Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) Applied to Platinum-Resistant Recurrence of Ovarian Tumor: A Single-Institution Experience (ID: PARROT Trial).

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in platinum-resistant recurrence of ovarian cancer and peritoneal carcinomatosis, while our secondary endpoint was to establish any changes in quality of life estimated via the EORTC QLQ-30 and QLQ-OV28 questionnaires. METHODS: In this monocentric, single-arm, phase II trial, women were prospectively recruited and every 28-42 days underwent courses of PIPAC with doxorubicin 2.1 mg/m2 followed by cisplatin 10.5 mg/m2 via sequential laparoscopy. RESULTS: Overall, 98 PIPAC procedures were performed on 43 women from January 2016 to January 2020; three procedures were aborted due to extensive intra-abdominal adhesions. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was reached in 82% of women. Three cycles of PIPAC were completed in 18 women (45%), and 13 (32.5%) and 9 (22.5%) patients were subjected to one and two cycles, respectively. During two PIPAC procedures, patients experienced an intraoperative intestinal perforation. There were no treatment-related deaths. Nineteen patients showed no response according to the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) and 8 patients showed minor response according to the PRGS. Median time from ovarian cancer relapse to disease progression was 12 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.483-17.517), while the median overall survival was 27 months (95% CI 20.337-33.663). The EORTC QLQ-28 and EORTC QLQ-30 scores did not worsen during therapy. CONCLUSIONS: PIPAC seems a feasible approach for the treatment of this subset of patients, without any impact on their quality of life. Since this study had a small sample size and a single-center design, future research is mandatory, such as its application in addition to systemic chemotherapy.

Is Systemic Chemotherapy Useful in Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) for Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases? A Propensity-Score Analysis.

PURPOSE: Multimodal treatment of colorectal (CRC) peritoneal metastases (PM) includes systemic chemotherapy (SC) and surgical cytoreduction (CRS), eventually with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), in select patients. Considering lack of clear guidelines, this study was designed to analyze the role of chemotherapy and its timing in patients treated with CRS-HIPEC. METHODS: Data from 13 Italian centers with PM expertise were collected by a collaborative group of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO). Clinicopathological variables, SC use, and timing of administration were correlated with overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local (peritoneal) DFS (LDFS) after propensity-score (PS) weighting to reduce confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 367 patients treated with CRS-HIPEC were included in the propensity-score weighting. Of the total patients, 19.9% did not receive chemotherapy within 6 months of surgery, 32.4% received chemotherapy before surgery (pregroup), 28.9% after (post), and 18.8% received both pre- and post-CRS-HIPEC treatment (peri). SC was preferentially administered to younger (p = 0.02) and node-positive (p = 0.010) patients. Preoperative SC is associated with increased rate of major complications (26.9 vs. 11.3%, p = 0.0009). After PS weighting, there were no differences in OS, DFS, or LDFS (p = 0.56, 0.50, and 0.17) between chemotherapy-treated and untreated patients. Considering SC timing, the post CRS-HIPEC group had a longer DFS and LDFS than the pre-group (median DFS 15.4 vs. 9.8 m, p = 0.003; median LDFS 26.3 vs. 15.8 m, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CRC-PM treated with CRS-HIPEC, systemic chemotherapy was not associated with overall survival benefit. The adjuvant schedule was related to prolonged disease-free intervals. Additional, randomized studies are required to clarify the role and timing of systemic chemotherapy in this patient subset.

Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastases: a single center outline and comparison of different surgical and intraperitoneal treatments.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis (GCPM) has an unfavourable prognosis. Cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) are promising treatment options that have been shown to improve survival. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of different treatments such as systemic chemotherapy, systemic chemotherapy + PIPAC, and CRS + HIPEC in patients with GCPM. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This single-centre retrospective study included 82 patients with GCPM treated between January 2016 and June 2021. After first-line chemotherapy, depending on disease response and burden, the patients were divided into three treatment groups: chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy + PIPAC, and CRS + HIPEC. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from diagnosis, which was compared among the treatment groups. RESULTS: Thirty-seven (45.1%) patients were administered systemic chemotherapy alone, 25 (30.4%) received chemotherapy + PIPAC, and 20 (24.4%) underwent CRS + HIPEC. The CRS + HIPEC group had better OS (median 24 months) than the PIPAC group (15 months, p = 0.01) and chemotherapy group (5 months, p = 0.0001). Following CRS + HIPEC, the postoperative grade 3-4 complication rate was 25%, and no postoperative in-hospital deaths occurred. The median disease-free survival (DFS) was 12 months. Multivariate analysis identified peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) > 7 as an independent predictor of worse DFS. No independent predictors of OS were identified. CONCLUSION: Among patients with GCPM, we identified a highly selected population with oligometastatic disease. In this group, CRS + HIPEC provided a significant survival advantage with an acceptable major complication rate compared with other available therapies (systemic chemotherapy alone or in combination with PIPAC).

Microsatellite and RAS/RAF Mutational Status as Prognostic Factors in Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC).

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) leads to prolonged survival for selected patients with colorectal (CRC) peritoneal metastases (PM). This study aimed to analyze the prognostic role of micro-satellite (MS) status and RAS/RAF mutations for patients treated with CRS. METHODS: Data were collected from 13 Italian centers with PM expertise within a collaborative group of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology. Clinical and pathologic variables and KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mutational and MS status were correlated with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: The study enrolled 437 patients treated with CRS-HIPEC. The median OS was 42.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 33.4-51.2 months], and the median DFS was 13.6 months (95% CI, 12.3-14.9 months). The local (peritoneal) DFS was 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.4-24.6 months). In addition to the known clinical factors, KRAS mutations (p = 0.005), BRAF mutations (p = 0.01), and MS status (p = 0.04) were related to survival. The KRAS- and BRAF-mutated patients had a shorter survival than the wild-type (WT) patients (5-year OS, 29.4% and 26.8% vs 51.5%, respectively). The patients with micro-satellite instability (MSI) had a longer survival than the patients with micro-satellite stability (MSS) (5-year OS, 58.3% vs 36.7%). The MSI/WT patients had the best prognosis. The MSS/WT and MSI/mutated patients had similar survivals, whereas the MSS/mutated patients showed the worst prognosis (5-year OS, 70.6%, 48.1%, 23.4%; p = 0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, OS was related to the Peritoneal Cancer Index [hazard ratio (HR), 1.05 per point], completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score (HR, 2.8), N status (HR, 1.6), signet-ring (HR, 2.4), MSI/WT (HR, 0.5), and MSS/WT-MSI/mutation (HR, 0.4). Similar results were obtained for DFS. CONCLUSION: For patients affected by CRC-PM who are eligible for CRS, clinical and pathologic criteria need to be integrated with molecular features (KRAS/BRAF mutation). Micro-satellite status should be strongly considered because MSI confers a survival advantage over MSS, even for mutated patients.

Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer with Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases: Multicenter Study of 'Italian Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Oncoteam-S.I.C.O.'

BACKGROUND: The development of multimodality treatment, including cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), has led to promising results in selected patients with peritoneal disease of gastric origin. The aim of this study was to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of CRS/HIPEC in the treatment of synchronous peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer. METHODS: The Italian Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Oncoteam-S.I.C.O. retrospective registry included patients with synchronous peritoneal malignancy from gastric cancer submitted to gastrectomy with CRS and HIPEC between 2005 and 2018 from 11 high-volume, specialized centers. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients with a median age of 58 years (range 26-75) were enrolled. The median overall survival (OS) time for the whole group of patients was 20.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.8-28.5] and the median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 7.3 months (95% CI 4-10.6). The completeness of cytoreduction score (CCS) of 0 and Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) score of ≤ 6 groups showed a significantly better long-term survival (median OS 40.7 and 44.3 months, respectively) compared with the incomplete resected groups (median OS 10.7 months, p = 0.003) and PCI score of > 6 group (median OS 13.4 months, p = 0.005). A significant difference was observed in the survival rate according to neoadjuvant treatment (untreated patients: 10.7 months, 95% CI 5.1-16.2; treated patients: 35.3 months, 95% CI 2.8-67.8; p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: In referral centers, CRS and HIPEC after neoadjuvant treatment significantly improved survival in selected patients. Patients with a PCI score ≤ 6, complete cytoreduction, negative nodal involvements, and negative cytology had encouraging results, showing a clinically meaningful survival.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in interval debulking surgery for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A single-center, real-life experience.

