Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34495403›Full record

ReviewLangenbeck's archives of surgery2021

Pelvic exenteration, cytoreductive surgery, and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal surface malignancy: experience and outcomes from an exenterative and peritonectomy unit.

Michael P Flood, Peadar S Waters, Mikael Soucisse, Robert Ramsay, Michael Michael, Jacob J McCormick, Satish Warrier, Alexander Heriot

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael P FloodDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Michael.flood@petermac.org.
Peadar S WatersDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Mikael SoucisseDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Robert RamsayDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Michael MichaelSir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jacob J McCormickDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Satish WarrierDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Alexander HeriotDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePelvic exenteration (PE) for locally advanced pelvic malignancy is well established, though high rates of morbidity and mortality exist. Such a complication profile has often deterred the surgical community from offering exenteration in combination with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). We aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes following pelvic exenteration when combined with CRS and HIPEC for peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM) in a tertiary referral centre.

methodsA review of a prospectively maintained PSM database from June 2015 to December 2020 at a tertiary referral institution was performed. Patients who underwent CRS, PE, and HIPEC were matched with patients who underwent PE alone. Primary endpoints were perioperative morbidity and mortality.

resultsFrom June 2015 to December 2020, 20 patients required PE as part of their CRS and HIPEC for PSM. The majority of patients were female (n = 16, 80%) with a median age of 52 (range 21-70). Colorectal cancer was the predominant pathology (n = 12, 60%). Median PCI was 11.5 (range 3-39). CC0 and R0 resections were achieved in all patients. CRS, PE, and HIPEC and PE-alone groups were well matched for clinicopathological variables. There was no difference in perioperative major morbidity (HIPEC: 30% vs PE: 15% p = 0.256) and mortality (HIPEC: 0 vs PE: 5% p = 0.311) between groups. Median follow-up was 17.5 months (range 7-68). Eight patients (40%) died from disease-related issues during the study period.

conclusionAn aggressive surgical strategy with complete resection is feasible and safe in select patients with complex PSM involving the pelvis.

Indexed as

Hyperthermia, InducedPelvic ExenterationPercutaneous Coronary InterventionPeritoneal NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyCytoreduction Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansHyperthermic Intraperitoneal ChemotherapyMaleSurvival RateCytoreductive surgery; Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy; HIPEC; Peritoneal surface malignancy; Pelvic exenteration

Identifiers

PMID34495403
OpenAlexW3196546253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.