ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive peritoneal surgery (CRS) associated with hyperthermic peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has long been considered the standard treatment for colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). However, although efficacy of surgery has been demonstrated, evidence supporting HIPEC's role is less certain. METHOD: Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and morbidity were analysed retrospectively for fifty consecutively included patients treated for colorectal CPM with complete CRS and systemic chemotherapy only. RESULTS: Median peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 8 (range 1-24). 23 patients had liver or lung metastases (LLM). 22 patients had synchronous CPM. 27 complications occurred (12 Grade 1/2, 14 Grade 3, 1 Grade 4a, 0 Grade 5). Median follow-up was 62.5 months (95 %CI 45.4-81.3), median survival 32.4 months (21.5-41.7). Three- and 5-year OS were 45.5% (0.31-0.59) and 29.64% (0.17-0.44) respectively. Presence of LLMs associated with peritoneal carcinomatosis was significantly associated with poorer prognosis, with survival at 5 years of 13.95% (95 %CI 2.9-33.6) vs. 43.87% (22.2-63.7) when no metastases were present (P= 0.018). Median PFS was 9.5 months (95 %CI 6.2-11.1). CONCLUSION: With an equivalent PCI range and despite one of the highest rates of LLM in the literature, our survival data of CRS + systemic chemotherapy only compare well with results reported after additional HIPEC. Tolerance was better with acceptable morbidity without any mortality. Extra-hepatic metastasis (LLM) is a strong factor of poor prognosis. Awaiting the results of the randomized PRODIGE trial, these results indicate that CRS + systemic chemotherapy only is a robust hypothesis to treat colorectal CPM.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Peritoneal Neoplasms/secondary , Combined Modality Therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Peritoneal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Peritoneal Neoplasms/surgery , Survival AnalysisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative radiofrequency ablation (IRFA) is added to surgery to obtain hepatic clearance of liver metastases. Complications occurring in IRFA should differ from those associated with wedge or anatomic liver resection. METHODS: Patients with liver metastases treated with IRFA from 2000 to 2010 were retrospectively analysed. Postoperative outcomes are reported according to the Clavien-Dindo system of classification. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients underwent 173 procedures for 430 metastases. Of these, 97 procedures involved IRFA plus liver resection and 76 involved IRFA only. The median number of lesions treated by IRFA was two (range: 1-11). A total of 123 (71.1%) procedures were carried out in patients who had received preoperative chemotherapy. The mortality rate was 1.2%. Thirty (39.5%) IRFA-only patients and 45 (46.4%) IRFA-plus-resection patients presented complications. Immediate complications (n = 4) were associated with IRFA plus resection. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, previous abdominal surgery or hepatic resection, body mass index, number of IRFA procedures, portal pedicle clamping, total vascular exclusion and preoperative chemotherapy were not associated with a greater number of complications of Grade III or higher severity. Length of surgery >4 h [odds ratio (OR) 2.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-6.3; P < 0.05] and an associated contaminating procedure (OR 3.72, 95% CI 1.53-9.06; P < 0.005) led to a greater frequency of complications of Grade III or higher. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality and morbidity after IRFA, with or without resection, are low. Nevertheless, long interventions and concurrent bowel operations increase the risk for septic complications.
