Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 148–154 | Cite as

Morbidity and Mortality Following Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: Data from the DGAV StuDoQ Registry with 2149 Consecutive Patients

  • Pompiliu PisoEmail author
  • Sebastian D. Nedelcut
  • Beate Rau
  • Alfred Königsrainer
  • Gabriel Glockzin
  • Michael A. Ströhlein
  • Rüdiger Hörbelt
  • Jörg Pelz
Gastrointestinal Oncology



Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are performed for well-selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. This combined treatment is potentially associated with an increased rate of complications.


The aim of this paper was to analyze the morbidity and mortality of CRS and HIPEC in the German national registry.


We present a retrospective analysis of 2149 consecutive patients from 52 hospitals. The data were prospectively documented in the DGAV StuDoQ Registry between February 2011 and December 2016.


Almost two-thirds of all patients had a colorectal malignancy; therefore, the most frequently performed resections were colectomies (54%) and rectal resections (30%). Only 36.2% of all patients had no anastomosis, and fewer than 20% of all patients were older than 70 years of age (16.4%). Enteric fistula and anastomotic leaks occurred in 10.5% of all cases. The reoperation rate was 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.51–18.1). Major grade 3 and 4 complications (Clavien–Dindo classification) occurred in 19.3% of all patients, half of which were due to surgical complications. The overall 30-day postoperative hospital mortality was 2.3% (95% CI 1.02–3.85). Multivariate analysis showed an increased risk for morbidity associated with pancreatic resections (odds ratio [OR] 2.4), rectal resection (OR 1.5), or at least one anastomosis (OR 1.35), and mortality with reoperation (OR 8.7) or age > 70 years (OR 3.35).


CRS and HIPEC are associated with acceptable morbidity and low mortality. These results show that CRS and HIPEC can be safely performed nationwide when close mentoring by experienced centers is provided.



The authors would like to thank Dr Daniel Leucuta, MSc, PhD, from the Department of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, “Iuliu Hatieganu”, Cluj-Napoca, Romania—for having performed the statistical analysis of all recorded data. The Peritoneum Surface Oncology Group and members of the StuDoQ-HIPEC Registry of the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery (DGAV) include the following institutions: Magdeburg Hospital; University Hospital Greifswald; Kempten-Oberallgäu Hospital; Katharinenhospital Stuttgart; University Hospital Würzburg; Hospital Barmherzige Brüder Regensburg; University Hospital Regensburg; University Hospital Charite Berlin Campus Mitte; University Hospital Tübingen; University Hospital Hamburg; University Hospital Schleswig–Holstein, Campus Kiel; Köln-Merheim Medical Center, Witten/Herdecke University; Hospital Dachau; Johanniter-Hospital Bonn; Diakonie Hospital Henriettenstiftung, Hannover; Marienhospital Herne, Ruhr University Hospital, Bochum; Hospital Osnabrück; Helios Hospital Berlin Buch; Asklepios Hospital Wiesbaden; Westpfalz – Hospital Kaiserslautern; Hospital Offenbach; Hospital Robert-Bosch Stuttgart; University Hospital Düsseldorf, Clemenshospital Münster; University Hospital Freiburg; University Hospital Gießen; St. Joseph Hospital Berlin-Tempelhof; Diakonissen Hospital Dresden; Asklepios Hospital Langen; Hospital Frankfurt-Höchst; Hospital Dresden-Friedrichstadt; University Hospital Mainz; Hospital Nordwest, Frankfurt am Main; Vivantes Humboldt Hospital Berlin; Rotkreuz Hospital München; Hospital Arnsberg; University Hospital Jena; Hospital Leverkusen; University Hospital Wien; University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck; University Hospital Charite Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin; Hospital Celle; LMU München, Hospital Großhadern; University Hospital Göttingen, University Hospital rechts der Isar TU München; University Hospital Münster; University Hospital Erlangen; Caritas Hospital Saarbrücken; University Hospital Magdeburg; Hospital Sindelfingen-Böblingen; Agaplesion Diakonie Hospital Kassel; Hospital München Bogenhausen; DRK-Hospital Berlin-Köpenick; Hospital Aschaffenburg; Pleißental- Hospital Werdau; Asklepios Hospital Barmbek; Paracelsus Private University Hospital Salzburg, University Hospital Leipzig; Catholic Hospital Essen; Hospital Bremen-Mitte; University Hospital Köln; Rems-Murr Hospital, Schorndorf; AMEOS Hospital Am Bürgerpark, Bremerhaven; University Hospital Olomouc. This manuscript was created with the help of the DGAV StuDoQ Registry (German Society for General and Visceral Surgery) under ID number StuDoQ-2017-0023.

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors of this current article, Prof. Dr. Piso declares there are no conflicts of interest with regard to the content of this article.


