Cargando…
The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)
OBJECTIVE: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are increasingly being used to treat peritoneal malignancies. Urological resections and reconstruction (URR) are occasionally performed during the surgery. We aim to evaluate the impact of these procedures o...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Second Military Medical University
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6033198/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29988907 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2017.09.003 |
_version_ | 1783337658572865536 |
---|---|
author | Tan, Grace Hwei Ching Shannon, Nicholas B. Chia, Claramae Shulyn Lee, Lui Shiong Soo, Khee Chee Teo, Melissa Ching Ching |
author_facet | Tan, Grace Hwei Ching Shannon, Nicholas B. Chia, Claramae Shulyn Lee, Lui Shiong Soo, Khee Chee Teo, Melissa Ching Ching |
author_sort | Tan, Grace Hwei Ching |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are increasingly being used to treat peritoneal malignancies. Urological resections and reconstruction (URR) are occasionally performed during the surgery. We aim to evaluate the impact of these procedures on peri-operative outcomes of CRS and HIPEC patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of all patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC from April 2001 to February 2016 was performed. Outcomes between patients who had surgery involving, and not involving URR were compared. Primary outcomes were the rate of major complications and the duration of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital. Secondary outcomes were that of overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors that would indicate a need for URR. RESULTS: A total of 214 CRS-HIPEC were performed, 21 of which involved a URR. Baseline clinical characteristics did not vary between the groups (URR vs. No URR). Urological resections comprised of 52% bladder resections, 24% ureteric resections, and 24% involving both bladder and ureteric resections. All bladder defects were closed primarily while ureteric reconstructions consisted of two end-to-end anastomoses, one ureto-uretostomy, five direct implantations into the bladder and three boari flaps. URR were more frequently required in patients with colorectal peritoneal disease (p = 0.029), but was not associated with previous pelvic surgery (76% vs. 54%, p = 0.065). Patients with URR did not suffer more serious complications (14% vs. 24%, p = 0.42). ICU (2.2 days vs. 1.4 days, p = 0.51) and hospital stays (18 days vs. 25 days, p = 0.094) were not significantly affected. Undergoing a URR did not affect OS (p = 0.99), but was associated with increased operation time (570 min vs. 490 min, p = 0.046). CONCLUSION: While concomitant URR were associated with an increase in operation time, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications or OS. Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases are more likely to require a URR compared to other primary tumours, and needs to be considered during pre-operative planning. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6033198 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Second Military Medical University |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60331982018-07-09 The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) Tan, Grace Hwei Ching Shannon, Nicholas B. Chia, Claramae Shulyn Lee, Lui Shiong Soo, Khee Chee Teo, Melissa Ching Ching Asian J Urol Original Article OBJECTIVE: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are increasingly being used to treat peritoneal malignancies. Urological resections and reconstruction (URR) are occasionally performed during the surgery. We aim to evaluate the impact of these procedures on peri-operative outcomes of CRS and HIPEC patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of all patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC from April 2001 to February 2016 was performed. Outcomes between patients who had surgery involving, and not involving URR were compared. Primary outcomes were the rate of major complications and the duration of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital. Secondary outcomes were that of overall survival (OS) and prognostic factors that would indicate a need for URR. RESULTS: A total of 214 CRS-HIPEC were performed, 21 of which involved a URR. Baseline clinical characteristics did not vary between the groups (URR vs. No URR). Urological resections comprised of 52% bladder resections, 24% ureteric resections, and 24% involving both bladder and ureteric resections. All bladder defects were closed primarily while ureteric reconstructions consisted of two end-to-end anastomoses, one ureto-uretostomy, five direct implantations into the bladder and three boari flaps. URR were more frequently required in patients with colorectal peritoneal disease (p = 0.029), but was not associated with previous pelvic surgery (76% vs. 54%, p = 0.065). Patients with URR did not suffer more serious complications (14% vs. 24%, p = 0.42). ICU (2.2 days vs. 1.4 days, p = 0.51) and hospital stays (18 days vs. 25 days, p = 0.094) were not significantly affected. Undergoing a URR did not affect OS (p = 0.99), but was associated with increased operation time (570 min vs. 490 min, p = 0.046). CONCLUSION: While concomitant URR were associated with an increase in operation time, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications or OS. Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases are more likely to require a URR compared to other primary tumours, and needs to be considered during pre-operative planning. Second Military Medical University 2018-07 2017-10-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6033198/ /pubmed/29988907 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2017.09.003 Text en © 2018 Editorial Office of Asian Journal of Urology. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Tan, Grace Hwei Ching Shannon, Nicholas B. Chia, Claramae Shulyn Lee, Lui Shiong Soo, Khee Chee Teo, Melissa Ching Ching The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) |
title | The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) |
title_full | The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) |
title_fullStr | The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) |
title_short | The impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) |
title_sort | impact of urological resection and reconstruction on patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (crs) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (hipec) |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6033198/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29988907 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2017.09.003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tangracehweiching theimpactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT shannonnicholasb theimpactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT chiaclaramaeshulyn theimpactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT leeluishiong theimpactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT sookheechee theimpactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT teomelissachingching theimpactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT tangracehweiching impactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT shannonnicholasb impactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT chiaclaramaeshulyn impactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT leeluishiong impactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT sookheechee impactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec AT teomelissachingching impactofurologicalresectionandreconstructiononpatientsundergoingcytoreductivesurgerycrsandhyperthermicintraperitonealchemotherapyhipec |