RESUMEN

Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the "The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the "ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference" were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinumbased chemotherapy and obtained complete response/partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie ­ AGO" score or "I-model" positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA 1/2 +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.

Introducción y objetivo: el abordaje de pacientes con cáncer epitelial de ovario (CEO) de alto grado avanzado o metastásico ha ido evolucionando a través del tiempo con el advenimiento de nuevas terapias y estrategias multimodales. El objetivo de este consenso de expertos es generar recomendaciones nacionales para el perfilamiento y manejo del CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, definido como estadios III y IV de la clasificación de la Federación Internacional de Ginecología y Obstetricia (FIGO) al momento del diagnóstico, a partir de la revisión de la literatura que incluyó guías de práctica clínica (GPC) internacionales basadas en la evidencia. Materiales y métodos: once panelistas (oncólogos y ginecólogos oncólogos) respondieron ocho preguntas sobre el perfilamiento y manejo del carcinoma epitelial de ovario avanzado o metastásico. Los panelistas fueron escogidos por su perfil académico e influencia en instituciones de salud nacionales. Para el desarrollo del consenso se utilizaron los lineamientos de la "Conferencia de consenso de procedimientos operativos estandarizados de ESMO". Se definió que el nivel de acuerdo para aceptar una recomendación debía ser ≥ 80%. El documento fue revisado por pares. Resultados: Se hacen 8 recomendaciones generales, presentadas en cinco dominios; algunas de ellas se subdividen en recomendaciones específicas. Tratamiento inicial Recomendación 1 1.1. Como terapia inicial de elección para pacientes con CEO de alto grado o metastásico se sugiere la cirugía de citorreducción primaria (Cpr) completa que, idealmente, debe realizarse en centros con experiencia, seguida de terapia adyuvante. 1.2. Se sugiere quimioterapia neoadyuvante seguida de cirugía de citorreducción de intervalo (Cint) en quienes sea improbable alcanzar una citorreducción completa en la Cpr, bien sea por enfermedad metastásica no resecable o que presenten criterios de irresecabilidad (imagenológicos, laparoscópicos o por laparotomía) que hayan sido definidos por un ginecólogo oncólogo. También en pacientes con un pobre estado funcional y comorbilidades de acuerdo con el criterio del equipo multidisciplinario (oncología clínica, ginecología oncológica, radiología, etc.). Recomendación 2. En pacientes con CEO de alto grado, en estadio III localmente avanzado o metastásico, que recibieron quimioterapia neoadyuvante y alcanzaron respuesta completa o parcial (citorreducción con residuo tumoral < 2,5 mm), se podría evaluar el uso de la quimioterapia intraperitoneal hipertérmica (Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy - HIPEC) como alternativa a la quimioterapia IV adyuvante estándar basada en platinos durante la Cint, previa discusión en junta multidisciplinaria, en un centro de experiencia en este tipo de pacientes. Uso de pruebas genéticas Recomendación 3. Al momento del diagnóstico, se sugiere ofrecer testeo molecular genético a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico, independientemente de la historia familiar. Recomendación 4. Se sugiere ofrecer asesoramiento genético, por parte de personal calificado, a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico a quien se le ordene un testeo genético. Recomendación 5. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico se le realice panel germinal que incluya los genes de susceptibilidad al cáncer de mama 1/2 (BRCA 1/2) y los otros genes de susceptibilidad de acuerdo con los protocolos institucionales y la disponibilidad de paneles de testeo genético; si es negativo entonces se debería realizar testeo somático que incluya el estatus de deficiencia de la recombinación homóloga (homologous recombination deficiency - HRD), independientemente de la historia familiar. Terapia adyuvante Recomendación 6 6.1. Se sugiere que a toda paciente con CEO estadios III/IV avanzado o metastásico, con estatus de desempeño (performance score care - PSC) de 0-2 se le administre como tratamiento estándar quimioterapia intravenosa (IV) adyuvante dentro de las seis semanas posteriores a la Cpr. Se sugiere administrar paclitaxel/carboplatino. 6.2. Se sugiere utilizar quimioterapia estándar basada en platino más bevacizumab como adyuvancia en pacientes con enfermedad de alto riesgo (CEO estadios IV o III con citorreducción tumoral subóptima), continuando con bevacizumab como mantenimiento. No se recomienda el uso de bevacizumab como terapia de mantenimiento si no se incluyó en la primera línea de tratamiento. Se sugiere seguir los esquemas de los estudios Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (GOG-0218) e International Collaborative Ovarian Neoplasm (ICON7). 6.3. Se sugiere la quimioterapia combinada IV/intraperitoneal (IP) solo para pacientes seleccionadas, con una citorreducción óptima (lesiones residuales < 1 cm), en especial aquellas sin enfermedad residual (R0) y que sean evaluadas en junta multidisciplinaria. La quimioterapia combinada IV/IP no se considera como tratamiento estándar. 6.4. 6.4.1. Se sugiere utilizar inhibidores de poli(ADP-ribosa) polimerasa (PARP) tales como olaparib o niraparib como mantenimiento después de recibir una primera línea de quimioterapia en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron respuesta completa/respuesta parcial (RC/RP). 6.4.2. Se sugiere utilizar olaparib solo o en combinación con bevacizumab o niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 positivo que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.3. Se sugiere utilizar niraparib en pacientes con CEO estadio III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino y obtuvieron RC/RP. 6.4.4. Se sugiere utilizar bevacizumab u olaparib más bevacizumab en pacientes con CEO estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 negativo o desconocido (HRD positivo) que recibieron quimioterapia basada en platino más bevacizumab y obtuvieron RC/RP. Tratamiento de la recaída de la enfermedad Recomendación 7. Se sugiere la realización de la cirugía de citorreducción secundaria (Csec), seguida de quimioterapia, a pacientes seleccionadas con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en primera recaída, platino-sensibles (intervalo libre de platinos ≥ 6 meses), puntuación Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO) positiva o Integrate model (I-Model) positivo (< 4,7), y con una potencial resección a R0, en centros con acceso a soporte quirúrgico y posoperatorio óptimo. Nota: el intervalo libre de tratamiento con platinos y la puntuación AGO solo se han desarrollado como predictores positivos de resección completa y no para excluir a las pacientes de la cirugía. Recomendación 8 8.1. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída platino-sensibles se sugiere: Quimioterapia combinada basada en platino: carboplatino/doxorrubicina liposomal o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/ nab-paclitaxel o carboplatino/docetaxel o carboplatino/gemcitabina, por seis ciclos. Si no se tolera la terapia combinada, dar carboplatino o cisplatino solo. Quimioterapia combinada: carboplatino/gemcitabina o carboplatino/paclitaxel o carboplatino/doxorubicina liposomal, más bevacizumab, seguida de bevacizumab como mantenimiento (hasta progresión o toxicidad). 8.2. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída, platino-resistentes, se sugiere: Tratamiento secuencial con quimioterapia, preferiblemente con un agente único que no sea un platino (paclitaxel semanal o doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o docetaxel o etopósido oral o gemcitabina o trabectidina o topotecan). El paclitaxel semanal o la doxorrubicina liposomal pegilada o el topotecan pueden ser administrados con o sin bevacizumab. Existen otros agentes que se consideran potencialmente act ivos (capecitabina, ciclofosfamida, ifosfamida, irinotecán, oxaliplatino, pemetrexed, vinorelbina, ciclofosfamida), que se podrían recomendar para líneas posteriores. Las pacientes con receptores hormonales positivos que no toleran o no tienen respuesta a los regímenes citotóxicos pueden recibir terapia hormonal con tamoxifeno u otros agentes, incluidos los inhibidores de la aromatasa (anastrozol y letrozol) o acetato de leuprolide o acetato de megestrol. Pacientes con PSC ≥ 3 deberían ser consideradas solo para el mejor cuidado de soporte. 8.3. Terapia de mantenimiento con inhibidores PARP. Para pacientes con CEO de alto grado avanzado o metastásico en recaída estadios III/IV BRCA1/2 (positivo, negativo o desconocido), que hayan recibido dos o más líneas de quimioterapia basada en platino y hayan alcanzado RC/RP, se sugiere utilizar olaparib, niraparib o rucaparib. El niraparib podría ser útil en pacientes BRCA 1/2 +/-/desconocido, al igual que el rucaparib, sin embargo, este último no tiene aún aprobación del ente regulador en Colombia. Conclusiones: se espera que las recomendaciones emitidas en este consenso contribuyan a mejorar la atención clínica, el impacto oncológico y la calidad de vida de estas mujeres.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

