Postoperative complications affect long‐term outcomes after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Morbidity after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) for colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) may negatively affect survival. The objective was to determine the impact of postoperative complications (CX) on survival in patients undergoing CRS + HIPEC for colorectal PC. METHODS: All patients undergoing laparotomy for planned CRS + HIPEC for colorectal PC at a single institution from 1999 to 2014 were included. Patients were divided into three groups: CRS + HIPEC without CX (+HIPEC-CX); CRS + HIPEC with postoperative complication (+HIPEC + CX); and aborted CRS and HIPEC due to unresectable disease (-HIPEC). Postoperative morbidity were defined as Clavien II+ complications. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling were used to describe the disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-two patients were included in the analysis (50 +HIPEC - CX, 40 +HIPEC + CX, 32-HIPEC). Overall complication rate was 42%. OS at 1-, 3-, and 5-years in patients undergoing successful CRS + HIPEC were 97%, 67%, and 45%. CX after successful CRS + HIPEC was independently associated with worsened OS (HR1.58, 95%CI, 1.19-1.97) but not DFS (HR1.11, 95%CI, 0.56-2.20). PCI also independently predicted worsened DFS (HR1.12, 95%CI, 1.06-1.18) and OS (HR1.08, 95%CI, 1.04-1.12). Patients with unresectable disease had significantly worse OS (HR6.50, 95%CI, 1.37-7.01). CONCLUSIONS: CX after CRS + HIPEC significantly affect OS. Patient selection and perioperative care are of paramount importance in the management of CRS + HIPEC for colorectal PC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".