Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Secondary cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for recurrent colorectal peritoneal metastases.
Cashin, Peter Harald; Asplund, Dan; Bexe Lindskog, Elinor; Ghanipour, Lana; Syk, Ingvar; Graf, Wilhelm; Nilsson, Per J; Jansson Palmer, Gabriella.
Afiliação
  • Cashin PH; Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Asplund D; Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Dept of Surgery, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  • Bexe Lindskog E; Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  • Ghanipour L; Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Dept of Surgery, Gothenburg, Sweden.
  • Syk I; Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Graf W; Skåne's University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
  • Nilsson PJ; Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Jansson Palmer G; Karolinska University Hospital & Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Surg Open Sci ; 20: 45-50, 2024 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38911055
ABSTRACT

Background:

Secondary treatment of recurrent colorectal peritoneal metastases after previous cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is poorly investigated.

Objectives:

To evaluate the overall survival outcome of secondary (repeat) CRS + HIPEC compared to palliative treatment in recurrent peritoneal disease.

Methods:

Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases treated with an index CRS + HIPEC and subsequently having recurrent peritoneal disease were identified from the prospective Swedish national HIPEC registry. Patients were divided into interventional group (secondary CRS + HIPEC) or palliative group. Multivariable logistic regression, propensity-score matching, and survival outcomes were calculated.

Results:

Among 575 patients who underwent complete CRS between 2010 and 2021, 208 (36 %) were diagnosed with a subsequent recurrent peritoneal disease. Forty-two patients (20 %) were offered secondary CRS + HIPEC. Propensity-score matching of secondary interventional cases with palliative cases succeeded in 88 % (n = 37) in which female sex, lower peritoneal cancer index at index surgery, longer disease-free interval, and absence of extra-peritoneal metastases were identified as the most relevant matching covariates. Median OS from date of recurrence was 38 months (95%CI 30-58) in the interventional group and 19 months (95%CI 15-24) in the palliative group (HR 0.35 95%CI 0.20-0.63, p = 0.0004). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the results. As reference, the median OS from index CRS + HIPEC in the whole colorectal registry (n = 575) was 41 months (95%CI 38-45).

Conclusion:

After matching for relevant factors, the hazard ratio for death was significantly reduced in patients who were offered a secondary CRS + HIPEC procedure for recurrent peritoneal disease. Selection bias is inherent, but survival outcomes were comparable to those achieved after the initial procedure.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article