-
Pancreas Jul 2016The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency and safety of peritoneal lavage in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency and safety of peritoneal lavage in patients with severe acute pancreatitis.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials that compared peritoneal lavage with conservative treatment for severe acute pancreatitis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included complications rate, proportion of need for operation, length of hospital stay, and medical costs.
RESULTS
A total of 899 patients from 15 studies were subjected to this systematic review. Peritoneal lavage did significantly decrease the mortality (relative risk, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.66; P < 0.01), with low heterogeneity among the studies (I = 7%). Peritoneal lavage also seemed to significantly alter any of the other end points.
CONCLUSIONS
Peritoneal lavage shows robustly beneficial effect in patients with severe acute pancreatitis in this systematic review. However, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the general high risk of bias in these included studies.
Topics: Acute Disease; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreatitis; Peritoneal Lavage; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Severity of Illness Index; Survival Rate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27295532
DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000530 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Mar 2023Intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) with saline has been widely used in surgical practice. However, the effectiveness of IOPL with saline in patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Intraoperative peritoneal lavage (IOPL) with saline has been widely used in surgical practice. However, the effectiveness of IOPL with saline in patients with intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) remains controversial. This study aims to systematically review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of IOPL in patients with IAIs.
METHODS
The databases of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, CNKI, WanFang, and CBM databases were searched from inception to December 31, 2022. Random-effects models were used to calculate the risk ratio (RR), mean difference, and standardized mean difference. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to rate the quality of the evidence.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs with 1318 participants were included, of which eight studies on appendicitis and two studies on peritonitis. Moderate-quality evidence showed that the use of IOPL with saline was not associated with a reduced risk of mortality (0% vs. 1.1%; RR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.02-6.39]), intra-abdominal abscess (12.3% vs. 11.8%; RR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.70-1.48]; I = 24%), incisional surgical site infections (3.3% vs. 3.8%; RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.18-2.86]; I = 50%), postoperative complication (11.0% vs. 13.2%; RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.39-1.41]; I = 64%), reoperation (2.9% vs. 1.7%; RR,1.71 [95% CI, 0.74-3.93]; I = 0%) and readmission (5.2% vs. 6.6%; RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.48-1.87]; I = 7%) in patients with appendicitis when compared to non-IOPL. Low-quality evidence showed that the use of IOPL with saline was not associated with a reduced risk of mortality (22.7% vs. 23.3%; RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.45-2.09], I = 0%) and intra-abdominal abscess (5.1% vs. 5.0%; RR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.16-6.98], I = 0%) in patients with peritonitis when compared to non-IOPL.
CONCLUSION
IOPL with saline use in patients with appendicitis was not associated with significantly decreased risk of mortality, intra-abdominal abscess, incisional surgical site infection, postoperative complication, reoperation, and readmission compared with non-IOPL. These findings do not support the routine use of IOPL with saline in patients with appendicitis. The benefits of IOPL for IAI caused by other types of abdominal infections need to be investigated.
Topics: Humans; Peritoneal Lavage; Abdominal Abscess; Peritonitis; Surgical Wound Infection; Appendicitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36991507
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00496-6 -
The British Journal of Surgery Jun 2013Intraperitoneal cancer cells are detectable at the time of colorectal cancer resection in some patients. The significance of this, particularly in patients with no other... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Intraperitoneal cancer cells are detectable at the time of colorectal cancer resection in some patients. The significance of this, particularly in patients with no other adverse prognostic features, is poorly defined. Consequently peritoneal lavage is not part of routine practice during colorectal cancer resection, in contrast with other abdominal malignancies. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the effect of positive intraoperative peritoneal cytology on cancer-specific outcomes in colorectal cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review of key electronic journal databases was undertaken using the search terms 'peritoneal cytology' and 'colorectal' from 1980 to 2012. Studies including patients with frank peritoneal metastasis were excluded. Meta-analysis for overall survival, local/peritoneal recurrence and overall recurrence was performed.
RESULTS
Twelve cohort studies (2580 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The weighted mean yield was 11·6 (range 2·2-41) per cent. Yield rates were dependent on timing of sampling (before resection, 11·8 per cent; after resection, 13·2 per cent) and detection methods used (cytopathology, 8·4 per cent; immunocytochemistry, 28·3 per cent; polymerase chain reaction, 14·5 per cent). Meta-analysis showed that positive peritoneal lavage predicted worse overall survival (odds ratio (OR) 4·26, 95 per cent confidence interval 2·86 to 6·36; P < 0·001), local/peritoneal recurrence (OR 6·57, 2·30 to 18·79; P < 0·001) and overall recurrence (OR 4·02, 2·24 to 7·22; P < 0·001).