BACKGROUND: An improvement in survival without increasing perioperative morbidity in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer treated with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after interval debulking surgery (IDS) has been recently demonstrated in a randomized controlled trial. This study was aimed at assessing the feasibility and perioperative outcomes of the use of HIPEC after IDS at a referral cancer center. METHODS: Over the study period, 149 IDSs were performed. Patients who had at least International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage III disease, with <2.5 mm of residual disease (RD) at the end of surgery and were not participating in clinical trials received HIPEC. Moreover, specific exclusion criteria were considered. These patients were compared with 51 patients with similar clinical characteristics at the same institution and within the same timeframe who did not receive HIPEC. RESULTS: No differences in patient or disease characteristics with the exception of the type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = .002) were found between the 2 groups. As for surgical characteristics, significant differences were found in RD after IDS (P = .007) and in the duration of surgery (P < .001), whereas the bowel resection and diversion rates (P = .583 and P = .213, respectively) and the postoperative intensive care unit and hospital stays (P = .567 and P = .727, respectively) were comparable. The times to start adjuvant chemotherapy were also similar (P = .998). Equally, the rates of any grade of both intraoperative complications (P = .189) and early postoperative complications (P = .238) were superimposable. CONCLUSIONS: In the authors' experience, the addition of HIPEC to IDS is feasible in 35% for the population. This value might increase with changes in the inclusion/exclusion criteria. HIPEC does not increase perioperative complications and does not affect a patient's recovery or time to start adjuvant chemotherapy. HIPEC should be offered to select patients listed for IDS.

External validation of a 'response score' after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma with complete clinical response.

OBJECTIVES: The chemotherapy response score (CRS) has been developed for measuring response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma. This study aimed to validate the ability of this three-tier scoring system of pathologic response on omental specimens to determine prognosis in a subgroups of patients who had clinical complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a retrospective study, conducted in women receiving interval debulking surgery at the Division of Gynecologic Oncology, between December 2007 and April 2017. Inclusion criteria were: high-grade serous ovarian cancer, FIGO stage IIIC/IV, platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (normalization in CA125 levels, disappearance of all target and non-target lesions according to RECIST 1.1). CRS was defined by a single pathology review and classified as previously reported: CRS1, no or minimal tumor response with fibroinflammatory changes limited to a few foci ranging from multifocal or diffuse regression-associated fibroinflammatory changes with viable tumor in sheets, or nodules to extensive regression-associated fibroinflammatory changes with multifocal residual tumor; CRS2, appreciable tumor response with viable tumor readily identifiable; and CRS3, complete absence of tumor or nodules with maximum size of 2 mm. CRS was analyzed according to clinical variables and survival. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients were eligible for analysis. The average age was 65 (range 36-85) years. A total of 91 (84.3%) patients had stage IIIC disease and 17 (15.7%) patients had stage IV disease. No statistically significant differences were observed in terms of age, FIGO stage, CA125 serum levels, type of chemotherapy schedules, and number of cycles between the three groups. Patients in the CRS3 group had a longer median progression-free survival (25.8 months) compared with CRS2 or CRS 1 (20.3 vs 17.4 months, respectively; p=0.001). Median overall survival was 68.9 months for CRS3, 35.0 months for CRS2, and 45.9 months for CRS1 (p=0.034). CONCLUSION: Complete or near-complete pathologic response assessed in the omental specimens of advanced epithelial ovarian carcinoma patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CRS3) is predictive of prolonged progression-free and overall survival. In particular, this is true in women with a clinical complete response.

