2022 Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International Consensus on HIPEC Regimens for Peritoneal Malignancies: Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selected patients with peritoneal metastases of colorectal cancer (PM-CRC) can benefit from potentially curative cytoreductive surgery (CRS) ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), with a median overall survival (OS) of more than 40 months. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this evidence-based consensus were to define the indications for HIPEC, to select the preferred HIPEC regimens, and to define research priorities regarding the use of HIPEC for PM-CRC. METHODS: The consensus steering committee elaborated and formulated pertinent clinical questions according to the PICO (patient, intervention, comparator, outcome) method and assessed the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Standardized evidence tables were presented to an international expert panel to reach a consensus (4-point, weak and strong positive/negative) on HIPEC regimens and research priorities through a two-round Delphi process. The consensus was defined as ≥ 50% agreement for the 4-point consensus grading or ≥ 70% for either of the two combinations. RESULTS: Evidence was weak or very weak for 9/10 clinical questions. In total, 70/90 eligible panelists replied to both Delphi rounds (78%), with a consensus for 10/10 questions on HIPEC regimens. There was strong negative consensus concerning the short duration, high-dose oxaliplatin (OX) protocol (55.7%), and a weak positive vote (53.8-64.3%) in favor of mitomycin-C (MMC)-based HIPEC (preferred choice: Dutch protocol: 35 mg/m2, 90 min, three fractions), both for primary cytoreduction and recurrence. Determining the role of HIPEC after CRS was considered the most important research question, regarded as essential by 85.7% of the panelists. Furthermore, over 90% of experts suggest performing HIPEC after primary and secondary CRS for recurrence > 1 year after the index surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, despite the negative results of PRODIGE 7, HIPEC could be conditionally recommended to patients with PM-CRC after CRS. While more preclinical and clinical data are eagerly awaited to harmonize the procedure further, the MMC-based Dutch protocol remains the preferred regimen after primary and secondary CRS.

PIPAC Pharmacologic and Clinical Data.

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) emerged as an innovative intraperitoneal chemotherapy delivery system to overcome the issue of limited efficacy of systemic therapies to induce response in peritoneal malignancies. Promising results for patients with mesothelioma peritonei and peritoneal metastasis from gastric, ovarian, colorectal, pancreatic, and hepatobiliary tumors origin are changing the landscape for patients otherwise just facing palliative treatment. Ongoing trials will shed more light on the actual benefits of PIPAC.

Guidelines for the Prophylaxis and Treatment of Peritoneal Metastases From Colorectal Cancer: A GRADE-Approach for Evidence Evaluation and Recommendations.

Colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) are common in colorectal cancer patients. This article aims to provide GRADE guidelines for the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in two clinical situations: (1) To determine the value of adjuvant HIPEC for the prevention of CPM in high-risk colorectal cancer patients; (2) to determine the impact on survival of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC followed by adjuvant systemic chemotherapy as compared to systemic chemotherapy alone in patients with CPM.

Review of 2022 PSOGI/RENAPE Consensus on HIPEC.

The 2022 PSOGI (Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International) and RENAPE (French Network for Rare Peritoneal Malignancies) consensus on hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) was a comprehensive effort aimed at standardizing treatment protocols for various peritoneal malignancies. This initiative is critical due to the wide range of technical variations in HIPEC procedures and the resulting need for standardization to ensure consistent and effective patient care and meaningful audit of multicenter data.

[Management of acute and chronic anal pain]. / Prise en charge des douleurs anales aiguës et chroniques.

Anal pain can be acute (most commonly related to anal fissure, perianal abcess or fistula, perianal vein thrombosis) or chronic (functional or neuropathic) including levator ani syndrome, proctalgia fugax, pudendal nevralgia and coccygodynia. History and clinical examination are keys to diagnose acute causes. Diagnosis of chronic anal pain on the other hand is more challenging and based on thorough history and analysis of symptoms. The aim of this article is to discuss the main etiologies and treatments of acute and chronic anal pain, including an update on the management and treatment of hemorrhoidal disease and postoperative pain management.

