UNASSIGNED: We compared the relative benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery ± systemic chemotherapy versus cytoreductive surgery ± systemic chemotherapy or systemic chemotherapy alone in people with peritoneal metastases from colorectal, gastric or ovarian cancers by a systematic review, meta-analysis and model-based cost-utility analysis.
UNASSIGNED: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and the Science Citation Index, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP trial registers until 14 April 2022. We included only randomised controlled trials addressing the research objectives. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2 to assess the risk of bias in randomised controlled trials. We used the random-effects model for data synthesis when applicable. For the cost-effectiveness analysis, we performed a model-based cost-utility analysis using methods recommended by The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
UNASSIGNED: The systematic review included a total of eight randomised controlled trials (seven randomised controlled trials, 955 participants included in the quantitative analysis). All comparisons other than those for stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer contained only one trial, indicating the paucity of randomised controlled trials that provided data. For colorectal cancer, hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably results in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (60.6% vs. 60.6%; hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 1.58) and may increase the serious adverse event proportions compared to cytoreductive surgery ± systemic chemotherapy (25.6% vs. 15.2%; risk ratio 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 2.77). Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably decreases all-cause mortality compared to fluorouracil-based systemic chemotherapy alone (40.8% vs. 60.8%; hazard ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.95). For gastric cancer, there is high uncertainty about the effects of hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy versus cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy or systemic chemotherapy alone on all-cause mortality. For stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery, hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably decreases all-cause mortality compared to cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy (46.3% vs. 57.4%; hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.93). Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy may not be cost-effective versus cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy for colorectal cancer but may be cost-effective for the remaining comparisons.
UNASSIGNED: We were unable to obtain individual participant data as planned. The limited number of randomised controlled trials for each comparison and the paucity of data on health-related quality of life mean that the recommendations may change as new evidence (from trials with a low risk of bias) emerges.
UNASSIGNED: In people with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer with limited peritoneal metastases and who are likely to withstand major surgery, hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should not be used in routine clinical practice (strong recommendation). There is considerable uncertainty as to whether hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy or cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should be offered to patients with gastric cancer and peritoneal metastases (no recommendation). Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should be offered routinely to women with stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer and metastases confined to the abdomen requiring and likely to withstand interval cytoreductive surgery after chemotherapy (strong recommendation).
UNASSIGNED: More randomised controlled trials are necessary.
UNASSIGNED: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019130504.
UNASSIGNED: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/135/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 51. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Cancers of the bowel, ovary or stomach can spread to the lining of the abdomen (‘peritoneal metastases’). Chemotherapy (the use of drugs that aim to kill cancer cells) given by injection or tablets (‘systemic chemotherapy’) is one of the main treatment options. There is uncertainty about whether adding cytoreductive surgery (cytoreductive surgery; an operation to remove the cancer) and ‘hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy’ (warm chemotherapy delivered into the lining of the abdomen during cytoreductive surgery) are beneficial. We reviewed all the information from medical literature published until 14 April 2022, to answer the above uncertainty. We found the following from eight trials, including about 1000 participants. In people with peritoneal metastases from bowel cancer, hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably does not provide any benefits and increases harm compared to cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy, while cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy appears to increase survival compared to systemic chemotherapy alone. There is uncertainty about the best treatment for people with peritoneal metastases from stomach cancer. In women with peritoneal metastases from ovarian cancer who require systemic chemotherapy before cytoreductive surgery to shrink the cancer to allow surgery (‘advanced ovarian cancer’), hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy probably increases survival compared to cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy. In people who can withstand a major operation and in whom cancer can be removed, cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should be offered to people with peritoneal metastases from bowel cancer, while hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy + cytoreductive surgery + systemic chemotherapy should be offered to women with peritoneal metastases from ‘advanced ovarian cancer’. Uncertainty in treatment continues for gastric cancer. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/135/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 51. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative selection of patients with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis (PC) for Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is challenging due to associated risks. Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL), an emerging alternative to conventional radiological imaging, has uncertain efficacy. This study aims to evaluate DL\'s diagnostic performance through a systematic review of available literature.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases from January 1987 to September 2023 identified studies investigating DL\'s diagnostic accuracy in selecting PC patients for CRS-HIPEC. Methodological bias assessment and analysis of performance metrics such as positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for primary ovarian cancer studies, and false positive sites were identified. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) was plotted to assess overall diagnostic efficacy, with meta-regression conducted to identify sources of heterogeneity across studies.
