Comparison of Staging Laparoscopy for Peritoneal Metastases with or without Pressurized Intra-Peritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC)
Abstract Background Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has been introduced for palliative treatment of peritoneal cancer (PC) and is currently tested also in the neoadjuvant and prophylactic setting. The aim was therefore to compare safety and tolerance of staging laparoscopy with or without PIPAC. Methods This retrospective analysis compared consecutive patients undergoing staging laparoscopy alone for oesogastric cancer with patients having PIPAC for suspected PC of various origins from January 2015 until January 2020. Safety was assessed by use of the Clavien classification for complications and CTCAE for capturing of adverse events. Pain and nausea were documented by use of a visual analogue scale (VAS: 0-10: maximal intensity). Results Overall, 25 PIPAC procedures were compared to 24 in the laparoscopy group. PIPAC procedures took a median of 35 min (IQR: 25-67) longer. Four patients experienced at least one complication in either (p=0.741). No differences were noted for postoperative nausea (p=0.961) and pain levels (p=0.156). Median hospital stay was 2 (IQR: 1-3) for PIPAC and 1 (IQR: 1-2) for the laparoscopy group (p=0.104). Conclusions The addition of PIPAC did not jeopardize safety and postoperative outcomes of staging laparoscopy alone. Further studies need to clarify its oncological benefits.