Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23897008›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2013

Cytoreduction and HIPEC in the Netherlands: nationwide long-term outcome following the Dutch protocol.

Anke M J Kuijpers, Boj Mirck, Arend G J Aalbers, Simon W Nienhuijs, Ignace H J T de Hingh, Martinus J Wiezer, Bert van Ramshorst, Robert J van Ginkel, Klaas Havenga, Andreas J Bremers and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
16.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

90 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 233 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Anke M J KuijpersDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, a.kuijpers@nki.nl.
Boj Mirck
Arend G J Aalbers
Simon W Nienhuijs
Ignace H J T de Hingh
Martinus J Wiezer
Bert van Ramshorst
Robert J van Ginkel
Klaas Havenga
Andreas J Bremers
Johannes H W de Wilt
Elisabeth A Te Velde
Vic J Verwaal
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLSt. Antonius Ziekenhuis · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLAmsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis nationwide study evaluated results of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for peritoneal metastasis of colorectal origin in the Netherlands following a national protocol.

methodsIn a multi-institutional study prospective databases of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from colorectal cancer and pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) treated according to the Dutch HIPEC protocol, a uniform approach for the CRS and HIPEC treatment, were reviewed. Primary end point was overall survival and secondary end points were surgical outcome and progression-free survival.

resultsNine-hundred sixty patients were included; 660 patients (69 %) were affected by PC of colorectal carcinoma and the remaining suffered from PMP (31 %). In 767 procedures (80 %), macroscopic complete cytoreduction was achieved. Three-hundred and thirty one patients had grade III-V complications (34 %). Thirty-two patients died perioperatively (3 %). Median length of hospital stay was 16 days (range 0-166 days). Median follow-up period was 41 months (95 % confidence interval (CI), 36-46 months). Median progression-free survival was 15 months (95 % CI 13-17 months) for CRC patients and 53 months (95 % CI 40-66 months) for PMP patients. Overall median survival was 33 (95 % CI 28-38 months) months for CRC patients and 130 months (95 % CI 98-162 months) for PMP patients. Three- and five-year survival rates were 46 and 31 % respectively in case of CRC patients and 77 and 65 % respectively in case of PMP patients.

conclusionsThe results underline the safety and efficacy of cytoreduction and HIPEC for PC from CRC and PMP. It is assumed the uniform Dutch HIPEC protocol was beneficial.

Indexed as

Chemotherapy, Cancer, Regional PerfusionHyperthermia, InducedAdenocarcinoma, MucinousAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCarcinoma, Signet Ring CellColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingNetherlands

Identifiers

PMID23897008
PMCPMC3827901
OpenAlexW2119163457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.