Search

Pancreatic cancer represents one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), normothermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (NIPEC), and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has been proven with curative intent mainly for other tumors and there is a lack of consensus regarding possible benefits also in pancreatic cancer. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide an up-to-date overview of the effectiveness and safety of intraperitoneal treatments in the management of pancreatic cancer.A systematic review of articles was conducted according to PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 guidelines. 11 studies were included in the analysis.We included in our analysis 212 patients subdivided in three groups: 64 in the HIPEC group (57 with prophylactic intent and 7 with curative intent), 55 in the PIPAC group and 93 in the NIPEC group. Primary outcomes were represented by survival rates; we evidenced at an observation time of three years a survival of 24% in the HIPEC group (25.5% in the prophylactic arm and 6.2% in the curative arm), 5.3% in the PIPAC group and 7.9% in the NIPEC group.HIPEC could be considered as a promising technique for prophylaxis and treatment of peritoneal metastasis (PM) in case of borderline resectable and locally advanced disease. Increased survival rates emerged without additional morbidity when surgical resection and CRS are possible. In addition, our data about PIPAC and NIPEC as palliative treatment in unresectable disease seems to identify more favorable survival rates compared to literature.

Background gastric cancer patients frequently develop peritoneal metastases (PM) with a poor long-term prognosis. A solid body of evidence underlines the beneficial role of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) on survival, but to date, there is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal strategy in the treatment of locally advanced primary tumors with or without peritoneal metastasis. The present meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of CRS + HIPEC on survival analyzing the results of randomized studies only. Methods A systematic review of articles was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Twelve studies were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis. Results A survival benefit for patients treated with CRS + HIPEC at all time points was highlighted. However, difference in survival was significant at all time points for patients treated for prophylaxis of PM, but no difference was found when considering resection with a curative intent. The 1, 2, 3 and 5-year survival rates (SR) for patients undergoing CRS + HIPEC were 86.9%, 70.5%, 63.7% and 55.7% respectively. CRS + HIPEC for the treatment rather than prophylaxis of PM was the only predictor of a reduced 3y SR. Conclusions CRS + HIPEC may lead to improved prognosis for patients suffering from locally advanced gastric cancer in both prophylactic and curative settings. However, due to far from negligible postoperative morbidity and mortality rates, a strict patient selection is crucial to achieve the best results. The presence of extraperitoneal disease strongly limits the indication of this kind of surgery.