Minerva medica · 2019
From palliation to cure: PIPAC for peritoneal malignancies.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Di Giorgio Andrea, Abatini Carlo, Attalla El Halabieh Miriam, Vita Emanuele, Vizzielli Giuseppe, Gallotta Valerio, Pacelli Fabio, Rotolo Stefano
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Systemic chemotherapy offers poor control over peritoneal disease, maybe as a consequence of restricted drug availability within the abdominal cavity. Locoregional chemotherapy may overcome these shortcomings but its administration is limited to a few patients with confined peritoneal spread. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) emerged in the last years as a novel method of intraperitoneal drug administration.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We report a meta-analysis of published studies on PIPAC safety and pathological anti-tumoral efficacy on PC from various tumor entities, with the aim of providing more evidence to support further research. This systematic review and meta-analysis were designed, conducted and reported according to the PRISMA statement.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: An overall pathological response rate of 43.7% was calculated on a total of 668 patients who underwent 1480 PIPAC cycles across the 20 studies. Pooled severe adverse events rate (CTCAE grade 3-4) was 10% and seven deaths across all studies were reported, of which only four were related to PIPAC.
CONCLUSIONS: PIPAC is a safe procedure which has a relevant anti-tumoral activity on peritoneal carcinomatosis. Further studies, even in the early stage of disease, are awaited to assess the clinical benefit of PIPAC. This review may serve as a reliable basis for future research.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We report a meta-analysis of published studies on PIPAC safety and pathological anti-tumoral efficacy on PC from various tumor entities, with the aim of providing more evidence to support further research. This systematic review and meta-analysis were designed, conducted and reported according to the PRISMA statement.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: An overall pathological response rate of 43.7% was calculated on a total of 668 patients who underwent 1480 PIPAC cycles across the 20 studies. Pooled severe adverse events rate (CTCAE grade 3-4) was 10% and seven deaths across all studies were reported, of which only four were related to PIPAC.
CONCLUSIONS: PIPAC is a safe procedure which has a relevant anti-tumoral activity on peritoneal carcinomatosis. Further studies, even in the early stage of disease, are awaited to assess the clinical benefit of PIPAC. This review may serve as a reliable basis for future research.