La douleur anale peut être de survenue aiguë (le plus fréquemment en lien avec une fissure anale, un abcès ou fistule anale, ou une thrombose des veines périanales) ou chronique (fonctionnelle ou neuropathique), comportant le syndrome du releveur de l'anus, la proctalgia fugax, la névralgie du pudendal et les coccygodynies. Le diagnostic d'une douleur anale aiguë est rapidement posé grâce à l'anamnèse et surtout l'examen clinique. Les causes chroniques sont en revanche plus difficiles à diagnostiquer et nécessitent un interrogatoire détaillé avec une analyse approfondie des symptômes. Le but de cet article est d'explorer le traitement des étiologies de douleur anale aiguë, de pouvoir reconnaître une grande part des douleurs anales chroniques, sans oublier une mise à jour sur la maladie hémorroïdaire avec la prévention et gestion des douleurs postopératoires.

The 2022 PSOGI International Consensus on HIPEC Regimens for Peritoneal Malignancies: Methodology.

BACKGROUND: A group of experts from the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) and the BIG-RENAPE group carried out a consensus among surgeons experienced in treating peritoneal malignancies from around the world to derive recommendations on indications of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), choice and details of HIPEC regimens, and areas for future research. This manuscript describes the methodology of achieving this consensus and the degree of participation of experts. METHODS: The Delphi technique was used and the questionnaire comprised three categories: evidence-based recommendations using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system with the PICO (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome) method, an opinion survey, and research recommendations. A consensus was achieved if any one option had >50% of votes, or positive or negative recommendations combined had > 70% of votes. RESULTS: Of the 145 experts solicited, 71.1% in round I and 72.2% in round II took the survey. Participation was highest among surgeons treating both gastrointestinal and gynecological malignancies. Of 113 questions, after round I, a consensus was achieved for 72 (63.7%) questions, and after the second round, consensus was achieved for another 22 (19.4%) questions, making a total of 94 (83.1%) questions for which a consensus was achieved. CONCLUSION: This consensus was carried out using a thorough review of literature and robust rating of evidence, and included key experts and opinion leaders from across the world. The results could guide clinicians on the use of HIPEC, both in their day-to-day clinical practice and in designing clinical trials.

A prediction model to refine the timing of an early second-look laparoscopic exploration in patients with colon cancer at high risk of early peritoneal metastasis recurrence.

BACKGROUND: In patients at high risk of peritoneal metastasis (PM) recurrence following surgical treatment of colon cancer (CC), second-look laparoscopic exploration (SLLE) is mandatory; however, the best timing is unknown. We created a tool to refine the timing of early SLLE in patients at high risk of PM recurrence. METHODS: This international cohort study included patients who underwent CC surgery between 2009 and 2020. All patients had PM recurrence. Factors associated with PM-free survival (PMFS) were assessed using Cox regression. The primary endpoint was early PM recurrence defined as a PMFS of <6 months. A model (logistic regression) was fitted and corrected using bootstrap. RESULTS: In total, 235 patients were included. The median PMFS was 13 (IQR, 8-22) months, and 15.7% of the patients experienced an early PM recurrence. Synchronous limited PM and/or ovarian metastasis (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.66-3.78]; p < 0.001) were associated with a very high-risk status requiring SLLE. T4 (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: [1.03-2.11]; p = 0.036), transverse tumor localization (HR: 0.35; 95% CI: [0.17-0.69]; p = 0.002), emergency surgery (HR: 2.06; 95% CI: [1.36-3.13]; p < 0.001), mucinous subtype (HR: 0.50; 95% CI [0.30, 0.82]; p = 0.006), microsatellite instability (HR: 2.29; 95% CI [1.06, 4.93]; p = 0.036), KRAS mutation (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: [1.24-2.55]; p = 0.002), and complete protocol of adjuvant chemotherapy (HR: 0.93; 95% CI: [0.89-0.96]; p < 0.001) were also prognostic factors for PMFS. Thus, a model was fitted (area under the curve: 0.87; 95% CI: [0.82-0.92]) for prediction, and a cutoff of 150 points was identified to classify patients at high risk of early PM recurrence. CONCLUSION: Using a nomogram, eight prognostic factors were identified to select patients at high risk for early PM recurrence objectively. Patients reaching 150 points could benefit from an early SLLE.

