Citations

AbstractBackgroundWhile parenchymal hepatic metastases were previously considered a contraindication to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), liver resection (LR) is increasingly performed with CRS/HIPEC.MethodsPatients from the US HIPEC Collaborative (2000–2017) with invasive appendiceal or colorectal adenocarcinoma undergoing primary, curative intent CRS/HIPEC with CC0‐1 resection were included. LR was defined as a formal parenchymal resection. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications and overall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 658 patients were included. About 83 (15%) underwent LR of colorectal (58%) or invasive appendiceal (42%) metastases. LR patients had more complications (81% vs. 60%; p = .001), greater number of complications (2.3 vs. 1.5; p < .001) per patient and required more reoperations (22% vs. 11%; p = .007) and readmissions (39% vs. 25%; p = .014) than non‐LR patients. LR patients had decreased OS (2‐year OS 62% vs. 79%, p < .001), even when accounting for peritoneal carcinomatosis index and histology type. Preoperative factors associated with decreased OS on multivariable analysis in LR patients included age < 60 years (HR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.10–11.81), colorectal histology (HR, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.69–12.65), and multiple liver tumors (HR, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.21–9.85) (all p < .05). When assigning one point for each factor, there was an incremental decrease in 2‐year survival as the risk score increased from 0 to 3 (0: 100%; 1: 91%; 2: 58%; 3: 0%).ConclusionsAs CRS/HIPEC + LR has become more common, we created a simple risk score to stratify patients considered for CRS/HIPEC + LR. These data aid in striking the balance between an increased perioperative complication profile with the potential for improvement in OS.

AbstractBackgroundVariations in care have been demonstrated both within and among institutions in many clinical settings. By standardizing perioperative practices, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways reduce variation in perioperative care. We sought to characterize the variation in cytoreductive surgery (CRS)/heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) perioperative practices among experienced US medical centers.MethodsData from the US HIPEC Collaborative represents a retrospective multi‐institutional cohort study of CRS and CRS/HIPEC procedures performed from 12 major academic institutions. Patient characteristics and perioperative practices were reported and compared. Institutional variation was analyzed using hierarchical mixed‐effects linear (continuous outcomes) or logistic (binary outcomes) regression models.ResultsA total of 2372 operations were included. CRS/HIPEC was performed most commonly for appendiceal histologies (64.2%). The rate of complications (overall 56.3%, range: 31.8‐70.9) and readmissions (overall 20.6%, range: 8.9‐33.3) varied by institution (P < .001). Institution‐level variation in perioperative practice patterns existed among measured ERAS pathway process/outcomes (P < .001). The percentages of variation with each process/outcome measure attributable solely to institutional practices ranged from 0.6% to 66.6%.ConclusionsSignificant variation exists in the perioperative care of patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC at major US academic institutions. These findings provide a strong rationale for the investigation of best practices in CRS/HIPEC patients.

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is associated with improved survival for patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CR-PM). However, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) prior to CRS-HIPEC is poorly understood. A retrospective review of adult patients with CR-PM who underwent CRS+/-HIPEC from 2000–2017 was performed. Among 298 patients who underwent CRS+/-HIPEC, 196 (65.8%) received NAC while 102 (34.2%) underwent surgery first (SF). Patients who received NAC had lower peritoneal cancer index score (12.1 + 7.9 vs. 14.3 + 8.5, p = 0.034). There was no significant difference in grade III/IV complications (22.4% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.650), readmission (32.3% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.114), or 30-day mortality (1.5% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.411) between groups. NAC patients experienced longer overall survival (OS) (median 32.7 vs. 22.0 months, p = 0.044) but similar recurrence-free survival (RFS) (median 13.8 vs. 13.0 months, p = 0.456). After controlling for confounding factors, NAC was not independently associated with improved OS (OR 0.80) or RFS (OR 1.04). Among patients who underwent CRS+/-HIPEC for CR-PM, the use of NAC was associated with improved OS that did not persist on multivariable analysis. However, NAC prior to CRS+/-HIPEC was a safe and feasible strategy for CR-PM, which may aid in the appropriate selection of patients for aggressive cytoreductive surgery.

