Skip to main content
. 2018 Jun 1;10:1758835918777036. doi: 10.1177/1758835918777036

Table 2.

Feasibility and response evaluation data.

Procedures
Total no. PIPAC procedures 129
 PIPACs/pt, mean (SD) 3.66 (1.95)
 PIPACs/pt, median (range) 3 (1–9)
Technical aspects PIPAC 1 (n = 35) PIPAC 3 (n = 27)
Intraperitoneal access, no. patients (%) 35 (100%) 27 (100%)
Procedure time, minutes (range) 100 (71–156) 92 (77–125)
Days of admission, median (range) 1 (1–4) 1 (0–3)
Discharge day 0/1, no. patients (%) 28 (80%) 24 (89%)
Pain/PONV
Postoperative pain*, median (range) 3 (0–10) 3 (0–7)
Postoperative nausea, no. patients
 None 24 14
 Mild 2 4
 Moderate 1 3
 Severe 8 5
Postoperative vomiting, no. patients
 None 26 18
 1 vomit 2 1
 2–3 vomits 3 2
 >3 vomits 4 5
Response evaluation PIPAC 1 PIPAC 3
PRGS, mean (SD) 2.05 (0.66) 1.54 (0.52) p = 0.0006
PRGS, maximum value 4 3
PRGS improvement, patients (%) 18/27 (67%)
Malignant cells in peritoneal lavage 13/22 (59%) 9/22 (41%)
 Conversion nonmalignant → malignant 1/22 (4.5%)
 Conversion malignant → nonmalignant 5/22 (23%)
 No conversion 8/22 (36%)
*

Visual Analog Scale 1–10.

PIPAC, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy; PONV, postoperative nausea and vomiting; PRGS, peritoneal regression grading score; Pt, patient; SD, standard deviation.