Are there intra-operative hemodynamic differences between the Coliseum and closed HIPEC techniques in the treatment of peritoneal metastasis? A retrospective cohort study.

backgroundAlthough two main methods of intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are currently accepted, the superiority of one over the other has not yet been demonstrated. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there are hemodynamic and temperature differences between patients who received HIPEC in two different techniques, open versus closed abdomen.

methodsThis retrospective study was conducted in our center between 2011-2015 in 30 patients who underwent surgery for peritoneal carcinomatosis secondary to colorectal cancer, in whom cytoreduction and HIPEC were performed by the Coliseum (15) or closed techniques (15). The main end points were morbidity, mortality, hemodynamic changes, and abdominal temperature. The comparative analysis of quantitative variables at different times was done with the parametric repeated measure ANOVA for those variables that fulfilled the suppositions of normality and independence and the Friedman non-parametric test for the variables that did not fulfill either of these suppositions.

resultsThere were no deaths in either group. The incidence of postoperative complications in the Coliseum group was 53% (8 patients), grade II-III. The incidence of complications in the closed group was 13% (2 patients), grade II-III. The intra-operative conditions regarding the systolic and diastolic pressures were more stable using the closed abdomen technique (but not significantly so). We found statistically significant differences in abdominal temperature in favor of the closed technique (p = 0.009).

conclusionsBoth HIPEC procedures are similar. In our series, the closed technique resulted in a more stable intra-abdominal temperature.