resumen está disponible en el texto completo

ABSTRACT Introduction and objective: The approach to patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) has evolved over time with the advent of new therapies and multimodal strategies. The objective of this consensus of experts is to generate national recommendations for the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic high-grade OEC, defined as stages III and IV of the "The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification at the time of diagnosis to base on the literature review that included international evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Material and methods: Eleven panelists (oncologists and gynecological oncologists) answered 8 questions about the profiling and management of advanced or metastatic ovarian epithelial carcinoma. The panelists were chosen for their academic profile and influence in national health institutions. Guidelines from the "ESMO Standardized Operating Procedures Consensus Conference" were used to develop the consensus. It was agreed that the level of agreement to accept a recommendation should be ≥ 80%. The document was peer reviewed. Results: Eight general recommendations are made, which are presented into five domains. Some of these recommendations are subdivided into specific recommendations. Initial treatment Recommendation 1.1 Complete primary cytoreduction (PCS) surgery is suggested as the initial therapy of choice for patients with high-grade or metastatic EOC, which should ideally be carried out in centers with experience, followed by adjuvant therapy. 1.2 Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval cytoreduction surgery (ICS) is suggested in those who are unlikely to achieve a complete cytoreduction in PCS either due to unresectable metastatic disease or who present unresectability criteria (imaging, laparoscopic and/or by laparotomy) and that have been defined by a gynecological oncologist and patients with poor functional status and comorbidities according to the criteria of the multidisciplinary team (clinical oncology, gynecological oncology, radiology, etc.). Recommendation 2. In patients with high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), in stage III locally advanced or metastatic, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and achieved a complete or partial response (cytoreduction with tumor residue < 2.5 mm), the use of Hyperthermic IntraPeritoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) could be considered as an alternative to standard platinum-based adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery, after discussion in a multidisciplinary tumor board, at a center experienced in treating this type of patients. Use of genetic testing. Recommendation 3. It is suggested at the time of diagnosis to offer molecular genetic testing to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC regardless of family history. Recommendation 4. It is suggested to offer genetic counseling, by qualified personnel, to all patients with high-grade advanced or metastatic EOC who are ordered genetic testing. Recommendation 5. It is suggested that all patients with advanced or metastatic high-grade EOC undergo a germ panel that includes the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes 1/2 genes (BRCA 1/2) and the other susceptibility genes according to with institutional protocols and the availability of genetic testing panels; If it is negative, then somatic testing should be performed that includes the homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status, regardless of family history. Adjuvant Therapy Recommendation 6. 6.1. It is suggested that all patients with advanced stage III/IV EOC, with PSC of (0-2), got adjuvant intravenous chemotherapy as standard treatment within six weeks after Prc. It is suggested paclitaxel/carboplatin. Recommendation 6.2. It is suggested to use standard chemotherapy base on platinum plus Bevacizumab as adjuvant chemotherapy to patients with high-risk disease (EOC stage IV or stage III with suboptimal tumor cytoreduction), following by bevacizumab as maintenance. The use of bevacizumab as maintenance therapy is not recommended if bevacizumab was not included in the first line of treatment. We suggested the dose used in GOG-0218 and ICON7 trials. Recommendation 6.3 It is suggested combined intravenous/intraperitoneal chemotherapy only for selected patients, with optimal cytoreduction (residual lesions < 1 cm), especially those without residual disease (R0) and who are evaluated in a multidisciplinary meeting. It is not considered standard treatment. Recommendation 6.4. 6.4.1 It is suggested to use Poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors such as olaparib or niraparib as maintenance after receiving first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage III/ IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and obtained complete response/ partial response (CR/PR), 6.4.2 It is suggested to use olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab or niraparib in patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 positive EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and achieved CR/PR. 6.4.3 It is suggested to use niraparibin patients with stage III/IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown EOC who received platinum-based chemotherapy and achieved CR/PR, 6.4.4 It is suggested to use bevacizumab or olaparib plus bevacizumab in patients with EOC stage III/ IV BRCA1/2 negative or unknown (HRD positive) who received platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab and obtained CR/PR. Treatment of disease relapse Recommendation 7. Secondary cytoreductive surgery followed by chemotherapy is suggested for selected patients with high-grade advanced EOC in first relapse, platinum-sensitive (platinum-free interval ≥ 6 months), positive "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie - AGO" score or "I-model" positive (< 4.7) with a potential resection to R0 in centers with access to optimal surgical and postoperative support. Note: Platinum-free interval and AGO score have only been developed as positive predictors of complete resection and not to exclude patients from surgery. Recommendation 8. 8.1 For patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC platinum-sensitive, the following is suggested: • Platinum-based combination chemotherapy: carboplatin/liposomal doxorubicin or carboplatin/ paclitaxel or carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel or carboplatin/docetaxel or carboplatin/gemcitabine) for six cycles. If combination therapy is not tolerated, give carboplatin or cisplatin alone. • Combination chemotherapy (carboplatin/ gemcitabine or carboplatin/paclitaxel or carboplatin/doxorubicin liposomal) plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab as maintenance (until progression or toxicity). Recommendation 8.2 For patients with relapsed advanced high-grade EOC platinum-resistant, it is suggested: • Sequential treatment with chemotherapy, preferably with a non-platinum single agent (weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or docetaxel or oral etoposide or gemcitabine or trabectidine or, topotecan). Weekly paclitaxel or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan could be administrate with or without bevacizumab. • Other agents are considered potentially active (capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, pemetrexed, vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide) could be recommended for later lines. • Hormone receptor-positive patients who do not tolerate or have no response to cytotoxic regimens may receive hormone therapy with tamoxifen or other agents, including aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) or leuprolide acetate, or megestrol acetate. • Patients with a performance score ≥ 3 should be considered only for best supportive care. Recommendation 8.3 Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors: It is suggested in patients with relapse advanced high-grade EOC stage III/IV BRCA1/2 (positive, negative or unknown) who have received two or more lines of platinum-based chemotherapy and have achieved CR/PR, use olaparib, niraparib or rucaparib. Niraparib could be useful in BRCA ½ +/-/unknown patients, as rucaparib, however, the latter does not yet have approval from the regulatory office in Colombia. Conclusions: It is expected that the recommendations issued in this consensus will contribute to improving clinical care, oncological impact, and quality of life of these women.

