIPAC-OX procedures. Major treatment-related adverse events occurred in 3 of 20 (15%) patients after 5 of 59 (8%) procedures (abdominal pain, intraperitoneal hemorrhage, iatrogenic pneumothorax, transient liver toxicity), including one possibly treatment-related death (sepsis of unknown origin). Minor treatment-related adverse events occurred in all patients after 57 of 59 (97%) procedures, the most common being abdominal pain (all patients after 88% of procedures) and nausea (65% of patients after 39% of procedures). Median hospital stay was 1 day (range 0-3). Response rates were 0% (radiological), 50% (biochemical), 56% (pathological), and 56% (ascites). Median progression-free and overall survival were 3.5 months (interquartile range [IQR] 2.5-5.7) and 8.0 months (IQR 6.3-12.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS In patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases undergoing PIPAC-OX monotherapy, some major adverse events occurred and minor adverse events were common. The clinical relevance of observed biochemical, pathological, and ascites responses remains to be determined, especially since radiological response was absent.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Emma C E Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Robin J Lurvink
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Geert-Jan M Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten J Deenen
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. .,GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Oor JE, Goense L, Wiezer MJ, Derksen WJM. Incidence and treatment of intussusception following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2021; 17:1017-1028. [PMID: 33632616 DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2021.01.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2020] [Revised: 12/08/2020] [Accepted: 01/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Intussusception is a rare yet potentially life-threatening complication following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Multiple case reports have described this complication, and recently, several retrospective studies have been published describing the surgical treatment of intussusception. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of intussusception following RYGB and provide insight into outcomes of subsequent operative treatment. A systematic search was performed using the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Article selection was performed using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses criteria, and selecting articles describing the incidence of intussusception following RYGB. Data was pooled only when 3 or more comparable studies reported on the same outcome. The incidence of intussusception and outcomes of subsequent treatment were analyzed. Furthermore, all published case reports describing intussusception following RYGB were analyzed. A total of 74 studies published between 1991 and 2020 were included, describing 191 patients who underwent RYGB and developed intussusception. We retrieved 68 case reports, including 84 patients, and 6 retrospective studies describing outcomes of surgical treatment in 107 patients, which were used to pool data. There was a predominance of females among the included patients (85%-98%), and patients had significant weight loss following RYGB. The pooled incidence of intussusception following RYGB was .64%. Resection of the affected segment was performed in 34% of the patients. A pooled recurrence rate of 22% was found during follow-up. Resection and reconstruction of the jejunojejunostomy appears to be associated with the lowest risk of recurrence and acceptable complication rates. The pooled incidence of intussusception following RYGB is 0.64%. Typically, patients are female with significant weight loss after RYGB. Symptoms include abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. Diagnosis is based on clinical findings and computed tomography scans, warranting early surgical exploration due to the high risk for ischemia. Resection of the jejunojejunostomy appears to be associated with the lowest recurrence rates and acceptable complication rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jelmer E Oor
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Lucas Goense
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter J M Derksen
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
van Veldhuisen SL, Kuppens K, de Raaff CAL, Wiezer MJ, de Castro SMM, van Veen RN, Swank DJ, Demirkiran A, Boerma EJG, Greve JWM, van Dielen FMH, Frederix GWJ, Hazebroek EJ. Protocol of a multicentre, prospective cohort study that evaluates cost-effectiveness of two perioperative care strategies for potential obstructive sleep apnoea in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e038830. [PMID: 33033026 PMCID: PMC7542938 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038830] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Despite the high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) in obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery, OSA is undiagnosed in the majority of patients and thus untreated. While untreated OSA is associated with an increased risk of preoperative and postoperative complications, no evidence-based guidelines on perioperative care for these patients are available. The aim of the POPCORN study (Post-Operative Pulse oximetry without OSA sCreening vs perioperative continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment following OSA scReeNing by polygraphy (PG)) is to evaluate which perioperative strategy is the most cost-effective for obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery without a history of OSA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS In this multicentre observational cohort study, data from 1380 patients who will undergo bariatric surgery will be collected. Patients will receive either postoperative care with pulse oximetry monitoring and supplemental oxygen during the first postoperative night, or care that includes preoperative PG and CPAP treatment in case of moderate or severe OSA. Local protocols for perioperative care in each participating hospital will determine into which cohort a patient is placed. The primary outcome is cost-effectiveness, which will be calculated by comparing all healthcare costs with the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs, calculated using EQ-5D questionnaires). Secondary outcomes are mortality, complications within 30 days after surgery, readmissions, reoperations, length of stay, weight loss, generic quality of life (QOL), OSA-specific QOL, OSA symptoms and CPAP adherence. Patients will receive questionnaires before surgery and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery to report QALYs and other patient-reported outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Approval from the Medical Research Ethics Committees United was granted in accordance with the Dutch law for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) (reference number W17.050). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at (inter)national conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NTR6991.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kim Kuppens
- Department of Pulmonary Medicine, St. Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ruben N van Veen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, location West, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Dingeman J Swank
- Department of Surgery, Dutch Obesity Clinic (Nederlandse Obesitas Kliniek), The Hague, The Netherlands
| | - Ahmet Demirkiran
- Department of Surgery, Rode Kruis Ziekenhuis, Beverwijk, The Netherlands
| | - Evert-Jan G Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medisch Centrum, Heerlen, The Netherlands
| | - Jan-Willem M Greve
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Medisch Centrum, Heerlen, The Netherlands
- Department of Surger / Nutrim, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Geert W J Frederix
- Department of Public Health, Julius Center Research Program Methodology, Universitair Medisch Centrum Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Eric J Hazebroek
- Department of Surgery / Vitalys Clinic, Rijnstate Ziekenhuis, Arnhem, The Netherlands
- Division of Human Nutrition and Health, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Gelderland, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Mou D, DeVries CEE, Pater N, Poulsen L, Makarawung DJS, Wiezer MJ, van Veen RN, Hoogbergen MM, Sorensen JA, Klassen AF, Pusic AL, Tavakkoli A. BODY-Q patient-reported outcomes measure (PROM) to assess sleeve gastrectomy vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: eating behavior, eating-related distress, and eating-related symptoms. Surg Endosc 2020; 35:4609-4617. [PMID: 32815020 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-07886-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2020] [Accepted: 08/05/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Post-operative changes in eating behavior, eating-related distress and eating-related symptoms play an important role in the lives of bariatric surgery patients. However, there are no studies that assess these outcomes using a specifically designed patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. We use our newly developed and validated scales as part of the well-established BODY-Q PROMs to compare laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients (LRYGB). METHODS We analyzed data from an international multi-center prospective cohort study of patients over 18 who underwent bariatric surgery. We used multivariable linear regression models to assess the difference between LRYGB and LSG for the new BODY-Q scales, which include eating behavior, eating-related distress and eating-related symptoms. All analyses were corrected for significant confounding variables. RESULTS Out of 1420 patients, 920 underwent LRYGB and 500 underwent LSG. The LRYGB group had a higher percentage total weight loss (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in eating behavior (e.g., stop eating before feeling full, avoiding unhealthy snacks, etc.) or eating-related distress (e.g., feeling ashamed or out of control after eating). Patients who underwent LSG scored significantly better on the post-prandial eating-related symptoms scale (e.g., vomiting, reflux; p < 0.001). Symptoms more prevalent in the LRYGB patients were related to dumping syndrome whereas symptoms more prevalent in LSG patients were related to reflux. CONCLUSION Patients who underwent LRYGB had a significantly better weight loss after surgery, but they scored worse on post-prandial symptoms in comparison to LSG patients. This information may be relevant for patients in the pre-operative counseling setting, as it may influence their decision for surgical procedure selection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danny Mou
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
