Objective To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of hyperthermia (HT) plus intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion chemotherapy (IHPC) versus IHPC alone for malignant ascites. Methods Such databases as PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, VIP, WanFang, CNKI and CBM were electronically and comprehensively searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on HT plus IHPC vs. IHPC alone for malignant ascites from inception to March 2013. Two reviewers independently screened studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed quality of the included studies. References of the included studies were also retrieved. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. Results A total of 16 RCTs involving 984 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with the IHPC alone group, the HT plus IHPC group had a higher effective rate of controlling ascites (OR=3.40, 95%CI 2.58 to 4.48, Plt;0.000 01), better improvement in quality of life (OR=2.77, 95%CI 1.90 to 4.05, Plt;0.000 01), with significant differences. The two groups were alike in 1-year survival with no significant difference (OR=1.80, 95%CI 0.61 to 5.31, P=0.28). As for safety, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidences of nausea and vomiting, abdominal distension and pain, myelosuppression, diarrhea, and constipation. Conclusion The results of this systematic review show that, compared with IHPC alone, HT plus IHPC improves the effective rate as well as the quality of life of patients with malignant ascites, and it does not increase the incidences of adverse reactions. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality RCTs with larger sample size are needed to verify the above conclusion.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of postoperative intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion chemotherapy (IHPC) for advanced gastric cancer, so as to provide references for clinical practice and study. Methods The following databases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang were searched on computer, and other searches were also performed to collect all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on postoperative IHPC versus intravenous chemotherapy alone (IC) for advanced gastric cancer. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to Cochrane Handbook 5.1 for Systematic Review, and Meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan 5.1 software. Results A total of 18 RCTs involving 2299 patients were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) Efficacy evaluation: There were significant differences between the IHPC group and the IC group in 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rate, 3- and 5-year recurrence rate, and 3- and 5-year distant metastasis rate; the OR value and 95%CI were 1.88 (1.49, 2.39), 2.45 (1.64, 3.67), 2.29 (1.92, 2.73), 2.17 (1.70, 2.76), 0.39 (0.29, 0.52), 0.54 (0.40, 0.72), 0.55 (0.38, 0.78), 0.58 (0.42, 0.81), respectively; b) Safety evaluation: There were significant differences between the IHPC group and the IC group in the incidence of abdominal pain, abdominal distension, nausea and vomiting; the OR value and 95%CI were 2.20 (1.58, 3.07), 7.00 (2.67, 18.36), 0.65 (0.45, 0.95), respectively. But there were no significant differences between the IHPC group and the IC group in the incidence of alopecia, ileus, bone marrow inhibition, and hepatic lesion. Conclusion Compared with IC, postoperative IHPC+IC can improve survival rate and reduce the recurrence and distant metastasis rate; additionally, it is safe and feasible, so it is recommended that the detailed condition of patients should be taken into consideration when the postoperative IHPC+IC therapy is applied to clinic.
Objective To evaluate the curative effectiveness and safety of prophylactic chemohyperthermic peritoneal perfusion (CHPP) during the radical surgery of advancing gastric cancer. Methods We searched MEDLINE (1980 to December 2002), EMBASE (1989 to December 2002), BIOSIS Previews (1980 to December 2002), Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 4, 2003) and CBMdisc (1981 to December 2002). Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing curative gastrectomy (CG) plus CHPP with CG for advancing gastric cancer were collected. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed, and a meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 4.2 software. Results Seven RCTs involving 744 patients met the selection criteria, all trials were of lower methodological quality. ① Meta-analysis results showed that no significant difference was found comparing CG plus CDDP (cisplatin) with CG for peritoneal recurrence after operation (The pooled OR 0.69，95%CI 0.43 to 1.12). Compared with CG alone, CG plus CDDP plus MMC significantly reduced peritoneal recurrence after operation during ≥5 years follow up (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.37), but this effect was not seen during lt; 5 years follow up (OR 0.35，95%CI 0.06 to 2.10). ② CG plus CDDP significantly reduced mortality after operation during ＜5 and ≥5 years follow up, compared with CG alone (OR 0.25, 95%CI 0.08 to 0.75; the pooled OR 0.62, 95%CI 0.41 to 0.95), CG plus CDDP plus MMC significantly reduced mortality after operation during ≥5 years follow up, compared with CG alone (the pooled OR 0.45, 95%CI 0.28 to 0.74), but this effect was not seen during lt; 5 years follow up (OR 0.29, 95%CI 0.08 to 1.15). ③ Side effects were reported in only one study and no significant difference was found between the two groups (P=0.96). Conclusions Because of the small number of included studies, the lower methodological quality, and the differences in diagnostic criteria of peritoneal recurrence after operation, the reviewers feel that no firm conclusion could be drawn. Some well designed RCTs of CHPP for advancing gastric cancer should be undertaken to further evaluate its effectiveness.
