• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Comparison of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy regimens for treatment of peritoneal-metastasized colorectal cancer

    2021-01-12 07:15:24JuliaSpiegelbergHannesNeeffPhilippHolznerMiraRunkelStefanFichtnerFeiglTorbenGlatz

    Julia Spiegelberg,Hannes Neeff,Philipp Holzner,Mira Runkel,Stefan Fichtner-Feigl,Torben Glatz

    Julia Spiegelberg,Hannes Neeff,Philipp Holzner,Mira Runkel,Stefan Fichtner-Feigl,Torben Glatz,Department of General and Visceral Surgery,Medical Center – University of Freiburg,Freiburg 79106,Germany

    Torben Glatz,Department of Surgery,Marien Hospital Herne,Ruhr-University Bochum,Herne 44625,Germany

    Abstract BACKGROUND Cytoreductive surgery(CRS)in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy(HIPEC)improves patient survival in colorectal cancer(CRC)with peritoneal carcinomatosis(PC).Commonly used cytotoxic agents include mitomycin C(MMC)and oxaliplatin.Studies have reported varying results,and the evidence for the choice of the HIPEC agent and uniform procedure protocols is limited.AIM To evaluate therapeutic benefits and complications of CRS + MMC vs oxaliplatin HIPEC in patients with peritoneal metastasized CRC as well as prognostic factors.METHODS One hundred and two consecutive patients who had undergone CRS and HIPEC for CRC PC between 2007 and 2019 at the Medical Center of the University Freiburg regarding interdisciplinary cancer conference decision were retrospectively analysed.Oxaliplatin and MMC were used in 68 and 34 patients,respectively.Each patient’s demographics and tumour characteristics,operative details,postoperative complications and survival were noted.Complications were stratified and graded using Clavien/Dindo analysis.Prognostic outcome factors were identified using univariate and multivariate analysis of survival.RESULTS The two groups did not differ significantly regarding baseline characteristics.We found no difference in median overall survival between MMC and oxaliplatin HIPEC.Regarding postoperative complications,patients treated with oxaliplatin HIPEC suffered increased complications(66.2% vs 35.3%;P=0.003),particularly intestinal atony,intraabdominal infections and urinary tract infection,and had a prolonged intensive care unit stay compared to the MMC group(7.2 d vs 4.4 d;P=0.035).Regarding univariate analysis of survival,we found primary tumour factors,nodal positivity and resection margins to be of prognostic value as well as peritoneal cancer index(PCI)-score and the completeness of cytoreduction regarding peritoneal carcinomatosis.Multivariate analysis of survival confirmed primary distant metastasis and primary tumour resection status to have a significant impact on survival and likewise peritoneal cancer index-scoring regarding peritoneal carcinomatosis.CONCLUSION In this single-institution retrospective review of patients undergoing CRS with either oxaliplatin or MMC HIPEC,overall survival was not different,though oxaliplatin was associated with a higher postoperative complication rate,indicating treatment favourably with MMC.Further studies comparing HIPEC regimens would improve evidence-based decision-making.

    Key words:Colorectal cancer;Peritoneal carcinomatosis;Cytoreductive surgery;Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy;Chemotherapy;Mitomycin

    INTRODUCTION

    Among patients with resected colorectal cancer(CRC),approximately 50% develop distant metastases either synchronously or metachronously.Most common locations are liver(35%-55%),lungs(10%-20%)and peritoneal carcinomatosis(PC)(10%-25%)[1].In the past,the median overall survival(OS)of patients diagnosed with PC of CRC origin was 4-7 mo,for patients undergoing palliative surgery or 5-fluorouracil(5-FU)-based systemic chemotherapy[2-4].Improvement in systemic chemotherapy,using chemotherapeutic agents such as oxaliplatin and irinotecan,along with antiangiogenesis molecular targeting agents cetuximab and bevacizumab,led to an increased OS of about 12 mo[5].

    The introduction of multimodal treatment strategies including systemic chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery(CRS)plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy(HIPEC)showed promising progress in long-term survival.The HIPEC procedure is intended to destroy any remaining tumour cells after surgical tumour debulking by local administration of chemotherapy to the peritoneal cavity for homogeneous drug distribution and enhanced cytotoxicity induced by heat[6].Depending on the extent of intraabdominal tumour load,remarkable survival benefits have been reported compared to systemic chemotherapy with 5-FU/leucovorin alone in a randomized controlled trial[7].Median OS of selected patients with CRC PC improved to 21-63 mo with a 5-year survival rate up to approximately 58%[8].The most frequently used cytotoxic drugs for HIPEC in CRC are mitomycin C(MMC)and oxaliplatin combined with systemic 5-FU and leucovorin[9].

