Title Page |
Introduction |
Principles
of Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy |
Current Indications for
Cytoreductive Surgery and Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy
Heated
Intraoperative Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy by the Coliseum
Technique
Immediate
Postoperative Abdominal Lavage in Preparation for Early
Postoperative Intraperitoneal 5-Fluorouracil
Early
Postoperative Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Adenocarcinoma |
Induction
Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Debilitating Ascites
Cytoreductive
Surgery for Peritoneal Surface Malignancy - Peritonectomy
Procedures |
Results of Treatment of
Peritoneal Surface Malignancy
Conclusions |
References
| II. | CURRENT INDICATIONS FOR CYTOREDUCTIVE SURGERY AND INTRAPERITONEAL CHEMOTHERAPY |
Table 4 presents the current indications for the use of
intraperitoneal chemotherapy to treat peritoneal carcinomatosis
or sarcomatosis or to prevent the progression of microscopic
residual disease in high-risk groups. Adenocarcinoma or sarcoma
of low malignant potential may arise from many different
intraabdominal sites and seed the abdominal or pelvic cavity
extensively. Most of these non-invasive malignancies can be
eradicated from the abdomen. Cytoreductive surgery followed by
intraperitoneal chemotherapy should be considered the standard
therapy for patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei syndrome. Also
these treatments have demonstrated benefits for patients with
large volume peritoneal surface disease from grade I sarcoma and
peritoneal mesothelioma.
TABLE 4 |
Current indications for cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy |
|
Patients with peritoneal seeding from invasive
adenocarcinomas or sarcomas are selectively treated at this point
in time according to the Peritoneal Cancer Index. This is a
clinical summary of both lesion size and distribution of
peritoneal surface malignancy (Figure 4). It should be
used in the decision making process as the abdomen is explored.
To arrive at a score, the size of intraperitoneal nodules must be
assessed. The lesion size or LS score should be used. An LS-0
score means that no malignant deposits are visualized. An LS-1
score signifies that tumor nodules less than 0.5 cm in greatest
dimension are present. The number of nodules is not scored, only
the size of the largest nodules. An LS-2 score signifies tumor
nodules between 0.5 and 5.0 cm present. LS-3 signifies tumor
nodules greater than 5.0 cm in any dimension present. If there is
a confluence of tumor, the lesion size is scored as 3.
In order to assess the distribution of peritoneal surface
disease, the abdominopelvic regions are utilized. For each of
these 13 regions, a lesion size score is determined. The
summation of the lesion size score in each of the 13
abdomino-pelvic regions is the Peritoneal Cancer Index for that
patient. A maximal score is 39 (13x3).
There are some caveats in the use of the Peritoneal Cancer Index.
Diseases such as pseudomyxoma peritonei, grade I sarcoma and
peritoneal mesothelioma are sometimes non-invasive. In these
situations, the status of the abdomen and pelvis after
cytoreduction may have no relationship to the status at the time
of abdominal exploration. In other words, even though the surgeon
may find an abdomen with a Peritoneal Cancer Index of 39, it can
be converted to an index of 0 by cytoreduction. In these
diseases, the prognosis will only be related to the completeness
of cytoreduction and not to the Peritoneal Cancer Index.
![]() |
|
Peritoneal Cancer Index is used to estimate the likelihood of
complete cytoreduction in patients with peritoneal surface
malignancy. The score is a summation of cancer implant lesion
size (scored 0 to 3) present in the 13 abdominopelvic regions.
From Esquivel J. Sugarbaker PH: Elective surgery in recurrent
colon cancer with peritoneal seeding: When to and when not to
proceed. Cancer Therapeutics, Nov, l998.
A second caveat for the Peritoneal Cancer Index is invasive
cancer at CRUCIAL ANATOMIC SITES. For example, unresectable
cancer on the common bile duct will cause a poor prognosis
despite a low Peritoneal Cancer Index. Cancer implants at
numerous sites on the small bowel surface will confer a poor
prognosis. Lymph nodes resected because there was nodal
metastases within groups unrelated to the primary cancer
represent dissemination from peritoneal surface cancer
(metastases from metastases). Cancer at crucial anatomic sites
becomes a systemic disease equivalent in assessing prognosis and
will override a favorable score with the Peritoneal Cancer Index
(6).
The use of the Peritoneal Cancer Index will vary with the type of
peritoneal surface malignancy treated. Berthet, et al in a study
of sarcomatosis found an index of < 13 associated with a 74%
five-year survival; an index of > 13 was associated
with an 11% five-year survival (7). For colon cancer with
carcinomatosis, Sugarbaker reported a Peritoneal Cancer Index of
< 10 associated with a 50% five-year survival; an index
of 11-20 was associated with a 20% five-year survival; and an
index of > 20 was associated with a 0% five-year survival (8).
Completeness of cytoreduction score
The final assessment to be used to assess prognosis with
peritoneal surface malignancy is the completeness of
cytoreduction (CC) score. This information is of less value to
the surgeon in planning treatments than the Peritoneal Cancer
Index because the CC score is not available until after the
cytoreduction is complete, rather than as the abdomen is being
explored. If during exploration it becomes obvious that
cytoreduction will not be complete, the surgeon may decide that a
palliative debulking that will provide symptomatic relief is
appropriate and discontinue plans for a potentially curative
cytoreduction with intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In both
noninvasive and invasive peritoneal surface malignancy, the
completeness of cytoreduction score is thought to be the
principle prognostic indicator.
For gastrointestinal cancer, the completeness of cytoreduction
score has been defined as follows: A CC-0 score indicates that no
visible peritoneal carcinomatosis remains after cytoreduction. A
CC-1 score indicates that tumor nodules persisting after
cytoreduction are less than 2.5 mm. This is a nodule size
thought to be penetrable by intracavitary chemotherapy. A CC-2
score indicates tumor nodules between 2.5 mm and 2.5 cm. A
CC-3 score indicates tumor nodules greater than 2.5 cm or a
confluence of unresected tumor nodules at any site within the
abdomen or pelvis (Figure 5). In high-grade malignancy,
complete cytoreduction may require a CC-0 score. In less invasive
malignancy such as pseudomyxoma peritonei, a complete
cytoreduction may include CC-0 and CC-1 cytoreduction.
![]() |
|
Completeness of cytoreduction score CC-0 to CC-3. A complete
cytoreduction for a noninvasive malignancy such as pseudomyxoma
peritonei includes CC-0 and CC-1 resection for invasive cancer
such as gastric cancer, only CC-O resection is considered
complete cytoreduction.
In the current approach to peritoneal carcinomatosis and
sarcomatosis, implant size and extent of tumor
distribution are the fundamental criteria for the selection
of patients for treatment with intraperitoneal chemotherapy. An
attempt at cytoreduction of peritoneal surface disease from
extensive invasive cancer is always to be avoided. Only patients
with MICROSCOPIC RESIDUAL DISEASE of high-grade peritoneal
surface cancer should be treated with curative intent using
cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Patients
with small lesion size peritoneal seeding with limited
distribution on peritoneal surfaces should be expected to benefit
and are candidates for an aggressive management strategy. Figure
6 shows the predictive effect of the Peritoneal Cancer Index
on the long-term survival of patients with sarcomatosis.
![]() |
|
Survival by the Peritoneal Cancer Index of patients with
sarcomatosis treated by cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal
chemotherapy. Patients with a score of < 13 showed a
statistically significant improvement in survival as compared to
a score of > 13 (p=0.0107).
A major role for intraperitoneal chemotherapy is the prevention
of subsequent peritoneal carcinomatosis or sarcomatosis. It
should be used in all patients who are at high risk for disease
progression on peritoneal surfaces. Virtually every patient who
has a free intraabdominal perforation of gastrointestinal cancer
through the malignancy itself subsequently develops peritoneal
carcinomatosis. Patients with primary cancer adherent to the
adjacent organs or structures (T4 lesions) are at great risk for
peritoneal carcinomatosis. The same is true for patients with
positive peritoneal cytology. Not infrequently, patients who are
undergoing the resection of a large intraabdominal tumor will
have a tumor spill. This maybe extremely common with advanced
primary or recurrent rectal malignancy and recurrent colonic
cancer. It may occur almost routinely in resections of advanced
gastric cancer. If there is a tumor spill, then in order to
prevent subsequent development of peritoneal carcinomatosis or
sarcomatosis, we recommend the use of intraperitoneal
chemotherapy. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy is an important
treatment option for recurrent ovarian malignancy. In patients
with recurrent ovarian cancer who have failed systemic
chemotherapy, cytoreduction is followed by intraperitoneal
chemotherapy with mitomycin C and 5-fluorouracil.
A final indication for intraperitoneal chemotherapy is
debilitating malignant ascites. This is one of the few instances
when intraperitoneal chemotherapy is not always combined with
cytoreductive surgery.
Title Page |
Introduction |
Principles
of Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy |
Current Indications for
Cytoreductive Surgery and Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy
Heated
Intraoperative Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy by the Coliseum
Technique
Immediate
Postoperative Abdominal Lavage in Preparation for Early
Postoperative Intraperitoneal 5-Fluorouracil
Early
Postoperative Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Adenocarcinoma |
Induction
Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Debilitating Ascites
Cytoreductive
Surgery for Peritoneal Surface Malignancy - Peritonectomy
Procedures |
Results of Treatment of
Peritoneal Surface Malignancy
Conclusions |
References