Impact of etiology leading to abdominoperineal resection with anterolateral thigh flap reconstruction: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Large and deep perineal defects following abdominal perineal resection (APR) are a challenge for reconstructive surgeons. Even if generally performed for oncological reasons, APR can be indicated as well in extended infection-related debridement for Hidradenitis suppurativa, Fournier's gangrene, or Crohn's disease. We aimed to compare the outcomes of two groups of patients with different indications for APR (infectious vs. oncological) after pedicled anterolateral thigh (ALT) flap coverage RESULTS: Forty-four consecutive pedicled ALT flap used for coverage after APR in 40 patients were analyzed. 26 patients (65%) underwent APR for oncological reasons and 14 patients (35%) for infectious reasons. The overall postoperative complications rate was significantly higher for infectious cases (76.5% vs. 40.7%, p = 0.0304). Major complications occurred in 52.9% of infectious cases versus 11.1% of oncological cases (p = 0.0045). Obesity and infectious etiology were independent risk factors for overall and major complications, respectively. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing APR for acute or chronic infections had significantly more overall and major complications than patients having oncological APR. Modified care might be considered, especially in obese patients, in terms of surgical debridement, antibiotic treatment modalities, and postoperative management.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Consensus Guidelines for Emergency Laparotomy Part 3: Organizational Aspects and General Considerations for Management of the Emergency Laparotomy Patient.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 3 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses organizational aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. RESULTS: Components of organizational aspects of care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best current available evidence for organizational aspects of an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy and include discussion of less common aspects of care for the surgical patient, including end-of-life issues. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Consensus Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations Part 2-Emergency Laparotomy: Intra- and Postoperative Care.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. Some ERAS® components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL. RESULTS: Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing EL. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

[Anal cancer screening. A decade's experience of a consultation in a tertiary centre]. / Dépistage du cancer anal. Expérience d'une décennie de consultation spécialisée.

Anal cancer is a disease with a low but gradually increasing incidence, especially in developed countries. Most of these cancers are caused by the HPV. In Switzerland, more than 70 % of the sexually active population is infected with HPV at least once, making it the most common sexually transmitted disease. Immunosuppression and anal sex remain other major risk factors. Precancerous lesions can progress to anal cancer (up to 13 % at 5 years), hence the importance of early detection. High resolution anoscopy is the standard of care for diagnosis and primary treatment of lesions. It is therefore important to monitor at-risk groups and to proactively screen for gynaecological and anal HPV infection.

Le cancer anal a une incidence faible mais en constante augmentation, particulièrement dans les pays développés. Le HPV est responsable de la plupart de ces cancers. En Suisse, plus de 70 % de la population sexuellement active est infectée au moins une fois par le HPV, ce qui en fait la maladie sexuellement transmissible la plus fréquente. D'autres facteurs de risque incluent l'immunosuppression et les rapports sexuels anaux. Les lésions précancéreuses peuvent évoluer en cancer de l'anus (jusqu'à 13 % à 5 ans), justifiant l'importance d'un dépistage précoce. L'anuscopie de haute résolution est l'examen privilégié pour le diagnostic et le traitement primaire des lésions. Il est donc crucial de surveiller les groupes à risque et d'adopter une attitude proactive en matière de dépistage de l'infection HPV gynécologique et anale.

Feasibility and Safety of Oxaliplatin-Based Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy With or Without Intraoperative Intravenous 5-Fluorouracil and Leucovorin for Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective multicenter cohort study compared the feasibility and safety of oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC-Ox) with or without intraoperative intravenous 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (L). METHODS: Our study included consecutive patients with histologically proven unresectable and isolated colorectal peritoneal metastases (cPM) treated with PIPAC-Ox in seven tertiary referral centers between January 2015 and April 2020. Toxicity events and oncological outcomes (histological response, progression-free survival, and overall survival) were compared between patients who received intraoperative intravenous 5-FU/L (PIPAC-Ox + 5-FU/L group) and patients who did not (PIPAC-Ox group). RESULTS: In total, 101 patients (263 procedures) were included in the PIPAC-Ox group and 30 patients (80 procedures) were included in the PIPAC-Ox + 5-FU/L group. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 grade 2 or higher adverse events occurred in 48 of 101 (47.5%) patients in the PIPAC-Ox group and in 13 of 30 (43.3%) patients in the PIPAC-Ox + 5-FU/L group (p = 0.73). The complete histological response rates according to the peritoneal regression grading score were 27% for the PIPAC-Ox + 5-FU/L group and 18% for the PIPAC-Ox group (p = 0.74). No statistically significant differences were observed in overall or progression-free survival between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and feasibility of PIPAC-Ox + 5-FU/L appears to be similar to the safety and feasibility of PIPAC-Ox alone in patients with unresectable cPM. Oncological outcomes must be evaluated in larger studies.

