4.4 Article

Cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer: The prognostic impact of baseline neutrophil-lymphocyte, platelet-lymphocyte and lymphocyte-monocyte ratios

期刊

SURGICAL ONCOLOGY-OXFORD
卷 35, 期 -, 页码 321-327

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2020.09.002

关键词

CRS; HIPEC; LMR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: In this retrospective analysis we sought to determine if the preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and lymphocyte-monocyte ratio (LMR) were predictive of both operability and survival in those patients presenting with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from colorectal cancer (CRC) who underwent cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC). Methods: Analysis included all patients admitted between 2009 and 2017 with PC from CRC who were treated with curative intent by CRS-Mitomycin C-HIPEC. Patients were assessed preand intra-operatively by the PC index (PCI) and by a completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score with calculation of Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors. Discrimination was made for NLR >3.5, PLR >168.8 and LMR >4.4. Results: We identified 98 CRC patients undergoing 105 CRS-HIPEC procedures. There were no associations detected between NLR/PLR/LMR and the rates of incomplete or abandoned CRS cases. Overall survival (OS) after CRS-HIPEC was worse with high versus low NLR (19.9 mths vs. 45.7 mths, respectively; P = 0.009) and also with low versus high LMR (27.1 mths vs. 53.2 mths, respectively; P = 0.01). On multivariate analysis, a low LMR (P = 0.008), the preoperative CT PCI value (P = 0.004), poor tumor differentiation (P = 0.023) and the preoperative CEA level (P < 0.001) were all independent variables associated with a worse OS after surgery. Conclusions: The baseline LMR value may have potential value as a selection tool for CRS-HIPEC in patients with CRC-related PC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据