    Initially,HIPEC regimen was most commonly conducted with MMC but subsequently the addition of oxaliplatin became the standard systemic treatment in CRC[10-12].This brought about a change of regimen for HIPEC with MMC being only used as salvage treatment[13].The combination of cisplatin and MMC is also frequently used and seems to be a valid HIPEC protocol in peritoneal metastases of CR origin.Recent studies evaluating this protocol demonstrated prolonged survival with limited toxicity[14,15].

    Upfront CRS with HIPEC(CRS-HIPEC)is currently the standard treatment for colorectal peritoneal metastases in eligible patients due to the proven superiority to palliative chemotherapy alone[16,17].Nevertheless,therapeutic efficacy of this treatment strategy for CRC PC patients remains controversial due to contradicting evidence,especially regarding the value of HIPEC.

    The first formal randomized controlled trial for CRC assessing the benefit of a 30 min oxaliplatin-based HIPEC added to surgery failed to show survival improvement[18].Leunget al[19]demonstrated that patients with CRC treated with oxaliplatin HIPEC had better OS than those receiving MMC-based HIPEC(median survival:56 movs26 mo,respectively).In contrast,Prada-Villaverdeet al[20]reported that HIPEC with MMC may be superior to oxaliplatin-based HIPEC when patients have favourable histology or a low burden of PC(median survival:54.3 movs30.4 mo,respectively).At present there is no prospective study that compares these two HIPEC regimens for treatment of peritoneal metastasized CRC.Thus,a reassessment of HIPEC and the need for structured treatment protocols should be addressed.In this retrospective clinical analysis,we evaluated the outcome of patients undergoing CRS HIPEC at the university medical centre of Freiburg.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    This study evaluated the outcome of 102 consecutive patients with PC of colorectal origin,who underwent CRS and HIPEC between January 2007 and March 2019 at the Medical Center of the University Freiburg(MCUF).Patients receiving HIPEC with either palliative or CRS were included.

    Patients with appendiceal tumours/pseudomyxoma peritonei and PC of other origin(non-colorectal)were excluded as well as patients who were planned for HIPEC but had not received HIPEC treatment due to surgeon’s intraoperative decision.HIPEC regimens were chosen regarding current available data with MMC or oxaliplatin.

    From 2007 until 2014,MMC was used,and from 2014 to 2018 it changed to oxaliplatin.Analogous to PRODIGE7 trial,HIPECs since 2018 were conducted with MMC.

    Informed consent was obtained from all patients before their inclusion in the cancer registry.The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the University of Freiburg(EK-FR 4/20).The analysed data was extracted from the anaesthetic protocols and the electronic health records.

    Pretherapeutic work-up

    Preoperative work-up started in the outpatient setting of MCUF.Previous oncological therapies and comorbidities were recorded,and pulmonary and cardiac check-ups were routinely performed in high-risk patients.Pretherapeutic diagnostics included thoraco-abdominal computerized tomography in all patients and endoscopy or diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsies when appropriate.All patients were discussed in our interdisciplinary cancer conference,and decision for CRS with HIPEC was made if a complete resection seemed achievable.Extensive liver metastases as well as extra abdominal or retroperitoneal metastases were seen as contraindication for surgical intervention.

    Depending on the treating physician’s protocol and interdisciplinary consensus as well as timing of diagnosis and previous chemotherapy courses,perioperative systemic therapy consisted of either neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of capecitabine with oxaliplatin,neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of 5-FU/leucovorin with oxaliplatin,or neoadjuvant cycles of 5-FU/leucovorin with irinotecan followed by capecitabine or adjuvant cycles of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy.

    For patients with intestinal obstruction,palliative resections and palliative HIPEC were considered according to interdisciplinary cancer conference decision.

    Surgical therapy

    The operative procedure was chosen according to the extent and location of the primary tumour and the peritoneal metastases.After explorative midline laparotomy,the complete abdominal cavity was inspected to assess the extent of peritoneal carcinomatosis,defined by the peritoneal cancer index(PCI).According to Sugarbaker’s original work,the PCI system divides the abdomen and the pelvis into 13 regions.The lesions are graded according to size(0 through 3)in each abdominopelvic region and are added as a numerical score[21].