Outcomes of the Composite Anterolateral Thigh Flap for Perineal Reconstruction After Postoncological Abdominoperineal Resection.

BACKGROUND: The vertical rectus abdominis flap is considered the gold standard in perineal reconstruction after oncological abdominoperineal resection; however, it has a nonnegligible donor site morbidity. The anterolateral thigh flap offers reliable soft tissue coverage. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to analyze long-term outcomes of composite anterolateral thigh-vastus lateralis flaps in oncological abdominoperineal resections. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of a prospectively maintained database. SETTINGS: This study was conducted in the Lausanne University Hospital. Annually, approximately 10 oncological abdomioperineal resections are performed. Literature reports 7% to 20% of patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection require flap reconstruction; in our institution, approximately 2 patients with large defects after abdominoperineal resections required reconstruction. PATIENTS: Twenty-nine pedicled anterolateral thigh-vastus lateralis flaps in 27 consecutive patients (mean age 63 years +/-11.2, 23 with radiochemotherapy) after abdominoperineal resection to cover large defects (median 190 cm2, 48-600 cm2) were analyzed. INTERVENTION: Pedicled composite anterolateral thigh-vastus lateralis flaps were performed after oncological abdominoperineal resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted. Short- and long-term outcomes were analyzed, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Median follow-up was 16 months (12-48 months). RESULTS: Flap-related postoperative complications occurred in 16 flaps; flap-survival was 100%. Multivariate logistic analysis identified initial defect size as predictive for complications. Patients with larger defects (≥ 190 cm2) had higher complication rates (p = 0.006). Long-term analysis revealed 3 chronic fistulae, 2 tumor recurrences, 1 flap dysesthesia, and one perineal acne inversa. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include retrospective analysis, selection bias, and lacking a control group. Sample size limits statistical power. CONCLUSIONS: The pedicled anterolateral thigh-vastus lateralis flap offers reliable, stable tissue with low morbidity and good long-term outcomes. Complications compared favorably with current literature describing perineal reconstructions with rectus abdominis flaps. The composite anterolateral thigh flap is a valid alternative without the setback of abdominal donor site morbidity. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B757.RESULTADOS DEL COLGAJO COMPUESTO ANTEROLATERAL DE MUSLO PARA LA RECONSTRUCCIÓN PERINEAL DESPUÉS DE LA RESECCIÓN ABDOMINOPERINEAL POST ONCOLÓGICAANTECEDENTES:El colgajo vertical de recto abdominal se considera el estándar de oro en la reconstrucción perineal después de la resección abdominoperineal oncológica, sin embargo, tiene una morbilidad no despreciable en el sitio donante. El colgajo anterolateral del muslo ofrece una cobertura confiable de los tejidos blandos.OBJETIVO:El objetivo fue analizar los resultados a largo plazo de los colgajos compuestos anterolaterales del muslo - vasto lateral - en resecciones abdominoperineales oncológicas.DISEÑO:Realizamos un análisis, retrospectivo, de tipo cohorte, de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.AJUSTES:Este estudio fue realizado en el hospital universitario de Lausanne. Anualmente se realizan aproximadamente 10 resecciones abdominoperineales oncológicas. La literatura reporta que entre el 7 y el 20% de los pacientes que se someten a una resección abdominoperineal requieren de reconstrucción con colgajo; en nuestra institución, aproximadamente 2 pacientes con grandes defectos tras la resección abdominoperineal requirieron reconstrucción.PACIENTES:Fueron analizados veintinueve colgajos pediculados anterolaterales de muslo - vasto lateral - en 27 pacientes consecutivos (edad media 63 años +/- 11,2, 23 con radio quimioterapia) después de la resección abdominoperineal para cubrir defectos grandes (mediana 190 cm2, 48-600 cm2).INTERVENCIÓN:Tras la resección abdominoperineal oncológica se realizaron colgajos pediculados compuestos anterolaterales de muslo - vasto lateral.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Fue realizado un análisis estadístico descriptivo. Fueron analizados los resultados a corto y largo plazo - fueron realizados así mismo análisis uni y multivariados. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 16 meses (12-48 meses).RESULTADOS:Complicaciones postoperatorias relacionadas con el colgajo ocurrieron en 16 colgajos, la supervivencia del colgajo fue del 100%. El análisis logístico multivariado identificó al tamaño del defecto inicial como predictor de complicaciones. Aquellos pacientes con defectos más grandes (≥190 cm2) tuvieron mayores tasas de complicaciones (p = 0,006). El análisis a largo plazo reveló tres fístulas crónicas, dos recidivas tumorales, una disestesia de colgajo y un acné perineal inverso.LIMITACIONES:Las limitaciones incluyen análisis retrospectivo, sesgo de selección y falta de grupo de control. El tamaño de la muestra limita el poder estadístico.CONCLUSIONES:El colgajo pediculado anterolateral de muslo - vasto lateral - ofrece tejido confiable y estable con baja morbilidad y buenos resultados a largo plazo. Los resultados de las complicaciones se mostraron favorables con respecto a la literatura actual que describe reconstrucciones perineales con colgajos de recto abdominal. El colgajo compuesto anterolateral de muslo es una alternativa válida sin el revés de la morbilidad del sitio donante abdominal. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B757. (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto).

