Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 15;26(7):2210–2221. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07294-y

Table 2.

Comparison of major postoperative complications between patients with synchronous versus metachronous peritoneal metastases who underwent CRS with HIPEC

Synchronous colorectal PM (n = 231)
n (%)
Metachronous colorectal PM (n = 202)
n (%)
p value
SAE score 0.693
 1–2 70 (30.3) 56 (27.7)
 ≥ 3 62 (26.8) 60 (29.7)
Reoperation 35 (15.2) 30 (14.9) 0.931
Hospital mortality 3 (1.3) 4 (2.0) 0.575
Grade ≥ 3 complications
 Anastomotic leakage 15 (6.5) 16 (7.9) 0.589
 Postoperative bleeding 3 (1.3) 2 (1.0) 0.714
 Intra-abdominal abscess 28 (12.1) 32 (15.8) 0.379
 Wound infection 5 (2.2) 3 (1.5) 0.468
 Urinary tract infection 1 (0.4) 2 (1.0) 0.361
 Pneumonia 3 (1.3) 4 (2.0) 0.549
 Other infection 3 (1.3) 8 (4.0) 0.735
 Ileus 6 (2.6) 4 (2.0) 0.630
 Gastroparesis 5 (2.2) 6 (3.0) 0.650
 Electrolyte disorder 0 (0.0) 1 (0.5) 0.636
 Anemia 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1.00
 Fistula formation 2 (0.9) 2 (1.0) 0.660
 Wound dehiscence 10 (4.3) 7 (3.5) 0.650
 Urinoma 4 (1.7) 1 (0.5) 0.286
 Pulmonary embolism 1 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 0.338
 Cardiac disease 5 (2.1) 3 (1.5) 0.368

CRS cytoreductive surgery, HIPEC hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, PM peritoneal metastases, SAE serious adverse event