4.6 Article

Extensive surgical history prior to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is associated with poor survival outcomes in patients with peritoneal mucinous carcinomatosis of appendiceal origin

Journal

EJSO
Volume 41, Issue 7, Pages 881-885

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.02.016

Keywords

Cytoreductive surgery/HIPEC; Mucinous appendiceal neoplasms; Survival

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Patients with PMCA commonly undergo surgery before CRS/HIPEC. We evaluated the role of extensive surgical treatment before CRS/HIPEC in terms of overall survival (OS). Methods: 105 patients with PMCA who underwent a CRS/HIPEC procedure were identified from a prospective database. Patients were divided into two groups based on Prior Surgery Score (PSS): PSS <= 1 limited surgery group (LSG), PSS >1 extensive surgery group (ESG). Survival of lymph node (LN) negative and positive patients was analyzed separately. Results: 40 patients were in LSG and 65 in ESG. Mean time from diagnosis to CRS/HIPEC was 6 and 17 months for LSG and ESG, respectively (p = 0.004). Groups were well balanced in peritoneal cancer index, complete cytoreduction rate, and LN status One, 3, and 5-year OS among LN negative patients was 95, 83, and 75% for the LSG (n = 22) group and 87, 55, and 32% for the ESG (n = 35), group respectively (p = 0.026). One, 3, and 5-year OS among LN positive patients was 69, 50, and 17% for the LSG (n = 18) group and 80, 21, and 14% for the ESG (n = 30), group respectively (p = 0.613). For all patients 1, 3, and 5-year OS was 84, 65, and 54% for the LSG (n = 40) group and 86, 43, and 26% for the ESG (n = 65) group, respectively (p = 0.029). Conclusion: Extensive surgical treatment before CRS/HIPEC is associated with delay of CRS/HIPEC and poorer OS overall, especially among LN negative patients. We recommend early referral of PMCA patients to a peritoneal surface malignancy center. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available