Peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer: a multi-institutional study of 159 patients treated by cytoreductive surgery combined with perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from gastric cancer has long been regarded a terminal disease with a short median survival. New locoregional therapeutic approaches combining cytoreductive surgery with perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (PIC) have evolved and suggest improved survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective multicentric study was performed in French-speaking centers to evaluate the toxicity and the principal prognostic factors in order to identify the best indications. All patients had cytoreductive surgery and PIC: hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and/or early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC). RESULTS: The study included 159 patients from 15 institutions between February 1989 and August 2007. The median follow-up was 20.4 months. HIPEC was the PIC used for 150 procedures. Postoperative mortality and grade 3-4 morbidity rates were 6.5 and 27.8%, respectively. By multivariate analysis, the institution had a significant influence on toxicity. The overall median survival was 9.2 months and 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 43, 18, and 13%, respectively. The only independent prognostic indicator by multivariate analysis was the completeness of cytoreductive surgery. For patients treated by complete cytoreductive surgery, the median survival was 15 months with a 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rate of 61, 30, and 23%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The therapeutic approach combining cytoreductive surgery with PIC for patients with gastric carcinomatosis may achieve long-term survival in a selected group of patients (limited and resectable PC). The high mortality rate underlines this necessarily strict selection that should be reserved to experienced institutions involved in the management of PC and gastric surgery

Primary Tumor Versus Liver-First Approach for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases: An Association Française de Chirurgie (AFC) Multicenter-Based Study with Propensity Score Analysis

OBJECTIVES: Multicenter studies comparing the reverse strategy (RS) with the classical strategy (CS) for the management of stage IVA liver-only colorectal cancer (CCR) are scarce. The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival and recurrence patterns following use of the CS and RS. METHOD: This retrospective multicenter review collected data from all consecutive patients with stage IVA liver-only CCR who underwent staged resection of CCR and liver metastases (LM) at 24 French hospitals between 2006 and 2013 and were retrospectively analyzed. Patients who underwent simultaneous liver and CCR resection, those with synchronous extrahepatic metastasis, and those who underwent emergent CCR resection were excluded. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates and recurrence patterns were investigated before and after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: A total of 653 patients were included: 587 (89.9%) in the CS group and 66 (10.1%) in the RS group. Compared with the CS patients, RS patients were more likely to have rectal cancer (43.9 vs. 24.9%; p = 0.006), larger liver tumor size (52.5 ± 38.6 vs. 39.6 ± 30 mm; p = 0.01), and more positive lymph nodes (62.1 vs. 44.8%; p = 0.009). OS was not different between the two groups (75 vs. 72% at 5 years; p = 0.77), while RFS was worse in the RS group (24 vs. 33% at 5 years; p = 0.01). Time to recurrence at any site (1.8 vs. 2.4 years, p = 0.024) and intrahepatic recurrence (1.7 vs. 2.2 years, p = 0.014) were significantly shorter in the RS group than in the CS group. After PSM (63 patients in each group), no significant difference was found between the two groups in OS (p = 0.35), RFS (p = 0.62), time to recurrence at any site (p = 0.19), or intrahepatic recurrence (p = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, approximately 10% of patients with CCR and synchronous LM were offered surgery with the RS. Both strategies ensured similar oncological outcomes

Guidelines for management of intra-abdominal infections

Intra-abdominal infections are one of the most common gastrointestinal emergencies and a leading cause of septic shock. A consensus conference on the management of community-acquired peritonitis was published in 2000. A new consensus as well as new guidelines for less common situations such as peritonitis in paediatrics and healthcare-associated infections had become necessary. The objectives of these Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) were therefore to define the medical and surgical management of community-acquired intra-abdominal infections, define the specificities of intra-abdominal infections in children and describe the management of healthcare-associated infections. The literature review was divided into six main themes: diagnostic approach, infection source control, microbiological data, paediatric specificities, medical treatment of peritonitis, and management of complications. The GRADE(®) methodology was applied to determine the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations. After summarising the work of the experts and application of the GRADE(®) method, 62 recommendations were formally defined by the organisation committee. Recommendations were then submitted to and amended by a review committee. After 2 rounds of Delphi scoring and various amendments, a strong agreement was obtained for 44 (100%) recommendations. The CPGs for peritonitis are therefore based on a consensus between the various disciplines involved in the management of these patients concerning a number of themes such as: diagnostic strategy and the place of imaging; time to management; the place of microbiological specimens; targets of empirical anti-infective therapy; duration of anti-infective therapy. The CPGs also specified the value and the place of certain practices such as: the place of laparoscopy; the indications for image-guided percutaneous drainage; indications for the treatment of enterococci and fungi. The CPGs also confirmed the futility of certain practices such as: the use of diagnostic biomarkers; systematic relaparotomies; prolonged anti-infective therapy, especially in children

Impact of hospital volume on outcomes after emergency management of obstructive colon cancer: a nationwide study of 1957 patients