| | - Claire E E DeVries
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Nena Pater
- Maastricht University Medical School, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Lotte Poulsen
- Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jens A Sorensen
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Anne F Klassen
- Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Andrea L Pusic
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Ali Tavakkoli
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francs St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Smit C, Wasmann RE, Wiezer MJ, van Dongen HPA, Mouton JW, Brüggemann RJM, Knibbe CAJ. Correction to: Tobramycin Clearance Is Best Described by Renal Function Estimates in Obese and Nonobese Individuals: Results of a Prospective Rich Sampling Pharmacokinetic Study. Pharm Res 2020; 37:32. [PMID: 31919778 DOI: 10.1007/s11095-020-2756-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
There was a mistake in the units of CL and Q, and in the parentheses of the formula for CL in the final model in Table 2. The corrected Table appears below.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cornelis Smit
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan1, 3435, CM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
- Department of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland E Wasmann
- Department of Pharmacy, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Johan W Mouton
- Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roger J M Brüggemann
- Department of Pharmacy, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Catherijne A J Knibbe
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan1, 3435, CM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
- Department of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Smit C, Wasmann RE, Goulooze SC, Wiezer MJ, van Dongen EPA, Mouton JW, Brüggemann RJM, Knibbe CAJ. Population pharmacokinetics of vancomycin in obesity: Finding the optimal dose for (morbidly) obese individuals. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2020; 86:303-317. [PMID: 31661553 PMCID: PMC7015748 DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2019] [Revised: 09/19/2019] [Accepted: 09/24/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Aims For vancomycin treatment in obese patients, there is no consensus on the optimal dose that will lead to the pharmacodynamic target (area under the curve 400–700 mg h L−1). This prospective study quantifies vancomycin pharmacokinetics in morbidly obese and nonobese individuals, in order to guide vancomycin dosing in the obese. Methods Morbidly obese individuals (n = 20) undergoing bariatric surgery and nonobese healthy volunteers (n = 8; total body weight [TBW] 60.0–234.6 kg) received a single vancomycin dose (obese: 12.5 mg kg−1, maximum 2500 mg; nonobese: 1000 mg) with plasma concentrations measured over 48 h (11–13 samples per individual). Modelling, internal validation, external validation using previously published data and simulations (n = 10.000 individuals, TBW 60–230 kg) were performed using NONMEM. Results In a 3‐compartment model, peripheral volume of distribution and clearance increased with TBW (both p < 0.001), which was confirmed in the external validation. A dose of 35 mg kg−1 day−1 (maximum 5500 mg/day) resulted in a > 90% target attainment (area under the curve > 400 mg h L−1) in individuals up to 200 kg, with corresponding trough concentrations of 5.7–14.6 mg L−1 (twice daily dosing). For continuous infusion, a loading dose of 1500 mg is required for steady state on day 1. Conclusion In this prospective, rich sampling pharmacokinetic study, vancomycin clearance was well predicted using TBW. We recommend that in obese individuals without renal impairment, vancomycin should be dosed as 35 mg kg−1 day−1 (maximized at 5500 mg/day). When given over 2 daily doses, trough concentrations of 5.7–14.6 mg L−1 correspond to the target exposure in obese individuals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cornelis Smit
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.,Department of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland E Wasmann
- Department of Pharmacy, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan C Goulooze
- Department of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Eric P A van Dongen
- Department of Anesthesiology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Johan W Mouton
- Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roger J M Brüggemann
- Department of Pharmacy, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Catherijne A J Knibbe
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.,Department of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Rovers KP, Lurvink RJ, Wassenaar EC, Kootstra TJ, Scholten HJ, Tajzai R, Deenen MJ, Nederend J, Lahaye MJ, Huysentruyt CJ, van 't Erve I, Fijneman RJ, Constantinides A, Kranenburg O, Los M, Thijs AM, Creemers GJM, Burger JW, Wiezer MJ, Boerma D, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IH. Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (ePIPAC) with oxaliplatin as a palliative monotherapy for isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of a Dutch, multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study (CRC-PIPAC). BMJ Open 2019; 9:e030408. [PMID: 31352425 PMCID: PMC6661551 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Repetitive electrostatic pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy with oxaliplatin (ePIPAC-OX) is offered as a palliative treatment option for patients with isolated unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in several centres worldwide. However, little is known about its feasibility, safety, tolerability, efficacy, costs and pharmacokinetics in this setting. This study aims to explore these parameters in patients with isolated unresectable colorectal PM who receive repetitive ePIPAC-OX as a palliative monotherapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II study is performed in two Dutch tertiary referral hospitals for the surgical treatment of colorectal PM. Eligible patients are adults who have histologically or cytologically proven isolated unresectable PM of a colorectal or appendiceal carcinoma, a good performance status, adequate organ functions and no symptoms of gastrointestinal obstruction. Instead of standard palliative treatment, enrolled patients receive laparoscopy-controlled ePIPAC-OX (92 mg/m2 body surface area (BSA)) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2 BSA) and bolus 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2 BSA) every 6 weeks. Four weeks after each procedure, patients undergo clinical, radiological and biochemical evaluation. ePIPAC-OX is repeated until disease progression, after which standard palliative treatment is (re)considered. The primary outcome is the number of patients with major toxicity (grade ≥3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0) up to 4 weeks after the last ePIPAC-OX. Secondary outcomes are the environmental safety of ePIPAC-OX, procedure-related characteristics, minor toxicity, postoperative complications, hospital stay, readmissions, quality of life, costs, pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin, progression-free survival, overall survival, and the radiological, histopathological, cytological, biochemical and macroscopic tumour response. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study is approved by an ethics committee, the Dutch competent authority and the institutional review boards of both study centres. Results are intended for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and for presentation to patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03246321, Pre-results; ISRCTN89947480, Pre-results; NTR6603, Pre-results; EudraCT: 2017-000927-29, Pre-results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Robin J Lurvink
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Emma Ce Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas Jm Kootstra
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Harm J Scholten
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Rudaba Tajzai
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten J Deenen
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Iris van 't Erve
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Remond Ja Fijneman
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Anna Mj Thijs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jacobus Wa Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace Hjt de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- GROW - School for Oncology and Development Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Smit C, Wasmann RE, Wiezer MJ, van Dongen HPA, Mouton JW, Brüggemann RJM, Knibbe CAJ. Tobramycin Clearance Is Best Described by Renal Function Estimates in Obese and Non-obese Individuals: Results of a Prospective Rich Sampling Pharmacokinetic Study. Pharm Res 2019; 36:112. [PMID: 31147853 PMCID: PMC6542779 DOI: 10.1007/s11095-019-2651-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2019] [Accepted: 05/22/2019] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
Purpose Tobramycin is an aminoglycoside antibiotic of which the 24 h exposure correlates with efficacy. Recently, we found that clearance of the aminoglycoside gentamicin correlates with total body weight (TBW). In this study, we investigate the full pharmacokinetic profile of tobramycin in obese and non-obese individuals with normal renal function. Methods Morbidly obese individuals (n = 20) undergoing bariatric surgery and non-obese healthy volunteers (n = 8), with TBW ranging 57–194 kg, received an IV dose of tobramycin with plasma concentrations measured over 24 h (n = 10 per individual). Statistical analysis, modelling and simulations were performed using NONMEM. Results In a two-compartment model, TBW was the best predictor for central volume of distribution (p < 0.001). For clearance, MDRD (de-indexed for body surface area) was identified as best covariate (p < 0.001), and was superior over TBW ((p < 0.05). Other renal function estimates (24 h urine GFR and de-indexed CKD-EPI) led to similar results as MDRD (all p < 0.001)). Conclusions In obese and non-obese individuals with normal renal function, renal function estimates such as MDRD were identified as best predictors for tobramycin clearance, which may imply that other processes are involved in clearance of tobramycin versus gentamicin. To ensure similar exposure across body weights, we propose a MDRD-based dosing nomogram for obese patients. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11095-019-2651-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cornelis Smit
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435, CM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.,Department of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland E Wasmann
- Department of Pharmacy, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Johan W Mouton
- Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roger J M Brüggemann
- Department of Pharmacy, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Catherijne A J Knibbe
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435, CM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. .,Department of Systems Biomedicine and Pharmacology, Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Rovers KP, Bakkers C, Simkens GAAM, Burger JWA, Nienhuijs SW, Creemers GJM, Thijs AMJ, Brandt-Kerkhof ARM, Madsen EVE, Ayez N, de Boer NL, van Meerten E, Tuynman JB, Kusters M, Sluiter NR, Verheul HMW, van der Vliet HJ, Wiezer MJ, Boerma D, Wassenaar ECE, Los M, Hunting CB, Aalbers AGJ, Kok NFM, Kuhlmann KFD, Boot H, Chalabi M, Kruijff S, Been LB, van Ginkel RJ, de Groot DJA, Fehrmann RSN, de Wilt JHW, Bremers AJA, de Reuver PR, Radema SA, Herbschleb KH, van Grevenstein WMU, Witkamp AJ, Koopman M, Haj Mohammad N, van Duyn EB, Mastboom WJB, Mekenkamp LJM, Nederend J, Lahaye MJ, Snaebjornsson P, Verhoef C, van Laarhoven HWM, Zwinderman AH, Bouma JM, Kranenburg O, van 't Erve I, Fijneman RJA, Dijkgraaf MGW, Hemmer PHJ, Punt CJA, Tanis PJ, de Hingh IHJT. Perioperative systemic therapy and cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC versus upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study (CAIRO6). BMC Cancer 2019; 19:390. [PMID: 31023318 PMCID: PMC6485075 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5545-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 77] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2019] [Accepted: 03/28/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC (CRS-HIPEC) is the standard treatment for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in the Netherlands. This study investigates whether addition of perioperative systemic therapy to CRS-HIPEC improves oncological outcomes. Methods This open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study is performed in nine Dutch tertiary referral centres. Eligible patients are adults who have a good performance status, histologically or cytologically proven resectable PM of a colorectal adenocarcinoma, no systemic colorectal metastases, no systemic therapy for colorectal cancer within six months prior to enrolment, and no previous CRS-HIPEC. Eligible patients are randomised (1:1) to perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC (experimental arm) or upfront CRS-HIPEC alone (control arm) by using central randomisation software with minimisation stratified by a peritoneal cancer index of 0–10 or 11–20, metachronous or synchronous PM, previous systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin or mitomycin C. At the treating physician’s discretion, perioperative systemic therapy consists of either four 3-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX), six 2-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), or six 2-weekly neoadjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by four 3-weekly (capecitabine) or six 2-weekly (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin) adjuvant cycles of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. Bevacizumab is added to the first three (CAPOX) or four (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. The first 80 patients are enrolled in a phase II study to explore the feasibility of accrual and the feasibility, safety, and tolerance of perioperative systemic therapy. If predefined criteria of feasibility and safety are met, the study continues as a phase III study with 3-year overall survival as primary endpoint. A total of 358 patients is needed to detect the hypothesised 15% increase in 3-year overall survival (control arm 50%; experimental arm 65%). Secondary endpoints are surgical characteristics, major postoperative morbidity, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, health-related quality of life, costs, major systemic therapy related toxicity, and objective radiological and histopathological response rates. Discussion This is the first randomised study that prospectively compares oncological outcomes of perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC with upfront CRS-HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal PM. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov/NCT02758951, NTR/NTR6301, ISRCTN/ISRCTN15977568, EudraCT/2016–001865-99.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Checca Bakkers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Geert A A M Simkens
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Geert-Jan M Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602, Eindhoven, ZA, Netherlands
| | - Anna M J Thijs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602, Eindhoven, ZA, Netherlands
| | | | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Ninos Ayez
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Nadine L de Boer
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Esther van Meerten
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Miranda Kusters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Nina R Sluiter
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Henk M W Verheul
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Hans J van der Vliet
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location VUMC, PO Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, MB, Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Emma C E Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis B Hunting
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430, Nieuwegein, EM, Netherlands
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Koert F D Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Henk Boot
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Myriam Chalabi
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Schelto Kruijff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Lukas B Been
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Robert J van Ginkel
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Derk Jan A de Groot
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Rudolf S N Fehrmann
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Andreas J A Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Philip R de Reuver
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Sandra A Radema
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | - Karin H Herbschleb
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500, Nijmegen, HB, Netherlands
| | | | - Arjen J Witkamp
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Miriam Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Nadia Haj Mohammad
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Eino B van Duyn
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50000, 7500, Enschede, KA, Netherlands
| | - Walter J B Mastboom
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50000, 7500, Enschede, KA, Netherlands
| | - Leonie J M Mekenkamp
- Department of Medical Oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50000, 7500, Enschede, KA, Netherlands
| | - Joost Nederend
- Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602, Eindhoven, ZA, Netherlands
| | - Max J Lahaye
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000, Rotterdam, CA, Netherlands
| | - Hanneke W M van Laarhoven
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Aeilko H Zwinderman
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Jeanette M Bouma
- Clinical Trial Department, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), PO Box 19079, 3501, Utrecht, DB, Netherlands
| | - Onno Kranenburg
- UMC Utrecht Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508, Utrecht, GA, Netherlands
| | - Iris van 't Erve
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Remond J A Fijneman
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, PO Box 90203, 1006, Amsterdam, BE, Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, RB, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Location AMC, PO Box 22660, 1100, Amsterdam, DD, Netherlands
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Bastiaenen VP, Klaver CEL, Kok NFM, de Wilt JHW, de Hingh IHJT, Aalbers AGJ, Boerma D, Bremers AJA, Burger JWA, van Duyn EB, Evers P, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, Madsen EVE, Snaebjornsson P, Tuynman JB, Wiezer MJ, Dijkgraaf MGW, van der Bilt JDW, Tanis PJ. Second and third look laparoscopy in pT4 colon cancer patients for early detection of peritoneal metastases; the COLOPEC 2 randomized multicentre trial. BMC Cancer 2019; 19:254. [PMID: 30898098 PMCID: PMC6429794 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5408-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2019] [Accepted: 02/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Approximately 20–30% of patients with pT4 colon cancer develop metachronous peritoneal metastases (PM). Due to restricted accuracy of imaging modalities and absence of early symptoms, PM are often detected at a stage in which only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative intent treatment. Preliminary findings of the COLOPEC trial (NCT02231086) revealed that PM were already detected during surgical re-exploration within two months after primary resection in 9% of patients with pT4 colon cancer. Therefore, second look diagnostic laparoscopy (DLS) to detect PM at a subclinical stage may be considered an essential component of early follow-up in these patients, although this needs confirmation in a larger patient cohort. Furthermore, a third look DLS after a negative second look DLS might be beneficial for detection of PM occurring at a later stage. Methods The aim of this study is to determine the yield of second look DLS and added value of third look DLS after negative second look DLS in detecting occult PM in pT4N0-2 M0 colon cancer patients after completion of primary treatment. Patients will undergo an abdominal CT at 6 months postoperative, followed by a second look DLS within 1 month if no PM or other metastases not amenable for local treatment are detected. Patients without PM will subsequently be randomized between routine follow-up including 18 months abdominal CT, or an experimental arm with a third look DLS provided that PM or incurable metastases are absent at the 18 months abdominal CT. Primary endpoint is the proportion of PM detected after a negative second look DLS and will be determined at 20 months postoperative. Discussion Second look DLS is supposed to result in 10% occult PM, and third look DLS after negative second look DLS is expected to detect an additional 10% of PM compared to routine follow-up alone in patients with pT4 colon cancer. Detection of PM at an early stage will likely increase the proportion of patients eligible for curative intent treatment and subsequently improve survival, given the uniformly reported direct association between the extent of peritoneal disease and survival. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03413254, January 2018. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5408-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivian P Bastiaenen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Charlotte E L Klaver
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Andre J A Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Eino B van Duyn
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Pauline Evers
- Dutch Federation of Cancer Patient Organizations (NFK), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Eva V E Madsen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of Pathology, the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jarmila D W van der Bilt
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Flevo hospital, Almere, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Klaver CEL, Wisselink DD, Punt CJA, Snaebjornsson P, Crezee J, Aalbers A, Bemelman WA, Brandt A, Bremers A, Burger JW, van Grevenstein WM, Hemmer PH, de Hingh IH, Kok N, Tuynman J, Wiezer MJ, de Wilt JHW, Dijkgraaf MG, Tanis PJ. Adjuvant HIPEC in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal metastases: Primary outcome of the COLOPEC multicenter randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.4_suppl.482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
482 Background: Patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer are at high risk (~25%) of peritoneal metastases (PM). Sensitivity of imaging modalities for PM is limited and the majority of patients is diagnosed in a palliative setting. This provides a rationale for adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). In this study, the effectiveness of adjuvant HIPEC in reducing the risk of PM was determined. Methods: In this multicenter trial, patients with T4 (either cT4 or pT4, N0-2, M0) or perforated colon cancer, who underwent curative resection were randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy or to adjuvant systemic chemotherapy alone (1:1). Adjuvant HIPEC with oxaliplatin was performed simultaneously (9%) or within five-eight weeks (91%) after the primary tumor resection. Patients without evidence of recurrent disease at 18 months based on CT imaging underwent diagnostic laparoscopy in both arms. The primary endpoint was PM free survival (PMFS) at 18 months using Kaplan Meier analysis. Results: Between April 2015 and January 2017, 204 patients were randomized: 102 in the control arm (0 drop-outs), 102 in the experimental arm (two drop-outs). Surgical exploration at the start of the HIPEC procedure at five-eight weeks postoperatively revealed metastases in 11 patients (PM in 9/11) in the experimental arm, and adjuvant HIPEC was not applied. Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy was administered in 89/100 eligible patients after median 6 weeks (IQR 5-7) in the control arm and in 84/89 after 10 weeks (IQR 9-12) in the experimental arm. PM rate after completion of 18 months follow-up was 22/102 and 18/100, respectively. In the ITT analysis no difference in 18 months PMFS was observed: 77% (control) versus 81% (experimental), HR 0.836 (0.489-1.428)). Also, no differences were observed in 18 months DFS (HR 1.016 (0.646-1.598)) and OS (HR 1.139 (0.532-2.439)). One patient developed encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis after HIPEC. Conclusions: Adjuvant HIPEC with oxaliplatin for patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer does not result in improved 18 months PMFS. Long-term results have to be awaited to assess the role of HIPEC in the adjuvant setting. Clinical trial information: NCT02231086.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Arend Aalbers
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Niels Kok
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Johannes H. W. de Wilt
- Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Department of Surgery, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Künzli HT, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Gisbertz SS, van Esser S, Meijer SL, Bennink RJ, Wiezer MJ, Seldenrijk CA, Bergman JJGHM, Weusten BLAM. Pilot-study on the feasibility of sentinel node navigation surgery in combination with thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without esophagectomy in early esophageal adenocarcinoma patients. Dis Esophagus 2017; 30:1-8. [PMID: 28881907 DOI: 10.1093/dote/dox097] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
High-risk submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma's might be treated curatively by means of radical endoscopic resection, followed by thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without concomitant esophagectomy. A preclinical study has shown the feasibility and safety of this approach; however, no studies are performed in a clinical setting. In addition, sentinel node navigation surgery could be valuable in tailoring the extent of the lymphadenectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without esophagectomy (phase I) and sentinel node navigation surgery (phase II) in patients with early esophageal adenocarcinoma. Patients with T1N0M0 early esophageal adenocarcinoma scheduled for esophagectomy without neoadjuvant therapy were included. Phase I: Two-field, esophagus preserving, thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy was performed, followed by esophagectomy in the same session. Primary outcome parameters were the number of lymph nodes resected, and number of retained lymph nodes in the esophagectomy specimen. Phase II: A radioactive tracer was injected endoscopically the day before surgery. Static imaging was performed 15 and 120 minutes after injection. The day of surgery, sentinel node navigation surgery followed by esophagectomy was performed. Primary outcome parameters were the percentage of patients with a detectable sentinel node, and the concordance between static imaging and probe-based detection of sentinel node. Phase I: Five patients were included, and a median of 30 (IQR: 25-46) lymph nodes was resected. A median of 6 (IQR: 2-9) retained lymph nodes was found in the esophagectomy specimen. No acute adverse events occurred, but near the end of lymphadenectomy esophageal discoloration was observed, possibly indicating ischemia. Phase II: In all five included patients sentinel nodes could be visualized and resected, at a median of 3 (IQR: 2-5) locations. There was a high concordance between imaging and probe-based detection of sentinel nodes. In conclusion, sentinel node navigation surgery followed by lymphadenectomy without concomitant esophagectomy seems feasible in patients with high-risk submucosal early esophageal adenocarcinoma. More evidence is however needed before applying this technique in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H T Künzli
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.,Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
| | | | | | | | | | - R J Bennink
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - C A Seldenrijk
- Department of Pathology, Pathology-DNA, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein
| | | | - B L A M Weusten
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.,Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Anderegg MCJ, van der Sluis PC, Ruurda JP, Gisbertz SS, Hulshof MCCM, van Vulpen M, Mohammed NH, van Laarhoven HWM, Wiezer MJ, Los M, van Berge Henegouwen MI, van Hillegersberg R. Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Versus Perioperative Chemotherapy for Patients With Resectable Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 24:2282-2290. [PMID: 28424936 PMCID: PMC5491642 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-017-5827-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2016] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study compares neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with perioperative chemotherapy (pCT) for patients with resectable esophageal or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma in terms of toxicity, postoperative complications, pathologic response, and survival. METHODS This study retrospectively analyzed and compared 313 patients with resectable esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma treated with either nCRT (carboplatin/paclitaxel 41.4 Gy, n = 176) or pCT (epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine, n = 137). RESULTS The baseline and tumor characteristics were similar in both groups. The ability to deliver all planned preoperative cycles was greater in the nCRT group (92.0 vs. 76.6%). Whereas nCRT was associated with a higher rate of grades 3 and 4 esophagitis, pCT was associated with a higher rate of grades 3 and 4 thromboembolic events, febrile neutropenia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, cardiac complications, and electrolyte imbalances. Two patients in the pCT group died during neoadjuvant treatment due to febrile neutropenia. More postoperative cardiac complications occurred in the nCRT group. All other postoperative complications and the in-hospital mortality rate (nCRT, 4.7%; pCT, 2.3%) were comparable. The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate was 15.1% after nCRT and 6.9% after pCT. Radicality of surgery was comparable (R0: 93.0 vs. 91.6%). The median overall survival was 35 months after nCRT versus 36 months after pCT. CONCLUSION For patients with esophageal or GEJ adenocarcinoma, chemoradiotherapy with paclitaxel, carboplatin and concurrent radiotherapy, and perioperative chemotherapy with epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabin lead to equal oncologic outcomes in terms of radical resection rates, lymphadenectomy, patterns of recurrent disease, and (disease-free) survival. However, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is associated with a considerably lower level of severe adverse events and should therefore be the preferred protocol until a well-powered randomized controlled trial provides different insights.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M C J Anderegg
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P C van der Sluis
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J P Ruurda
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - S S Gisbertz
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M C C M Hulshof
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M van Vulpen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - N Haj Mohammed
- Department of Clinical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - H W M van Laarhoven
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - M Los
- Department of Internal Medicine and Oncology, Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - R van Hillegersberg
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
van der Kaaij RT, Braam HJ, Boot H, Los M, Cats A, Grootscholten C, Schellens JH, Aalbers AG, Huitema AD, Knibbe CA, Boerma D, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B, van Sandick JW. Treatment of Peritoneal Dissemination in Stomach Cancer Patients With Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC): Rationale and Design of the PERISCOPE Study. JMIR Res Protoc 2017; 6:e136. [PMID: 28705789 PMCID: PMC5532515 DOI: 10.2196/resprot.7790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2017] [Accepted: 05/30/2017] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal carcinomatosis have a very poor prognosis; median survival is 3 to 4 months. Palliative systemic chemotherapy is currently the only treatment available in the Netherlands. Intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has an established role in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis originating from colorectal cancer, appendiceal cancer, and pseudomyxoma peritonei; its role in gastric cancer is uncertain. Currently, there is no consensus on the choice of chemotherapeutic agents used in HIPEC for gastric cancer. Objective The main objectives of this study are (1) to investigate the safety, tolerability, and feasibility of gastrectomy combined with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC after systemic chemotherapy, as a primary treatment option for patients with advanced gastric cancer with tumor positive peritoneal cytology and/or limited peritoneal carcinomatosis; and (2) to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of intraperitoneal docetaxel in combination with a fixed dose of intraperitoneal oxaliplatin. Methods The PERISCOPE study is a multicenter, open label, phase I-II dose-escalation study. The MTD of docetaxel will be studied using a 3+3 design. Patients with locally advanced (cT3-cT4) gastric adenocarcinoma are eligible for inclusion if the primary gastric tumor is considered resectable, tumor positive peritoneal cytology and/or limited peritoneal carcinomatosis is confirmed by diagnostic laparoscopy/ laparotomy, and prior systemic chemotherapy was without disease progression. At laparotomy, cytoreductive surgery (complete removal of all macroscopically visible tumor deposits) and a total or partial gastrectomy with a D2 lymph node dissection is performed. An open HIPEC technique is used with 460mg/m2 hyperthermic oxaliplatin for 30 minutes (41°C to 42°C) followed by normothermic docetaxel for 90 minutes (37°C) in a dose that will be escalated per 3 patients (0, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150 mg/m2). The primary endpoint is treatment related toxicity. Results Patient accrual is ongoing and the first results are expected in 2017. Conclusions The PERISCOPE study will determine the safety, tolerability, and feasibility of gastrectomy combined with cytoreduction and HIPEC using oxaliplatin in combination with docetaxel after systemic chemotherapy as primary treatment option for gastric cancer patients with tumor positive peritoneal cytology and/or limited peritoneal carcinomatosis. This study will provide pharmacokinetic data on the intraperitoneal administration of oxaliplatin and docetaxel, including the MTD of intraperitoneal-administered docetaxel. These data are a prerequisite for the safe conduct of future HIPEC studies in patients with gastric cancer. Trial Registration Netherlands Trial Registration (NTR): NTR4250; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/ rctview.asp?TC=4250 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6rWJONgkt)
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosa T van der Kaaij
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Surgical Oncology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hidde Jw Braam
- St. Antonius Hospital, Department of Surgery, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | - Henk Boot
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Gastroenterology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- St. Antonius Hospital, Department of Medical Oncology, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | - Annemieke Cats
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Gastroenterology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Cecile Grootscholten
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Jan Hm Schellens
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Arend Gj Aalbers
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Surgical Oncology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Alwin Dr Huitema
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Amsterdam, Netherlands.,University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Djamila Boerma
- St. Antonius Hospital, Department of Surgery, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- St. Antonius Hospital, Department of Surgery, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | | | - Johanna W van Sandick
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Department of Surgical Oncology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Rovers KP, Simkens GA, Vissers PA, Lemmens VE, Verwaal VJ, Bremers AJ, Wiezer MJ, Burger JW, Hemmer PH, Boot H, van Grevenstein WM, Meijerink WJ, Aalbers AG, Punt CJ, Tanis PJ, de Hingh IH. Survival of patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases is affected by treatment disparities among hospitals of diagnosis: A nationwide population-based study. Eur J Cancer 2017; 75:132-140. [PMID: 28222307 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.12.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2016] [Revised: 11/24/2016] [Accepted: 12/11/2016] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the Netherlands, surgery for peritoneal metastases of colorectal cancer (PMCRC) is centralised, whereas PMCRC is diagnosed in all hospitals. This study assessed whether hospital of diagnosis affects treatment selection and overall survival (OS). METHODS Between 2005 and 2015, all patients with synchronous PMCRC without systemic metastases were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Treatment was classified as cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC), systemic therapy or other/no treatment. Hospitals of diagnosis were classified as: (1) non-teaching or academic/teaching hospital and (2) HIPEC centre or referring hospital. Referring hospitals were further classified based on the frequency of CRS/HIPEC as high-, medium- or low-frequency hospital. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess the independent influence of hospital categories on the likelihood of CRS/HIPEC and OS. RESULTS A total of 2661 patients, diagnosed in 89 hospitals, were included. At individual hospital level, CRS/HIPEC and systemic therapy ranged from 0% to 50% and 6% to 67%, respectively. Hospital of diagnosis influenced the likelihood of CRS/HIPEC: 33% versus 13% for HIPEC centres versus referring hospitals (odds ratio (OR) 3.66 [2.40-5.58]) and 11% versus 17% for non-teaching hospitals versus academic/teaching hospitals (OR 0.60 [0.47-0.77]). Hospital of diagnosis affected median OS: 14.1 versus 9.6 months for HIPEC centres versus referring hospitals (hazard ratio (HR) 0.82 [0.67-0.99]) and 8.7 versus 11.5 months for non-teaching hospitals versus academic/teaching hospitals (HR 1.15 [1.06-1.26]). Compared with diagnosis in medium-frequency referring hospitals, median OS was increased in high-frequency referring hospitals (12.6 months, HR 0.82 [0.73-0.91]) and reduced in low-frequency referring hospitals (8.1 months, HR 1.12 [1.01-1.24]). CONCLUSION Treatment disparities among hospitals of diagnosis and their impact on survival indicate suboptimal treatment selection for PMCRC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koen P Rovers
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Geert A Simkens
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Pauline A Vissers
- Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), PO Box 19079, 3501 DB, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Valery E Lemmens
- Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), PO Box 19079, 3501 DB, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Victor J Verwaal
- Department of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Norrebrogade 44, DK-8000, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Andre J Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Jacobus W Burger
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Patrick H Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, PO Box 30001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Henk Boot
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, PO Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Wilhelmus J Meijerink
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Centre, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Arend G Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, PO Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J Punt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
van Vugt JLA, Braam HJ, van Oudheusden TR, Vestering A, Bollen TL, Wiezer MJ, de Hingh IHJT, van Ramshorst B, Boerma D. Erratum to: Skeletal Muscle Depletion is Associated with Severe Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 22 Suppl 3:S1610. [PMID: 25791788 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4467-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hidde J Braam
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Asra Vestering
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas L Bollen
- Department of Radiology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Simkens GA, van Oudheusden TR, Braam HJ, Wiezer MJ, Nienhuijs SW, Rutten HJ, van Ramshorst B, de Hingh IH. Cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC offers similar outcomes in patients with rectal peritoneal metastases compared to colon cancer patients: a matched case control study. J Surg Oncol 2016; 113:548-53. [PMID: 27110701 DOI: 10.1002/jso.24169] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2015] [Accepted: 12/28/2015] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES The effect of cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with rectal peritoneal metastases (PM) is unclear. This case-control study aims to assess the results of cytoreduction and HIPEC in patients with rectal PM compared to colon PM patients. METHODS Colorectal PM patients treated with complete macroscopic cytoreduction and HIPEC were included. Two colon cancer patients were case-matched for each rectal cancer patient, based on prognostic factors (T stage, N stage, histology type, and extent of PM). Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between both groups. RESULTS From 317 patients treated with complete macroscopic cytoreduction and HIPEC, 29 patients (9.1%) had rectal PM. Fifty-eight colon cases were selected as control patients. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Major morbidity was 27.6% and 34.5% in the rectal and colon group, respectively (P = 0.516). Median disease-free survival was 13.5 months in the rectal group and 13.6 months in the colon group (P = 0.621). Two- and five-year overall survival rates were 54%/32% in rectal cancer patients, and 61%/24% in colon cancer patients (P = 0.987). CONCLUSIONS Cytoreduction and HIPEC in selected patients with rectal PM is feasible and provides similar outcomes as in colon cancer patients. Rectal PM should not be regarded a contra-indication for cytoreduction and HIPEC in selected patients. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:548-553. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Geert A Simkens