    Afterwards,the Sugarbaker protocol(Sugarbakeret al[6],1995)was adhered,which assessed tumour resection and resection of visceral organs and peritoneum.Here,resections were classified and subdivided into large intestine,small intestine,liver,diaphragm,omentum and peritoneum.

    The Completeness of Cytoreduction(CC)Score,which quantifies the completion of CRS,was assessed after resection.Before closure of the abdominal cavity at least four 24CH silicon-drainages and a temperature probe for the HIPEC were placed.

    HIPEC

    Simultaneous application of cytotoxic drugs both intraperitoneal and intravenously(i.v.)was used when performing an oxaliplatin based HIPEC with 5-FU + leukovorin i.v.(bidirectional HIPEC).Cytotoxic drugs were prepared by our clinic pharmacy using saline solution as carrier solution in a 50 mL syringe.Dosage level was 30 mg/m2 body surface for MMC,300 mg/m2 for oxaliplatin,400 mg/m2 for 5-FU and 20 mg/m2 for leukovorin.

    The chemo infusion was performed in a closed abdominal system using an extra corporal roller pump system with heat exchanger.Three silicon-drainages were used as fluid inlets and one as outlet.After establishing a stable circulation of saline solution,the cytotoxic drug was added.The degree of hyperthermia ranged between 39 °C to 43 °C using 42 °C as target level.The intraperitoneal circulating time of oxaliplatin was 30 min,respectively 90 min for MMC.After completing the circulation time,the roller pump was used to aspirate the intraabdominal fluids.Silicon drainages were left in the early postoperative setting to allow drainage of remaining accumulated fluids.All patients were transferred postoperatively to the intensive care unit(ICU)for further monitoring.

    Follow-up

    Perioperative complications were recorded up to 90 d after surgery and were graded according to Clavien/Dindo-Classification[22].Grade 1 complications(minor deviation)were not recorded.Discharged patients were followed up at least once in the surgical outpatient department and referred back either to the oncology department or to a resident oncologist for further follow-up.The survival data were systematically obtained from the cancer registry of the MCUF Cancer Center.Data regarding postoperative chemotherapy were directly obtained from the resident oncologist or general physician.

    Statistical analysis

    The results of our study were gained by retrospective analysis of our prospective CRC databases.SPSS 22 for WindowsTMwas used for statistical analysis(SPSS,Armonk,NY,United States).Categorical variables were given in absolute and relative frequencies;differences were evaluated by Fisher’s exact test.Quantitative values were expressed as mean ± standard deviation and medians with range,as appropriate,and differences were measured using the Kruskal-Wallis test.A Mann-Whitney-U-test was added to compare groups.Survival was univariately analysed by the Kaplan-Meier method with a log-rank test for the comparison of subgroups.Multivariate survival analysis was performed by the Cox proportional hazard model(forward selection strategy using a likelihood ratio statistic)including the report of relative risks and their 95%-confidential intervals.APvalue <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

    RESULTS

    Demographics

    From January 2007 to March 2019,102 patients underwent CRS-HIPEC or palliative resections and HIPEC.The cohort contained 60 male patients and 42 female patients.Sixty-eight patients were treated with oxaliplatin/5-FU HIPEC and 34 patients with MMC HIPEC.Three patients in the MMC-group received early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy during the first 48 hours after CRS.

    The groups were balanced regarding baseline characteristics,besides a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists(ASA)(P=0.002)score and a higher rate of T4b(P=0.027)tumours in the Oxaliplatin group.Median PCI-score was not statistically different across groups but was lower by trend in the Oxaliplatin group [8(range 0-30)vs12(range 0-39)in the MMC-group;P=0.312].

    Palliative resections without cytoreduction were performed in one patient receiving oxaliplatin/5-FU HIPEC and in two patients treated with MMC-HIPEC(Table 1).

    We had a loss to follow-up rate of 3.9 %(four patients).All of them were treated with MMC-HIPEC.

    Perioperative results

    There was no difference in the overall length of hospital stay [11.4 d(4-35)] for MMCvs12.4(2-46)for oxaliplatin;however,the oxaliplatin based HIPEC showed a significantly longer ICU stay [7.2 d(2-50)vs4.4 d(2-9);P=0.035].

    Our data showed a total complication rate of 56%,with a statistically significant higher complication rate associated with oxaliplatin compared to MMC:35%vs66%(P=0.003).