Early postoperative outcomes of staging laparoscopy for peritoneal metastases with or without pressurized intra-peritoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC).

BACKGROUND: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has been introduced for palliative treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) and is currently tested also in the neoadjuvant and prophylactic setting. The aim was therefore to compare safety and tolerance of staging laparoscopy with or without PIPAC. METHODS: This retrospective analysis compared consecutive patients undergoing staging laparoscopy alone for oesogastric cancer with patients having PIPAC for suspected PSM of various origins from January 2015 until January 2020. Safety was assessed by use of the Clavien classification for complications and CTCAE for capturing of adverse events. Pain and nausea were documented by use of a visual analogue scale (VAS: 0-10: maximal intensity). RESULTS: Overall, 25 PIPAC procedures were compared to 24 staging laparoscopies. PIPAC procedures took a median of 35 min (IQR: 25-67) longer. Four patients experienced at least one complication in either group (p = 0.741). No differences were noted for postoperative nausea (p = 0.961) and pain levels (p = 0.156). Median hospital stay was 2 (IQR: 1-3) for PIPAC and 1 (IQR: 1-2) for the laparoscopy group (p = 0.104). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of PIPAC did not jeopardize safety and postoperative outcomes of staging laparoscopy alone. Further studies need to clarify its oncological benefits.

[ERAS: perioperative care for the benefit of the patient]. / ERAS : la médecine périopératoire au bénéfice du patient.

During surgical procedures, surgery, and anesthesia lead to pathophysiological stress on the human body. The goal of perioperative medicine is to prepare patients and take all possible measures to reduce this pathophysiological stress. The emergence of ERAS over the past 15 years has made it possible to set up a multimodal program based on scientific evidence, showing that the adequate application of an improved rehabilitation program after surgery, ERAS-type, is possible in all surgical specialties, including gynecology, cardiac surgery, and neurosurgery. ERAS improves the quality of life of patients, reduces postoperative complications and lengths of stay, and finally, reduces costs. The purpose of this article is to show the most important elements of such an ERAS program by taking the example of digestive surgery.