摘要:目的:探讨晚期食管癌切除、纵隔淋巴结清扫及术中纵隔热灌注化疗对残留于气管、支气管、胸主动脉、奇静脉等器官的癌性肉眼微小病灶治疗效果。方法:选择食管癌病变浸润超过外膜层外侵至气管、支气管、胸主动脉、奇静脉等器官患者112例，随机分为两组:治疗组56例,术中42～43℃无菌蒸馏水2000～2500 mL加入顺铂(DDP)150 mg及氟尿嘧啶(5FU)1200 mg在体外循环下行纵隔热灌注化疗40 min;对照组56例,术中未进行纵隔热灌注化疗。结果:治疗组术后第一年有6例出现纵隔区域肿瘤复发及淋巴结转移,术后第二年有11例纵隔区域肿瘤复发及淋巴结转移;对照组术后第一年有14例出现纵隔区域肿瘤复发及淋巴结转移,术后第二年23例出现纵隔区域肿瘤复发及淋巴结转移。结论:晚期食管癌术中纵隔热灌注化疗可明显减少或延迟纵隔区域肿瘤复发及淋巴转移,提高术后第一至第二年生存率。Abstract: Objective: To explore the advanced esophageal cancer resection, mediastinum, lymph node dissection, mediastinum, hot infusion chemoembolization and clinical observation of residual heat infusion chemoembolization and trachea, or the thoracic aorta, bronchus, eye cancer organs such as intravenous of tiny lesions therapeutic effect. Methods: Select esophageal lesions than the outer membrane layer of infiltrating the trachea and bronchus to the thoracic aorta, and 112 cases of patients with venous organs such as random points to two groups: treatment group treated with perfusion of 56 cases at 4243 degrees Celsius sterile 2000 mL distilled water 2500 mL ~ (DDP) joined cisplatin 150 mg, 5fluorouracil (5FU 1200 mg) in extracorporeal circulation downlink mediastinal hot perfusion 40 minutes, control group treated with perfusion of 56 cases without mediastinal hot perfusion chemotherapy. Results: Treatment group in 6 cases occured after first mediastinal tumor recurrence and regional lymph node metastases after 11 cases, the regional recurrence and lymphatic metastasis mediastinal, control group first fill after 14 cases mediastinal tumor recurrence and bureau of regional lymph node metastasis appeared in 23 cases, surgery between regional tumor locally recurrent lymph node metastases. Conclusion: Advanced esophageal intraoperative mediastinal hot perfusion chemotherapy can obviously reduce or delay mediastinal tumor recurrence and regional lymph node metastases, raise the firstsurial.
Objective To evaluate the rational of peritoneal warm perfusion chemotherapy after the operation. MethodsOne hundred and two patients with gastric cancer were included in this study. One hundred milliliter of peritoneal fluid were collected respectively after opening the abdomen,before closing the peritoneal cavity,and after hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion chemotherapy for free cancer cells examination. ResultsAfter opening the abdomen, the positive rate of free cancer cells was 36.3%(37/102), and the positive rate before closure of peritoneal cavity was 52.9%(54/102), 31 cases of free cancer cells were found killed after the warm perfusion chemotherapy,the effect rate was 57.4%(31/54).The free cancer cells positive rate related to the tumor infiltration depth, serous membrane invasion area and the type of histopathology. Conclusion In the peritoneal cavity of patients with gastric cancer, free cancer cells are able to survive and have a high degree of activity. Hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion chemotherapy is an effective method to kill free cancer cells.
Objective To observe the toxic and side effects during the continuous hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion chemotherapy (CHPPC).Methods Abdominal paracentesis and catheterization were performed under ultrasound guidance, then CHPPC was carried out, which was in temperature of 42-44 ℃ for 1 h. The changes of body temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, saturation of blood oxygen and respiratory frequency were recorded in 109 patients during and after perfusion, meanwhile symptoms and physical signs of abdominal region and system status such as abdominal tenderness, rebound tenderness were observed. Results There were no significant differences of body temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, saturation of blood oxygen or respiratory frequency between before and after perfusion (Pgt;0.05). There were 25 patients with abdominal pain, but in which only 3 patients with symptoms of acute abdomen, 26 patients with gastrointestinal symptoms, 20 patients with myelosuppression, and others (22 cases) with aches of puncture position which were released by symptomatic treatment. Conclusion There are less toxic and side effect and better tolerance in patients with CHPPC application 1 month after operation.
