4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Institutional Learning Curve of Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemoperfusion for Peritoneal Malignancies

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 22, 期 5, 页码 1673-1679

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-4111-x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion (HIPEC) is routinely used to treat certain peritoneal carcinomatoses (PC), but it can be associated with relatively high complication rates, prolonged hospital length of stay, and potential mortality. Our objective was to determine the learning curve (LC) of CRS/HIPEC in our high-volume institution. A total of 370 patients with PC from mucinous appendiceal neoplasms (MAN = 282), malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM = 60), and gastric cancer (GC = 24) were studied. Outcomes analyzed included incomplete cytoreduction (IC), severe morbidity (SM), 60-day mortality, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Risk-adjusted sequential probability ratio test (RA-SPRT) was employed to assess the LC of CRS/HIPEC for IC and SM using prespecified odds ratio (OR) boundaries derived from previously published data. Risk adjusted-cumulative average probability (RA-CAP) was used to analyze 1-year PFS and 2-year OS. Complete cytoreduction, severe morbidity, and 60-day mortality were 84.2, 30, and 1.9 % respectively. Higher simplified peritoneal cancer index was the major independent risk factor for IC, whereas high-grade histology, IC, and diagnosis of MPM and GC (compared with MAN) were predictors of SM after CRS/HIPEC (p < 0.05). RA-SPRT showed that approximately 180 cases are needed to achieve the lowest risk of IC and SM. Ninety cases were needed to achieve a steady 1-year PFS and 2-year OS in RA-CAP plots. The completeness of cytoreduction, morbidity, and mortality rates for CRS/HIPEC at our institution are comparable to previously reported data. Approximately 180 and 90 procedures are required to improve operative and oncologic outcomes respectively.

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

4.7
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