RESUMEN

Background: Mature teratomas belong to the group of germ line ovarian tumors; they generally have benign behavior. Malignant transformation occurs in 0.2% to 1% of tumors. The objective is to show the results of peritonectomy with HIPEC in the treatment of a mature teratoma with malignant differentiation with signet ring cells. Clinical case: 43-year-old woman diagnosed with mature malignant teratoma with signet ring cells. It was performed optimal primary cytoreduction surgery, total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, peritonectomy, appendectomy, cholecystectomy and splenectomy adding intraoperative hyperthermic chemotherapy (HIPEC). Conclusions: Malignant transformation of a mature teratoma of the ovary is a rare event, but not exceptional. HIPEC was used after optimal cytoreduction, with good results, since the patient is in a disease-free period of 36 months. It is necessary to report cases in order to compare different types of treatment to improve oncological results.

Introducción: los teratomas maduros pertenecen al grupo de los tumores de ovario de estirpe germinal; por lo general, tienen un comportamiento benigno. La transformación maligna ocurre en un rango de 0.2 a 1% de los tumores. El objetivo es mostrar los resultados de peritonectomía con HIPEC en el tratamiento de un teratoma maduro con diferenciación maligna con células en anillo de sello. Caso clínico: mujer de 43 años de edad, con diagnóstico de teratoma maduro maligno con células en anillo de sello. Se realizó cirugía de citorreducción primaria optima; histerectomía total, salpingooforectomía bilateral, peritonectomía, apendicectomía, colecistectomía y esplenectomía, además de quimioterapia hipertérmica intraoperatoria (HIPEC). Conclusiones: la transformación maligna de un teratoma maduro del ovario es un evento raro, pero no excepcional. Se utilizó HIPEC posterior a la citorredución óptima y hubo buenos resultados, ya que la paciente lleva un periodo libre de enfermedad de 36 meses. Es necesario el reporte de casos a fin de comparar diversos tipos de tratamiento para mejorar resultados oncológicos.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal metastases (PM) have a poor prognosis in gastric cancer (GC). Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) gives favorable outcomes, but the influence of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) remains contentious. We designed to distinguish results between CRS versus HIPEC-CRS in patients with peritoneal metastases from gastric cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Cochrane library accessed to collect data and language is restricted to English. RevMan 5.4 was used to perform statistical analysis. The outcomes for categorical variables are mentioned in the risk ratio. RESULTS: Ten trials involving 1367 patients in which 707 were CRS-HIPEC, while 660 CRS. We got significant results in 3rd year survival (P < 0.05), while 1st and 5th years are not statistically significant P > 0.05. CONCLUSION: To compare with CRS, CRS-HIPEC has improved survival rate in deprived of further morbidity or mortality.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis in gastric cancer is considered a fatal disease, without expectation of definitive cure. As systemic chemotherapy is not sufficient to contain the disease, a multimodal approach associating intraperitoneal chemotherapy with surgery may represent an alternative for these cases. AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the role of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in stage IV gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis. METHODS: This study is a single institutional single-arm prospective clinical trial phase II (NCT05541146). Patients with the following inclusion criteria undergo implantation of a peritoneal catheter for intraperitoneal chemotherapy: Stage IV gastric adenocarcinoma; age 18-75 years; Peritoneal carcinomatosis with peritoneal cancer index<12; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0/1; good clinical status; and lab exams within normal limits. The study protocol consists of four cycles of intraperitoneal chemotherapy with paclitaxel associated with systemic chemotherapy. After treatment, patients with peritoneal response assessed by staging laparoscopy undergo conversion gastrectomy. RESULTS: The primary outcome is the rate of complete peritoneal response. Progression-free and overall survivals are other outcomes evaluated. The study started in July 2022, and patients will be screened for inclusion until 30 are enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: Therapies for advanced gastric cancer patients have been evaluated in clinical trials but without success in patients with peritoneal metastasis. The treatment proposed in this trial can be promising, with easy catheter implantation and ambulatory intraperitoneal chemotherapy regime. Verifying the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel with systemic chemotherapy is an important progress that this study intends to investigate.

RESUMO RACIONAL: A carcinomatose peritoneal no câncer gástrico é considerada uma doença fatal, sem expectativa de cura definitiva. Como a quimioterapia sistêmica não é suficiente para conter a doença, uma abordagem multimodal associando a quimioterapia intraperitoneal à cirurgia pode representar uma alternativa para esses casos. OBJETIVOS: Investigar o papel da quimioterapia intraperitoneal em pacientes com câncer gástrico estágio IV com metástases peritoneais. MÉTODOS: Trata-se de um ensaio clínico prospectivo unicêntrico, braço único, fase II (NCT05541146). Pacientes com os seguintes critérios de inclusão serão submetidos à implantação de cateter peritoneal para quimioterapia intraperitoneal: adenocarcinoma gástrico estágio IV; idade 18-75 anos; carcinomatose peritoneal com índice de câncer peritoneal<12; ECOG 0/1; bom estado clínico e exames laboratoriais dentro da normalidade. O protocolo do estudo consiste em 4 ciclos de quimioterapia intraperitoneal com Paclitaxel associado à quimioterapia sistêmica. Após o tratamento, os pacientes com resposta peritoneal avaliada por laparoscopia serão submetidos à gastrectomia de conversão. RESULTADOS: O desfecho primário é a taxa de resposta peritoneal completa. A sobrevida livre de progressão e global são outros desfechos avaliados. O estudo foi iniciado em julho de 2022 e os pacientes serão selecionados para inclusão até que 30 sejam inscritos. CONCLUSIONS: Terapias para pacientes com câncer gástrico avançado foram avaliadas em ensaios clínicos, mas sem sucesso em pacientes com metástase peritoneal. O tratamento proposto neste estudo pode ser promissor, com fácil implantação do cateter e regime de quimioterapia intraperitoneal ambulatorial. Verificar a eficácia e segurança do Paclitaxel associado à quimioterapia sistêmica é um progresso importante que o presente estudo pretende investigar.

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) indicates advanced stage cancer, which is generally associated with a poor outcome and a 6 to 12 months. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is an option for treating patients with primary PC, such as mesothelioma, or secondary PC, such as colorectal cancer (CRC) or pseudomixoma. Until recently, such patients were deemed untreatable. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the results of CRS + HIPEC in patients with PC. Postoperative complications, mortality and survival rates were evaluated according to the diagnosis. Results: Fifty-six patients with PC, undergoing full CRS + HIPEC between October 2004 and January 2020, were enrolled. The mortality rate was 3.8% and the morbidity rate was 61.5%. Complications were significantly higher in proportion to the duration of surgery (p<0.001). The overall survival rates, as shown in the Kaplan-Meyer curve, were respectively 81%, 74% and 53% at 12, 24 and 60 months. Survival rates according to each diagnosis for the same periods were 87%, 82% and 47% in patients with pseudomixoma, and 77%, 72% and 57% in patients with CRC (log-rank 0.371, p=0.543). Conclusion: CRS with HIPEC is an option for pacients with primary or secondary PC. Although complication rates are high, a longer survival rate may be attained compared to those seen in previously published results; in some cases, patients may even be cured.

RESUMO O diagnóstico de carcinomatose peritoneal (CP), indica um estágio avançado do câncer e em geral está associado a um mau prognóstico com sobrevida média variando de 6 a 12 meses. A cirurgia citorredutora (CRS) associada à quimioterapia intraperitoneal hipertérmica (HIPEC) tem sido descrita como uma opção de tratamento para os pacientes portadores de CP primária como nos portadores de mesotelioma, ou secundária como em portadores de cancer colorretal ou pseudomixoma, até recentemente considerados sem possibilidade terapêutica. Objetivo: Avaliar os resultados do tratamento de pacientes portadores de CP submetidos a CRS + HIPEC. Foram analisadas as taxas complicações pós-operatórias, mortalidade e a sobrevida desses pacientes. Resultados: Foram incluídos 56 pacientes com CP, submetidos a c CRS + HIPEC, no período de Outubro 2004 a Janeiro 2020. A taxa de mortalidade foi de 3,8% e taxa de morbidade de 61,5%, sendo a ocorrência de complicações significativamente maior quanto maior o tempo cirúrgico (p<0,001). A sobrevida global pela curva de Kaplan-Meyer foi de 81%, 74% e 53% em 12, 24 e 60 meses respectivamente. Já a sobrevida por diagnóstico nos mesmos períodos foi de 87%, 82%, 47% para os pacientes portadores de pseudomixoma e de 77%, 72% e 57% para pacientes portadores de câncer colorretal (Log -RANK 0,371, p=0,543). Conclusão: A CRS + HIPEC é uma opção de tratamento para pacientes portadores de CP primária ou secundária. Embora com taxa de complicações elevadas, pode proporcionar aumento da sobrevida quando comparado com resultados prévios da literatura e em alguns casos até a cura.

