Assessing feasibility and perioperative outcomes with minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy for interval debulking surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

Objective To determine peri-operative outcomes in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) undergoing interval debulking surgery (IDS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) via minimally invasive interval debulking surgery (MIS) or laparotomy (LAP). Methods A single institution, retrospective cohort study was performed in women with EOC who underwent IDS with HIPEC from 2017 to 2019 via MIS or LAP. Peri-operative outcomes were compared using univariate analysis. Results In total, 50 eligible women were identified; ten (20.0%) underwent MIS + HIPEC and 40 (80.0%) LAP + HIPEC. The median age of patients in the MIS group was 71.1 vs. 64.2 years in LAP (p = 0.031). There was no significant difference in pre-operative complete radiographic response following NACT (p = 0.18). Notably, there was no difference in the rate of R0 resection (70.0% vs. 77.5%; p = 0.39). There was no significant difference in ICU admission, estimated blood loss, operative time, or use of vasopressors between the cohorts. Similarly, there was no difference in 30-day adverse events for MIS vs. LAP, but length of stay was decreased for those who underwent minimally invasive procedures (3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.016). Time to initiation of chemotherapy following surgery was not significantly different between groups (26.2 days vs 32.0 days, p = 0.090). With median follow-up of 15.1 months, there was no difference in recurrence free survival (median 15.0 vs 17.2 months log-rank, p = 0.30) for MIS vs. LAP. Conclusions In this retrospective cohort study, we demonstrate that in women with advanced EOC, HIPEC with MIS at the time of IDS following NACT is feasible. Our institutional experience demonstrates similar rates of R0 cytoreduction, compared to LAP. An MIS approach should not prevent surgeons from utilizing HIPEC where indicated for management of advanced EOC.
Highlights • When comparing MIS and LAP at time of HIPEC, no differences are observed in adverse perioperative outcomes. • MIS was associated with shorter hospitalization and with no significant difference in the rate of R0 resections. • Patient candidacy for an MIS IDS should not prevent surgeons from utilizing HIPEC in appropriate candidates.