RESULTS: This study included 25 studies comprising 3820 patients. Pooled PPV was 93.04 %, with a complication rate of 1.61 %. Pooled sensitivity was 98.26 % and pooled specificity was 83.67 %. The pooled DOR was 139.18, and sROC plot yielded an area under the curve of 0.96. Meta-regression found the ovarian subgroup as a strong source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis indicated similar findings in primary ovarian cancer studies, while false positives were commonly observed in the celiac axis, mesentery, ureters and para-aortic lymph nodes.
CONCLUSIONS: DL demonstrates robust diagnostic accuracy in selecting PC patients for CRS-HIPEC, with potential benefits in patient outcomes and resource optimization. Further multicenter investigations are warranted to validate DL\'s efficacy across diverse primary cancer types.

Peritoneal sarcomatosis is a rare malignant disease with a poor prognosis, secondary to peritoneal dissemination of abdominopelvic soft tissue sarcomas. Its rarity, together with the characteristic histological heterogeneity and the historically poor response to systemic treatments, has prevented the establishment of widely accepted treatment criteria with curative intent. In this sense, radical cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with peritonectomy procedures and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), widely used in peritoneal carcinomatosis with excellent results, have not had the same evolutionary development in patients with peritoneal sarcomatosis. A multidisciplinary working group of experts in sarcomas and peritoneal oncological surgery established a series of recommendations based on current scientific evidence for the management of peritoneal sarcomatosis, taking into account the different histological subgroups of abdominopelvic sarcomas that can cause it depending on their origin: retroperitoneal sarcomas, uterine sarcomas, and visceral/peritoneal sarcomas of GIST (gastrointestinal stromal tumor) and non-GIST origin. This article shows the results of sarcoma experts\' voting on the recommendations presented during the I Ibero-American Consensus on the Management of Peritoneal Sarcomatosis, which took place during the recent celebration of the III Hispanic-Portuguese Meeting for Updates on the Treatment of Sarcomas.

Peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer is associated with rapid disease progression. Hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) done immediately after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has become an important treatment for peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer patients. However, different treatment options for HIPEC exist with potential influence on survival rates and prognosis in patients, exist. These treatment options include open or closed abdomen technique, perfusion solution, number of catheters, temperature, duration, and drug regimens. This paper aims to provide more evidence on standardization of HIPEC treatment options and technologies by systematically reviewing different drug regimens and technical approaches. The study included 2 randomized controlled trials, 3 phase I/II clinical trials, 2 prospective cohort studies, and 34 retrospective cohort studies, involving 1511 patients. The most common HIPEC option is to dissolve 50-75 mg/m2 of Cisplatin and 30-40 mg/m2 of Mitomycin C in 3-4 L saline solution at 42-43℃. After gastrointestinal anastomosis, 2-3 catheters are used in the HIPEC system with a perfusion flow rate of 500 ml/min. The duration is 60-90 minutes. Anastomotic leakage was low in studies where HIPEC was performed after gastrointestinal anastomosis. The utilization of open HIPEC and a two-drug regimen resulted in improved overall survival rates. The future development of HIPEC aims to enhance tumor-specific therapy by optimizing various aspects, such as identifying the safest and most effective chemotherapy regimens, refining patient selection criteria, and improving perioperative care.
胃癌的腹膜转移与疾病迅速进展相关。细胞减灭术（CRS）后直接进行腹腔热灌注化疗（HIPEC）已成为治疗胃癌腹膜转移患者的重要手段。然而，HIPEC存在不同的治疗方案，如开腹或闭腹、灌注液、管数、温度、持续时间以及不同的药物方案，可影响患者的生存率和预后。本文旨在通过对不同的HIPEC药物技术方案进行系统综述，为HIPEC治疗方案和技术的标准化提供更多参考证据。本文纳入两项随机对照试验、3项Ⅰ和Ⅱ期前瞻性临床试验、两项前瞻性队列研究和34项回顾性队列研究，共1 511例患者。最常见的HIPEC方案为将顺铂50~75 mg/m2和丝裂霉素C 30~40 mg/m2溶解于3~4 L生理盐水中，在42℃~43℃的温度下，胃肠吻合后，于闭腹的HIPEC系统中，使用2~3根导管，灌注液流速为500 ml/min，持续时间为60~90 min。在胃肠吻合后进行HIPEC的研究中，吻合口漏发生率较低。采用开腹HIPEC以及两种药物治疗方案的研究显示总体生存率更高。目前HIPEC的治疗方案存在较大异质性，在临床试验中，需进一步比较技术方法和不同的药物方案，以明确最佳治疗方案，使得该技术合乎标准化。.