RESUMEN

Abstract Introduction Intraoperative fluid therapy in cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy plays an important role in postoperative morbidity. Studies have found an association between overload fluid therapy and increased postoperative complications, advising restrictive intraoperative fluid therapy. Our objective in this study was to compare the morbidity associated with restrictive versus non-restrictive intraoperative fluid therapy. Methods Retrospective analysis of a database collected prospectively in the Anesthesiology Service of Virgen del Rocío Hospital, from December 2016 to April 2019. One hundred and six patients who underwent complete cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy were divided into two cohorts according to Fluid Therapy received 1. Restrictive ≤ 9 mL.kg-1.h-1 (34 patients), 2. Non-restrictive ≥ 9 mL.kg-1.h-1 (72 patients). Percentage of major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV) and length hospital stay were the main outcomes variables. Results Of the 106 enrolled patients, 68.9% were women; 46.2% had ovarian cancer, 35.84% colorectal cancer, and 7.5% peritoneal cancer. The average fluid administration rate was 11 ± 3.58 mL.kg-1.h-1. The restrictive group suffered a significantly higher percentage of Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV complications (35.29%) compared with the non-restrictive group (15.27%) (p= 0.02). The relative risk associated with restrictive therapy was 1.968 (95% confidence interval: 1.158-3.346). We also found a significant difference for hospital length of stay, 20.91 days in the restrictive group vs 16.19 days in the non-restrictive group (p= 0.038). Conclusions Intraoperative fluid therapy restriction below 9 mL.kg-1.h-1 in cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy was associated with a higher percentage of major postoperative complications.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is a condition presenting with tumors of the abdominal cavity presenting which could lead abdominal distention and ascites secondary to mucus production. Tumors of this type are potentially fatal due to their obstructing of abdominal structures. The current management of the condition includes surgical debulking with intraoperative or postoperative chemotherapy with protocols such as hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), respectively. We describe herein a case in which a tumor debulking surgery was performed. Afterwards, we placed intraperitoneal catheters so that a 4-day regimen of bedside intraperitoneal 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy could be administered on her bedside. Chemotherapy was infused and removed with the use of Hemovac and Jackson-Pratt drainage catheter systems attached to suction, for the intrahospital management of recurrent PMP in a young Hispanic female patient. Though it requires further study, we propose this method as a safe and effective alternative to current strategies at low income or resources centers.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative fluid therapy in cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy plays an important role in postoperative morbidity. Studies have found an association between overload fluid therapy and increased postoperative complications, advising restrictive intraoperative fluid therapy. Our objective in this study was to compare the morbidity associated with restrictive versus non-restrictive intraoperative fluid therapy. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a database collected prospectively in the Anesthesiology Service of Virgen del Roc.ío Hospital, from December 2016 to April 2019. One hundred and six patients who underwent complete cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy were divided into two cohorts according to Fluid Therapy received 1. Restrictive.ß..±.ß9.ßmL.kg-1.h-1 (34 patients), 2. Non-restrictive .ß.ß....ß9.ßmL.kg-1.h-1 (72 patients). Percentage of major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III...IV) and length hospital stay were the main outcomes variables. RESULTS: Of the 106 enrolled patients, 68.9% were women; 46.2% had ovarian cancer, 35.84% colorectal cancer, and 7.5% peritoneal cancer. The average fluid administration rate was 11.ß...ß3.58.ßmL.kg-1.h-1. The restrictive group suffered a significantly higher percentage of Clavien-Dindo grade III...IV complications (35.29%) compared with the non-restrictive group (15.27%) (p.ß=.ß0.02). The relative risk associated with restrictive therapy was 1.968 (95% confidence interval: 1.158...3.346). We also found a significant difference for hospital length of stay, 20.91 days in the restrictive group vs 16.19 days in the non-restrictive group (p.ß=.ß0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative fluid therapy restriction below 9.ßmL.kg-1.h-1 in cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy was associated with a higher percentage of major postoperative complications.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Resumo Objetivo Mapear as medidas de segurança ocupacional recomendadas aos profissionais envolvidos no atendimento transoperatório de pacientes submetidos à Quimioterapia Intraperitoneal Hipertérmica. Métodos Estudo qualitativo com ênfase em scoping review, fundamentado no Instituto Joanna Briggs. Realizou-se buscas nas bases de dados Pubmed, BVS, ScIELO, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, The Chocrane Library e literatura cinzenta. Pergunta de pesquisa utilizou o acrônimo PCC: quais medidas de segurança ocupacional são necessárias no Centro Cirúrgico para profissionais que atuam, direta ou indiretamente, no transoperatório da HIPEC? A Busca de artigos ocorreu entre 2015 a 2019. Resultados Evidenciou-se escassa literatura sobre a temática. Selecionados dez artigos: uma revisão sistemática; dois casos-controle; dois estudos descritivos; quatro estudos de revisão bibliográfica; um relato de experiência. Análise dos artigos evidenciou as medidas de segurança recomendadas para profissionais que atuam direta ou indiretamente nesse procedimento cirúrgico, a saber: educação e capacitação da equipe envolvida; utilização de equipamentos de proteção individual e coletiva; oferecer infraestrutura e orientações gerais. Conclusão Medidas de segurança recomendadas para os profissionais envolvidos no atendimento transoperatório do paciente submetido à Quimioterapia Intraperitoneal Hipertérmica são: capacitação da equipe; utilização de equipamentos específicos de proteção individual e coletiva; infraestrutura necessária como ajuste do ar condicionado com pressão maior dentro da sala cirúrgica; e orientações gerais em relação à organização da sala cirúrgica, descarte dos resíduos, limpeza da sala/materiais utilizados e acompanhamento da saúde ocupacional da equipe envolvida em procedimento cirúrgico.