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Hidde J Braam
- Department of Surgical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Harm J Rutten
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Department of Surgical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Kuijpers AM, Hauptmann M, Aalbers AG, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IH, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B, van Ginkel RJ, Havenga K, Verwaal VJ. Cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: The learning curve reassessed. Eur J Surg Oncol 2015; 42:244-50. [PMID: 26375923 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.08.162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2015] [Revised: 07/20/2015] [Accepted: 08/11/2015] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND CytoReductive Surgery and Hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal Chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is now the preferred treatment of many peritoneal surface malignancies. In this retrospective study we aimed to analyze how several performance indicators changed during the first 100 CRS-HIPEC procedures in hospitals which recently introduced this treatment, and compare those with an experienced institution. METHODS The first consecutive 100 CRS-HIPEC procedures of three institutions were compared to those of the pioneer hospital. The training provided by the pioneer hospital consisted of hands-on training during the first ten procedures; hereafter guidance was available on consult basis. Operation characteristics, morbidity and completeness of cytoreduction were evaluated by case sequence. Locally-estimated-scatter-plot smoothing was used to evaluate the learning curve. RESULTS From four institutions 372 cases were included. A macroscopic complete cytoreduction was reached in 66% of the cases in the pioneer hospital and in 86% in the new hospitals (p < 0.001). Complete cytoreduction rates were higher at start off in the new institutions compared with the experienced institution and increased significantly in the first 100 procedures. The new hospitals started with lower morbidity than the experienced hospital, which did not significantly decrease during the study period. CONCLUSION New institutions that were trained and mentored by an experienced CRS-HIPEC hospital performed better from the beginning with regard to complete cytoreduction and morbidity rate with than the experienced center. An improvement in complete cytoreduction rate during the first 100 procedures was observed in the new institutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A M Kuijpers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - M Hauptmann
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A G Aalbers
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - M J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - B van Ramshorst
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - R J van Ginkel
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - K Havenga
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - V J Verwaal
- Department of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Simkens GA, van Oudheusden TR, Braam HJ, Luyer MD, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IH. Treatment-Related Mortality After Cytoreductive Surgery and HIPEC in Patients with Colorectal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis is Underestimated by Conventional Parameters. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 23:99-105. [DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4699-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2015] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
|
38
|
Klaver CEL, Musters GD, Bemelman WA, Punt CJA, Verwaal VJ, Dijkgraaf MGW, Aalbers AGJ, van der Bilt JDW, Boerma D, Bremers AJA, Burger JWA, Buskens CJ, Evers P, van Ginkel RJ, van Grevenstein WMU, Hemmer PHJ, de Hingh IHJT, Lammers LA, van Leeuwen BL, Meijerink WJHJ, Nienhuijs SW, Pon J, Radema SA, van Ramshorst B, Snaebjornsson P, Tuynman JB, Te Velde EA, Wiezer MJ, de Wilt JHW, Tanis PJ. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal carcinomatosis; the COLOPEC randomized multicentre trial. BMC Cancer 2015; 15:428. [PMID: 26003804 PMCID: PMC4492087 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1430-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 96] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2015] [Accepted: 05/13/2015] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The peritoneum is the second most common site of recurrence in colorectal cancer. Early detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) by imaging is difficult. Patients eventually presenting with clinically apparent PC have a poor prognosis. Median survival is only about five months if untreated and the benefit of palliative systemic chemotherapy is limited. Only a quarter of patients are eligible for curative treatment, consisting of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CR/HIPEC). However, the effectiveness depends highly on the extent of disease and the treatment is associated with a considerable complication rate. These clinical problems underline the need for effective adjuvant therapy in high-risk patients to minimize the risk of outgrowth of peritoneal micro metastases. Adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) seems to be suitable for this purpose. Without the need for cytoreductive surgery, adjuvant HIPEC can be performed with a low complication rate and short hospital stay. Methods/Design The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of adjuvant HIPEC in preventing the development of PC in patients with colon cancer at high risk of peritoneal recurrence. This study will be performed in the nine Dutch HIPEC centres, starting in April 2015. Eligible for inclusion are patients who underwent curative resection for T4 or intra-abdominally perforated cM0 stage colon cancer. After resection of the primary tumour, 176 patients will be randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in the experimental arm, or to systemic chemotherapy only in the control arm. Adjuvant HIPEC will be performed simultaneously or shortly after the primary resection. Oxaliplatin will be used as chemotherapeutic agent, for 30 min at 42-43 °C. Just before HIPEC, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin will be administered intravenously. Primary endpoint is peritoneal disease-free survival at 18 months. Diagnostic laparoscopy will be performed routinely after 18 months postoperatively in both arms of the study in patients without evidence of disease based on routine follow-up using CT imaging and CEA. Discussion Adjuvant HIPEC is assumed to reduce the expected 25 % absolute risk of PC in patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer to a risk of 10 %. This reduction is likely to translate into a prolonged overall survival. Trial registration number NCT02231086 (Clinicaltrials.gov)
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte E L Klaver
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Gijsbert D Musters
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of oncology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Victor J Verwaal
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital/the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital/the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Jarmila D W van der Bilt
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Post box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Andre J A Bremers
- Department of surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 22, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Jacobus W A Burger
- Department of surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre/Daniel den Hoed, Post box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Christianne J Buskens
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Pauline Evers
- Dutch Cancer Patient Organization 'Leven met Kanker', Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Robert J van Ginkel
- Department of surgery, University Medical Centre, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Patrick H J Hemmer
- Department of surgery, University Medical Centre, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- Department of surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Post box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
| | - Laureen A Lammers
- Department of pharmacy, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Barbara L van Leeuwen
- Department of surgery, University Medical Centre, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Wilhelmus J H J Meijerink
- Departement of surgery, Vrije University Medical Center, Post box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Post box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
| | - Jolien Pon
- Society of patients with cancer of the gastrointestinal tract (SPKS), Darmkanker Nederland, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Sandra A Radema
- Department of oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 22, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Department of surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Post box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Petur Snaebjornsson
- Department of pathology, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek hospital/the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Departement of surgery, Vrije University Medical Center, Post box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Elisabeth A Te Velde
- Departement of surgery, Vrije University Medical Center, Post box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Post box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein-Zuid 22, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post box 22660, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Braam HJ, Boerma D, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B. Cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC in treatment of colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis: experiment or standard care? A survey among oncologic surgeons and medical oncologists. Int J Clin Oncol 2015; 20:928-34. [DOI: 10.1007/s10147-015-0816-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2014] [Accepted: 03/03/2015] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
|
40
|