40 Background: Postoperative complications (POCs) are associated with worse oncologic outcomes in various cancer histologies. The impact of POCs on the survival of patients with appendiceal or colorectal cancer after cytoreductive surgery/heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is unknown. Methods: US HIPEC Collaborative (2000-17) was reviewed for patients who underwent CCR0/1 CRS/HIPEC for appendiceal/colorectal cancer. Analysis was stratified by non-invasive appendiceal neoplasm vs invasive appendiceal/colorectal adenocarcinoma. POCs were grouped into infectious, cardiopulmonary, thromboembolic and intestinal dysmotility. Primary outcomes were 3-yr overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Results: Of 1304 pts, median age was 55 yrs, 41% were male (n = 537), 33% had non-invasive appendiceal (n = 426) and 67% had invasive appendiceal/colorectal adenocarcinoma (n = 878). In the non-invasive appendiceal cohort, POCs were identified in 55% (n = 233) and OS and RFS did not differ between patients who experienced a complication and those who did not (OS 94 vs 94% p = 0.26; RFS 68 vs 60% p = 0.15). In the invasive appendiceal/colorectal adenocarcinoma cohort, however, POCs (63%; n = 555) were associated with decreased OS (59 vs 74% p < 0.001) and RFS (32 vs 42% p < 0.001). Infectious POCs were most common (35%; n = 196). On MV analysis accounting for gender, PCI and incomplete resection (CCR1), infectious POCs in particular were associated with decreased OS compared to no complication (HR 2.08 95%CI 1.48-2.93 p < 0.01) or other types of complications (HR 1.7 95%CI 1.28-2.25 p < 0.01). This association persisted for infectious POCs and reduced RFS (HR 1.61 95%CI 1.23-2.10 p < 0.01). Conclusions: Postoperative complications are associated with decreased OS and RFS after CRS/HIPEC for invasive histology, but not for an indolent disease like non-invasive appendiceal neoplasm. Of all complication types, infectious complications are the main driver for this association. The exact mechanism is not known, but may be immunologic. Efforts must target best practices and standardized prevention strategies to minimize infectious POCs.

37 Background: While parenchymal hepatic metastases were previously considered a contraindication to cytoreductive surgery(CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy(HIPEC), liver resection(LR) is increasingly performed concomitantly with CRS/HIPEC. As this practice continues to expand, identification of preoperative factors associated with poor outcomes is paramount. Methods: Patients from the US HIPEC Collaborative(2000-2017) with invasive appendiceal or colorectal adenocarcinoma undergoing primary, curative intent CRS/HIPEC with CC0-1 resection were included. LR was defined as a formal parenchymal resection. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications and overall survival(OS). Results: 658 patients were included. Average age was 54 years and 45% were male; 83 (15%) underwent liver resection of colorectal (58%) or invasive appendiceal (42%) metastases. Liver resection patients had more complications (81 vs 60%; p = 0.001), greater number of complications (2.3 vs 1.5; p < 0.001), and required more reoperations (22 vs 11%; p = 0.007) and readmissions (39 vs 25%; p = 0.014) than non-liver resection patients. Liver resection patients had decreased OS (2-year OS 62% vs 79%, p < 0.001), which persisted on multivariable Cox regression when accounting for PCI and histology type. Preoperative factors associated with decreased OS on multivariable analysis in patients undergoing liver resection included age < 60 years (HR:3.61), colorectal histology (HR:3.84), and multiple liver tumors (HR:3.45) (all p < 0.05). When assigning one point for each factor, there was an incremental decrease in 2-yr survival as the risk score increased from 0 to 3 (0: 100%; 1: 91%; 2: 58%; 3: 0%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: As concurrent liver resection with CRS/HIPEC has become more common, we created a simple risk score to stratify patients considered for CRS/HIPEC with liver resection. These data aid in striking the balance between an increased perioperative complication profile with the potential for improvement in overall survival.