Resumen Objetivo Mapear las medidas de seguridad ocupacional recomendadas a los profesionales involucrados en la atención transoperatoria de pacientes sometidos a Quimioterapia Intraperitoneal Hipertérmica. Métodos Estudio cualitativo con énfasis en el scoping review, fundamentado en el Instituto Joanna Briggs. Se realizaron búsquedas en las bases de datos Pubmed, BVS, ScIELO, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, The Chocrane Library y literatura gris. Pregunta de encuesta utilizó el acrónimo PCC: ¿qué medidas de seguridad ocupacional se hacen necesarias en el Quirófano para profesionales que actúan, directa o indirectamente, en el transoperatorio de la HIPEC? La búsqueda de los artículos ocurrió entre el 2015 y el 2019. Resultados Se puso en evidencia una escasa literatura sobre la temática. Seleccionados diez artículos: una revisión sistemática; dos casos-control; dos estudios descriptivos; cuatro estudios de revisión bibliográfica; un relato de experiencia. Análisis de los artículos evidenció las medidas de seguridad recomendadas para profesionales que actúan directa o indirectamente en ese procedimiento quirúrgico, a saber: educación y capacitación del equipo involucrado; utilización de equipos de protección individual y colectiva; brindar infraestructura y orientaciones generales. Conclusión Representan medidas de seguridad recomendadas para los profesionales involucrados en la atención transoperatoria del paciente sometido a Quimioterapia Intraperitoneal Hipertérmica: capacitación del equipo; utilización de equipos específicos de protección individual y colectiva; infraestructura necesaria como ajuste del aire acondicionado con una presión más alta dentro del quirófano; y orientaciones generales con relación a la organización del quirófano, descarte de los deshechos, limpieza de la sala/materiales utilizados y acompañamiento de la salud ocupacional por el equipo involucrado en el procedimiento quirúrgico.

Abstract Objective To map the occupational safety measures recommended to professionals involved in the intraoperative care of patients undergoing Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy. Methods Qualitative scoping review based on the Joanna Briggs Institute. Searches were performed in Pubmed, VHL, ScIELO, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, The Chocrane Library databases and gray literature. The PCC acronym was used in the research question: what occupational safety measures are necessary in the operating room for professionals working directly or indirectly in the intraoperative period of HIPEC? A search for articles published between 2015 and 2019 was performed. Results Literature on the subject was scarce. Ten articles were selected: a systematic review; two control cases; two descriptive studies; four literature review studies; an experience report. In the analysis of articles, the recommended safety measures for professionals who work directly or indirectly in this surgical procedure was evidenced, namely: education and training of the staff involved; use of individual and collective protective equipment; provision of infrastructure and general guidelines. Conclusion Recommended safety measures for professionals involved in the intraoperative care of patients undergoing Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy are: team training; use of specific individual and collective protection equipment; necessary infrastructure, such as adjusting the air conditioning to higher pressure inside the operating room; and general guidelines regarding the organization of the operating room, waste disposal, cleaning of the room/materials used, and monitoring of the occupational health of the team involved in the surgical procedure.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Resumen Introducción: PIPAC (Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy) Es una técnica que, vía laparoscopía, permite administrar quimioterapia en aerosol intraperitoneal, para el tratamiento de la carcinomatosis, ya sea para disminuir masa tumoral y aumentar la resecabilidad, o como paliación sintomática. Objetivo: Presentar los dos primeros casos de PIPAC en Chile, las consideraciones técnicas y revisión de la literatura. Pacientes y Método: Se describe la forma en que un programa PIPAC fue implementado en Clínica Las Condes. Se describe la técnica. Este procedimiento se realizó en dos pacientes, ambas portadoras de carcinomatosis con ascitis refractaria. Resultados: No hubo complicaciones. Alta a las 24 h. Ambas pacientes presentaron disminución de la ascitis, la que se ha mantenido a los seis meses de seguimiento. Discusión: PIPAC es una técnica emergente, que ha demostrado ser segura, con escasas complicaciones, cuya indicación incluye carcinomatosis por cáncer de colon y ovario y que se está extendiendo a páncreas, vía biliar y estómago. Su rol exacto está por definirse. Conclusiones: PIPAC es una técnica factible de realizar en nuestro país; sus resultados preliminares son alentadores y exentos de complicaciones.

