The impact on postoperative outcomes of intraoperative fluid management strategies during cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of intraoperative fluid management during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) on postoperative outcomes has been poorly investigated. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the impact of intraoperative fluid management strategy on postoperative outcomes and survival. METHODS: 509 patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC at Uppsala University Hospital/Sweden 2004-2017 were categorized into two groups according to the intraoperative fluid management strategy: pre-goal directed therapy (pre-GDT) and goal directed therapy (GDT), where a hemodynamic monitor (CardioQ or FloTrac/Vigileo) was used to optimize fluid management. Impact on morbidity, postoperative hemorrhage, length-of-stay and survival was analyzed. RESULTS: The pre-GDT group received higher fluid volume compared to the GDT group (mean 19.9 vs. 16.2 ml/kg/h, p < 0.001). Overall postoperative morbidity Grade III-V was higher in the GDT group (30% vs. 22%, p = 0.03). Multivariable adjusted odds ratio (OR) for Grade III-V morbidity was 1.80 (95%CI 1.10-3.10, p = 0.02) in the GDT group. Numerically, more cases of postoperative hemorrhage were found in the GDT group (9% vs. 5%, p = 0.09), but no correlation was observed in the multivariable analysis 1.37 (95%CI 0.64-2.95, p = 0.40). An oxaliplatin regimen was a significant risk factor for postoperative hemorrhage (p = 0.03). Mean length of stay was shorter in the GDT group (17 vs. 26 days, p < 0.0001). Survival did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: While GDT increased the risk for postoperative morbidity, it was associated with shortened hospital stay. Intraoperative fluid management during CRS and HIPEC did not affect the postoperative risk for hemorrhage, while the use of an oxaliplatin regimen did.

Morbidity following cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal metastases with or without early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy: A propensity score matched study.

BACKGROUND: Combining hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) treatment with early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) may increase postoperative morbidity. This study aims to investigate postoperative morbidity after HIPEC+EPIC compared with HIPEC alone in patients with peritoneal metastases (PM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective propensity score matched cohort study. All patients undergoing PM treatment at Uppsala University Hospital between February 2004 and December 2014 were included. Propensity score matching with a 1:1 ratio was performed using sex, primary tumor site, preoperative chemotherapy, peritoneal cancer index, completeness of cytoreduction score, and HIPEC regimen. Length of hospital stay, morbidity, reoperation rate, and readmission rate within 6 months were selected as endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 390 consecutive patients were divided in two arms: HIPEC+EPIC (n = 115) and HIPEC alone (n = 275). The propensity score matching (n = 190) was successful with balanced covariates: 95 patients/arm. The length of stay (LOS) was longer in the HIPEC + EPIC group in the total cohort (30 vs 24 days, p < 0.001), with a trend towards significance in the propensity matched group (29 vs 25 days, p = 0.062). No other differences in endpoints were found. CONCLUSION: HIPEC+EPIC is associated with a prolonged hospital stay, but with no statistically significant relevant increase in postoperative morbidity, reoperation rate or incidence of readmission.

The current practice of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal metastases: Results of a worldwide web-based survey of the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI).

BACKGROUND: At present, selected patients with resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM) are increasingly treated with a combination therapy of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The aim of this study was to investigate the current worldwide practice. METHODS: HIPEC experts from 19 countries were invited through the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) to complete an online survey concerning their personal expertise and current hospital and countrywide practice. RESULTS: It is estimated that currently more than 3800 patients with CRC-PM (synchronous and metachronous) are annually treated with CRS and HIPEC in 430 centers. Integration of CRS and HIPEC in national guidelines varies, resulting in large treatment disparities between countries. Amongst the experts, there was general agreement on issues related to indication, surgical technique and follow up but less on systemic chemotherapy or proactive strategies. CONCLUSION: This international survey demonstrates that CRS and HIPEC is now performed on a large scale for CRC-PM patients. Variation in treatment may result in heterogeneity in surgical and oncological outcomes, emphasising the necessity to reach consensus on several issues of this comprehensive procedure. Future initiatives directed at achieving an international consensus statement are needed.