184 Background: Patient age is often a significant factor in preoperative selection for major abdominal surgery. Its association with postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery(CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy(HIPEC) remains ill-defined. Methods: The US HIPEC Collaborative database(2000-2017) was reviewed for patients who underwent a CCR0/1 CRS/HIPEC. Age was categorized into < 65 or >65yrs. Primary outcomes were postoperative major complications, readmission, 30-day mortality, and non-home discharge(NHD). Analysis was stratified by disease histology: non-invasive(appendiceal LAMN/HAMN), and invasive(appendiceal/colorectal adenocarcinoma). Results: Of 1090pts identified, 22% were >65yrs(n = 240), 59% were female(n = 646), 25% had non-invasive(n = 276) and 51% had invasive(n = 555) histology. Median PCI was 13(IQR7-20). Patients >65yrs had a higher rate of major complications(37vs26%, p = 0.02), readmission(28vs22%,p = 0.05), 30-day mortality(3vs1%,p = 0.02), and NHD(12vs5%,p < 0.01) compared to those < 65yrs. On multivariable analysis accounting for extent of disease as measured by PCI, for non-invasive histology, age >65yrs was an independent predictor for NHD(OR:2.54,95%CI:1.08-5.99,p = 0.03), but not major complications. For invasive histology, even when accounting for PCI, age >65yrs was an independent predictor for both NHD(OR:2.54,95%CI:1.08-5.98,p = 0.03) and major complications(OR:2.04,95%CI:1.16-3.59,p = 0.05). Age was not associated with hospital readmission or 30-day mortality for any histology. Conclusions: Regardless of histology, patients >65yrs are nearly at three-fold increased risk for non-home discharge after CRS/HIPEC. For invasive histology, age >65yrs is also associated with increased major complication rates, but the procedure seems to be better tolerated when performed for indolent biology. These data inform preoperative counseling and risk stratification. Early planning for discharge disposition in this high-risk population can potentially translate to cost savings.

Purpose: Hospital readmissions after surgery are a focus of quality improvement efforts. Although some reflect appropriate care, others are potentially preventable readmissions (PPRs). We aim to describe the burden, timing, and factors associated with readmissions after complex cancer surgery. Methods: The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2013) was used to select patients undergoing a complex oncologic resection, which was defined as esophagectomy/gastrectomy, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, colorectal resection, lung resection, or cystectomy. Readmissions within 30 days from discharge were analyzed. International Classification of Diseases (9th revision) primary diagnosis codes were reviewed to identify PPRs. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified demographic, clinical, and hospital factors associated with readmissions. Results: Of the 59,493 eligible patients, 14% experienced a 30-day readmission, and 82% of these were deemed PPRs. Half of the readmissions occurred within the first 8 days of discharge. Infections (26%), GI complications (17%), and respiratory conditions (10%) accounted for most readmissions. Factors independently associated with an increased likelihood of readmission included Medicaid versus private insurance (odds ratio [OR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.48), higher comorbidity score (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.33 to 1.63), discharge to a facility (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.51), prolonged length of stay (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.52), and occurrence of a major in-hospital complication (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.34). Conclusion: One in seven patients undergoing complex cancer surgery suffered a readmission within 30 days. We identified common causes of these and identified patients at high risk for such an event. These data can be used by physicians, administrators, and policymakers to develop strategies to decrease readmissions.

109 Background: Hospital readmissions following surgery are a focus of quality improvement efforts nationwide. Although some reflect appropriate care, others are potentially preventable readmissions (PPRs). We aim to describe the burden, timing, and factors associated with PPRs after complex cancer surgery. Methods: The National Readmissions Dataset (2013) was used to select patients undergoing a complex oncologic resection (defined as esophagectomy/gastrectomy, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, colorectal resection, lung resection, and cystectomy). All Readmissions occurring within 30 days from discharge were analyzed. Causes for readmissions were categorized in eleven diagnostic groups and tabulated. ICD-9 primary diagnosis codes were reviewed to identify PPRs. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify demographic, clinical and hospital factors associated with PPRs. Results: We analyzed 60,970 patients with 92,260 admissions. A 30 day readmission occurred in 14% of patients, and was highest following cystectomy (25%) and lowest for lung resections (9%). Of all readmissions 82% were deemed to be PPRs. Half of PPRs occurred within the first 10 days of discharge. Infections, gastrointestinal complications and respiratory conditions accounted for 59% of PPRs. Other common causes included dehydration/electrolyte deficiencies (11%), exacerbation of comorbidity (9.2%), bleeding (5%), thromboembolism (3.5%), and wound complications (3.2%). Factors associated with an increased likelihood of PPRs include Medicaid compared with private insurance (OR 1.24, 95%CI 0.8-1.7), higher comorbid conditions (OR 1.44, 95%CI 1.32, 1.59), and discharge to a facility (OR 1.9, 95%CI 1.7-2.1). Patients with a prolonged hospital stay or a major complication during the index admission had a 34% (OR 1.34, 95%CI 1.3-1.4), and 64% (OR 1.64, 95%CI 1.5-1.7) higher likelihood of a PPR respectively. Conclusions: Most 30 day readmissions after complex cancer surgery are potentially preventable and occur within 10 days of discharge. We identify common causes of readmission and high risk populations to help physicians, administrators and policy makers develop strategies to decrease PPRs.