    In further subgroup analysis we found an increased rate of intestinal atony(9%vs29%;P=0.015),abdominal infections(3%vs21%;P=0.013)and urinary tract infections(0%vs9%;P=0.034)for oxaliplatin HIPEC.The severity of complications,stratified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification,was also higher in the Oxaliplatin group(P=0.029).

    No patients died perioperatively,and 11 patients died during the first 90 d after surgery due to oncological or other medical reasons(Table 2).

    Analysis of survival

    Mean follow-up was 23.3 mo.There was no statistically significant difference recording median OS(P=0.139).We performed a univariate survival analysis to compare potential prognostic factors.No differences in survival rates were found comparing sex,age,body mass index(BMI)and ASA-scoring(Table 3).Likewise,primary tumour location(colonvsrectum)did not affect survival rate in our cohort(P=1.0).Our data showed no difference in median survival when comparing primary Tstage(49 mo for T1-3vs30 mo for T4avsnot reached for T4b)but a significant influence of primary nodal stage(88 mo for N0vs51 mo for N1vs30 mo for N2a and 18 mo for N2b;P=0.013).Likewise,according to our data,synchronous diagnosis of the PC or other distant metastasis was associated with a worse median survival(57 mo for M0vs35 mo for M+;P=0.046).Furthermore,tumour grading and primary resection level also affected median survival(Figure 1).

    In addition,lower PCI-score and a CC0- resection were associated with higher median survival.Patients undergoing a simultaneous liver metastasis resection during CRS had a worse survival prognosis(51 movs27 mo for liver metastasis resection;P=0.024).

    To analyse further survival outcome factors,we performed multivariate analysis(Cox regression)with forward selection strategy using a likelihood ratio statistic.Synchronous distant metastasis(P=0.029)and primary tumour resection status(P=0.016)were confirmed to have a significant impact on survival as well as PCI-scoring regarding PC(P=0.001).After carrying out a separate multivariate analysis,adapting the cut-offPvalue for inclusion to include HIPEC regimen into the analysis,HIPEC regimen failed to prove significance regarding OS at aPvalue of 0.144(Figure 2).

    DISCUSSION

    With varying evidence for the therapeutic value of CRS-HIPEC in metastatic colon cancer,attention has refocused upon standardization and optimization of this procedure.However,there is a severe lack of evidence regarding comparison of survival benefits for the most commonly utilized chemotherapeutic agents for HIPEC oxaliplatin and MMC.This study is one of a few to focus on prognostic factors and treatment strategies after the development of peritoneal metastasis.Furthermore,the two most commonly used cytotoxic agents were compared regarding survival benefits and outcome rates.

    Table 1 Patients,tumours and treatment,n(%)

    1Fisher's exact test.aP <0.05.bP <0.01.5-FU:5-Fluorouracil;ASA:American Society of Anesthesiologists;BMI:Body mass index;MMC:Mitomycin C;PCI:Peritoneal cancer index.

    Oxaliplatin and MMC,both interfering with DNA and DNA-synthesis,can reach high intraperitoneal drug concentrations during HIPEC with simultaneous limited systemic absorption[23,24].Furthermore,they have elevated cytotoxicity under hyperthermia with a concordant tissue penetration depth of 2 mm[9].The most commonly used intraperitoneal dose for oxaliplatin is 460 mg/m2 with a perfusion time limited to 30 min.In contrast,the recommended intraperitoneal dose for MMC is 35 mg/m2 with a prolonged perfusion duration of 90 min[9,25,26].With the objective of potentiating the oxaliplatin activity,patients in the Oxaliplatin group received intravenous 5-FU and folinic acid approximately 1 hour before starting intraperitoneal HIPEC circulation.

    Our study shows a 3-year-survival rate of 43% after CRS/HIPEC for peritoneal metastasized CRC.We could not show any statistically significant survival benefit comparing HIPEC regimens with oxaliplatin/5-FUvsMMC.Nevertheless,a statistical trend towards the oxaliplatin/5-FU group was noticed(Figure 2;median survival 30 mo for MMCvsnot reached for oxaliplatin/5-FU).In our cohort,MMC group had a trend towards a higher PCI-scoring and a smaller number of CC-0 resections,which could possibly be responsible for the observed trend towards a prolonged survival in the Oxaliplatin group as well as differences in systemic preoperative treatments regarding multi-agent and targeted systemic therapy and surgical approach.

