ArticlePleura and peritoneum2019
Perceptions in the management of colorectal peritoneal metastases: A bi-national survey of colorectal surgeons.
Article in Pleura and peritoneum, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perspectives of the Use of Neoadjuvant Therapy in the Management of Locally Advanced and Locally Recurrent Colon Cancer: A Bi-National Survey of Colorectal Surgeons.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Consensus Guideline for the Management of Colorectal Cancer with Peritoneal Metastases.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Preoperative Peritoneal MRI: Usefulness to Highlight Potential Hidden Lesions for Complete Cytoreductive Surgery in Patients with Colorectal Cancer with Surgical History.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Practice patterns, attitudes, and knowledge among clinicians regarding hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy: a national survey by Indian society of peritoneal surface malignancies (ISPSM).Pleura and peritoneum · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is great variability in the uptake of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the management of colorectal peritoneal metastases (CRPM) in Australia and New Zealand. This study aims to provide a snapshot of perceptions among colorectal surgeons in the management of CRPM.
methodsA structured ten-question online survey was sent to all colorectal surgeons, with three questions on clinical experience and demographics, one on health economics and six on hypothetical clinical scenarios. Scores were collated and reported based on Likert scales.
resultsEighty-one respondents (36.2%) completed the survey. Most surgeons (66.7%) strongly disagreed with offering CRS and HIPEC at all hospitals. The majority (87.7%) agreed that CRS and HIPEC offered a higher survival benefit than systemic chemotherapy in pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP), and 69.1% in CRPM (comparators: 60.5% ovarian cancer, 14.8% gastric cancer). There were mixed strategies in managing low-volume, isolated peritoneal recurrences. The majority did not recommend second-look laparoscopy, but favoured operative management of Krukenberg tumours. In the presence of incidental peritoneal metastases, only 29.6% favoured biopsy only and referring the patient to a peritoneal disease centre.
conclusionsResponse rate was relatively low. In Australia and New Zealand, colorectal surgeons see a strong role for CRS and HIPEC in the management of PMP and CRPM. The role of "second look" surgery in high-risk cases is controversial and not supported. Krukenberg tumours are viewed as surgical disease. Regular updates and collaboration with peritoneal centres may help surgeons stay abreast with latest evidence in the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.