Randomised controlled trial comparing sapheno-femoral ligation and stripping of the great saphenous vein with endovenous laser ablation (980 nm) using local tumescent anaesthesia: one year results.

OBJECTIVES: Comparison of sapheno-femoral ligation and stripping (SFL/S) versus endovenous laser ablation (EVLA, 980-nm) in the treatment of great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency, using local tumescent anaesthesia. DESIGN: Randomised, single centre trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with GSV incompetence and varicose veins were randomised to either SFL/S or EVLA. At days 1, 2, 3, 7, 10, and 14 post-treatment, patients completed questionnaires on pain and quality of life. Recurrent varicose veins were evaluated by Duplex ultrasound (DUS) performed at 1 and 6 weeks, and 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: 130 legs in 121 patients were treated by SFL/S (n=68) or EVLA (n=62). Significantly more post-treatment pain was noted after EVLA at days 7, 10 and 14 (p<0.01; p<0.01; p=0.01), more hindrance in mobility at days 7 (p<0.01) and 10 (p=0.01), and in self care (p=0.03) and daily activities (p=0.01) at day 7 compared to SFL/S. DUS at 1-year follow-up showed 9% recurrences (5/56) after EVLA and 10% (5/49) after SFL/S. CONCLUSION: Both SFL/S and EVLA, using local tumescent anaesthesia, were well tolerated, with no difference in short-term recurrence rate. In the second week after EVLA, patients experienced significantly more pain resulting in restricted mobility, self care and daily activity compared to SFL/S.

Extensive cytoreductive surgery combined with intra-operative intraperitoneal perfusion with cisplatin under hyperthermic conditions (OVHIPEC) in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer: a feasibility pilot.

AIMS: The feasibility, morbidity and toxicity of an intensified surgical treatment strategy consisting of aggressive cytoreductive surgery, intra-operative intraperitoneal perfusion of cisplatin and hyperthermia were evaluated in women with recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: Five heavily pre-treated patients with extensive abdominal tumour bulk entered this pilot study. In all cases aggressive cytoreduction leaving tumour remnants <5 mm in diameter could be performed. This was followed intra-operatively by perfusion of the abdominal cavity with hyperthermic cisplatin 50-70 mg/m(2)for 90 min. During perfusion the intra-abdominal temperature was maintained at 40 degrees C. The median duration of surgery was 10 hours (range 9-11 hours). RESULTS: No major intra- or post-operative complications emerged. Median post-operative ileus (resuming of soft diet) was 11 days (9-13 days). The mean period of hospitalization was 25 days (range 17-42). Toxicity due to i.p. cisplatin was mainly metabolic and of grade 1-2, while no nephrotoxicity was observed. The pharmacokinetics of cisplatin indicated that the maximum concentration of cisplatin measured in the perfusate was 15 times higher than in plasma. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that aggressive cytoreduction combined with hyperthermic intra-operative intraperitoneal cisplatin was feasible in a small group of heavily pre-treated ovarian cancer patients with extensive tumour bulk with acceptable morbidity and toxicity. Further studies are required in larger groups of patients to further establish the feasibility of this intensified treatment strategy. We stress that OVHIPEC is not a treatment modality on its own for advanced ovarian cancer. The effectiveness of OVHIPEC is likely to be dependent on the effectiveness of post-operative adjuvant chemotherapeutic regimens.

Intraperitoneal cisplatin with regional hyperthermia in advanced ovarian cancer: pharmacokinetics and cisplatin-DNA adduct formation in patients and ovarian cancer cell lines.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of hyperthermia on cisplatin pharmacokinetics and DNA adduct formation. The latter was investigated both in tumour cell lines in vitro and in tumour cells and buccal cells from cancer patients. The patients had advanced ovarian carcinoma and were entered into a phase I study for cytoreductive surgery followed by hyperthermia in combination with intraperitoneal cisplatin administration. The cisplatin-DNA modifications in vivo and in vitro were studied by an immunocytochemical method with the polyclonal antiserum NKI-A59. The patient samples for pharmacokinetic determinations were analysed by flameless atomic absorption spectrometry. In vitro, the combination of hyperthermia and cisplatin enhanced cell killing compared with either treatment alone, such that the cisplatin-resistant ovarian cell line A2780/DDP became almost as sensitive as the parent A2780 cell line (resistance factor reduced from 30 to 2 at the IC50). In addition, increased cisplatin-DNA adducts were observed in the resistant cell line after the combined treatment compared with cisplatin alone. A good correlation was found between nuclear staining density and surviving fraction for all groups, indicating that the DNA adducts generated are an important determinant of toxicity and that the mechanism by which hyperthermia enhances kill is by increasing adduct levels. In the patients, the ratio of drug concentration in the peritoneal perfusate compared with that in plasma was found to be approximately 15, indicating a favourable pharmacokinetic ratio. Cisplatin-DNA adduct formation in tumour cells from patients was higher than in buccal cells, reflecting this higher drug exposure, i.e. local plus systemic versus systemic only. In addition, the tumour cells but not buccal cells were exposed to hyperthermia. The higher number of tumour adducts also suggests that a favourable therapeutic ratio could be achieved. Platinum-DNA adduct formation was found to decrease with distance from the surface of the tumour nodules. However, at a distance of 3-5 mm, the nuclear staining density levels were still measurable and higher than in buccal cells. In conclusion, the combined pharmacokinetic and adduct data in patients support the advantages of the intraperitoneal route for drug administration, and the addition of heat.