Two-stage cytoreductive surgery for ‘extensive’ pseudomyxoma peritonei: A legitimate alternative or salvage strategy?

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Ejso Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108593
{"title":"Two-stage cytoreductive surgery for ‘extensive’ pseudomyxoma peritonei: A legitimate alternative or salvage strategy?","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and aim</h3><p>Two-stage cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has been proposed as an alternative to one-stage surgery in patients who have ‘extensive’ pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) and/or are unfit for very extensive surgery, to reduce morbidity. We review current evidence on two-stage CRS focusing on patient selection, interval between procedures, extent of surgery, use of HIPEC, perioperative and oncological outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a narrative review. A literature search on PubMed and Embase was performed using keywords– ‘Two-stage cytoreductive surgery’, ‘pseudomyxoma peritonei’, ‘high-volume PMP’, ‘huge PMP’, ‘cytoreductive surgery’, ‘HIPEC’, ‘staged surgery’ and ‘extensive pseudomyxoma peritonei’.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Five studies reported outcomes in a total of 114 patients. The indications for two-stage CRS were: in two studies, patients undergoing an incomplete cytoreduction due to undue surgical risk were reevaluated for a second surgery during routine surveillance; severe comorbidities in one; extensive disease with PCI&gt;28 in another and in one, only HIPEC was performed as a second procedure due to intraoperative hemodynamic instability (the two-stage procedure was performed in interest of patient's safety). Major morbidity ranged from 0 to 37.5 % (first-stage) and 25%–38.9 % (second-stage). Short term follow-up demonstrated equivalent short-term oncological outcomes compared to historical data. Long term follow-up and quality-of-life data were not available.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The published studies showed different interpretations and applications of the two-stage CRS concept. The reported morbidity was similar to that after single-stage CRS for extensive PMP. Though short-term survival outcomes are acceptable, long-term follow-up is needed. Planned two-stage CRS should currently be reserved for highly selected clinical situations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11522,"journal":{"name":"Ejso","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ejso","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748798324006450","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aim

Two-stage cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has been proposed as an alternative to one-stage surgery in patients who have ‘extensive’ pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) and/or are unfit for very extensive surgery, to reduce morbidity. We review current evidence on two-stage CRS focusing on patient selection, interval between procedures, extent of surgery, use of HIPEC, perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Methods

This is a narrative review. A literature search on PubMed and Embase was performed using keywords– ‘Two-stage cytoreductive surgery’, ‘pseudomyxoma peritonei’, ‘high-volume PMP’, ‘huge PMP’, ‘cytoreductive surgery’, ‘HIPEC’, ‘staged surgery’ and ‘extensive pseudomyxoma peritonei’.

Results

Five studies reported outcomes in a total of 114 patients. The indications for two-stage CRS were: in two studies, patients undergoing an incomplete cytoreduction due to undue surgical risk were reevaluated for a second surgery during routine surveillance; severe comorbidities in one; extensive disease with PCI>28 in another and in one, only HIPEC was performed as a second procedure due to intraoperative hemodynamic instability (the two-stage procedure was performed in interest of patient's safety). Major morbidity ranged from 0 to 37.5 % (first-stage) and 25%–38.9 % (second-stage). Short term follow-up demonstrated equivalent short-term oncological outcomes compared to historical data. Long term follow-up and quality-of-life data were not available.

Conclusions

The published studies showed different interpretations and applications of the two-stage CRS concept. The reported morbidity was similar to that after single-stage CRS for extensive PMP. Though short-term survival outcomes are acceptable, long-term follow-up is needed. Planned two-stage CRS should currently be reserved for highly selected clinical situations.

两期细胞剥脱手术治疗 "广泛 "假性腹膜肌瘤:合法的替代方案还是挽救策略?
背景和目的:有人建议对患有 "广泛性 "假性腹膜肌瘤(PMP)和/或不适合进行大范围手术的患者采用两期细胞剥脱手术(CRS)替代一期手术,以降低发病率。我们回顾了两阶段CRS的现有证据,重点关注患者选择、手术间隔、手术范围、HIPEC的使用、围手术期和肿瘤学结果:这是一篇叙述性综述。在PubMed和Embase上进行了文献检索,关键词为 "两期细胞再生手术"、"腹膜假性肌瘤"、"高容量PMP"、"巨大PMP"、"细胞再生手术"、"HIPEC"、"分期手术 "和 "广泛腹膜假性肌瘤":结果:五项研究共报告了 114 名患者的治疗结果。两期CRS的适应症包括:在两项研究中,由于手术风险过大而接受不完全细胞减灭术的患者在常规监测期间被重新评估以进行第二次手术;在一项研究中,严重的合并症;在另一项研究中,PCI>28的广泛性疾病;在一项研究中,由于术中血流动力学不稳定,仅进行了HIPEC作为第二次手术(为了患者的安全,进行了两期手术)。主要发病率从 0% 到 37.5%(第一阶段)不等,25% 到 38.9%(第二阶段)不等。短期随访结果显示,短期肿瘤治疗效果与历史数据相当。长期随访和生活质量数据不详:已发表的研究显示了对两期CRS概念的不同解释和应用。报告的发病率与单阶段 CRS 治疗广泛 PMP 后的发病率相似。虽然短期生存结果可以接受,但仍需要长期随访。计划中的两阶段 CRS 目前应保留给经过严格筛选的临床情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ejso
Ejso 医学-外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1148
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: JSO - European Journal of Surgical Oncology ("the Journal of Cancer Surgery") is the Official Journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and BASO ~ the Association for Cancer Surgery. The EJSO aims to advance surgical oncology research and practice through the publication of original research articles, review articles, editorials, debates and correspondence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信