Prognostic scores for colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Selecting colorectal patients for HIPEC-surgery needs improvement. The study aim was to improve the colorectal peritoneal score (COREP) and to compare it with three other scores: peritoneal-surface disease-severity score (PSDS), colorectal-peritoneal metastases prognostic-surgical-score (COMPASS), and the CEA/PCI ratio. METHOD: Twelve preoperative factors were chosen to evaluate for COREP score modification. Criteria from logistical analyses were set to qualify for the modified COREP score (mCOREP). Odds ratios were used to assign score points for the eligible factors with open/close laparotomy prediction as endpoint. mCOREP was applied internally and compared with the original COREP, PSDS, COMPASS, and CEA/PCI ratio. Odds ratios, hazard ratios, and Kaplan-Meier curves were used for comparison. RESULTS: Seven factors qualified for mCOREP: CEA, CA 19-9, CA-125, C-reactive protein, albumin, platelet count and signet-cell histology. mCOREP was superior to the original COREP. mCOREP and COMPASS scores were the only scores with independent prognostic value. The mCOREP had the best discriminatory ability between its prognostic groupings. mCOREP 11 + had 9 months survival with half of patients being open/close surgery. CONCLUSION: The mCOREP has successfully been simplified while still improving its prognostic ability. The mCOREP and COMPASS scores have independent prognostic value. Patients with mCOREP 11 + may not benefit from treatment.

Quality of life and cost effectiveness in a randomized trial of patients with colorectal cancer and peritoneal metastases.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) and cost-effectiveness between cytoreductive surgery with intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + IPC) and systemic chemotherapy for patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases. METHODS: Patients included in the Swedish Peritoneal Trial comparing CRS + IPC and systemic chemotherapy completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and SF-36 questionnaires at baseline, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. HRQOL at 24 months was the primary endpoint. EORTC sum score, SF-36 physical and mental component scores at 24 months were calculated and compared for each arm and then referenced against general population values. Two quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) indices were applied (EORTC-8D and SF-6D) and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained was calculated. A projected life-time ICER per QALY gained was calculated using predicted survival according to Swedish population statistics. RESULTS: No statistical differences in HRQOL between the arms were noted at 24 months. Descriptively, survivors in the surgery arm had higher summary scores than the general population at 24 months, whereas survivors in the chemotherapy arm had lower scores. The projected life-time QALY benefit was 3.8 QALYs in favor of the surgery arm (p=0.06) with an ICER per QALY gained at 310,000 SEK (EORTC-8D) or 362,000 SEK (SF-6D) corresponding to 26,700-31,200 GBP. CONCLUSION: The HRQOL in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases undergoing CRS + IPC appear similar to those receiving systemic chemotherapy. Two-year survivors in the CRS + IPC arm have comparable HRQOL to a general population reference. The treatment is cost-effective according to NICE guidelines.

Cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus systemic chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases: A randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment of isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases remains unclear. This study (the Swedish peritoneal study) compares cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (surgery arm) with systemic chemotherapy (chemotherapy arm). METHODS: Patients deemed resectable preoperatively were randomised to surgery and intraperitoneal 5-fluorouracil 550 mg/m(2)/d for 6 d with repeated courses every month or to systemic oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil regimen every second week. Both treatments continued for 6 months. Primary end-point was overall survival (OS) and secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS), and morbidity. RESULTS: The study terminated prematurely when 48 eligible patients (24/arm) were included due to recruitment difficulties. Two-year OS was 54% in the surgery arm and 38% in the chemotherapy arm (p = 0.04). After 5 years, 8 versus 1 patient were alive, respectively (p = 0.02). Median OS was 25 months versus 18 months, respectively, hazard ratio 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.27-0.96, p = 0.04). PFS in the surgery arm was 12 months versus 11 months in the chemotherapy arm (p = 0.16) with 17% versus 0% 5-year PFS. Grade III-IV morbidity was seen in 42% and 50% of the patients, respectively. No mortalities. CONCLUSIONS: Cytoreductive surgery with intraperitoneal chemotherapy may be superior to systemic oxaliplatin-based treatment of colorectal cancer with resectable isolated peritoneal metastases.(ClinicalTrials.gov nr:NCT01524094).