Introduction: PIPAC (Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy is a technique that allows laparoscopic administration of aerosol chemotherapy in the peritoneum. This procedure is utilized for treatment of carcinomatosis, for debulk abdominal tumors, increasing resectability, or for palliation of abdominal symptoms. Aim: To present the first two cases of PIPAC performed in Chile, technical considerations and review of the literature. Patients and Method: The way this program was started at Clínica Las Condes is presented. The technique is described. This procedure was performed in two females, both with refractory ascites due to carcinomatosis. Results: The procedure was uneventfully and patients were discharged 24 hours later. Both patients showed important reduction of ascites, maintained at 6 months of followup. Discussion: PIPAC is a safe emerging technique, with low complication rate. It is indicated in carcinomatosis of colonic and ovarían origin and in selected cases of pancreatic, bile duct and gastric carcinomatosis. More prospective, randomized studies should be done to stablish its exact role. Conclusions: PIPAC is a feasible technique to perform in our country. Preliminary results are encouraging and no complications were observed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has become a valuable treatment strategy for selected patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). In Chile, it is an emerging technique. The aim of this study is to describe our protocol and report our perioperative results. METHODS: A prospectively maintained database for patients undergoing exploratory surgery for PC was reviewed. Eligible patients were selected using the peritoneal cancer index in correlation with the primary tumor. Patients underwent HIPEC using mitomycin C. Clinical data and postoperative results were analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients underwent exploratory surgery. Most patients were female (55%) with a median age of 62 years (range, 25-83). Complete CRS and HIPEC were achieved in 53 patients. The most frequent primary tumor site was colon-rectum (49%). The median number of resected organs was 4 (range, 1-13). Overall 90-day incidence of major complications was 26%. After a median follow-up of 26 months, 44 patients (83%) in the resected group were alive with no evidence of disease. CONCLUSIONS: The PC treatment program at our institution has been established in a safe manner, with acceptable morbidity comparable to high-volume centers. A comprehensive preoperative evaluation, careful patient selection, and a cohesive team are necessary for successful results.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel end-to-end "true" reinforced stapling colorectal anastomosis and to assess surgical outcomes in a large case series of advanced cancer patients undergoing this procedure. Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains the main concern following surgery for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Between September 2006 and May 2018, in the context of the Catalonian Program of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis, 1193 consecutive patients with advanced abdominal and/or pelvic tumors were included in a prospective single-center study. They underwent cytoreductive radical surgery (CRS) in most cases combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Among other surgical procedures, 374 patients underwent rectal resection and colorectal/ileorectal anastomosis, whether alone or associated to other digestive anastomosis. Key aspects of colorectal anastomosis technique were: (1) complete dissection and mobilization of the distal third of the rectum, (2) placement of a stitch that included both ends of the linear stapling of the rectal stump that was knotted on the anvil of the circular stapler, (3) "cleaning" the fatty tissue of the intestinal ends, (4) adjustment of the height of staples to the thickness of the intestinal wall, and (5) a second layer of interrupted nonperforating sutures placed circumferentially to reinforce the stapled anastomoses. A diverting stoma was not performed. RESULTS: According to clinical criteria, of the 1193 patients included, 296 cases underwent CRS (group 1) and 897 cases CRS + HIPEC (group 2). In group 1, 332 surgical procedures were performed, with 248 digestive anastomoses, of which 98 (39.5%) were colorectal anastomoses, associated to other digestive anastomosis in 37 cases. In group 2, 972 surgical procedures were performed, with 707 digestive anastomoses, of which 263 were colorectal (37.2%), 116 were associated with other digestive anastomosis. Ileocolic anastomosis was the most frequently associated digestive anastomosis. 71 major urinary reconstructions, 283 radical hysterectomies and no diverting stoma were performed. Globally, there was only three colo-ileorectal AL (3/374 = 0.8%). The overall 90-day mortality rate was 0.25%. CONCLUSIONS: A technical modification to create a "true" end-to-end and completely circular reinforced anastomosis effectively prevents anastomotic leakage in patients with advanced tumors undergoing radical resection of the rectum, with no need of diverting stoma.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCCIÓN: El mesotelioma peritoneal multiquístico benigno (MPMB) es una entidad con muy baja incidencia que se presentan con mayor frecuencia en mujeres jóvenes. CASO CLÍNICO: Paciente de 17 años que consulta por amenorrea secundaria. Además, refería pérdida de peso, estreñimiento y molestias abdominales. La exploración fue normal y en las pruebas de imagen se objetivó una pelvis ocupada por una masa multiquística, de unos 20 cm de diámetro máximo, de paredes finas y contenido anecoico. Se solicitaron marcadores tumorales de los cuales sólo se encontró elevado el CA 19.9 (35,2 U/mL). Se decidió realizar una laparoscopia exploradora para establecer un diagnóstico y ante los hallazgos y al considerarse la masa fácilmente resecable, en el mismo acto quirúrgico se extirpó por completo para su estudio anatomopatológico, que confirmó un MPMB. Se desestimaron tratamientos adicionales y actualmente se encuentra en seguimiento y asintomática. CONCLUSIÓN: La patogénesis del MPMB no está clara. Algunos autores defienden que se trata de una reacción peritoneal a un daño inflamatorio, otros apoyan que se trata de una neoplasia benigna. Esta naturaleza incierta, junto con la escasa experiencia, hacen que el manejo resulte complejo. Es necesario individualizar cada caso e intentar ser conservadores especialmente en pacientes jóvenes. Si se opta por un manejo activo, lo más acertado es la citorreducción completa seguida de quimioterapia hipertérmica peritoneal. El seguimiento, en cualquier caso, debe ser exhaustivo y multidisciplinar principalmente con pruebas de imagen.

BACKGROUND: Benign Multicystic Peritoneal Mesothelioma (BMPM) is an entity with a very low incidence that occurs more frequently in young women. CASE REPORT: A 17-year-old woman attended for secondary amenorrhea. She also referred to weight loss, constipation and abdominal discomfort. The examination was normal and echography revealed a pelvis occupied by a 20 centimeters multicystic mass, with thin walls and anechoic content. A preoperative study with tumor markers was requested in which only a CA 19.9 elevation was observed (35.2 U/ml 0-27). It was decided to perform an exploratory laparoscopy to establish a diagnosis. Due to the findings and because of the fact that the mass was considered easy to remove, it was completely removed in the same surgical act. The pathological result confirmed a BMPM. Additional treatments have been dismissed and are the patient is currently being followed up without symptoms. CONCLUSION: The pathogenesis of BMPM is unclear. Some authors argue that it is a peritoneal reaction to inflammatory damage, others support that it is a benign neoplasm. This uncertain nature coupled with limited experience make management complex. It is necessary to evaluate each case and try to be conservative especially in young patients. If surgery management is chosen, complete cytoreduction followed by hyperthermic peritoneal chemotherapy is the most successful option. The follow-up in any case must be exhaustive and multidisciplinary, mainly with imaging tests.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

RESUMEN La técnica PIPAC se presenta como una variante de tratamiento para los pacientes con carcinomato sis peritoneal que no son candidatos a una resección. Se describen de manera detallada los pasos y el procedimiento quirúrgico para la administración de quimioterapia intraperitoneal presurizada con dispositivo PIPAC.