van Vugt JLA, Braam HJ, van Oudheusden TR, Vestering A, Bollen TL, Wiezer MJ, de Hingh IHJT, van Ramshorst B, Boerma D. Skeletal Muscle Depletion is Associated with Severe Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Colorectal Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22:3625-31. [PMID: 25672564 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4429-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2014] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery, skeletal muscle depletion (sarcopenia) is associated with impaired postoperative recovery and decreased survival. This study aimed to determine whether skeletal muscle depletion can predict postoperative complications for patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) for peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer. METHODS All consecutive patients with an available preoperative computed tomography (CT) scan who underwent CRS-HIPEC for peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer in two centers were analyzed. Skeletal muscle mass was determined using the L3 muscle index on the preoperative CT scan. The cutoff values defined by Prado et al. were used to classify the patients as sarcopenic or nonsarcopenic. RESULTS Of the study's 206 patients, 90 (43.7 %) were classified as sarcopenic. The sarcopenic patients underwent significantly more reoperations than the nonsarcopenic patients (25.6 vs. 12.1 %; p = 0.012). The mean L3 muscle index was significantly lower for the patients who experienced severe postoperative complications than for the patients without severe postoperative complications (85.6 vs. 110.2 cm(2)/m(2); p = 0.008). In a multivariable logistic regression model, L3 muscle index was the only parameter independently associated with the risk of severe postoperative complications (odds ratio 0.93; 95 % confidence interval 0.87-0.99; p = 0.018). CONCLUSION Skeletal muscle mass depletion, assessed using CT-based muscle mass measurements, is associated with an increased risk of severe postoperative complications in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis and could therefore be used in preoperative risk assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hidde J Braam
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Asra Vestering
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas L Bollen
- Department of Radiology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
van der Sluis PC, Ubink I, van der Horst S, Boonstra JJ, Voest EE, Ruurda JP, Borel Rinkes IHM, Wiezer MJ, Schipper MEI, Siersema PD, Los M, Lolkema MP, van Hillegersberg R. Safety, efficacy, and long-term follow-up evaluation of perioperative epirubicin, Cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy in esophageal resection for adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22:1555-63. [PMID: 25564156 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-4120-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2014] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECC) chemotherapy was evaluated in patients who underwent esophageal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). METHODS A cohort of 93 consecutive patients was analyzed. The median follow-up period was 60 months. Source data verification of adverse events was performed by two independent observers. RESULTS All three planned preoperative chemotherapy cycles were administered to 65 patients (69.9 %). Only 27 % of the patients completed both pre- and postoperative chemotherapy. The reasons for not receiving postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy could be separated in two main problems: toxicity of the preoperative chemotherapy and postoperative problems involving difficulty in recovery and postoperative complications. Finally, 25 patients (27 %), completed three preoperative and three postoperative cycles. Grades 3 and 4 nonhematologic adverse events of preoperative chemotherapy mainly consisted of thromboembolic events (16.2 %) and cardiac complications (7.5 %). A history of cardiac and vascular disease was independently associated with discontinuation of preoperative chemotherapy and the occurrence of grade 3 or higher adverse events. Surgery was performed for 94 % of all the patients who started with ECC chemotherapy. A radical resection (R0) was achieved in 93 % of the patients. A complete pathologic response was observed in 8 % of the patients. During a median follow-up period of 60 months, the median disease-free survival time was 28 months, and the median overall survival time was 36 months. The 3-year overall survival rate was 50 %, and the 5-year overall survival rate was 42 %. CONCLUSION For patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or GEJ, six cycles of ECC-based perioperative chemotherapy is associated with a relatively high number of adverse events. Although this toxicity did not affect the esophageal resectability rate, this regimen should be used with caution in this patient population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P C van der Sluis
- Department of Surgery, G04.228, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Braam HJ, van Oudheusden TR, de Hingh IHJT, Nienhuijs SW, Boerma D, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B. Urological procedures in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer treated with HIPEC: morbidity and survival analysis. Anticancer Res 2015; 35:295-300. [PMID: 25550563] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
AIM To investigate whether cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS+HIPEC) is a feasible and effective option for patients with urological involvement of peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer (CRC-PC). PATIENTS AND METHODS The characteristics of patients with CRC-PC treated with CRS+HIPEC, with or without a urological procedure, between April 2005 and June 2013 in two tertiary Centres were analyzed. RESULTS Thirty-eight patients (14%) out of 267 CRC-PC patients treated with CRS+HIPEC had a urological procedure during cytoreduction. The median survival was not significantly different between patients with or without a urological procedure (26.9 versus 32.1 months, p=0.29). Severe complications occurred more in patients with a urological procedure (47% versus 20%, p<0.001). In patients with a urological procedure, the most frequent complications were gastrointestinal leakage (n=9) and intra-abdominal abscess formation (n=5). CONCLUSION Urological resections as a part of CRS+HIPEC in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin are feasible and effective. Severe complications are prevalent in these patients but survival is comparable to patients without involvement of the urinary system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hidde J Braam
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | - Marinus J Wiezer
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
van Oudheusden TR, Braam HJ, Luyer MDP, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IHJT. Peritoneal cancer patients not suitable for cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC during explorative surgery: risk factors, treatment options, and prognosis. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 22:1236-42. [PMID: 25319584 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-4148-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2014] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is currently the only curative option for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin. Despite meticulous preoperative assessment, CRS and HIPEC appear to be impossible in a subset of patients at the time of surgery. This study investigated which clinical factors may identify these patients before surgery and reported on factors influencing survival. METHODS All patients with PC of colorectal origin between April 2005 and November 2013 who underwent exploratory surgery to determine whether cytoreduction and HIPEC was feasible were included in this study. Details concerning preoperative patient characteristics, perioperative outcomes, treatment and survival were compared. RESULTS In total, 350 patients with PC were referred to evaluate the possibility of CRS + HIPEC of which 268 (76.6 %) underwent CRS and HIPEC and 82 (23.4 %) had an open-close procedure. The main reason for discontinuing surgery was widespread peritoneal disease (50 %). A preoperative ostomy and an ASA score of 3 were associated with an increased risk for "open and close" (O&C). Median survival was 11.2 months in patients treated with palliative chemotherapy (75 %) compared with 2.7 months with palliative care only. CONCLUSIONS CRS and HIPEC were deemed unsuitable in almost a quarter of all patients undergoing surgery. No strong clinical predictors for O&C were found, stressing the need for better preoperative imaging modalities. Survival in these patients is limited, but the majority could be treated with palliative chemotherapy resulting in survival of almost 1 year.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T R van Oudheusden
- Department of Surgery, Department of Surgical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
van Oudheusden TR, Braam HJ, Nienhuijs SW, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B, Luyer MD, Lemmens VE, de Hingh IH. Cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a feasible and effective option for colorectal cancer patients after emergency surgery in the presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21:2621-6. [PMID: 24671638 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3655-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2014] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND When peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is diagnosed during emergency surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC), further treatment with curative intent may seem futile given the known poor prognosis of both PC and emergency surgery. The aim of the current study was to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for CRC patients who previously underwent emergency surgery in the presence of PC. METHODS All patients with synchronous PC of CRC referred to two tertiary centers between April 2005 and November 2013 were included in this study. Operative, postoperative and survival details were compared between patients presenting in an emergency or elective setting. RESULTS In total, 149 patients with synchronous PC underwent CRS and HIPEC. Amongst these patients, 36 (24.2 %) initially presented with acute symptoms requiring emergency surgery. Acute presentation did not result in a longer interval between the initial operation and HIPEC (2.2 vs. 2.1 months; P = 0.09). When comparing operative outcomes, no significant differences were found in blood loss (P = 0.47), operation time (P = 0.39), or completeness of cytoreduction (P = 0.97). In addition, complication rates, degree and types of complication did not differ between the groups. Median survival was 36.1 months for emergency presentation compared with 32.1 in the elective group (P = 0.73). CONCLUSION CRS + HIPEC may be performed safely in patients with PC of colorectal origin presenting with acute symptoms requiring emergency surgery. More importantly, the 5-year survival rate in these patients was equal to elective cases. This should be regarded as promising and therefore considered for these patients.