    Regarding PRODIGE 7 trial,subgroup analysis showed a significant survival benefit for CRS + oxaliplatin HIPECvsCRS for a subgroup with PCI 10-15[15].Thus,there is a need of further studies,stratifying patients by PCI and prospectively examining the relative therapeutic effectiveness of MMC and oxaliplatin.

    On the other hand,our study demonstrates significant differences between the two regimes regarding postoperative morbidity and complication rates.In our collective,patients treated with oxaliplatin/5-FU suffered increased rates of postoperative complications,especially intraperitoneal infections,urinary tract infections and intestinal atony.

    Postoperative morbidity has to be taken into account when selecting an appropriate cytotoxic agent.Oxaliplatin has been suggested to cause higher morbidity rates with Grade II and III complication compared to MMC[27],as confirmed in this study.Reported complications in oxaliplatin trials include fistula formation,pneumonia or intraabdominal abscess formation[28].The PRODIGE 7 trial likewise reported enhanced complication rates for CRS + oxaliplatin HIPECvsCRS.A similar study design focusing on hematologic changes after CRS and HIPEC with either MMC or oxaliplatin was not able to show an increased complication rate after oxaliplatin HIPEC but a different complication scheme[29].Contrary to this study,our analysis focuses on surgical complications in the postoperative phase.Therefore,the difference in the results can be explained.

    Increased postoperative complication rates,especially severe complications(grade IIIb and IV according to Clavien-Dindo analysis),were also associated with prolonged ICU stay for the Oxaliplatin group compared to MMC(7.2 dvs4.4 d;P=0.035),which adds to evidence supporting MC for CRS-HIPEC.

    Furthermore,we were able to identify different primary tumour factors affecting OS in this collective of peritoneal metastasized CRC.Interestingly,clinical factors such as age,sex,BMI or even ASA-scoring at CRS-HIPEC operation time have no influence on OS.Literature describes poorly differentiated carcinoma,venous invasion,lymphatic invasion,T4 disease,lymph node metastasis,malignant bowel obstruction and adjuvant chemotherapy as having negative impact on OS[30].

    Even though primary T-stage and tumour location(colon/rectum)had no influence on survival outcome,primary nodal positivity and poor differentiation grade seem to affect tumour recurrence and lower survival rates in our patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis.This agrees with numerous other studies[31-33].

    Table 2 Impact of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy regimen on perioperative outcome,n(%)

    In our cohorts,21% of tumours(18% in the MMC group and 22% in the Oxaliplatin group)were mucinous carcinoma.Regarding univariate analysis,we found no survival benefits for mucinous carcinomavsadenocarcinoma.Our cohort contains no patients with adenosquamous or squamous carcinoma.As both groups contain a similar percentage of mucinous carcinoma,we expect no selection bias due to this histopathological criterion.

    Table 3 Impact of other prognostic factors on overall survival

    1Univariate analysis by Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test for the comparison of subgroups.aP <0.05.bP <0.01.5-FU:5-Fluorouracil;ASA:American Society of Anesthesiologists;BMI:Body mass index;HIPEC:Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy;MMC:Mitomycin C;PCI:Peritoneal cancer index.

    We also found R1-resections of primary tumours to be a prognostic factor after peritoneal metastasis,as well as synchronous metastatic spread.Two studies[34,35]analysed the prognostic influence of disease-free resection margins on survival and also found this to have independent prognostic value.These results are useful to identify optimal subgroups for high risk of recurrent PC.

    An important prognostic factor of survival is the concept of tumour burden correlated with PCI-scoring.Oncologic results seem to be significantly better when PCI is <10[36]or ≤ 13[37].However,PCI ≥ 20 is associated with decreased survival according to many different studies[38-40].This agrees with our results from univariate and multivariate analysis of survival.Patients with distant metastasis,especially liver metastasis,were included in this analysis.Current literature suggests that patients with distant metastasis amendable to resection should not be excluded from CRS and HIPEC[38,41].Concordant to the literature,univariate analysis of survival of our data shows a significant reduced survival for patients undergoing liver resections during CRS and HIPEC(27 movs51 mo without liver resection;P=0.024).

