Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 868–874 | Cite as

Significance of Urinary Tract Involvement in Patients Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery (CRS) and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC)

  • Konstantinos I. Votanopoulos
  • Reese W. Randle
  • Brandon Craven
  • Katrina R. Swett
  • Edward A. Levine
  • Perry Shen
  • John H. Stewart
  • Majid Mirzazadeh
Gastrointestinal Oncology

Abstract

Background

Urinary tract involvement in patients with peritoneal surface disease treated with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) often requires complex urologic resections and reconstruction to achieve optimal cytoreduction. The impact of these combined procedures on surgical outcomes is not well defined.

Methods

A prospective database of CRS/HIPEC procedures was analyzed retrospectively. Type of malignancy, performance status, resection status, hospital and intensive care unit stay, morbidity, mortality, and overall survival were reviewed.

Results

A total of 864 patients underwent 933 CRS/HIPEC procedures, while 64 % (550) had preoperative ureteral stent placement. A total of 7.3 % had an additional urologic procedure without an increase in 30-day (p = 0.4) or 90-day (p = 1.0) mortality. Urologic procedures correlated with increased length of operating time (p < 0.001), blood loss (p < 0.001), and length of hospitalization (p = 0.003), yet were not associated with increased overall 30-day major morbidity (grade III/IV, p = 0.14). In multivariate analysis, independent predictors of additional urologic procedures were prior surgical score (p < 0.001), number of resected organs (p = 0.001), and low anterior resection (p = 0.03). Long-term survival was not statistically different between patients with and without urologic resection for low-grade appendiceal primary lesions (p = 0.23), high-grade appendiceal primary lesions (p = 0.40), or colorectal primary lesions (p = 0.14).

Conclusions

Urinary tract involvement in patients with peritoneal surface disease does not increase overall surgical morbidity. Patients with urologic procedures demonstrate survival patterns with meaningful prolongation of life. Urologic involvement should not be considered a contraindication for CRS/HIPEC in patients with resectable peritoneal surface disease.

Notes

Disclosure

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Chua TC, Moran BJ, Sugarbaker PH, Levine EA, Glehen O, Gilly FN, et al. Early- and long-term outcome data of patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei from appendiceal origin treated by a strategy of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2449–56.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elias D, Gilly F, Boutitie F, Quenet F, Bereder JM, Mansvelt B, et al. Peritoneal colorectal carcinomatosis treated with surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy: retrospective analysis of 523 patients from a multicentric French study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:63–8.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glehen O, Gilly FN, Boutitie F, Bereder JM, Quenet F, Sideris L, et al. Toward curative treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from nonovarian origin by cytoreductive surgery combined with perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a multi-institutional study of 1,290 patients. Cancer. 2010;116:5608–18.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goéré D, Malka D, Tzanis D, Gava V, Boige V, Eveno C, et al. Is there a possibility of a cure in patients with colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis amenable to complete cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy? Ann Surg. 2013;257:1065–71.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Levine EA, Stewart JH, Russell GB, Geisinger KR, Loggie BL, Shen P. Cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy: experience with 501 procedures. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:943–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smeenk RM, Bex A, Verwaal VJ, Horenblas S, Zoetmulder FA. Pseudomyxoma peritonei and the urinary tract: involvement and treatment related complications. J Surg Oncol. 2006;93:20–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Honore C, Souadka A, Goere D, Dumont F, Deschamps F, Elias D. HIPEC for peritoneal carcinomatosis: does an associated urologic procedure increase morbidity? Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:104–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sugarbaker PH, Chang D. Results of treatment of 385 patients with peritoneal surface spread of appendiceal malignancy. Ann Surg Oncol. 1999;6:727–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shen P, Stewart JH, Levine EA. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy: overview and rationale. Curr Probl Cancer. 2009;33:125–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Law WL, Chu KW. Anterior resection for rectal cancer with mesorectal excision: a prospective evaluation of 622 patients. Ann Surg. 2004;240:260–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Votanopoulos KI, Swett K, Blackham AU, Ihemelandu C, Shen P, Stewart JH, et al. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in peritoneal carcinomatosis from rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1088–92.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Konstantinos I. Votanopoulos
    • 1
  • Reese W. Randle
    • 1
  • Brandon Craven
    • 2
  • Katrina R. Swett
    • 3
  • Edward A. Levine
    • 1
  • Perry Shen
    • 1
  • John H. Stewart
    • 1
  • Majid Mirzazadeh
    • 2
  1. 1.Surgical Oncology Service, Department of General SurgeryWake Forest UniversityWinston-SalemUSA
  2. 2.Department of UrologyWake Forest UniversityWinston-SalemUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiostatisticsWake Forest UniversityWinston-SalemUSA

Personalised recommendations