Collapse
|
45
|
Braam HJ, van Oudheusden TR, de Hingh IHJT, Nienhuijs SW, Boerma D, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B. Patterns of recurrence following complete cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal cancer. J Surg Oncol 2014; 109:841-7. [PMID: 24619813 DOI: 10.1002/jso.23597] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2013] [Accepted: 02/17/2014] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES CytoReductive Surgery (CRS) combined with Hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) has an established role in the treatment of peritoneally metastasized colorectal cancer. The aim of the study was to describe the recurrence patterns and to evaluate treatment options and related survival. METHODS Patients treated with CRS + HIPEC in two tertiary referral centers between April 2005 and March 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. The prognostic value of several parameters was calculated using Cox Regression. RESULTS One hundred thirty two of 287 patients (46%) with peritoneal carcinomatosis treated with complete CRS and HIPEC were diagnosed with recurrent disease, after a median disease-free interval of 11.4 months. Recurrence were locoregional (43%), distant metastases (26%) or both (31%). Thirty-two of the 132 patients with recurrences (24%) were treated surgically with curative intent, which extended the median survival from 12 months to 43 months, compared to palliative treatment (best supportive care or chemotherapy; P < 0.001). Initial nodal status (P = 0.01) and the number of affected regions at initial CRS (P = 0.02) were significantly correlated to survival after disease recurrence. CONCLUSION Disease recurrence after CRS and HIPEC is common; in selected patients, an aggressive surgical approach may be beneficial and extend survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hidde J Braam
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
van Santvoort HC, Braam HJ, Spekreijse KR, Koning NR, de Bruin PC, de Vries Reilingh TS, Boerma D, Smits AB, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B. Peritoneal carcinomatosis in t4 colorectal cancer: occurrence and risk factors. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21:1686-91. [PMID: 24398543 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-3461-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2013] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy improves outcome of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of colorectal carcinoma. Data on the occurrence of PC in T4 colorectal carcinoma are scarce. We investigated the occurrence and risk factors for PC in these patients. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing a first resection of a T4 colorectal carcinoma in a tertiary hospital between January 2000 and December 2007. Primary outcome was the occurrence of synchronous or metachronous PC. The association with PC and several patient and tumor characteristics was evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS A total of 200 patients underwent resection of a T4 colorectal carcinoma. Median follow-up censored for death was 66 months (18-89 months). Synchronous PC was found in 46 of 200 patients (23 %) and metachronous PC in 33 of 154 patients (21 %). In univariable analysis, factors associated with PC were: age (OR 0.97; 95 % CI 0.94-0.99; P = 0.03), radical resection (OR 0.32; 95 % CI 0.11-0.91; P = 0.03), and N stage (OR 1.63; 95 % CI 1.36-2.34; P = 0.008). In multivariable analysis, only N stage was associated with PC (OR 1.62; 95 % CI 1.12-2.34; P = 0.01). This association was not significant for the 154 patients at risk for metachronous PC. CONCLUSIONS Around 1 in 5 patients undergoing resection of a T4 colorectal carcinoma either have PC during primary resection or develop PC during follow-up. N stage was associated with PC in the entire study population. However, none of the clinical or pathological variables were associated with the risk of metachronous PC and therefore cannot be used to develop targeted surveillance strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Leeuwenburgh MMN, Wiezer MJ, Wiarda BM, Bouma WH, Phoa SSKS, Stockmann HBAC, Jensch S, Bossuyt PMM, Boermeester MA, Stoker J. Accuracy of MRI compared with ultrasound imaging and selective use of CT to discriminate simple from perforated appendicitis. Br J Surg 2013; 101:e147-55. [PMID: 24272981 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9350] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/24/2013] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Discrimination between simple and perforated appendicitis in patients with suspected appendicitis may help to determine the therapy, timing of surgery and risk of complications. The aim of this study was to estimate the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in distinguishing between simple and perforated appendicitis, and to compare MRI against ultrasound imaging with selected additional (conditional) use of computed tomography (CT). METHODS Patients with clinically suspected appendicitis were identified prospectively at the emergency department of six hospitals. Consenting patients underwent MRI, but were managed based on findings at ultrasonography and conditional CT. Radiologists who evaluated the MRI were blinded to the results of ultrasound imaging and CT. The presence of perforated appendicitis was recorded after each evaluation. The final diagnosis was assigned by an expert panel based on perioperative data, histopathology and clinical follow-up after 3 months. RESULTS MRI was performed in 223 of 230 included patients. Acute appendicitis was the final diagnosis in 118 of 230 patients, of whom 87 had simple and 31 perforated appendicitis. MRI correctly identified 17 of 30 patients with perforated appendicitis (sensitivity 57 (95 per cent confidence interval 39 to 73) per cent), whereas ultrasound imaging with conditional CT identified 15 of 31 (sensitivity 48 (32 to 65) per cent) (P = 0.517). All missed diagnoses of perforated appendicitis were identified as simple acute appendicitis with both imaging protocols. None of the MRI features for perforated appendicitis had a positive predictive value higher than 53 per cent. CONCLUSION MRI is comparable to ultrasonography with conditional use of CT in identifying perforated appendicitis. However, both strategies incorrectly classify up to half of all patients with perforated appendicitis as having simple appendicitis. Triage of appendicitis based on imaging for conservative treatment is inaccurate and may be considered unsafe for decision-making. Presented to a scientific meeting of the Association of Surgeons of the Netherlands, Veldhoven, The Netherlands, May 2012; published in abstract form as Br J Surg 2012; 99(Suppl 7): S6.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M M N Leeuwenburgh
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
van de Wall BJM, Draaisma WA, van Iersel JJ, Consten ECJ, Wiezer MJ, Broeders IAMJ. Elective resection for ongoing diverticular disease significantly improves quality of life. Dig Surg 2013; 30:190-7. [PMID: 23838742 DOI: 10.1159/000346482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2012] [Accepted: 12/10/2012] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although the risks of elective resection for diverticular disease are well studied, studies on subjective improvement are scarce. This study aims to investigate subjective improvement. METHODS All patients who underwent elective resection for recurring or persisting complaints after an episode of diverticulitis were identified from an in-hospital database. Patients with at least 1 year of follow-up were sent visual analogue scales (VAS) to grade their quality of life (QoL) and the degree of discomfort caused by abdominal pain, abnormal defecation and fatigue before and after resection. RESULTS One hundred and five patients responded to the questionnaire (response rate 76.6%). The median follow-up was 33 (15-53) months. Elective resection improved general QoL (median VAS improvement 40) and reduced discomfort caused by abdominal pain (median VAS improvement 60) in up to 89.3 and 87.5% of patients, respectively. The effects of elective resection are less profound for discomfort caused by abnormal defecation (77.1%, median VAS improvement 33) and fatigue (75.2%, median VAS improvement 30). CONCLUSION Elective resection of the sigmoid for persisting or recurring symptoms after an episode of diverticulitis improves general QoL and discomfort caused by abdominal pain, abnormal defecation and fatigue in the vast majority of patients.
Collapse
|
49
|
Braam HJ, Boerma D, Wiezer MJ, van Ramshorst B. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy during primary tumour resection limits extent of bowel resection compared to two-stage treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013; 39:988-93. [PMID: 23810334 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.06.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2013] [Revised: 04/24/2013] [Accepted: 06/06/2013] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
AIM To compare the clinical outcome of a one-stage, primary tumour resection and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) procedure, versus a two-stage procedure of tumour resection and secondary HIPEC in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with synchronous peritoneal carcinomatosis. METHODS A prospective database of all patients treated with HIPEC in the St. Antonius Hospital in the Netherlands between 2005 and 2012 was analysed. RESULTS A total of 72 patients with synchronous peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from CRC were included. In 20 patients (27.8%) the primary tumour was resected simultaneously with HIPEC (early referral). In the other 52 patients (72.2%) the primary tumour was resected prior to the HIPEC procedure (late referral). During CRS + HIPEC following late referral, 22 (59.5%) of the 37 anastomoses of the earlier operation were resected, revealing malignancy in 12 (54.5%) on histopathological examination. In twenty (27.8%) patients a permanent colostomy was constructed after HIPEC. Ten of these patients had complete bowel continuity after earlier primary resection. The relaparotomy rate was higher in patients after a resection of a previous anastomosis (36.4%) compared to 12% in the rest of the patients (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Resection of the primary tumour simultaneously with HIPEC in patients with synchronous PC from CRC may prevent extended bowel resections and permanent colostomy. Our data support early referral of patients with PC from colorectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H J Braam
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, 3435 CM Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
van de Wall BJM, Draaisma WA, van der Kaaij RT, Consten ECJ, Wiezer MJ, Broeders IAMJ. The value of inflammation markers and body temperature in acute diverticulitis. Colorectal Dis 2013; 15:621-6. [PMID: 23088216 DOI: 10.1111/codi.12072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2012] [Accepted: 10/13/2012] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
AIM To determine the diagnostic value of serological infection markers and body temperature in discriminating complicated from uncomplicated diverticulitis. METHODS Patients in whom diverticulitis was pathologically or radiologically proven at presentation were included. Patients were classified as either complicated (Hinchey Ib, II, III and IV) or uncomplicated (Hinchey Ia) diverticulitis. The discriminative value of C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell (WBC) count and body temperature at presentation was tested. RESULTS A total of 426 patients were included in this study of which 364 (85%) presented with uncomplicated and 62 (15%) with complicated diverticulitis. Only CRP was of sufficient diagnostic value (area under the curve 0.715). The median CRP in patients with complicated diverticulitis was significantly higher than in patients with uncomplicated disease (224 mg/l, range 99-284 vs 87 mg/l, range 48-151). Patients with a CRP of 25 mg/l had a 15% chance of having complicated diverticulitis. This increased from 23% at a CRP value of 100 mg/l to 47% for 250 mg/l or higher. The optimal threshold was reached at 175 mg/l with a positive predictive value of 36%, negative predictive value of 92%, sensitivity of 61% and a specificity of 82%. CONCLUSION WBC count and body temperature are of no value in discriminating complicated from uncomplicated diverticulitis. Only CRP can be used as an indicator for the presence of complications, but a low CRP does not mean that complicated disease can safely be excluded. Therefore, radiological examination remains central in the diagnostic work-up of patients presenting with diverticulitis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B J M van de Wall
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre Amersfoort, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|