Secondary Laparoscopic Cytoreduction in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: A Large, Single-Institution Experience.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To analyze the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic secondary cytoreductive surgery in a retrospective series of patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. PATIENTS: Between October 2010 and October 2016, 58 patients with recurrent ovarian cancer were selected for a retrospective analysis of data. INTERVENTIONS: All patients underwent a laparoscopic secondary cytoreduction with single or multiple procedures. RESULTS: The most frequent pattern of recurrence was peritoneal (48.3%); 6 patients (10.3%) experienced parenchymal disease (spleen, n = 5; liver, n = 1), and 24 patients (41.4%) had lymph node recurrence. Complete debulking was achieved in all patients. The median operative time was 204 minutes (range, 55-448 minutes), median estimated blood loss was 70 mL (range, 20-300 mL), and the median length of hospital stay was 4 days (range, 1-21 days). Four patients (6.8%) experienced intraoperative complications. Early postoperative complications were documented in 6 patients (10.3%), but only 1 G3 complication was noted. The median duration of follow-up since secondary cytoreduction was 24 months (range, 9-71 months). Twenty-one patients (36.2%) experienced a second disease relapse. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 28 months, and the 2-year PFS was 58.7%. Five patients died (8.6%); the 2-year overall survival was 90.7%. CONCLUSIONS: For selected patients, laparoscopy is a feasible and safe approach to optimal cytoreduction for patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

Hepatoceliac Lymph Node Involvement in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients: Prognostic Role and Clinical Considerations.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed too investigate the rate of hepatoceliac lymph node (HCLN) involvement, as well as its association with clinicopathologic features, together with morbidity of HCLN resection and the prognostic impact of metastatic HCLN status on patients with advanced ovarian cancer (OC) undergoing cytoreductive surgery. METHODS: All consecutive patients with stages 3c to 4 epithelial OC who underwent HCLN surgery from January 2010 to September 2016 were analyzed for surgical procedures, pathology, and oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period, 85 patients underwent HCLN resection. Absence of visible tumor at the end of surgery was documented for 73 of the patients (85.9%). The median number of HCLNs removed was 6 (range 1-18). Histopathologic evaluation was able to identify HCLN metastasis in 45 (52.9%) of the 85 cases. No difference in the rate of surgical morbidity according to pathologic status of HCLN was observed. As of December 2016, the median follow-up period was 36 months (range 6-54 months). Recurrence of disease was observed in 35 (41.2%) of the 85 cases. Relapse of disease most frequently occurred for the patients with metastatic HCLN involvement (65.7%) compared with the patients who had no HCLN involvement (34.3%) (p = 0.048). The median progression-free survival values were 16 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12-19 months) for the patients with metastatic HCLNs and 22 months (95% CI, 12-19 months) for the patients with no HCLN involvement (p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: The study confirmed that HCLN surgery is feasible with acceptable morbidities for patients with advanced OC. Metastatic HCLNs are a marker of disease severity associated with worst oncologic outcome.

Efficacy of Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) + HIPEC in Gastric Cancer with Peritoneal Metastasis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis is one of deadliest metastatic patterns of gastric cancer, being associated with a median overall survival (OS) of 4 months. Up to now, palliative systemic chemotherapy (pSC) has been the only recommended treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate a potential survival benefit after CRS + HIPEC compared to pSC. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines in March 2024. Manuscripts reporting patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer treated with CRS + HIPEC were included. A meta-analysis was performed, comparing the survival results between the CRS + HIPEC and pSC groups, and the primary outcome was the comparison in terms of OS. We performed random-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs). We assessed heterogeneity using the Q2 statistic. RESULTS: Out of the 24 papers included, 1369 patients underwent CRS + HIPEC, with a median OS range of 9.8-28.2 months; and 103 patients underwent pSC, with a median OS range of 4.9-8 months. CRS + HIPEC was associated with significantly increased survival compared to palliative systemic chemotherapy (-1.8954 (95% CI: -2.5761 to -1.2146; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CRS + HIPEC could provide survival advantages in gastric cancer peritoneal metastasis compared to pSC.

Benefit of a multimodal approach combining chemotherapy and surgery in oligometastatic gastric cancer: experience from a tertiary referral center.

