Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32041558›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2020

Bidirectional treatment of peritoneal metastasis with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) and systemic chemotherapy: a systematic review.

Magnus Ploug, Martin Graversen, Per Pfeiffer, Michael Bau Mortensen

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Magnus PlougOdense PIPAC Center (OPC) and Odense Pancreas Center (OPAC), Upper GI and HPB Section, Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital, J.B.Winsløvs Vej 4, 5000, Odense C, Denmark. Magnus.Ploug@rsyd.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4229-3994
Martin GraversenOdense PIPAC Center (OPC) and Odense Pancreas Center (OPAC), Upper GI and HPB Section, Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital, J.B.Winsløvs Vej 4, 5000, Odense C, Denmark.
Per PfeifferOdense PIPAC Center (OPC) and Odense Pancreas Center (OPAC), Upper GI and HPB Section, Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital, J.B.Winsløvs Vej 4, 5000, Odense C, Denmark.
Michael Bau MortensenOdense PIPAC Center (OPC) and Odense Pancreas Center (OPAC), Upper GI and HPB Section, Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital, J.B.Winsløvs Vej 4, 5000, Odense C, Denmark.
Odense University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is used in the palliative treatment of peritoneal metastasis. The combination of intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy seems rational, and the aim of this systematic review was to compare PIPAC directed monotherapy with a bidirectional treatment approach (PIPAC in combination with systemic chemotherapy). Main outcomes were survival and quality of life.

methodsA systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, Cochrane and the "Pleura and Peritoneum" was conducted and analyzed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies in English reporting on bidirectional treatment with PIPAC and systemic chemotherapy and published before April 2019 were included.

resultsTwelve studies with a total of 386 patients were included. None were specifically designed to compare mono- versus bidirectional treatment, but 44% of the patients received bidirectional treatment. This was more frequent in women (non-gynecological cancers) and one-third of the bidirectional treated patients had received no prior chemotherapy. Data from the included studies provided no conclusions regarding survival or quality of life.

conclusionBidirectional treatment with PIPAC and systemic chemotherapy is practised and feasible, and some patients are enrolled having received no prior systemic chemotherapy for their PM. The difficulty in drawing any conclusions based on this systematic review has highlighted the urgent need to improve and standardize reports on PIPAC directed therapy. We have, therefore, constructed a list of items to be considered when reporting on clinical PIPAC research.

trial registrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, PROSPERO. Registration number: 90352, March 5, 2018.

Indexed as

AerosolsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsClinical Trials as TopicHumansInfusions, ParenteralPeritoneal NeoplasmsPrognosisQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeAerosolsBidirectionalCarcinomatosisIntraperitoneal chemotherapyPeritoneal metastasisPIPAC

Identifiers

PMID32041558
PMCPMC7011374
OpenAlexW3005721967

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.