CONCLUSION
Evidence of intraoperative peritoneal tumour cells at colorectal cancer resection is predictive of adverse cancer outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Colorectal Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Intraoperative Care; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Peritoneal Lavage; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Survival Rate; Young Adult
PubMed: 23536330
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9118 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2015Ultrasonography (performed by means of a four-quadrant, focused assessment of sonography for trauma (FAST)) is regarded as a key instrument for the initial assessment of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ultrasonography (performed by means of a four-quadrant, focused assessment of sonography for trauma (FAST)) is regarded as a key instrument for the initial assessment of patients with suspected blunt abdominal and thoraco-abdominal trauma in the emergency department setting. FAST has a high specificity but low sensitivity in detecting and excluding visceral injuries. Proponents of FAST argue that ultrasound-based clinical pathways enhance the speed of primary trauma assessment, reduce the number of unnecessary multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) scans, and enable quicker triage to surgical and non-surgical care. Given the proven accuracy, increasing availability of, and indication for, MDCT among patients with blunt abdominal and multiple injuries, we aimed to compile the best available evidence of the use of FAST-based assessment compared with other primary trauma assessment protocols.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of diagnostic algorithms using ultrasonography including in FAST examinations in the emergency department in relation to the early, late, and overall mortality of patients with suspected blunt abdominal trauma.
SEARCH METHODS
The most recent search was run on 30th June 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), ISI Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, CPCI-S, and CPSI-SSH), clinical trials registers, and screened reference lists. Trial authors were contacted for further information and individual patient data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Participants were patients with blunt torso, abdominal, or multiple trauma undergoing diagnostic investigations for abdominal organ injury. The intervention was diagnostic algorithms comprising emergency ultrasonography (US). The control was diagnostic algorithms without US examinations (for example, primary computed tomography (CT) or diagnostic peritoneal lavage (DPL)). Outcomes were mortality, use of CT or invasive procedures (DPL, laparoscopy, laparotomy), and cost-effectiveness.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors (DS and CG) independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Where possible, data were pooled and relative risks (RRs), risk differences (RDs), and weighted mean differences, each with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated by fixed-effect or random-effects models as appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified four studies meeting our inclusion criteria. Overall, trials were of poor to moderate methodological quality. Few trial authors responded to our written inquiries seeking to resolve controversial issues and to obtain individual patient data. Strong heterogeneity amongst the trials prompted discussion between the review authors as to whether the data should or should not be pooled; we decided in favour of a quantitative synthesis to provide a rough impression about the effect sizes achievable with US-based triage algorithms. We pooled mortality data from three trials involving 1254 patients; the RR in favour of the FAST arm was 1.00 (95% CI 0.50 to 2.00). FAST-based pathways reduced the number of CT scans (random-effects model RD -0.52, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.21), but the meaning of this result was unclear.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The experimental evidence justifying FAST-based clinical pathways in diagnosing patients with suspected abdominal or multiple blunt trauma remains poor. Because of strong heterogeneity between the trial results, the quantitative information provided by this review may only be used in an exploratory fashion. It is unlikely that FAST will ever be investigated by means of a confirmatory, large-scale RCT in the future. Thus, this Cochrane Review may be regarded as a review which provides the best available evidence for clinical practice guidelines and management recommendations. It can only be concluded from the few head-to-head studies that negative US scans are likely to reduce the incidence of MDCT scans which, given the low sensitivity of FAST (or reliability of negative results), may adversely affect the diagnostic yield of the trauma survey. At best, US has no negative impact on mortality or morbidity. Assuming that major blunt abdominal or multiple trauma is associated with 15% mortality and a CT-based diagnostic work-up is considered the current standard of care, 874, 3495, or 21,838 patients are needed per intervention group to demonstrate non-inferiority of FAST to CT-based algorithms with non-inferiority margins of 5%, 2.5%, and 1%, power of 90%, and a type-I error alpha of 5%.
Topics: Abdominal Injuries; Algorithms; Emergencies; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ultrasonography; Wounds, Nonpenetrating
PubMed: 26368505
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004446.pub4 -
International Journal of Surgery... Nov 2023Staging laparoscopy for gastric cancer is recommended to assess the tumor's locoregional extension and exclude peritoneal disease. As there is no consensus on optimizing...
BACKGROUND
Staging laparoscopy for gastric cancer is recommended to assess the tumor's locoregional extension and exclude peritoneal disease. As there is no consensus on optimizing the procedure's diagnostic accuracy, we aimed to systematically review the literature on operative techniques, followed by peritoneal lavage fluid assessment in gastric cancer patients. Specifically, we sought to indicate the most common characteristics of the procedure and cytological evaluation.