International audiencePURPOSEVolume-outcome relationship is well established in elective colorectal surgery for cancer, but little is known for patients managed for obstructive colon cancer (OCC). We aimed to compare the management and outcomes according to the hospital volume in this particular setting. METHODS:Patients managed for OCC between 2005 and 2015 in centers of the French National Surgical Association were retrospectively analyzed. Hospital volume was dichotomized between low and high volume on the median number of patients included per center during the study period. RESULTSA total of 1957 patients with OCC were managed in 56 centers with a median number of 28 (1-123) patients per center: 298 (15%) were treated in low-volume hospitals (LVHs) and 1659 (85%) in high-volume hospitals (HVHs). Patients in LVH were significantly younger, and had fewer comorbidities and synchronous metastases. Proximal diverting stoma was the preferred surgical option in LVH (p < 0.0001), whereas tumor resection with primary anastomosis was more frequently performed in HVH (p < 0.0001). Cumulative morbidity (59 vs. 50%, p = 0.003), mortality (13 vs. 8%, p = 0.03), and length of hospital stay (22 ± 19 vs. 18 ± 14 days, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in LVH. At multivariate analysis, LVH was a predictor for cumulative morbidity (p < 0.0001) and mortality (p = 0.03). There was no difference between the two groups for tumor resection and stoma rates, and for oncological outcomes. CONCLUSIONSThe hospital volume has no impact on outcomes after the first-stage surgery in OCC patients. When all surgical stages are considered, hospital volume influences cumulative postoperative morbidity and mortality but has no impact on oncological outcomes

Margin Status is Still an Important Prognostic Factor in Hepatectomies for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

International audienceThe width of resection margin is still a matter of debate in case of colorectal liver metastasis resection. The aim of this study was to determine the risk factors for R1 resection. Once risk factors had been identified, patients were matched according to Fong's prognostic criteria, in order to evaluate whether R1 resection still remained a negative prognostic factor impacting overall and disease-free survival

Parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies (PSH) for bilobar colorectal liver metastases are associated with a lower morbidity and similar oncological results: a propensity score matching analysis

International audienceOBJECTIVE:The aim of this study is to evaluate whether a parenchymal-sparing strategy provides similar results in terms of morbidity, mortality, and oncological outcome of non-PSH hepatectomies in a propensity score matched population (PSMP) in case of multiple (>3) bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM).BACKGROUND:The surgical treatment of bilobar liver metastasis is challenging due to the necessity to achieve complete resection margins and a sufficient future remnant liver. Two approaches are adaptable as follows: parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies (PSH) and extended hepatectomies (NON-PSH).METHODS:A total of 3036 hepatectomies were analyzed from a multicentric retrospective cohort of hepatectomies. Patients were matched in a 1:1 propensity score analysis in order to compare PSH versus NON-PSH resections.RESULTS:PSH was associated with a lower number of complications (≥1) (25% vs. 34%, p = 0.04) and a lower grade of Dindo-Clavien III and IV (10 vs. 16%, p = 0.03). Liver failure was less present in PSH (2 vs. 7%, p = 0.006), with a shorter ICU stay (0 day vs. 1 day, p = 0.004). No differences were demonstrated in overall and disease-free survival.CONCLUSION:In conclusion, PSH resection for bilobar multiple CLMs represents a valid alternative to NON-PSH resection in selected patients with a reduced morbidity and comparable oncological results

Outcomes of Rehepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Contemporary Multi-Institutional Analysis from the French Surgical Association Database

International audienceBACKGROUND:Recurrence remains frequent after curative-intent hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). We sought to define short- and long-term outcomes, and identify prehepatectomy factors associated with survival, following rehepatectomy (RH) for recurrence.METHODS:We conducted a multi-institutional cohort study of hepatectomy for CRLM over 2006-2013. Second-stage resections were excluded. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Secondary outcomes included 30-day overall morbidity and mortality, and survival from recurrence. Outcomes of RH and initial hepatectomy (IH) were compared.RESULTS:Of 2771 hepatectomies included in the study, 447 were RH. Median operative time, 30-day morbidity, mortality, and median length of stay did not differ for RH and IH. Five-year OS did not statistically differ, i.e. 56.5 % from RH and 67.6 % from IH [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.9, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.5-1.7], and 5-year RFS was inferior after RH (18.5 vs. 28.8 %; adjusted HR 1.3, 95 % CI 1.0-1.7). In patients who eventually recurred, 5-year survival from the time of recurrence did not differ whether it was after RH (46.5 %) or after IH (60.3 %) (adjusted HR 1.1, 95 % CI 0.8-1.8). Rectal primary tumor (HR 1.4, 95 % CI 1.0-2.1) and metastasis ≥3 cm (HR 1.3, 95 % CI 1.1-2.7) were independently associated with RFS, but not OS, after RH.CONCLUSION:Short-term outcomes of RH did not differ from IH. While recurrence was more frequent after RH than IH, it did not impact OS. Survival from the time of recurrence did not differ whether recurrence occurred after RH or after IH. CRLM recurrence can be treated with curative intent with excellent long-term outcomes

Postoperative Infectious Complications Impact Long-Term Survival in Patients Who Underwent Hepatectomies for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Propensity Score Matching Analysis

International audienceOBJECTIVE: Postoperative complications strongly impact the postoperative course and long-term outcome of patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Among them, infectious complications play a relevant role. The aim of this study was to evaluate if infectious complications still impact overall and disease-free survival after liver resection for CRLM once patients were matched with a propensity score matching analysis based on Fong's criteria. METHODS: A total of 2281 hepatectomies were analyzed from a multicentric retrospective cohort of hepatectomies. Patients were matched with a 1:3 propensity score analysis in order to compare patients with (INF+) and without (INF-) postoperative infectious complications. RESULTS: Major resection (OR = 1.69 (1.01-2.89), p = 0.05) and operative time (OR = 1.1 (1.1-1.3), p = 0.05) were identified as risk factors of infectious complications. After propensity score matching, infectious complications are associated with overall survival (OS), with 1-, 3-, 5-year OS at 94, 81, and 66% in INF- and 92, 66, and 57% in INF+ respectively (p = 0.01). Disease-free survival (DFS) was also different with regard to 1-, 3-, 5-year survival at 65, 41, and 22% in R0 vs. 50, 28, and 17% in INF+ (p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Infectious complications are associated with decreased overall and disease-free survival rates