  1. 1.
    Sugarbaker PH. Peritonectomy procedures. Ann Surg. 1995;221(1):29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brücher BL, Piso P, Verwaal V, et al. Peritoneal carcinomatosis: cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC: overview and basics. Cancer Invest. 2012;30:209–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chua TC, Yan TD, Saxena A, et al. Should the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis by cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy still be regarded as a highly morbid procedure? A systematic review of morbidity and mortality. Ann Surg. 2009;249:900–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baratti D, Kusamura S, Mingrone E, et al. Identification of a subgroup of patients at highest risk for complications after surgical cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Ann Surg. 2012;256:334–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moran B, Cecil T, Chandrakumaran K, et al. The results of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in 1200 patients with peritoneal malignancy. Colorectal Dis. 2015;17(9):772–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jafari MD, Halabi WJ, Stamos MJ, et al. Surgical outcomes of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: analysis of the American College of Surgeons national surgical quality improvement program. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(2):170–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stephens AD, Alderman R, Chang D, et al. Morbidity and mortality analysis of 200 treatments with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy using the coliseum technique. Ann Surg Oncol. 1999;6:790–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huang CQ, Min Y, Wang SY, et al. Cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy improves survival for peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence. Oncotarget. 2017;8(33):55657–83.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Newton AD, Bartlett EK, Karakousis GC. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a review of factors contributing to morbidity and mortality. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016;7(1):99–111Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Verwaal VJ, Rau B, Jamali F, et al. Registries on peritoneal surface malignancies throughout the world, their use and their options. Int J Hyperthermia. 2017;33(5):528–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jähne J, Piso P, Schmoll E, et al. Intraoperative (hyperthermic) chemotherapy: considerations and aspects of safe intra- and postoperative treatment with cytostatic drugs. Langenbecks Arch Chir. 1997;382:8–14Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Piso P, Bektas H, Werner U, et al. Improved prognosis following peritonectomy procedures and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis of appendiceal carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27:286–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Piso P. Bericht aus der Arbeitsgruppe “Primäre und sekundäre Malignome des Peritoneums”. Onkologie. 2005;28:446–7Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Deraco M, Baratti D, Kusamura S, et al. Surgical technique of parietal and visceral peritonectomy for peritoneal surface malignancies. J Surg Oncol. 2009;100:321–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cascales Campos P, Gil J, Parrilla P. Morbidity and mortality outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with primary and recurrent advanced ovarian cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:970–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Doud AN, Randle RW, Clark CJ, et al. Impact of distal pancreatectomy on outcomes of peritoneal surface disease treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:1645–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Downs-Canner S, Ding Y, Magge DR, et al. a comparative analysis of postoperative pancreatic fistulas after surgery with and without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:1651–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schwarz L, Votanopoulos K, Morris D, et al. Is the combination of distal pancreatectomy and cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC reasonable? Results of an international multicener study. Ann Surg. 2016;263(2):369–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Piso P, Slowik P, Popp F, et al. Safety of gastric resections during cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(8):2188–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kusamura S, Younan R, Baratti D, et al. Cytoreductive surgery followed by intraperitoneal hyperthermic perfusion: analysis of morbidity and mortality in 209 peritoneal surface malignancies treated with closed abdomen technique. Cancer. 2006;106:1144–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smeenk RM, Verwaal VJ, Zoetmulder FAN. Toxicity and mortality of cytoreduction and intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in pseudomyxoma peritonei: a report of 103 procedures. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:186–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Passot G, Vaudoyer D, Villeneuve L, et al. What made hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy an effective curative treatment for peritoneal surface malignancy: a 25-year experience with 1,125 procedures. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113(7):796–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kuijpers AM, Hauptmann M, Aalbers AG, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IH, Wiezer MJ, et al. Cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: the learning curve reassessed. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42(2):244–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mohamed F, Moran BJ. Morbidity and mortality with cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy: the importance of a learning curve. Cancer J. 2009;15(3):196–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Parsons HM, Henderson WG, Ziegenfuss JY, et al. Missing data and interpretation of cancer surgery outcomes at the American College of Surgeons national surgical quality improvement program. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;213:379–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pompiliu Piso
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sebastian D. Nedelcut
    • 1
  • Beate Rau
    • 2
  • Alfred Königsrainer
    • 3
  • Gabriel Glockzin
    • 4
    • 5
  • Michael A. Ströhlein
    • 6
  • Rüdiger Hörbelt
    • 7
  • Jörg Pelz
    • 8
  1. 1.Department of General and Visceral SurgeryHospital Barmherzige BrüderRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Surgery, Campus Virchow-Klinikum and Charité Campus MitteCharité – Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Department of General, Visceral and Transplant SurgeryEberhard-Karls University HospitalTübingenGermany
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryUniversity Medical Center RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  5. 5.Department of Surgery, Städtisches Klinikum München GmbHKlinikum BogenhausenMünchenGermany
  6. 6.Department of Abdominal, Vascular and Transplant Surgery, Köln-Merheim Medical CenterWitten/Herdecke UniversityKölnGermany
  7. 7.Department of SurgeryUniversity Hospital of Giessen-MarburgGiessenGermany
  8. 8.Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Pediatric SurgeryUniversity Hospital WürzburgWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations