Review
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Surg Proced. Jul 28, 2015; 5(2): 187-197
Published online Jul 28, 2015. doi: 10.5412/wjsp.v5.i2.187
Table 1 Peritoneal wash cytology before and after bidirectional intraperitoneal and systemic induction chemotherapy
CytologyCytology after BIPSC
Before BIPSCNegativePositiveTotal
Negative15015
Positive26 (79%)733
41748
Table 2 Peritoneal wash cytology before and after neoadjuvant intraperitoneal/systemic chemotherapy
CytologyCytology after NIPS
Before NIPSNegativePositiveTotal
Negative47148
Positive69 (70%)3099
11631147
Table 3 Histoloogic effects of primary tumor and peritoneal carcinomatosis in 41 patients after bidirectional intraperitoneal and systemic induction chemotherapy
EF-0EF-1EF-2EF-3Total
Primary tumors3 (12%)15 (58%)7 (27%)1 (4%)26 (100%)
Peritoneal metastasis7 (17%)18 (44%)7 (17%)9 (22%)41 (100%)
Table 4 Histoloogic effects of primary tumor and peritoneal carcinomatosis in 147 patients with PC treated with neoadjuvant intraperitoneal/systemic chemotherapy
EF-0EF-1EF-2EF-3Total
Primary tumors13 (18%)38 (54%)20 (28%)071 (100%)
Peritoneal metastasis59 (40%)35 (24%)14 (10%)39 (25%)147 (100%)
Table 5 Side effects during bidirectional intraperitoneal and systemic induction chemotherapy
Grade 0Grade 1-2Grade 3Grade 4Grade 5Total
44 (76%)8 (14%)4 (7%)2 (3%)0 (0%)58
Table 6 Multivariate analysis of 304 patients with peritoneal metastasis treated with a comprehensive treatmnent
Prognostic factorsχ2P valueHR95%CI
Sex male vs female0.2630.607520.92180.6761.257
CC score: complete vs incomplete4.030.044681.5041.012.24
Nodal involvement: N0-1 vs N2-30.4450.504541.13380.7841.639
Neoadjuvant chemo.: negative vs positive2.5170.112591.34450.9331.938
PCI: ≤ 6 vs≥ 78.8090.002991.78631.2182.621
HIPEC: Not done vs done8.2180.004140.63220.4620.865
Histilogicl effects: EF 0-1 vs EF 2-312.3050.000450.4690.3070.716
Cytology: Negative vs positive8.21630.004151.84581.2132.806