A precise temperature control during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy promises an early return of bowel function. Issue 8 (2nd August 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ye, Jinning; Chen, Liuhua; Zuo, Jidong; Peng, Jianjun; Chen, Chuangqi; Cai, Shirong; Song, Wu; He, Yulong; Yuan, Yujie
• Is Part Of: Cancer biology & therapy. Volume 21:Issue 8(2020)
• Page Start: 726
• Page End: 732
• Publication Date: 2020-08-02
• Subjects: Gastrointestinal cancer -- peritoneal carcinomatosis -- hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy -- bowel function; 616.99406
• DOI: 10.1080/15384047.2020.1775444
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1538-4047

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Introduction: The hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has been widely applied in clinical practice for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). The temperature is one of the important elements affecting the efficacy of HIPEC, and it can become fluctuant by several factors. This study is aimed to explore the role of a stable perfusion temperature in promoting bowel recovery of PC patients due to gastrointestinal malignancies. Methods: Between January 2012 and July 2013, 59 PC patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and three-cycle HIPEC were included. Patients having stable perfusion temperature for all cycles were assigned into the study group, with the rest having unstable temperature into the control group. Time of flatus and defecation passage and initiation time of enteral nutrition were compared between both groups to detect the significance in bowel function recovery, with visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity and overall survival (OS) compared meanwhile. Results: In sum, 33 (55.9%) patients obtained stable temperature during HIPEC, and the rest of 26 (44.1%) developed fluctuant perfusion temperature. Average time of flatus (2.3 ± 1.2 vs 3.9 ± 2.2 days, P = .002), defecation passage (5.2 ± 2.1 vs 7.1 ± 2.9 days, P = .004) and enteral nutrition initiation (4.3 ± 1.5 vs 6.7 ± 2.3 days, P < .001) were much shorter in the study group than the control group. Additionally, the VAS score (4.5 ± 2.3 vs 6.3 ± 1.3, P < .001) and 5-year OS rate (17.8% vs 11.1%, P =.135) were both improved, with significance observed in postoperative pain control. Conclusions: During HIPEC, a precise temperature control could promise an early recovery of bowel function and reduce postoperative pain, without survival significance found based on the current cohort.