Introduction: Gastric cancer (GC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide with limited therapeutic options. The aim of this study was to analyze the value of adding surgery to the first-line treatment in patients with oligometastatic GC (OGC). Methods: This retrospective study included patients with OGC who underwent induction chemotherapy followed by surgery of both primary tumor and synchronous metastasis between April 2012 and April 2022. Endpoints were overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were assessed with the Cox model. Results: Data from 39 patients were collected. All cases were referred to our multidisciplinary tumor board (MTB) to evaluate the feasibility of radical surgery. After a median follow-up of 33.6 months (mo.), median OS was 26.6 mo. (95% CI 23.8-29.4) and median RFS was 10.6 mo. (95% CI 6.3-14.8). Pathologic response according to the Mandard criteria (TRG 1-3, not reached versus 20.5 mo. for TRG 4-5; HR 0.23, p=0.019), PS ECOG ≤ 1 (26.7 mo. for PS ≤ 1 versus 11.2 mo. for PS >1; HR 0.3, p=0.022) and a low metastatic burden (26.7 mo. for single site versus 12.9 mo. for ≥2 sites; HR 0.34, p=0.039) were related to good prognosis. No major intraoperative complications nor surgery-related deaths occurred in our series. Discussion: A sequential strategy of preoperative chemotherapy and radical surgical excision of both primary tumor and metastases was demonstrated to significantly improve OS and RFS. Multidisciplinary evaluation is mandatory to identify patients who could benefit from this strategy.

How to Implement Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy into a National Health System Scenario: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of Costs and Economic Sustainability at a High-Volume Italian Hospital.

PIPAC is a new surgical procedure and a viable treatment option for PSM patients, due to promising therapeutic outcomes, minimal invasiveness, limited surgical morbidity, and systemic toxicity side effects. However, its implementation throughout hospitals is hard to obtain due to its fragile economical sustainability. A retrospective health economic analysis was conducted in order to evaluate the cost of hospitalization for patients undergoing PIPAC treatment at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, in Rome. The average cost of a PIPAC procedure was defined based on the cost of surgery (cost of surgical material, operating room, intraperitoneal chemotherapy), hospital stay, diagnostic examinations, and drugs used during the stay. A total of 493 PIPAC procedures were performed on 222 patients with peritoneal metastases or primary peritoneal cancer from 2017 to 2023. Since the mean remuneration for each PIPAC hospitalization is €5916 and the mean expenditure per hospitalization is €6538, this results in an operating profit per PIPAC hospitalization of -€622. The reimbursement of PIPAC treatment by the Italian National Health System currently only partially covers the hospital's costs. Development of specific codes and adequate reimbursement for PIPAC by recognizing this procedure as a proper treatment for peritoneal carcinomatosis is essential.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) implementation in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic IntraPEritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC): Insights from Italian peritoneal surface malignancies expert centers.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) is a complex procedure that involves extensive peritoneal and visceral resections followed by intraperitoneal chemotherapy. The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program aims to achieve faster recovery by maintaining pre-operative organ function and reducing the stress response following surgery. A recent publication introduced dedicated ERAS guidelines for CRS and HIPEC with the aim of extending the benefits to patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. METHODS: A survey was conducted among 21 Italian centers specializing in peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM) treatment to assess adherence to ERAS guidelines. The survey covered pre/intraoperative and postoperative ERAS items and explored attitudes towards ERAS implementation. RESULTS: All centers completed the survey, demonstrating expertise in PSM treatment. However, less than 30 % of centers adopted ERAS protocols despite being aware of dedicated guidelines. Preoperative optimization was common, with variations in bowel preparation methods and fasting periods. Intraoperative normothermia control was consistent, but fluid management practices varied. Postoperative practices, including routine abdominal drain placement and NGT management, varied greatly among centers. The majority of respondents expressed an intention to implement ERAS, citing concerns about feasibility and organizational challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The study concludes that Italian centers specialized in PSM treatment have limited adoption of ERAS protocols for CRS ± HIPEC, despite being aware of guidelines. The variability in practice highlights the need for standardized approaches and further evaluation of ERAS applicability in this complex surgical setting to optimize patient care.