Pharmacokinetics of cisplatin during hyperthermic intraperitoneal treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis.

PURPOSE: Cisplatin during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has not previously been measured with a selective technique. The primary aims were to examine the pharmacokinetics of active cisplatin and its monohydrated complex (MHC) during HIPEC using a specific measuring technique, to compare cisplatin's systemic absorption with oxaliplatin, and to compare active cisplatin levels to that of total platinum. METHODS: Ten patients treated with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC (cisplatin 50 mg/m(2),doxorubicin 15 mg/m(2)) were recruited. Blood and perfusate samples were drawn during and after HIPEC. Cisplatin analysis was conducted using liquid chromatography (LC) with post-column derivatization with diethyldithiocarbamate and compared with inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). RESULTS: The mean half-life (t1/2) of perfusate cisplatin was 18.4 min, with area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) 0-90 min of 2.87 mM·min and estimated 0-60 min of 2.45 mM·min. The absorption t1/2 was 9.0 min for cisplatin and 18.2 min for oxaliplatin. The ratio of total platinum to active cisplatin increased in a linear manner by time of perfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Cisplatin is absorbed quicker than oxaliplatin. Lowering the perfusion time to 60 min does not significantly change the pharmacokinetics of cisplatin, and is therefore to be considered. As the HIPEC perfusion progresses, the ICP-MS technique does not adequately reflect active cisplatin levels in the perfusate.

Cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis: prognosis and treatment of recurrences in a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC) treatment of colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is gaining acceptance, but controversy remains. The primary aims were to analyse the outcome and prognostic variables of colorectal PC patients treated with CRS and IPC, and to report on the outcome of additional surgical treatments of subsequent recurrences. METHODS: Patients referred for treatment of colorectal PC between 1996 and 2010 were included in a cohort. The following data was collected: clinicopathological parameters, survival, recurrences, perioperative chemotherapy and type of IPC (hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, HIPEC; or sequential postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy, SPIC). Multivariable analyses were conducted on potential prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In the 151-patient cohort, the median OS was 34 months (range: 2-77) for CRS and HIPEC with five-year survival predicted at 40% (five-year disease-free survival 32%). For CRS and SPIC, the OS was 25 months (range: 2-188) with five-year survival at 18%. Open-and-close patients survived 6 months (range: 0-14) with no five-year survival (HIPEC vs. SPIC p = 0.047, SPIC vs. open-and-close p < 0.001). Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy was a noteworthy independent prognostic factor in the multivariable analysis. OS for patients undergoing additional surgical treatment of recurrences was 25 months vs. 10 months with best supportive care or palliative chemotherapy (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Substantial long-term survival is possible in patients with colorectal PC. HIPEC was associated with better OS than SPIC and adjuvant systemic chemotherapy may improve the outcome in patients. Good OS is achievable in selected patients undergoing additional surgical treatment of isolated liver or peritoneal recurrences after prior complete CRS.

Intraoperative hyperthermic versus postoperative normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colonic peritoneal carcinomatosis: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy has improved prognosis in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. The main modes of intraperitoneal chemotherapy treatment are peroperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and normothermic sequential postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (SPIC). The aim of this study was to compare HIPEC and SPIC with respect to overall survival, disease-free survival, morbidity, and mortality in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A matched case-control study was conducted in patients with surgical macroscopic complete removal of carcinomatosis; matching was according to the peritoneal cancer index score. Thirty-two patients were included, 16 in each group (HIPEC and SPIC). Overall survival, disease-free survival, morbidity, mortality, and clinicopathological parameters were compared. RESULTS: Median overall survival was 36.5 months in the HIPEC group and 23.9 months in the SPIC group (P = 0.01). Median disease-free survival for these groups was 22.8 (HIPEC) and 13.0 months (SPIC; P = 0.02). Morbidity was not statistically different, 19% in SPIC and 37% in HIPEC. Postoperative mortality was observed in one patient in each group. CONCLUSION: HIPEC was associated with improved overall survival and disease-free survival compared with SPIC at similar morbidity and mortality, suggesting that HIPEC is the treatment of choice in colonic peritoneal carcinomatosis.