Although several studies have been completed to investigate the effect of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in endometrial cancer with peritoneal metastasis (ECPM), a direct comparison was not performed previously. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the suspected additional survival benefits of CRS plus HIPEC over CRS only. Twenty-one and ten studies with a total number of 1116 and 152 cases investigating CRS only and CRS plus HIPEC were identified, respectively. When all articles were analyzed, the 1-year survival rate was 17.60% higher for CRS plus HIPEC (82.28% vs. 64.68%; p = 0.0102). The same tendency was observed for the 2-year (56.07% vs. 36.95%; difference: 19.12%; p = 0.0014), but not for the 5-year (21.88% vs. 16.45%; difference: 5.43%; p = 0.3918) survival rates. The same clinical significance, but statistically less strong observations, could be made if only the studies published after 2010 were investigated (1-year survival rate: 12.08% and p = 0.0648; 2-year survival rate: 10.90% and p = 0.0988). CRS remains one of the core elements of ECPM treatment, but the addition of HIPEC to CRS can increase the positive clinical outcome, especially in the first 2 years.

Background: Cisplatin is employed in hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for peritoneal surface malignancies (PSMs). The main concern regarding intraperitoneal cisplatin administration is nephrotoxicity. Numerous reports in this context are available. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess cisplatin-based HIPEC-related nephrotoxicity (CHRN). Methods: A systematic literature review on CHRN after CRS for the treatment of PSMs was performed. The literature search was carried out using Medline, Cochrane, and Embase. The last day of the search was 23 October 2023. PRISMA guidelines were used. A meta-analysis was then conducted. The main endpoint was the incidence of acute and chronic renal impairment after CHRN. Secondary endpoints included the potential impact of several clinical variables on the primary endpoint and a critical appraisal of the different renal impairment scales employed. Results: Our study included 26 articles with a total sample of 1473 patients. The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) was 18.6% (95% CI: 13.6-25%, range of true effects 3-59%). For chronic kidney disease, it was 7% (95% CI: 3-15.3%, range of true effects 1-53%). The variables that statistically influenced these results were the scale used to measure renal insufficiency, the use of nephroprotective agents, and the presence of pre-existing renal disease. Conclusions: The reported incidence of renal impairment following cisplatin-based HIPEC is highly variable. The incidence of renal failure obtained in this meta-analysis should be used as a reference for subsequent reports on this topic. Further prospective studies are warranted to establish optimal and standardized management.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with peritoneal metastasis (CRC-PM) have a worse prognosis than those with liver and lung metastases. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is an effective locoregional treatment for CRC-PM. To date, the prognostic analysis of CRS/HIPEC mostly focuses on clinical and pathological characteristics; however, genetic characteristics, such as RAS/BRAF mutation status, are not sufficient. This study aimed to systematically assess the correlation between RAS/BRAF status and PM risk, as well as the prognostic efficacy of CRS/HIPEC for CRC.
METHODS: This study was written in accordance with the 2020 guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library with the following keywords: \"Peritoneal Neoplasms,\" \"raf Kinases\" and \"ras Proteins\". The fixed-effects model and inverse variance method were used for analysis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were used to reflect the risk of PM associated with RAS/BRAF mutations. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % CI were used to evaluate the effects of RAS/BRAF mutations on the prognosis of CRS/HIPEC.
RESULTS: Eighteen articles included 5567 patients. In the risk analysis of PM, patients with BRAF mutation were more likely to have PM than those with wild-type BRAF (OR = 2.28, 95 % CI = 1.73-3.01, P < 0.001, I2 = 0 %). In contrast, there was no significant difference in the effect of RAS mutation and wild-type on PM of CRC (OR = 1.28, 95 % CI = 0.99-1.66, P = .06, I2 = 0 %). In a prognostic analysis of CRS/HIPEC, RAS mutation predicted poor overall survival (HR = 1.68, 95 % CI = 1.39-2.02, P < 0.001, I2 = 1 %) and disease-free survival (HR = 1.61, 95 % CI = 1.34-1.94, P < 0.001, I2 = 42 %). The results for BRAF mutation was consistent with the prognostic impact of RAS mutation\'s overall survival (HR = 2.57, 95 % CI = 1.93-3.44, P < 0.001, I2 = 0 %) and disease-free survival (HR = 1.90, 95 % CI = 1.40-2.56, P < 0.001, I2 = 82 %).