METHODS
This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The protocol for this systematic review was registered on PROSPERO database (CRD: 42022306746). On September 2022, a search was carried out using Embase, Medline ALL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science Core Collection.
RESULTS
The search identified 1632 studies on staging laparoscopy and 2190 studies on peritoneal fluid assessment. Some 212 studies were included. Open Hasson was the method of choice in accessing the peritoneal cavity in 65% of the studies, followed by establishing a pneumoperitoneum at 10-12 mmHg in 52% of reports. Most frequently, the patient was positioned supine (70%), while a 30° scope and three ports were used to assess the peritoneal cavity clockwise (72%, 77%, and 85%, respectively). Right and left upper abdomen quadrants were the predominant area of laparoscopic exploration (both 65%), followed by the primary tumor region (54%), liver and pelvis (both 30%), and small bowel and spleen (19% and 17%, respectively). Regions of peritoneal lavage and aspiration were limited to the pelvis (50%), followed by right and left upper abdomen quadrants (37.5% and 50%, respectively). No studies compared different methods of operative techniques or analysis of ascites/fluid.
CONCLUSIONS
This study indicates a high heterogeneity in the technique of staging laparoscopy and peritoneal fluid assessment in gastric cancer patients. Further research and initiatives to reach a consensus on the standardization of the procedure are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Stomach Neoplasms; Ascitic Fluid; Neoplasm Staging; Laparoscopy; Peritoneal Lavage
PubMed: 37581636
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000632 -
Gastric Cancer : Official Journal of... Jan 2018Peritoneal cytology has been used as a part of the cancer staging of gastric cancer patients. The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the value of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Peritoneal cytology has been used as a part of the cancer staging of gastric cancer patients. The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the value of peritoneal cytology as part of the staging of gastric cancer and survival prediction. The second aim was to establish if positive cytology may be modified by neoadjuvant therapy, to improve prognosis.
METHODS
An electronic literature search was performed using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane library databases up to January 2016. The logarithm of the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was used as the primary summary statistic. Comparative studies were used, and the outcome measure was survival in three groups: (1) positive versus negative cytology at staging laparoscopy immediately preceding surgery; (2) effect of neoadjuvant therapy on cytology and survival; and (3) positive cytology in the absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease was compared with obvious macroscopic peritoneal disease.
RESULTS
Pooled analysis demonstrated that positive cytology was associated with significantly reduced overall survival (HR, 3.46; 95% CI, 2.77-4.31; P < 0.0001). Interestingly, negative cytology following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.31-0.57; P < 0.0001). The absence of macroscopic peritoneal disease with positive cytology was associated with significantly improved overall survival (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.56-0.73; P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
This study suggests that patients with initial positive cytology may have a good prognosis following neoadjuvant treatment if the cytology results change to negative after treatment.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Staging; Peritoneal Lavage; Prognosis; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 28779261
DOI: 10.1007/s10120-017-0749-y -
European Journal of Surgical Oncology :... Sep 2016The most common cause of tumour progression in advanced gastric cancer is peritoneal carcinosis (PC). The necessity to increase the survival in advanced diseases... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
The most common cause of tumour progression in advanced gastric cancer is peritoneal carcinosis (PC). The necessity to increase the survival in advanced diseases suggested to deliver the chemotherapy directly in the peritoneal cavity also in Cy+/PC- and to experiment the effect of massive peritoneal lavage to wash out the tumour cells. The aim of this study is to investigate the gain in term of survival and peritoneal recurrence rate of the intraperitoneal chemotherapy and/or peritoneal lavage in patients with Cy+/PC-.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review with meta-analysis of trials about the effect of intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IPC) and/or peritoneal lavage (PL) on positive cytology in gastric cancer without carcinosis.
RESULTS
Three trials have been included (164 patients: 76 received surgery alone, 51 surgery + IPC and 37 surgery + IPC + PL). Two- and five-years survival is increased by IPC (RR = 1.62, RR = 3.10). 2 and 5 years survival is further increased by IPC + PL (RR = 2.33, RR = 6.19). Peritoneal recurrence is reduced by IPC (OR = 0.45) and by IPC + PL (OR = 0.13).
