Safety of secondary CRS/HIPEC in peritoneal surface malignancies: Insights from a national cohort study.
코호트
1/5 보강
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
환자: PSMs, comparable to primary CRS/HIPEC
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
[CONCLUSIONS] Secondary CRS/HIPEC can be performed safely in selected patients with PSMs, comparable to primary CRS/HIPEC. Reoperation rates and 30-day mortality rates were similar between groups, even after adjusting for confounding factors.
[BACKGROUND] For carefully selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies (PSMs), secondary cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can prov
APA
Pollmann L, Zieren J, et al. (2026). Safety of secondary CRS/HIPEC in peritoneal surface malignancies: Insights from a national cohort study.. European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology, 52(3), 111408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2026.111408
MLA
Pollmann L, et al.. "Safety of secondary CRS/HIPEC in peritoneal surface malignancies: Insights from a national cohort study.." European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology, vol. 52, no. 3, 2026, pp. 111408.
PMID
41564855 ↗
Abstract 한글 요약
[BACKGROUND] For carefully selected patients with peritoneal surface malignancies (PSMs), secondary cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can provide similar oncological results as primary CRS/HIPEC. However, the mortality rate and the incidence of reoperations due to perioperative complications after secondary CRS/HIPEC remain understudied.
[METHODS] A retrospective analysis was conducted using the StuDoQ|HIPEC registry, a prospectively maintained national German CRS/HIPEC database, to compare reoperation rates and 30-day mortality between patients undergoing primary and secondary CRS/HIPEC. The analysis included patients treated at 83 centers between 2011 and 2024. Propensity-score matching was performed to adjust for confounding factors prior to comparing outcomes between the matched cohorts.
[RESULTS] A comprehensive analysis of 5011 primary CRS/HIPEC cases and 236 secondary CRS/HIPEC cases showed no significant differences in reoperation rates (15 % vs. 12 %, p = 0.192) or 30-day mortality (2 % vs. 1 %, p = 0.240). After propensity-score matching to control for confounding factors, outcomes remained comparable, with identical reoperation rates of 12 % in both groups (p = 1.000) and similar 30-day mortality (2 % vs. 1 %, p = 0.685). Within the secondary CRS/HIPEC group, the male-to-female ratio was 1:3, and the median age was 55 years. The majority of these patients underwent secondary CRS/HIPEC primarily for appendiceal cancer (27 %), pseudomyxoma peritonei (21 %), or colorectal cancer (20 %), mesothelioma (12 %) and ovarian cancer (10 %).
[CONCLUSIONS] Secondary CRS/HIPEC can be performed safely in selected patients with PSMs, comparable to primary CRS/HIPEC. Reoperation rates and 30-day mortality rates were similar between groups, even after adjusting for confounding factors.
[METHODS] A retrospective analysis was conducted using the StuDoQ|HIPEC registry, a prospectively maintained national German CRS/HIPEC database, to compare reoperation rates and 30-day mortality between patients undergoing primary and secondary CRS/HIPEC. The analysis included patients treated at 83 centers between 2011 and 2024. Propensity-score matching was performed to adjust for confounding factors prior to comparing outcomes between the matched cohorts.
[RESULTS] A comprehensive analysis of 5011 primary CRS/HIPEC cases and 236 secondary CRS/HIPEC cases showed no significant differences in reoperation rates (15 % vs. 12 %, p = 0.192) or 30-day mortality (2 % vs. 1 %, p = 0.240). After propensity-score matching to control for confounding factors, outcomes remained comparable, with identical reoperation rates of 12 % in both groups (p = 1.000) and similar 30-day mortality (2 % vs. 1 %, p = 0.685). Within the secondary CRS/HIPEC group, the male-to-female ratio was 1:3, and the median age was 55 years. The majority of these patients underwent secondary CRS/HIPEC primarily for appendiceal cancer (27 %), pseudomyxoma peritonei (21 %), or colorectal cancer (20 %), mesothelioma (12 %) and ovarian cancer (10 %).
[CONCLUSIONS] Secondary CRS/HIPEC can be performed safely in selected patients with PSMs, comparable to primary CRS/HIPEC. Reoperation rates and 30-day mortality rates were similar between groups, even after adjusting for confounding factors.
🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만
- Humans
- Female
- Peritoneal Neoplasms
- Male
- Middle Aged
- Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures
- Retrospective Studies
- Reoperation
- Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy
- Aged
- Propensity Score
- Registries
- Adult
- Germany
- Postoperative Complications
- Survival Rate
- Cytoreductive surgery (CRS)
- Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC)
- Peritoneal surface malignancies (PSM)
- Propensity-score matching
- Reoperation rate
🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반
- A Phase I Study of Hydroxychloroquine and Suba-Itraconazole in Men with Biochemical Relapse of Prostate Cancer (HITMAN-PC): Dose Escalation Results.
- Self-management of male urinary symptoms: qualitative findings from a primary care trial.
- Clinical and Liquid Biomarkers of 20-Year Prostate Cancer Risk in Men Aged 45 to 70 Years.
- Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus multiparametric MRI for preoperative pelvic invasion in the patients with prostate cancer.
- Comprehensive analysis of androgen receptor splice variant target gene expression in prostate cancer.
- Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Surgery for Thyroid Cancer.