La chirurgie et l'anesthésie entraînent un stress pathophysiologique de l'organisme. Le but de la médecine périopératoire est de préparer les patients et de prendre toutes les mesures possibles pour diminuer ce stress physiologique. L'émergence de ERAS (Enhanced Rehabilitation After Surgery ; réhabilitation améliorée après chirurgie) ces 15 dernières années a permis de mettre sur pied un programme multimodal basé sur des preuves scientifiques montrant que l'application adéquate d'un programme de type ERAS dans l'ensemble des spécialités chirurgicales, y compris la gynécologie, la chirurgie cardiaque et la neurochirurgie, permet d'améliorer la qualité de vie des patients, de diminuer les complications postopératoires, les durées de séjour et, finalement, les coûts. Le but de cet article est de montrer les éléments les plus importants d'un tel programme ERAS en prenant l'exemple de la chirurgie digestive.

[Human Papillomavirus: screening of cervical and anal cancers]. / Papillomavirus humain : dépistage des cancers du col et de l'anus.

Cervical cancer is preventable through primary and secondary prevention. Vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV), the virus necessary for the development of precancerous lesions, can prevent most of them. Screening by cytology for these precancerous (or cancerous) lesions can be replaced by screening for certain types of HPV, high risk (HR-HPV), causing cervical cancer. The presence of HR-HPV on the cervix should raise suspicion of concomitant infection in the anus, as both epithelia are highly susceptible. This attitude is dictated by the increase incidence in anal cancer in the population, which is also HPV-dependent and therefore also potentially preventable through vaccination and screening.

Le cancer du col utérin est évitable, au travers d'une politique de prévention primaire et secondaire. Une vaccination contre le papillomavirus humain (HPV), et plus particulièrement contre les HPV dits à haut risque (HR-HPV) qui induisent le développement des états précancéreux, permet ainsi d'éviter une majeure partie de ceux-ci. Un dépistage par cytologie à la recherche de ces lésions précancéreuses (ou cancéreuses) peut être supplanté par la recherche de la présence des HR-HPV. La présence de HR-HPV sur le col doit faire suspecter une infection concomitante au niveau de l'anus car les deux épithéliums y sont très sensibles. Cette attitude est dictée par l'augmentation des cancers de l'anus dans la population, cancer lui aussi dépendant du HPV, et donc aussi potentiellement évitable au travers de la vaccination et du dépistage.

[Obstructed colon cancer: which strategy in 2022?] / Cancer colique en occlusion : quelle prise en charge en 2022 ?

The key priority for obstructed colon cancer (OCC) is urgent resolution of the large bowel obstruction with ideally no compromise of oncological outcomes and low initial and permanent ostomy rates. Proactive management is pivotal to decrease the risk of perforation and septic shock. Staged procedures have an important place to provide optimal treatment and offer similar treatment and outcomes as in the elective setting. The approach is tailored to the patient's condition, the oncological situation and expertise of the available surgical team. This overview concludes by proposing a comprehensive treatment algorithm for individualized treatment of OCC.

La principale priorité du cancer du côlon obstructif (CCO) est la levée urgente de l'obstacle colique, sans compromettre les résultats oncologiques tout en réduisant les taux de stomies initiales et permanentes. Une prise en charge proactive est essentielle pour minimiser le risque de perforation et de choc septique. Les procédures par étapes (staged procedures) ont une place primordiale afin de permettre un traitement optimal associé à des résultats proches des conditions de la chirurgie élective. L'approche doit être adaptée à l'état des patients, au stade oncologique, ainsi qu'à l'expertise chirurgicale disponible. Cette synthèse de la littérature se conclut par la proposition d'un algorithme pour le traitement individualisé du CCO.

[Intraperitoneal therapy for carcinomatosis in ovarian cancer: proposed treatment algorithm]. / Traitements intrapéritonéaux de la carcinose ovarienne : proposition d'algorithmes décisionnels.

Ovarian cancer is the first cause of death by gynecological cancer. Most of the patients are diagnosed with peritoneal carcinomatosis that represents a therapeutic challenge. Its management implies maximal cytoreductive surgery with survival benefit. Over the last three decades, several strategies of intra-peritoneal chemotherapy have been investigated. This includes intra-peritoneal adjuvant chemotherapy that is used mainly in North America, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and more recently pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). In the current article, we review the evidence in favor of each therapeutic approach, and we propose treatment algorithms depending on the clinical situation of ovarian cancer patients: upfront, platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant relapse.