CONCLUSIONS
Two- and five-years overall survival in patients with free cancer cells without carcinosis is incremented by intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Peritoneal lavage further increases these survival rates and also it further decreases the peritoneal recurrence rate.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma; Humans; Infusions, Parenteral; Peritoneal Cavity; Peritoneal Lavage; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Prognosis; Stomach Neoplasms; Survival Rate; Therapeutic Irrigation
PubMed: 27134147
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.03.035 -
Updates in Surgery Feb 2022This study aims to synthesize the benefits of surgery plus extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage (EIPL) for patients with gastric cancer compared with surgery... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The benefits of surgery plus extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage (EIPL) for patients with gastric cancer compared with surgery alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
This study aims to synthesize the benefits of surgery plus extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage (EIPL) for patients with gastric cancer compared with surgery alone. We searched Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for randomized controlled trials from 2000 to 2021 according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The reference lists of studies meeting the criteria were also screened for additional studies. The quality of these studies was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. An inverse-variance random-effects model of DerSimonian and Laird was used to synthesize the HRs and corresponding 95% CIs of short-term outcomes: hospital mortality and postoperative complications. For long-term outcomes (peritoneal recurrence and 3-year or 5-year overall survival rate), narrative synthesis was used. 4 of 43 studies were included for quantitative analysis. For short-term outcomes, the pooled HRs of hospital mortality and postoperative complications are 0.422 (95%CI: 0.037, 4.790) and 0.774 (95%CI: 0.376, 1.592). For long-term outcomes, despite the inconsistent results, patients receiving EPIL did not have reduced peritoneal recurrence and 3-year or 5-year overall survival rate. Compared with surgery alone, surgery plus EIPL does not have more benefits for patients with gastric cancer.
Topics: Humans; Peritoneal Lavage; Postoperative Complications; Stomach Neoplasms; Survival Rate
PubMed: 34170498
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-021-01120-5 -
International Journal of Surgery... Feb 2017Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) has been proposed as an alternative, less invasive technique in the treatment of acute perforated sigmoid diverticulitis (APSD). The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) has been proposed as an alternative, less invasive technique in the treatment of acute perforated sigmoid diverticulitis (APSD). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the effectiveness of LPL versus surgical resection (SR) in terms of morbidity and mortality in the management of APSD.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LPL versus SR in the treatment of APSD. The end points included peri-operative mortality, severe adverse events, overall mortality, post-operative abscess, percutaneous reinterventions, reoperation, operative time, postoperative stay, and readmissions.
RESULTS
Three RCTs with a total of 372 patients, randomised to either LPL or SR were included. There was no significant difference in peri-operative mortality between LPL and SR (OR 1.356, 95% CI 0.365 to 5.032, p = 0.649), or serious adverse events (OR = 1.866, 95% CI = 0.680 to 5.120, p = 0.226). The LPL required significantly less time to complete than SR (WMD = -72.105, 95% CI = -88.335 to -55.876, p < 0.0001). The LPL group was associated with a significantly higher rate of postoperative abscess formation (OR = 4.121, 95% CI = 1.890 to 8.986, p = 0.0004) and subsequent percutaneous interventions (OR = 5.414, 95% CI 1.618 to 18.118, p = 0.006).
CONCLUSION
Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage is a safe and quick alternative in the management of APSD. In comparison to SR, LPL results in higher rates of postoperative abscess formation requiring more percutaneous drainage interventions without any difference in perioperative mortality and serious morbidity.
Topics: Diverticulitis, Colonic; Humans; Intestinal Perforation; Laparoscopy; Peritoneal Lavage; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reoperation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28089941
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.01.020 -
Anticancer Research Mar 2018Detecting free tumor cells in the peritoneal lavage fluid of gastric cancer patients permits to assess a more accurate prognosis, predict peritoneal recurrence and... (Review)
Review
Gastric Cancer Cells in Peritoneal Lavage Fluid: A Systematic Review Comparing Cytological with Molecular Detection for Diagnosis of Peritoneal Metastases and Prediction of Peritoneal Recurrences.
BACKGROUND/AIM
Detecting free tumor cells in the peritoneal lavage fluid of gastric cancer patients permits to assess a more accurate prognosis, predict peritoneal recurrence and select cases for a more aggressive treatment. Currently, cytology and molecular biology comprise the two most popular methods of detection that are under constant study by researchers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We burrowed into the available literature comparing cytological with molecular detection of free intraperitoneal gastric cancer cells. PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus and Google Scholar were the search engines investigated.
RESULTS
As of 2017, 51 dedicated studies have been published. Messenger RNA of carcinoembryonic antigen was the genetic target most frequently described. The genetic technique is usually superior to cytology in sensitivity (38-100% vs. 12.3-67% respectively), whereas cytological examination tends to show a slight pre-eminence in specificity (approximately 100%).
CONCLUSION
So far, given the imperfection of each method, employment of both cytology and molecular examination seem to be mandatory.
Topics: Ascitic Fluid; Carcinoembryonic Antigen; Cytodiagnosis; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Peritoneal Lavage; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 29491048
DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12347