    There are several limitations in this study that should be considered.Mainly,the retrospective non-randomized study design lowers comparability between the groups.Furthermore,the retrospective database lacks complete information regarding Tumour Node Metastasis staging,preoperative treatments especially chemotherapy as well as varying follow-up duration.The patients were treated over a time period of 10 years with changes in perioperative management and systemic chemotherapy.Different surgeons performed HIPECs at the university hospital of Freiburg.Therefore,an individual learning curve cannot be assessed.Nevertheless,the learning curve of the complete surgical department could influence postoperative outcome depending on operation timing.

    For this special collective of patients with PC based on a colorectal primary tumour,several outcome predictors were identified.We were also able to show comparable outcome results for CRS/HIPEC with oxaliplatin and MMC.Nevertheless,increased complication rates for oxaliplatin were demonstrated,which,according to the literature,significantly affects OS[42]indicating that patients should be treated favourably with MMC-HIPEC.As we could not show any survival benefit for patients treated with MMC or oxaliplatin HIPEC,it remains to be determined whether there is enough evidence for HIPEC.However,the importance of complete cytoreduction has been established,which has been broadly discussed in the literature and is consistent with our data.

    Figure 1 Kaplan-Maier:5-year overall survival after cytoreductive surgery + hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy depending on different outcome factors.Univariate analysis of survival of patients with peritoneal metastasized colorectal cancer dependent on primary tumour nodal status,resection status and peritoneal cancer index scoring system.

    Further studies,in particular a phase III clinical trial comparing both HIPEC regimens,would improve evidence-based decision-making.

    Figure 2 Kaplan-Maier:3-year overall survival cytoreductive surgery + hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.Kaplan-Maier analysis of 3-year overall survival of patients with peritoneal metastasized colorectal cancer being treated with cytoreductive surgery and oxaliplatin or mitomycin C-hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research background

    Cytoreductive Surgery(CRS)in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy(HIPEC)improves patient survival in colorectal cancer(CRC)with peritoneal carcinomatosis(PC).Commonly used cytotoxic agents nowadays include mitomycin C(MMC)and oxaliplatin.Evidence for the choice of the HIPEC agent and uniform procedure protocols is scarce,with studies reporting varying results.

    Research motivatio n

    There’s a severe lack of evidence regarding comparison of survival benefits for most commonly utilized chemotherapeutic agents for HIPEC oxaliplatin and MMC.At present there is no prospective study that compares these two HIPEC regimens for treatment of peritoneal metastasized CRC,thus leading to the reassessment of HIPEC and the need for structured treatment protocols.In this retrospective clinical analysis,we evaluated the outcome of patients undergoing CRS HIPEC at the university medical centre of Freiburg.Furthermore,this study is one of a few to focus on prognostic factors and treatment strategies after the development of peritoneal metastasis.

    Research objectives

    The aim of the study was to evaluate therapeutic benefits and operative and postoperative complications of CRS + MMCvsoxaliplatin HIPEC in patients with peritoneal metastasized CRC as well as prognostic factors for overall survival(OS).

    Research methods

    One hundred two patients who had undergone CRS and HIPEC for CRC PC between 2007 and 2019 at the Medical Center of the University Freiburg regarding interdisciplinary cancer conference decision were retrospectively analysed.Oxaliplatin and MMC were used in 68 and 34 patients,respectively.Each patient’s demographics and tumour characteristics,operative details,postoperative complications and survival were noted and compared.Complications were stratified and graded using Clavien/Dindo analysis.Prognostic outcome factors were identified using univariate and multivariate analysis of survival.

    Research results

    The two groups did not differ significantly regarding baseline characteristics.We found no difference in median OS.Patients treated with oxaliplatin HIPEC suffered increased postoperative complications(66.2%vs35.3%;P=0.003),particularly intestinal atony,intraabdominal infections and urinary tract infections,and had a prolonged intensive care unit(ICU)stay compared to the MMC group(7.2 dvs4.4 d;P=0.035).Regarding univariate analysis of survival,we found primary tumour factors,nodal positivity and resection margins to be of prognostic value as well as PC index(PCI)-score and the completeness of cytoreduction regarding peritoneal carcinomatosis.Multivariate analysis of survival confirmed primary distant metastasis and primary tumour resection status to have a significant impact on survival and likewise PCI-scoring regarding peritoneal carcinomatosis.

    Research conclusions

    We could not show any survival advantage for neither HIPEC regimens.Oxaliplatin showed an increased complication rate.Increased postoperative complication rates,especially severe complications(grade IIIb and IV according to Clavien-Dindo analysis),were also associated with prolonged ICU stay for the Oxaliplatin group compared to MMC(7.2 dvs4.4 d;P=0.035),which improves evidence to choose MMC for CRS-HIPEC.