Le cancer de l'ovaire est la première cause de décès par cancer gynécologique. La plupart des patientes sont diagnostiquées au stade de carcinose péritonéale qui représente un défi thérapeutique. Sa prise en charge chirurgicale implique une cytoréduction maximaliste. Au cours des 30 dernières années, plusieurs stratégies de chimiothérapie intrapéritonéale ont été testées afin d'améliorer le contrôle de la carcinose péritonéale. Il s'agit des chimiothérapies intrapéritonéale adjuvante utilisée surtout en Amérique du Nord, hyperthermique intrapéritonéale (CHIP) et intrapéritonéale pressurisée en aérosols (PIPAC). Dans cet article, nous reprenons les données de la littérature sur chacune de ces trois approches thérapeutiques et proposons des algorithmes décisionnels selon la situation clinique des patientes traitées pour un cancer de l'ovaire : au diagnostic, récidive platine-sensible et platine-résistante.

Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy Enhanced by Electrostatic Precipitation (ePIPAC) for Patients with Peritoneal Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a new mode of intraperitoneal chemotherapy administration that can potentially be improved by the addition of electrostatic precipitation (ePIPAC). This study aimed to describe the procedural details of ePIPAC and to analyze its safety for patients with nonresectable peritoneal metastasis as well as their tolerance and response to this treatment. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients treated with ePIPAC in three centers from April 2019 to April 2020. The toxicities of each patient were assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Complications were documented according to the Clavien classification. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed using EORTC-QLQ-C30, and the peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) was used to grade histologic responses. Further surrogates for responses were the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI), ascites, and symptoms. RESULTS: Overall, 69 patients received 147 ePIPACs with oxaliplatin (n = 34) or cisplatin/doxorubicin (n = 35) mainly for colorectal (n = 25), ovarian (n = 14), and gastric (n = 13) primary cancers. Systemic chemotherapy was used in the treatment of 54 patients (76%). The median electrostatic therapy time was 12 min (range 6-30 min). The overall and major CTCAE toxicity rates were respectively 24.6% and 15.9%. The postoperative complications rate according to Clavien classification was 4.7%. The responses of 22 patients who had three or more ePIPAC treatments were evaluated as follows: PCI (16 vs 14; p = 0.4), ascites (320 vs 98 ml; p = 0.1), and PRGS (2.23 vs 1.73; p = 0.15). The complete (PRGS1) and major (PRGS2) histologic responses at the third ePIPAC were respectively 38.5% and 53.8%. Overall QoL was stable during the first ePIPACs. CONCLUSION: Repetitive ePIPACs were safe and well tolerated for patients with unresectable peritoneal metastasis.

HIPEC Methodology and Regimens: The Need for an Expert Consensus.

BACKGROUND: Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is performed with a wide variation in methodology, drugs, and other elements vital to the procedure. Adoption of a limited number of regimens could increase the collective experience of peritoneal oncologists, make comparison between studies more meaningful, and lead to a greater acceptance of results from randomized trials. This study aimed to determine the possibility of standardizing HIPEC methodology and regimens and to identify the best method of performing such a standardization. METHODS: A critical review of preclinical and clinical studies evaluating the pharmacokinetic aspects of different HIPEC drugs and drug regimens, the impact of hyperthermia, and the efficacy of various HIPEC regimens as well as studies comparing different regimens was performed. RESULTS: The preclinical and clinical data were limited, and studies comparing different regimens were scarce. Many of the regimens were neither supported by preclinical rationale or data nor validated by a dose-escalating formal phase 1 trial. All the regimens were based on pharmacokinetic data and did not take chemosensitivity of peritoneal metastases into account. Personalized medicine approaches such as patient-derived tumor organoids could offer a solution to this problem, although clinical validation is likely to be challenging. CONCLUSIONS: Apart from randomized trials, more translational research and phases 1 and 2 studies are needed. While waiting for better preclinical and clinical evidence, the best way to minimize heterogeneity is by an expert consensus that aims to identify and define a limited number of regimens for each indication and primary site. The choice of regimen then can be tailored to the patient profile and its expected toxicity and the methodology according regional factors.