Primary Tumor Resection Before Systemic Therapy in Patients With Colon Cancer and Unresectable Metastases: Combined Results of the SYNCHRONOUS and CCRe-IV Trials.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy is established as primary treatment in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer and unresectable metastases. Data from nonrandomized clinical trials have fueled persistent uncertainty if primary tumor resection (PTR) before chemotherapy prolongs survival. We investigated the prognostic value of PTR in patients with newly diagnosed stage IV colon cancer who were not amenable to curative treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients enrolled in the multicenter, randomized SYNCHRONOUS and CCRe-IV trials were included in the analysis. Patients with colon cancer with synchronous unresectable metastases were randomly assigned at 100 sites in Austria, Germany, and Spain to undergo PTR or up-front chemotherapy (No PTR group). The chemotherapy regimen was left at discretion of the local team. Patients with tumor-related symptoms, inability to tolerate surgery and/or systemic chemotherapy, and history of another cancer were excluded. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and the analyses were performed with intention-to-treat. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients were randomly assigned to undergo PTR (n = 187) or no PTR (n = 206) between November 2011 and March 2017. Chemotherapy was not administered to 6.4% in the No PTR group and 24.1% in the PTR group. The median follow-up time was 36.7 months (95% CI, 36.6 to 37.3). The median OS was 16.7 months (95% CI, 13.2 to 19.2) in the PTR group and 18.6 months (95% CI, 16.2 to 22.3) in the No PTR group (P = .191). Comparable OS between the study groups was further confirmed on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 0.944 [95% CI, 0.738 to 1.209], P = .65) and across all subgroups. Patients with serious adverse events were more common in the No PTR group (10.2% v 18.0%; P = .027). CONCLUSION: Among patients with colon cancer and synchronous unresectable metastases, PTR before systemic chemotherapy was not associated with prolonged OS.

Intraoperative Wound Irrigation for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection After Laparotomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial by CHIR-Net.

Importance: Surgical site infections frequently occur after open abdominal surgery. Intraoperative wound irrigation as a preventive measure is a common practice worldwide, although evidence supporting this practice is lacking. Objective: To evaluate the preventive effect of intraoperative wound irrigation with polyhexanide solution. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Intraoperative Wound Irrigation to Prevent Surgical Site Infection After Laparotomy (IOWISI) trial was a multicenter, 3-armed, randomized clinical trial. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to the intervention. The clinical trial was conducted in 12 university and general hospitals in Germany from September 2017 to December 2021 with 30-day follow-up. Adult patients undergoing laparotomy were eligible for inclusion. The main exclusion criteria were clean laparoscopic procedures and the inability to provide consent. Of 11 700 screened, 689 were included and 557 completed the trial; 689 were included in the intention-to-treat and safety analysis. Interventions: Randomization was performed online (3:3:1 allocation) to polyhexanide 0.04%, saline, or no irrigation (control) of the operative wound before closure. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was surgical site infection within 30 postoperative days according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition. Results: Among the 689 patients included, 402 were male and 287 were female. The median (range) age was 65.9 (18.5-94.9) years. Participants were randomized to either wound irrigation with polyhexanide (n = 292), saline (n = 295), or no irrigation (n = 102). The procedures were classified as clean contaminated in 92 cases (8%). The surgical site infection incidence was 11.8% overall (81 of 689), 10.6% in the polyhexanide arm (31 of 292), 12.5% in the saline arm (37 of 295), and 12.8% in the no irrigation arm (13 of 102). Irrigation with polyhexanide was not statistically superior to no irrigation or saline irrigation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% CI, 0.64-2.36 vs HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.74-1.94; P = .47). The incidence of serious adverse events did not differ among the 3 groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, intraoperative wound irrigation with polyhexanide solution did not reduce surgical site infection incidence in clean-contaminated open abdominal surgical procedures compared to saline or no irrigation. More clinical trials are warranted to evaluate the potential benefit in contaminated and septic procedures, including the emergency setting. Trial Registration: drks.de Identifier: DRKS00012251.