ABSTRACT Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a therapeutic option for patients with unresectable peritoneal carcinomatosis. The steps and the surgical technique of the PIPAC technique are thoroughly described.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) is an effective but complex treatment for peritoneal metastasis (PM). Our objective was to identify risk factors for postoperative morbidity and mortality following CRS-HIPEC. METHODS: Retrospective study of prospectively collected data of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC for PM arises from colorectal cancer between January 2008 and December 2017. Perioperative variables were correlated with morbidity outcomes using a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients underwent CRS-HIPEC, and overall morbidity and mortality were 31.3% and 4.5% respectively. Major morbidity rate was 19.4%; 7.5% of patients were re-operated. Intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.01), liver resection (p < 0.01), and intestinal anastomosis (p < 0.01) were associated with a higher morbidity in univariate analysis. A multivariate analysis identified blood transfusion and liver resection as independent risk factors (OR 3.66, IC 1.13-16.54; OR 4.33, IC 1.17-11.46, respectively). Extension of visceral resection did not correlate with morbidity. Patients with lymph-node infiltration had a higher major complication rate (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: CRS-HIPEC is a feasible treatment for colorectal PM with an acceptable morbi-mortality rate in experienced centers. In our study, digestive anastomosis, perioperative blood transfusion, hepatic resection, and lymph-node infiltration were associated with higher morbidity rates.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: In patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC), the incidence of respiratory complications following cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is not well established. We aimed to describe the center-specific incidence and patient characteristics associated with respiratory complications following CRS and HIPEC in patients receiving treatment for PC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the University Hospital of Arrixaca study database to identify patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC for PC. Patients who experienced a post-operative respiratory complication were categorized according to the National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Multivariable regression methods were used to identify independent risk factors for developing a respiratory complication following CRS and HIPEC. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2017, we identified 247 patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC for PC. A total of eight patients (3.2%) were categorized as having a post-operative respiratory complication. A diaphragmatic peritonectomy and a PC index of > 14 were identified as independent risk factors for developing a respiratory complication. Radiographic evidence of a pleural effusion was identified in 72 patients who had CRS of the diaphragmatic peritoneum; however, only 6 (8.3%) of these patients required pleural drainage. CONCLUSIONS: Only 3.2% of patients developed a symptomatic respiratory complication following CRS and HIPEC. A pleural effusion was identified in almost all patients requiring a diaphragmatic peritonectomy as part of their CRS; however, less than one in ten of these patients required pleural drainage. Prophylactic insertion of a pleural drainage tube is, therefore, not indicated following CRS and HIPEC.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel has been used frequently for Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) for ovarian carcinomatosis. Cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC are associated with high rates of morbidity being anastomotic dehiscence one of the most frequent. The objective of this study is to quantify the effect of Paclitaxel-based HIPEC on colonic anastomosis in an experimental rat model. METHODS: After left colon resection and anastomosis, animals were randomized into four groups: Controls (C); Hyperthermia (H); Normothermic Intraperitoneal Paclitaxel (CP) and Paclitaxel-based HIPEC (HP). On postoperative day four, animals' peritoneal cavities were examined macroscopically, colon anastomosis burst pressures measured and specimens analyzed histologically. RESULTS: Thirty-nine animals were randomized and 36 were included in the analysis. H group presented the highest burst pressure 105.11 ± 22.9 mmHg, which was 27% higher than C (77.89 ± 27.6 mmHg). On the other hand, HP presented the lowest burst pressure 64 ± 26 mmHg, 16% lower than C group and 39% lower than H, being this latter difference statistically significant (p = 0.004). There were no significant differences regarding weight loss, adhesion scores, perianastomotic abscesses and histological findings (inflammation, fibroblasts, neoangiogenesis, and collagen among groups). CONCLUSION: Strength of colonic anastomosis was improved by isolated hyperthermia and negatively affected by Paclitaxel-based HIPEC.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) of gastric origin have a poor prognosis of life with an average survival of 1-3 months. Systemic chemotherapy has improved the survival of those patients with gastric metastatic cancer at 7-10 months. However, this benefit could not be reproduced in those patients with PC. The current literature for the use of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for gastric PC has significant variation related to patient selection, treatment intent (palliative vs. attempt at curative treatment), surgical technique, intraperitoneal chemotherapy agent utilized, and systemic chemotherapy administered adjuvantly. From the perspective of patient selection for cytoreduction and HIPEC, patients with extensive PC are not candidates. In addition, unresectable location would make a patient a poor candidate for cytoreduction and HIPEC. Optimally, those with positive peritoneal cytology alone could benefit most. However, the role of cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC in patients with PC of gastric origin has not yet been clarified.

Los pacientes con carcinomatosis peritoneal (CP) de origen gástrico tienen un mal pronóstico de vida, con una supervivencia media de 1 a 3 meses. La quimioterapia sistémica ha mejorado la supervivencia de los pacientes con cáncer gástrico metastásico a los 7-10 meses. Sin embargo, este beneficio no se ha podido reproducir en los pacientes con CP. En cuanto a lo relacionado con la literatura actual para el uso de HIPEC (hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy) en la CP de origen gástrico, existe una variación significativa en la selección de pacientes, la intención de tratamiento (paliativo frente a intento de tratamiento curativo), la técnica quirúrgica, el agente quimioterapéutico intraperitoneal utilizado y la quimioterapia sistémica adyuvante administrada. Desde la perspectiva de la selección de pacientes para citorreducción y tratamiento con HIPEC, los pacientes con CP extensa no son candidatos. Además, lesiones irresecables por su localización harían al paciente un pobre candidato para citorreducción y tratamiento con HIPEC. De manera óptima, aquellos pacientes con citología peritoneal positiva en ausencia de CP son quienes más podrían beneficiarse. Sin embargo, el papel de la cirugía citorreductora y del tratamiento con HIPEC en los pacientes con CP de origen gástrico aún no ha sido esclarecido.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis is usually a terminal disease with short median survival in patients with gastric cancer. Systemic FOLFOX is one of the most used regimens in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer. However, there is scarce evidence that cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and intraperitoneal heated chemotherapy (HIPEC) improves oncological outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: Herein we present a case of a young woman with advanced gastric cancer with omental and peritoneal metastases who achieved an excellent response after 6 months of FOLFOX followed by CRS and HIPEC. RESULTS: A 53-year-old woman was diagnosed with advanced gastric carcinoma, with extensive omental caking and several peritoneal implants measuring 2 cm at the largest diameter. The patient received mFOLFOX6 for 6 months with excellent clinical and radiographic response. She was then submitted to a D2 total gastrectomy followed by CRS and HIPEC with mitomycin. The final pathology report showed a focal adenocarcinoma in the stomach measuring 0.4 mm with no residual tumor in the peritoneum (ypT1ypN0). The patient has been well and disease free for more than 4 years. CONCLUSION: While still controversial, CRS followed by HIPEC may be a curative therapeutic option for highly selected patients.