Dataset Information

The attitude and practice of general surgeons toward cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: A cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) mandate well-established HIPEC and oncology centers, which are not available in many medical institutions. This study assessed the knowledge, attitude, and practice toward CRS and HIPEC of general surgeons in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Patients and methods

General surgeons (n = 266) from nine hospitals who treat patients with gastrointestinal cancer were surveyed. The responses of surgeons who work in HIPEC and academic centers (Group A) and surgeons working in tertiary and secondary hospitals (Group B) were compared. The survey response rate was 48.1% (128/266).

Results

Surgeons in group B treated significantly more patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis per year than surgeons in group A (P = .001). Group B reported having a HIPEC specialist at their hospital, and 71.4% reported that the nearest HIPEC center was within 30 miles, compared to 4.5% of respondents in group A (P = .001). Lack of access to a HIPEC specialist was reported by 15.5% of surgeons in group B and 0% of surgeons in group A (P = .006). HIPEC as a possible therapeutic option for appendiceal cancer was cited by 60.7% of surgeons in group B compared to 84.1% of surgeons in group A (P = .007) and as a therapeutic option for ovarian cancer by 52.4% of surgeons in group B and 81.8% of surgeons in group A (P = .001).

Conclusion

New strategies are needed to improve the knowledge and implementation of the referral system for HIPEC among general surgeons. Our study was limited by a low response rate.

SUBMITTER: Bin Traiki TA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8187938 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceStudies on the prognostic role of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) are currently not available.ObjectivesTo evaluate outcomes after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and HIPEC compared with CRS alone in patients with PMP.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study analyzed data from the Peritoneal Surface Oncology Group International (PSOGI) registry, including 1924 patients with histologically confirmed PMP due to an appendiceal mucinous neoplasm. Eligible patients were treated with CRS with or without HIPEC from February 1, 1993, to December 31, 2017, and had complete information on the main prognostic factors and intraperitoneal treatments. Inverse probability treatment weights based on the propensity score for HIPEC treatment containing the main prognostic factors were applied to all models to balance comparisons between the CRS-HIPEC vs CRS-alone groups in the entire series and in the following subsets: optimal cytoreduction, suboptimal cytoreduction, high- and low-grade histologic findings, and different HIPEC drug regimens. Data were analyzed from March 1 to June 1, 2018.InterventionsHIPEC including oxaliplatin plus combined fluorouracil-leucovorin, cisplatin plus mitomycin, mitomycin, and other oxaliplatin-based regimens.Main outcomes and measuresOverall survival, severe morbidity (determined using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology for Adverse Events, version 3.0), return to operating room, and 30- and 90-day mortality. Differences in overall survival were compared using weighted Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional hazards multivariable models. A sensitivity analysis was based on the E-value from the results of the main Cox proportional hazards model. Differences in surgical outcomes were compared using weighted multivariable logistic models.ResultsOf the 1924 patients included in the analysis (997 [51.8%] men; median age, 56 [interquartile range extremes (IQRE), 45-65] years), 376 were in the CRS-alone group and 1548 in the CRS-HIPEC group. Patients with CRS alone were older (median age, 60 [IQRE, 48-70] vs 54 [IQRE, 44-63] years), had less lymph node involvement (14 [3.7%] vs 119 [7.7%]), received more preoperative systemic chemotherapy (198 [52.7%] vs 529 [34.2%]), and had higher proportions of high-grade disease (179 [47.6%] vs 492 [31.8%]) and suboptimal cytoreduction residual disease (grade 3, 175 [46.5%] vs 117 [7.6%]). HIPEC was not associated with a higher risk of worse surgical outcomes except with mitomycin, with higher odds of morbidity (1.99; 95% CI, 1.25-3.19; P = .004). HIPEC was associated with a significantly better overall survival in all subsets (adjusted hazard ratios [HRs], 0.60-0.68, with 95% CIs not crossing 1.00). The weighted 5-year overall survival was 57.8% (95% CI, 50.8%-65.7%) vs 46.2% (95% CI, 40.3%-52.8%) for CRS-HIPEC and CRS alone, respectively (weighted HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.83; P < .001; E-value, 2.03). Such prognostic advantage was associated with oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil-leucovorin (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19-0.93; P = .03) and cisplatin plus mitomycin (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.78; P = .001) schedules.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, HIPEC was associated with better overall survival when performed after CRS in PMP, generally without adverse effects on surgical outcomes.

Project description:Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) has an emerging role in the treatment of peritoneal malignancies. The CRS-HIPEC approach has known treatment-related toxicities. This study sought to determine the predictors of major postoperative complications after CRS-HIPEC in a high-volume center.From a single-institution database, this study investigated complications experienced by patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC. Multiple preoperative and operative factors were analyzed for their ability to predict 60-day Clavien grade 3 and greater (major) complications by logistic regression. A predictive model was created from preoperative factors using multivariate logistic regression. The model was tested by Akaike's information criterion, the Hosmer and Lemeshow Goodness-of-Fit Test, the receiver operating characteristic, and the Youden Index.The study evaluated 247 patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC. The primary tumor site was the appendix in 166 cases (67.2 %), the colorectal area in 51 cases (20.6 %), the peritoneum (mesothelioma) in 22 cases (8.9 %), the ovary in 5 cases (2 %), and the small bowel in 3 cases (1.2 %). The median peritoneal cancer index was 14 (range 0-29), and 235 patients (95.1 %) had a complete (CC-0/1) cytoreduction. Major complications occurred for 41 patients (16.6 %), classified as grade 3 in 33 cases (13.4 %), grade 4 in 5 cases (2 %), and grade 5 (deaths) in 3 cases (1.2 %). The factors predictive of major complications in the multivariate analysis were a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score higher than 0 [odds ratio (OR), 2.505; p = 0.035], presence of preoperative symptoms (OR 1.951; p = 0.064), and prior resection status [no resection or prior CRS-HIPEC (OR 2.087) vs. prior resection without CRS-HIPEC (OR 3.209); p = 0.046]. These variables were used to create a tool predictive of postoperative complications.Presence of symptoms, CCI, and prior resection status predict major complications and define a low-risk population after CRS-HIPEC.