Mininvasive Cytoreduction Surgery plus HIPEC for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background and objectives: The Gold-Standard treatment for Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer remains cytoreductive surgery followed by systemic chemotherapy. Surgery can be performed either by an open or minimally invasive approach (MIS), although the former remains the most widely used approach. Recently, Van Driel et al. proved that adding 100 mg/m2 of Cisplatin in Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) at Interval Debulking Surgery (IDS) gives a disease-free survival (DFS) advantage. Similarly, Gueli-Alletti et al. demonstrated how the MIS approach is feasible and safe in IDS. Moreover, Petrillo et al. reported pharmacokinetic profiles with a higher chemotherapy concentration in patients undergoing HIPEC after MIS compared with the open approach. Therefore, the following review investigates the oncological and clinical safety consequences of the association between MIS and HIPEC. Methods: Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the PubMed and Scopus databases in April 2022. Studies containing data about oncological and safety outcomes were included. We registered the Review to the PROSPERO site for meta-analysis with protocol number CRD42022329503. Results: Five studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. 42 patients were included in the review from three different Gynecological Oncological referral centers. The systematic review highlighted a Recurrence Rate ranging between 0 and 100%, with a 3-year Platinum-Free Survival between 10 and 70%. The most common HIPEC drug was Cisplatin, used at concentrations between 75 and 100 mg/m2 and at an average temperature of 42 °C, for 60 to 90 min. Only 1 Acute Kidney Insufficiency has been reported. Conclusions: The scarcity of clinical trials focusing on a direct comparison between MIS and the open approach followed by HIPEC in EOC treatment does not make it possible to identify an oncological advantage between these two techniques. However, the safety profiles shown are highly reassuring.