ObjectiveTo investigate the curative effects of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyper-thermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for treating the hepatocellular carcinoma with peritoneal metastasis. MethodsThe clinical data of 80 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma with peritoneal metastasis who were treated in our hospital from January 2004 to January 2012 were collected, and were classified into observation group (n=40) and control group (n=40) according to the treatment. Case of observation group received CRS+HIPEC, and cases of control group received CRS+conventional intraperitoneal injection of chemotherapy. Then the comparison of clinical effect and prog-nosis was performed. ResultsIn observation group, the results of completeness of cytoreduction (CC) grade was:31 cases in grade 0, 6 cases in grade 1, and 3 cases in grade 2. In control group, the results of CC grade was:32 cases in grade 0, 6 cases in grade 1, and 2 cases in grade 3. There was no significant difference between 2 groups in the CC grade (P=0.213). In addition, there were no significant differences between observation group and control group in operation time (6.8 hours vs. 6.5 hours), hospital stay (17.3 days vs.18.7 days), and incidence of adverse reactions[70.0% (28/40) vs. 60.0% (24/40)], P>0.05. All of the cases of observation group and control group were followed up for 10-61 months (average of 42.5 months) and 6-49 months (average of 30.2 months) respectively. During the follow up period, in observation group, there were 18 cases died, 12 cases suffered from recurrence, 5 cases suffered from metastasis, and the rest of 5 cases survived; in the control group, there were 26 cases died, 9 cases suffered from recurrence, and 5 cases suffered from metastasis. However, the survival situation was better in observation group than that of control group (P<0.01). ConclusionCombining CRS and HIPEC for treating hepatocellular carcinoma with peritoneal metastasis was safe and effective, which would be widely applied.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the effectiveness and safety of intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion chemotherapy (IHPC) for ovarian cancer, so as to provide references for clinical practice and studies. MethodsWe electronically searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 6, 2013), Web of Science, WanFang Data, CBM, VIP and CNKI for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about IHPC vs. intravenous chemotherapy (IC) for ovarian cancer from the inception of the databases to June 2013. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. ResultsA total of 10 RCTs involving 723 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the IHPC group was superior to the IC group in clinical efficiency (OR=4.02, 95%CI 2.85 to 5.68, P < 0.000 01), clinical benefit response (OR=3.41, 95%CI 2.13 to 5.45, P < 0.000 01), recurrence and metastasis rates (OR=0.29, 95%CI 0.20 to 0.42, P < 0.000 1), and overall survival rates (OR=3.30, 95%CI 1.82 to 5.99, P < 0.000 1). In the aspect of safety, no significant difference was found in bone marrow suppression, hemoglobin reduction, nausea and vomiting between two groups. ConclusionIHPC for ovarian cancer can improve clinical efficiency, clinical benefit response and overall survival rates, and reduce recurrence and metastasis rates; and it is also safe for patients.
Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been used in clinical setting, and is one of the optional treatment for peritoneal surface tumors. It can be used as adjuvant therapy to prevent peritoneal recurrence after gastric or colorectal cancer resection, or to treat those diseases with peritoneal metastasis alone through cytoreductive surgery +HIPEC or HIPEC alone, based on a multidisciplinary model. The updates of European HIPEC-related clinical trials, GASTRIPEC, GASTRICHIP, PRODIGE 7, PROPHYLOCHIP, COLOPEC, COMBATAC, were reported at the 11th International Workshop on Peritoneal Surface Malignancy. In those trials, there was no definitive result surporting that HIPEC treatment might bring survival benefits to patients with gastric or colorectal cancer. However, long-term follow-up results remain to be seen, and some studies are still recruiting. Although several studies were designed as phase Ⅲ trials, the overall sample size was small-scaled. In addition, in the trials, diagnostic laparoscopy were widely used in gastric or colorectal cancer patients, which was helpful to improve staging accuracy and optimizing treatment strategies. The indications for HIPEC therapy (peritoneal cancer index) and technical issues (duration, temperature, approach, and agents) need further investigate.
In recent years, cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have been increasingly used for the treatment of peritoneal metastases. Imaging examination plays an important role in the process of CRS+HIPEC in treatment of peritoneal metastasis. This article briefly introduces the preoperative imaging evaluation, postoperative imaging evaluation, and current limitations of CRS+HIPEC in the treatment of peritoneal metastases.