4.7 Article

Prospective Quality of Life Study for Colorectal Cancer Patients with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy

Journal

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 9, Pages 2905-2913

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5203-6

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is becoming accepted treatment for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from colorectal cancer. Quality of life (QoL) for patients after surgery is still a concern amongst physicians despite studies that show that QoL recovers after surgery. We conducted a prospective QoL study on patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC and attempt to identify factors that affect the QoL. Patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC for PC from colorectal cancer from March 2012 to January 2015 were included. The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the colorectal module (QLQ-CR29) were administered prior to surgery and thereafter at 3, 6, and 12 months. Twenty-three patients underwent 25 procedures. Median disease-free survival was 12.9 months [95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.5-19.3]. Physical and role functioning scores decreased at 3 months but returned to baseline at 6 months. There were significant increases in emotional and social functioning scores at 6-12 months and improvements in all symptoms scales at 6-12 months, especially the fatigue and appetite scores. A higher PCI score, longer duration of surgery, the presence of a stoma, and recurrence within 3 months were associated with a poorer QoL. QoL after CRS and HIPEC improved or returned to baseline in all categories by 6-12 months after surgery. Patient selection is important not only for improved survival but also for improved QoL.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available