    Primary distant metastasis and primary tumour resection seem to have a significant impact on survival and likewise PCI-scoring regarding peritoneal carcinomatosis.

    Research perspectives

    For this special collective of patients with PC based on a colorectal primary tumour,several outcome predictors could be identified.We were also able to show comparable outcome results for CRS/HIPEC with oxaliplatin and MMC.Nevertheless,increased complication rates for oxaliplatin were demonstrated,which,according to literature,significantly affects OS,indicating that patients should be treated favourably with MMC-HIPEC.Further studies,in particular a phase III clinical trial comparing both HIPEC regimens would improve evidence-based decision-making.

    国产免费男女视频| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| www.自偷自拍.com| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 性欧美人与动物交配| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 免费看日本二区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 此物有八面人人有两片| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| xxx96com| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 欧美黑人巨大hd| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 欧美日本视频| 久久人妻av系列| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 日韩 欧美 亚洲 中文字幕| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 日本a在线网址| 美女午夜性视频免费| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 黄频高清免费视频| www.999成人在线观看| 搡老岳熟女国产| 国产99白浆流出| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 国产黄片美女视频| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 欧美3d第一页| 又大又爽又粗| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 18禁观看日本| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 男女那种视频在线观看| av福利片在线| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| av中文乱码字幕在线| 成年版毛片免费区| 手机成人av网站| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻 | 九九热线精品视视频播放| 一区福利在线观看| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 久久久久性生活片| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 午夜免费激情av| 成人午夜高清在线视频| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 两个人的视频大全免费| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看 | 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 全区人妻精品视频| 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 色综合婷婷激情| 91大片在线观看| 日本在线视频免费播放| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 欧美3d第一页| 国产亚洲欧美98| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 欧美午夜高清在线| 国产三级在线视频| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 久久久精品大字幕| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 两性夫妻黄色片| 久久性视频一级片| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 女生性感内裤真人,穿戴方法视频| 国产精品影院久久| 国产乱人伦免费视频| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 夜夜爽天天搞| 91成年电影在线观看| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 色综合站精品国产| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av | 久久久久久九九精品二区国产 | 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 丰满的人妻完整版| 亚洲片人在线观看| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 身体一侧抽搐| 日本成人三级电影网站| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 日日夜夜操网爽| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 天堂√8在线中文| 成人三级黄色视频| av福利片在线观看| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 91大片在线观看| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 免费看a级黄色片| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 搡老岳熟女国产| 国产精品,欧美在线| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 久久中文字幕人妻熟女| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 黄片大片在线免费观看| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 久久人妻av系列| 一本综合久久免费| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 亚洲 国产 在线| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 长腿黑丝高跟| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 免费人成视频x8x8入口观看| tocl精华| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 脱女人内裤的视频| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 日本 av在线| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 美女午夜性视频免费| 欧美在线黄色| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免费看| 1024香蕉在线观看| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 中国美女看黄片| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| av视频在线观看入口| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| av视频在线观看入口| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 国产精华一区二区三区| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 99久久无色码亚洲精品果冻| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 久久精品成人免费网站| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 高清在线国产一区| 窝窝影院91人妻| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 久久国产精品影院| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 国产精品免费视频内射| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 男人舔奶头视频| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 亚洲激情在线av| 日韩欧美三级三区| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 女生性感内裤真人,穿戴方法视频| 亚洲无线在线观看| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av | 精品福利观看| 欧美大码av| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 男女视频在线观看网站免费 | 久久 成人 亚洲| 色综合婷婷激情| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 看黄色毛片网站| 国产成+人综合+亚洲专区| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 成人欧美大片| 欧美日本视频| 久久国产精品影院| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 在线看三级毛片| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 成人国语在线视频| 99热这里只有是精品50| 成人欧美大片| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 欧美成人性av电影在线观看| a在线观看视频网站| 99久久国产精品久久久| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 一区二区三区激情视频| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 欧美午夜高清在线| 天天添夜夜摸| 午夜免费激情av| 欧美3d第一页| www.