Efficacy and outcome of extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage plus surgery vs surgery alone with advanced gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common malignant tumors. After resection, one of the major problems is its peritoneal dissemination and recurrence. Some free cancer cells may still exist after resection. In addition, the surgery itself may lead to the dissemination of tumor cells. Therefore, it is necessary to remove residual tumor cells. Recently, some researchers found that extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage (EIPL) plus intraperitoneal chemotherapy can improve the prognosis of patients and eradicate peritoneal free cancer for GC patients. However, few studies explored the safety and long-term outcome of EIPL after curative gastrectomy. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and long-term outcome of advanced GC patients treated with EIPL. METHODS: According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 150 patients with advanced GC were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomly allocated to two groups. All patients received laparotomy. For the non-EIPL group, peritoneal lavage was washed using no more than 3 L of warm saline. In the EIPL group, patients received 10 L or more of saline (1 L at a time) before the closure of the abdomen. The surviving rate analysis was compared by the Kaplan-Meier method. The prognostic factors were carried out using the Cox appropriate hazard pattern. RESULTS: The basic information in the EIPL group and the non-EIPL group had no significant difference. The median follow-up time was 30 mo (range: 0-45 mo). The 1- and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates were 71.0% and 26.5%, respectively. The symptoms of ileus and abdominal abscess appeared more frequently in the non-EIPL group (P < 0.05). For the OS of patients, the EIPL, Borrmann classification, tumor size, N stage, T stage and vascular invasion were significant indicators. Then multivariate analysis revealed that EIPL, tumor size, vascular invasion, N stage and T stage were independent prognostic factors. The prognosis of the EIPL group was better than the non-EIPL group (P < 0.001). The 3-year survival rate of the EIPL group (38.4%) was higher than the non-EIPL group (21.7%). For the recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients, the risk factor of RFS included EIPL, N stage, vascular invasion, type of surgery, tumor location, Borrmann classification, and tumor size. EIPL and tumor size were independent risk factors. The RFS curve of the EIPL group was better than the non-EIPL group (P = 0.004), and the recurrence rate of the EIPL group (24.7%) was lower than the non-EIPL group (46.4%). The overall recurrence rate and peritoneum recurrence rate in the EIPL group was lower than the non-EIPL group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: EIPL can reduce the possibility of perioperative complications including ileus and abdominal abscess. In addition, the overall survival curve and RFS curve were better in the EIPL group.