CONCLUSIONS: BRAF mutation, rather than RAS mutation, was a high-risk factor for CRC-PM. And both BRAF and RAS mutations negatively affected the prognosis of CRS/HIPEC in CRC-PM patients. Our results could provide suggestions for the selection of comprehensive treatment for CRC-PM with RAS/BRAF mutations.

OBJECTIVE: Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is still controversial in ovarian cancer (OC) management. Doubts are related mainly to HIPEC effectiveness, but also to its safety. European Society of Medical Oncology and European Society of Gynecologic Oncology do not consider HIPEC as a standard of care. Opposite to European recommendations, National Comprehensive Cancer Network found HIPEC as a treatment option in patients undergoing interval debulking surgery in first-line treatment. This may be confusing for oncologists in clinical practice. The aim of this narrative review is to present literature review focusing on efficacy, confounding factors, complications and immunological issue of HIPEC in OC management.
METHODS: PubMed was searched for meta-analyses, randomized trials, observational studies, experimental studies to outline the role of HIPEC in OC management since January 2015 until August 2023. Keywords included \"hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy\", \"HIPEC\", \"ovarian cancer\", \"immune response\". References from full-text articles were screened for additional studies.
UNASSIGNED: Most meta-analyses found that HIPEC improved survival in patients with OC and none of the meta-analyses showed that addition HIPEC to surgery was associated with a worse treatment outcome compared to surgery alone. Positive effect on treatment outcome was found more common in first-line treatment than recurrent disease. Positive effect on treatment outcome was more common in first-line treatment (especially during interval debulking surgery) than recurrent disease. HIPEC efficacy can be affected by patients\' characteristics (BRCA status, platinum sensitivity), cytostatic type and dose, intensity of hyperthermia and peritoneal flow characteristics. Apart from strict cytotoxic effect, HIPEC can induce anti-cancer immune response.
CONCLUSIONS: Although factors confounding HIPEC efficacy are not well-defined, survival improvement, related to addition HIPEC to surgery in OC, was observed. Future studies should focus on determining a subgroup of patients, who benefit from HIPEC. This will contribute to the unification of European and American recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is traditionally a maximally invasive operation with a large abdominal incision and multi-visceral resections. However, to minimize abdominal wall morbidity and improve functional recovery, some centres have adopted a minimally invasive (MI) approach in select cases. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the evidence for safety and patient selection for minimally invasive approaches to CRS and HIPEC with curative intent.
METHODS: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review was performed using three electronic databases: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science. Data regarding postoperative morbidity was meta-analysed.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria (N = 462 MI patients), all of which were retrospective in design. Six studies included an open comparison group. Pseudomyxoma peritonei, mesothelioma and ovarian carcinoma made up the majority of cases (>90%), with a PCI < 10 listed as a prerequisite to selection across all studies. On pooled analysis there was no difference in major morbidity between MI and open groups (OR 0.52 95% CI 0.18-1.46, P = 0.33). There was one perioperative death reported in the MI group. Length of stay appeared shorter in the MI group (median range MI: 4-11 v Open: 7-13 days). Short-term recurrence and overall survival between both groups also appeared no different.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive CRS and HIPEC appears feasible and safe in appropriately selected patients. Clear histological stratification and longer term follow up is required to determine oncological safety, particularly in more aggressive tumours such as colorectal peritoneal metastases.

UNASSIGNED: Pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) is characterized by the accumulation of mucinous fluid in the abdominal cavity, typically originating from mucin-producing tumors, most commonly arising in the appendix.
METHODS: A 63-year-old male patient presented to the hospital with complaints of abdominal pain, significant weight loss, a palpable mass in the right iliac fossa, and evidence of ascites. A diagnosis of PMP was proposed based on findings from a computed tomography (CT) scan, which was subsequently confirmed through histopathological examination of a biopsy. The patient underwent successful treatment with Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC).
UNASSIGNED: Diagnosing PMP presents challenges due to its rarity and the potential for extensive spread throughout the peritoneal cavity, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach for successful treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Pseudomyxoma peritonei is a rare yet medically significant condition. Documenting a case of this ailment in Palestine has the potential to advance medical understanding, raise awareness, and improve patient care standards within the local healthcare system. By documenting this uncommon condition, healthcare practitioners in Palestine can gain valuable insights into its manifestations, diagnostic processes, and treatment modalities. This contribution not only enriches the global medical literature but also promotes collaboration in addressing the challenges associated with rare diseases.