精华液| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 日韩免费av在线播放| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 一本精品99久久精品77| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 变态另类丝袜制服| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 国产成人系列免费观看| 久久精品影院6| 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 久久久久性生活片| 精品国产乱子伦一区二区三区| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 国产精品一及| 我要搜黄色片| 一本一本综合久久| 99热这里只有精品一区 | 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 久久性视频一级片| 老司机福利观看| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 久久精品人妻少妇| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 18美女黄网站色大片免费观看| 欧美3d第一页| 亚洲av成人一区二区三| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 午夜福利18| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 毛片女人毛片| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 美女免费视频网站| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 91麻豆av在线| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 操出白浆在线播放| 国产精品野战在线观看| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 亚洲全国av大片| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 久久这里只有精品中国| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看 | www.精华液| 成人国产综合亚洲| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 1024视频免费在线观看| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 欧美在线一区亚洲| av视频在线观看入口| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 免费看a级黄色片| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 麻豆成人午夜福利视频| 性欧美人与动物交配| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 午夜两性在线视频| 变态另类丝袜制服| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看 | 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 夜夜爽天天搞| 校园春色视频在线观看| 一本综合久久免费| 一级黄色大片毛片| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 丁香六月欧美| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 久久人妻av系列| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 很黄的视频免费| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 国产99白浆流出| 国产av不卡久久| 亚洲人成电影免费在线| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 18禁黄网站禁片免费观看直播| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 好男人电影高清在线观看| or卡值多少钱| 欧美3d第一页| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 亚洲激情在线av| 禁无遮挡网站| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 久久久久久人人人人人| 99热只有精品国产| 精品久久久久久久末码| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 午夜影院日韩av| 国产成人精品无人区| 伦理电影免费视频| 一区二区三区激情视频| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 国产高清videossex| 午夜视频精品福利| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 精品福利观看| 黄色女人牲交| 久9热在线精品视频| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 日本a在线网址| 很黄的视频免费| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 国产精品久久视频播放| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 一级黄色大片毛片| 天堂√8在线中文| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 亚洲最大成人中文| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 青草久久国产| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 色av中文字幕| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品 | 免费在线观看成人毛片| 成年版毛片免费区| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 特级一级黄色大片| 黄片小视频在线播放| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 亚洲国产欧美网| 国产在线观看jvid| 成人午夜高清在线视频| 久久中文看片网| 91av网站免费观看| 国产精品永久免费网站| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看 | 国产片内射在线| 黄色 视频免费看| 一夜夜www| 日本一本二区三区精品| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 久久精品国产综合久久久| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频 | 美女黄网站色视频| 99热6这里只有精品| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 亚洲五月天丁香| 91在线观看av| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| x7x7x7水蜜桃| 不卡一级毛片| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 看免费av毛片| 久久这里只有精品中国| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 99热只有精品国产| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 成人手机av| 两性夫妻黄色片| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 伦理电影免费视频| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 91国产中文字幕| 国产黄片美女视频| 欧美日韩黄片免| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 国产精品一及| 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 日韩免费av在线播放| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| xxx96com| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 午夜a级毛片| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 欧美日韩精品网址| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 丁香欧美五月| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 精品福利观看| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| av天堂在线播放| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 一级作爱视频免费观看| 看片在线看免费视频| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 性欧美人与动物交配| 午夜激情av网站| 国产精品,欧美在线| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 国产午夜精品论理片| 搡老岳熟女国产| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 操出白浆在线播放| 精品电影一区二区在线| tocl精华| 久久国产精品影院| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 日日夜夜操网爽| 88av欧美| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 免费看a级黄色片| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 国产黄片美女视频| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 亚洲18禁久久av| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 国产一区在线观看成人免费| 很黄的视频免费| 两个人的视频大全免费| 久久久久九九精品影院| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 日韩欧美免费精品| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 99久久精品热视频| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 一个人免费在线观看电影 | www.精华液| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 久久婷婷成人综合色麻豆| 麻豆av在线久日| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 亚洲中文av在线| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 国产野战对白在线观看| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 久久久久国内视频| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 1024手机看黄色片| 此物有八面人人有两片| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 午夜免费观看网址| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 国产精品一及| 性欧美人与动物交配| 亚洲成人久久性| 两性夫妻黄色片| 日本成人三级电影网站| 欧美成人性av电影在线观看| 中文资源天堂在线| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址| 久久中文看片网| 日本在线视频免费播放| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| av天堂在线播放| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 极品教师在线免费播放| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 国内毛片毛片毛片毛片毛片| 久久 成人 亚洲| 香蕉av资源在线| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| av有码第一页| 国产激情欧美一区二区| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 中文字幕久久专区| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区|