ArticleThe Permanente journal2026
Impact of Omission of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Treatment of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases.
Article in The Permanente journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) have traditionally been the treatment for colorectal peritoneal metastasis (CPM). PRODIGE 7, a French multicenter trial, showed no survival difference with the addition of HIPEC to CRS but showed increased morbidity. With substantial differences between US and French HIPEC regimens, validity of PRODIGE 7 in US practice has been questioned with concern that omission of HIPEC will result in undertreatment. Given these controversies, the authors evaluated their experience of CRS with and without HIPEC in patients with CPM to compare morbidity, recurrence patterns, and overall survival (OS).
methodsRetrospective cohort study was performed to evaluate patients with CPM undergoing CRS with or without HIPEC within a single health care system. HIPEC regimen was mitomycin-C/90 min.
resultsThirty patients with CPM were identified; 23 underwent CRS-HIPEC, while 7 underwent CRS only. Between groups, there were no differences in age, sex, surgical or systemic treatment history, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen levels, and time from diagnosis of CPM to surgery. There was no difference in peritoneal cancer index scores, regions affected by CPM, resected organs, and operative time. There was no difference in length of stay, surgical reinterventions, and all 30-day morbidity. There was no difference in 1-year OS. DISCUSSION: With addition of HIPEC-mitomycin to CRS, patients had longer time to return to regular diet and intensive care unit length of stay, without difference in 1-year OS.
conclusionCRS with mitomycin-HIPEC can be considered for treatment of CPM without significant morbidity and equivalent short-term oncologic benefits. However, the long-term benefit of HIPEC remains unclear.
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.