Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Assessment of Intraoperative Scoring Systems for Predicting Cytoreduction Outcome in Peritoneal Metastatic Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Assessment of Intraoperative Scoring Systems for Predicting Cytoreduction Outcome in Peritoneal Metastatic Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Assessment of Intraoperative Scoring Systems for Predicting Cytoreduction Outcome in Peritoneal Metastatic Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Assessment of Intraoperative Scoring Systems for Predicting Cytoreduction Outcome in Peritoneal Metastatic Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
2024
Overview
Background
Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) is a widely acknowledged treatment approach for peritoneal metastasis, showing favorable prognosis and long-term survival. Intraoperative scoring systems quantify tumoral burden before CRS and may predict complete cytoreduction (CC). This study reviews the intraoperative scoring systems for predicting CC and optimal cytoreduction (OC) and evaluates the predictive performance of the Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI) and Predictive Index Value (PIV).
Methods
Systematic searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses of extracted data were performed to compare the absolute predictive performances of PCI and PIV.
Results
Thirty-eight studies (5834 patients) focusing on gynecological (
n
= 34; 89.5%), gastrointestinal (
n
= 2; 5.3%) malignancies, and on tumors of various origins (
n
= 2; 5.3%) were identified. Seventy-seven models assessing the predictive performance of scoring systems (54 for CC and 23 for OC) were identified with PCI (
n
= 39/77) and PIV (
n
= 16/77) being the most common. Twenty models (26.0%) reinterpreted previous scoring systems of which ten (13%) used a modified version of PIV (reclassification). Meta-analyses of models predicting CC based on PCI (
n
= 21) and PIV (
n
= 8) provided an AUC estimate of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79–0.86;
Q
= 119.6,
p
= 0.0001;
I
2
= 74.1%) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.68–0.81;
Q
= 7.2,
p
= 0.41;
I
2
= 11.0%), respectively.
Conclusions
Peritoneal Cancer Index models demonstrate an excellent estimate of CC, while PIV shows an acceptable performance. There is a need for high-quality studies to address management differences, establish standardized cutoff values, and focus on non-gynecological malignancies.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