Endoscopic plastic stenting for bile duct stones: stent changing on demand or every 3 months. A prospective comparison study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy and stone removal is the standard of care for choledocholithiasis, with a success rate of > 90%. For stones ≤ 25 mm diameter, mechanical lithotripsy, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, electrohydraulic lithotripsy, and laser lithotripsy can be used. In the case of failure, the next step is surgery. In elderly patients and in patients with an elevated surgical risk, stenting is the only treatment modality. In these cases the aim is to avoid the onset of acute obstructive cholangitis. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the best management of plastic stents in patients with biliary duct stones who were unfit for surgery and in whom previous endoscopic therapy had failed. METHODS: Patients who were high surgical risks and in whom stone clearance was not possible due to the number and sizes of stones were included. Between March 2008 and September 2010 all patients were treated with endoscopic plastic biliary stenting at four tertiary care referral centers in Italy. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: in Group A (n=39) plastic stents were changed every 3 months or sooner if symptoms appeared; in Group B plastic stents were changed on demand at the onset of symptoms, and ultrasonography and blood samples were performed every 3 months to check for signs of cholestasis and inflammation. The primary outcome was the rate of cholangitis. The secondary outcome was the rate of stone clearance after a period of stenting. RESULTS: A total of 78 patients were included in the study (43 M/35F; mean age 76 years). Acute cholangitis occurred in 3 patients from Group A and in 14 patients from Group B (P=0.03). Mortality related to cholangitis occurred in one patient from Group A and three patients from Group B (P=n.s.). The mean follow-up was 13.5 months (range 2-23). Stone clearance after long term stenting occurred in 24 patients from Group A (61.5 %) and in 21 patients from group B (53.8%) (P=n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with bile duct stones who were treated with biliary plastic stents, the best stent management to avoid cholangitis was stent changing at defined intervals (every 3 months in the current study). The data confirmed that plastic biliary stenting may decrease stone size with a high percentage of subsequent total stone clearance.

Rare recurrence of malignant mesothelioma spreading to the perineum.

Malignant mesothelioma is a rare aggressive tumour of the mesothelium with a propensity to spread locally and, rarely, to distant organs. The latest advances in its diagnosis and treatment have led to an increase in unusual disease presentations. Although a direct invasion of the perineum has been previously described in a men, a malignant mesothelioma spreading to the perianal region was never reported in a women. We presented a rare case of malignant mesothelioma recurrence spreading from the peritoneal cavity to the perineum through the rectovaginal space.

Descriptive review of current practices and prognostic factors in patients with ovarian cancer treated by pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): a multicentric, retrospective, cohort of 234 patients.

Introduction: Ovarian cancer (OC) is the primary cause of mortality in women diagnosed with gynecological cancer. Our study assessed pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) as treatment for peritoneal surface metastases (PSM) from recurrent or progressive OC and conducted survival analyses to identify prognostic factors. Material and methods: This retrospective cohort study, conducted across 18 international centers, analyzed the clinical practices of patients receiving palliative treatment for PSM from OC who underwent PIPAC. All patients were initially treated appropriately outside any clinical trial setting. Feasibility, safety, and morbidity were evaluated along with objective endpoints of oncological response. Multivariate analysis identified prognostic factors for OS and PFS. Results: From 2015-2020, 234 consecutive patients were studied, from which 192 patients were included and stratified by platinum sensitivity for analysis. Patients with early recurrence, within one postoperative month, were excluded. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups regarding platinum sensitivity (platinum sensitive (PS) and resistant (PR)), but chemotherapy frequency differed, as did PCI before PIPAC. Median PCI decreased in both groups after three cycles of PIPAC (PS 16 vs. 12, p < 0.001; PR 24 vs. 20, p = 0.009). Overall morbidity was 22%, with few severe complications (4-8%) or mortality (0-3%). Higher pathological response and longer OS (22 vs. 11m, p = 0.012) and PFS (12 vs. 7m, p = 0.033) were observed in the PS group. Multivariate analysis (OS/PFS) identified ascites (HR 4.02, p < 0.001/5.22, p < 0.001), positive cytology at first PIPAC (HR 3.91, p = 0.002/1.96, p = 0.035), and ≥ 3 PIPACs (HR 0.30, p = 0.002/0.48, p = 0.017) as independent prognostic factors of overall survival/progression-free survival. Conclusions: With low morbidity and mortality rates, PIPAC is a safe option for palliative treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. Promising results were observed after 3 PIPAC, which did improve the peritoneal burden. However, further research is needed to evaluate the potential role of PIPAC as an independent prognostic factor.

10 Years of Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel intraperitoneal drug delivery method of low-dose chemotherapy as a pressurized aerosol in patients affected by peritoneal cancer of primary or secondary origin. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with the aim of assessing the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of PIPAC. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using Medline and Web of Science databases from 1 January 2011, to inception, to 31 December 2021. Data were independently extracted by two authors. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality and risk of bias of studies. Meta-analysis was performed for pathological response, radiological response, PCI variation along treatment, and for patients undergoing three or more PIPAC. Pooled analyses were performed using the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation, and 95% CIs were calculated using Clopper-Pearson exact CIs in all instances. RESULTS: A total of 414 papers on PIPAC were identified, and 53 studies considering 4719 PIPAC procedure in 1990 patients were included for analysis. The non-access rate or inability to perform PIPAC pooled rate was 4% of the procedures performed. The overall proportion of patients who completed 3 or more cycles of PIPAC was 39%. Severe toxicities considering CTCAE 3-4 were 4% (0% to 38.5%). In total, 50 studies evaluated deaths within the first 30 postoperative days. In the included 1936 patients were registered 26 deaths (1.3%). The pooled analysis of all the studies reporting a pathological response was 68% (95% CI 0.61-0.73), with an acceptable heterogeneity (I2 28.41%, p = 0.09). In total, 10 papers reported data regarding the radiological response, with high heterogeneity and a weighted means of 15% (0% to 77.8%). PCI variation along PIPAC cycles were reported in 14 studies. PCI diminished, increased, or remained stable in eight, one and five studies, respectively, with high heterogeneity at pooled analysis. Regarding survival, there was high heterogeneity. The 12-month estimated survival from first PIPAC for colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, gynecological cancer and hepatobiliary/pancreatic cancer were, respectively, 53%, 25%, 59% and 37%. CONCLUSIONS: PIPAC may be a useful treatment option for selected patients with PM, with acceptable grade 3 and 4 toxicity and promising survival benefit. Meta-analysis showed high heterogeneity of data among up-to-date available studies. In a subset analysis per primary tumor origin, pathological tumor regression was documented in 68% of the studies with acceptable heterogeneity. Pathological regression seems, therefore, a reliable outcome for PIPAC activity and a potential surrogate endpoint of treatment response. We recommend uniform selection criteria for patients entering a PIPAC program and highlight the urgent need to standardize items for PIPAC reports and datasets.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Program for Patients with Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery with or without HIPEC: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program refers to a multimodal intervention to reduce the length of stay and postoperative complications; it has been effective in different kinds of major surgery including colorectal, gynaecologic and gastric cancer surgery. Its impact in terms of safety and efficacy in the treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies is still unclear. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the effect of ERAS after cytoreductive surgery with or without HIPEC for peritoneal metastases. MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Database were searched from January 2010 and December 2021. Single and double-cohort studies about ERAS application in the treatment of peritoneal cancer were considered. Outcomes included the postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative morbidity and mortality rates and the early readmission rate. Twenty-four studies involving 5131 patients were considered, 7 about ERAS in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) + HIPEC and 17 about cytoreductive alone; the case histories of two Italian referral centers in the management of peritoneal cancer were included. ERAS adoption reduced the LOS (-3.17, 95% CrI -4.68 to -1.69 in CRS + HIPEC and -1.65, 95% CrI -2.32 to -1.06 in CRS alone in the meta-analysis including 6 and 17 studies respectively. Non negligible lower postoperative morbidity was also in the meta-analysis including the case histories of two Italian referral centers. Implementation of an ERAS protocol may reduce LOS, postoperative complications after CRS with or without HIPEC compared to conventional recovery.