Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 4/2015

01-04-2015 | Gynecologic Oncology

Postoperative Time Course and Utility of Inflammatory Markers in Patients with Ovarian Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Cytoreductive Surgery, and HIPEC

Authors: F. J. Medina Fernández, MD, F. C. Muñoz-Casares, MD, PhD, A. Arjona-Sánchez, MD, PhD, A. Casado-Adam, MD, I. Gómez-Luque, MD, D. J. Garcilazo Arismendi, MD, H. Thoelecke, MD, S. Rufián Peña, MD, PhD, J. Briceño Delgado, MD, PhD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 4/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Inflammatory markers may help monitor postoperative evolution of surgical patients and detect complications. However, to date, the effect that neoadjuvant chemotherapy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) may have in the postoperative kinetics of these parameters remains unknown.

Methods

Between July 2011 and June 2014, all patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, cytoreductive surgery, and HIPEC for ovarian peritoneal carcinomatosis were studied. Patients were divided into four groups: no complications, noninfective complication, and infective complications during the first and second postoperative weeks. Retrospectively, C-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), white blood cell count, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and prothrombin ratio were collected from postoperative days 1–14. Postoperative behavior of each parameter was carefully evaluated across groups.

Results

The study included 122 patients. Only CRP and NLR showed promising results. CRP presented a mean peak value at 48 h (186.1 mg/L), while NLR peaked at 24 h (10.21 mg/L). Both parameters rose with infective complications. Statistically significant differences were found at several time points compared with uncomplicated patients. A simple test comparing the peak value of CRP with the value when an infective complication was suspected accurately diagnosed these complications with sensitivity of 81 %, specificity of 91 %, and negative and positive predictive value of 93.1 and 76 %, respectively. This comparison presented lower diagnostic performance when NLR was used.

Conclusions

Both CRP and NLR are useful in monitoring postoperative evolution in these patients; however, only CRP is useful for detecting infective complications.
Literature
1.
Heintz AP, Odicino F, Maisonneuve P, et al. Carcinoma of the ovary. FIGO 26th Annual Report on the Results of Treatment in Gynecological Cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;95(Suppl 1):S161–92.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Munoz-Casares FC, Rufian S, Arjona-Sanchez A, et al. Neoadjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy with paclitaxel for the radical surgical treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in ovarian cancer: a prospective pilot study. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2011;68:267–74.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Munoz-Casares FC, Rufian S, Rubio MJ, et al. The role of hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis in recurrent ovarian cancer. Clin Transl Oncol. 2009;11:753–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Munoz-Casares FC, Rufian S, Rubio MJ, et al. Treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from ovarian cancer. Present, future directions and proposals. Clin Transl Oncol. 2007;9:652–62.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Helm CW, Richard SD, Pan J, et al. Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer: first report of the HYPER-O registry. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20:61–9.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Yoon SI, Lim SS, Rha JD, et al. The C-reactive protein (CRP) in patients with long bone fractures and after arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 1993;17:198–201.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Dupont C, Rodenbach J, Flachaire E. The value of C-reactive protein for postoperative monitoring of lower limb arthroplasty. Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2008;51:348–57.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Mok JM, Pekmezci M, Piper SL, et al. Use of C-reactive protein after spinal surgery: comparison with erythrocyte sedimentation rate as predictor of early postoperative infectious complications. Spine. 2008;33:415–21.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Kang BU, Lee SH, Ahn Y, Choi WC, Choi YG. Surgical site infection in spinal surgery: detection and management based on serial C-reactive protein measurements. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;13:158–64.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Neumaier M, Scherer MA. C-reactive protein levels for early detection of postoperative infection after fracture surgery in 787 patients. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:428–32.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Ortega-Deballon P, Radais F, Facy O, et al. C-reactive protein is an early predictor of septic complications after elective colorectal surgery. World J Surg. 2010;34:808–14.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
13.
Almeida AB, Faria G, Moreira H, Pinto-de-Sousa J, Correia-da-Silva P, Maia JC. Elevated serum C-reactive protein as a predictive factor for anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Int J Surg. 2012;10:87–91.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Lagoutte N, Facy O, Ravoire A, et al. C-reactive protein and procalcitonin for the early detection of anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery: pilot study in 100 patients. J Visc Surg. 2012;149:e345–9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Oberhofer D, Juras J, Pavicic AM, Rancic Zuric I, Rumenjak V. Comparison of C-reactive protein and procalcitonin as predictors of postoperative infectious complications after elective colorectal surgery. Croat Med J. 2012;53:612–9.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
16.
Platt JJ, Ramanathan ML, Crosbie RA, et al. C-reactive protein as a predictor of postoperative infective complications after curative resection in patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:4168–77.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Garcia-Granero A, Frasson M, Flor-Lorente B, et al. Procalcitonin and C-reactive protein as early predictors of anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery: a prospective observational study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:475–83.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Guirao X, Juvany M, Franch G, Navines J, Amador S, Badia JM. Value of C-reactive protein in the assessment of organ-space surgical site infections after elective open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Infect. 2013;14:209–15.CrossRef
19.
Dutta S, Fullarton GM, Forshaw MJ, Horgan PG, McMillan DC. Persistent elevation of C-reactive protein following esophagogastric cancer resection as a predictor of postoperative surgical site infectious complications. World J Surg. 2011;35:1017–25.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Warschkow R, Tarantino I, Ukegjini K, et al. Diagnostic study and meta-analysis of C-reactive protein as a predictor of postoperative inflammatory complications after gastroesophageal cancer surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2012;397:727–36.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Dominguez-Comesana E, Lopez-Gomez V, Estevez-Fernandez SM, et al. Procalcitonin and C-reactive protein as early indicators of postoperative intra-abdominal infection after surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. Cir Esp. 2014;92:240–6.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Warschkow R, Tarantino I, Folie P, et al. C-reactive protein 2 days after laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery reliably indicates leaks and moderately predicts morbidity. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1128–35.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Albanopoulos K, Alevizos L, Natoudi M, et al. C-reactive protein, white blood cells, and neutrophils as early predictors of postoperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:864–71.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Romain B, Chemaly R, Meyer N, et al. Diagnostic markers of postoperative morbidity after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for obesity. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2014;399:503–8.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Ramanathan ML, Mackay G, Platt J, Horgan PG, McMillan DC. Impact of day 2 C-reactive protein on day 3 and 4 thresholds associated with infective complications following curative surgery for colorectal cancer. World J Surg. 2013;37:2705–10.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Terradas R, Grau S, Blanch J, et al. Eosinophil count and neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio as prognostic markers in patients with bacteremia: a retrospective cohort study. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e42860.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
27.
28.
Koyama K, Madoiwa S, Tanaka S, et al. Evaluation of hemostatic biomarker abnormalities that precede platelet count decline in critically ill patients with sepsis. J Crit Care. 2013;28:556–63.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Hoppensteadt D, Tsuruta K, Cunanan J, et al. Thrombin generation mediators and markers in sepsis-associated coagulopathy and their modulation by recombinant thrombomodulin. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2014;20:129–35.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Turak O, Ozcan F, Isleyen A, et al. Usefulness of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio to predict in-hospital outcomes in infective endocarditis. Can J Cardiol. 2013;29:1672–8.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Kahramanca S, Kaya O, Ozgehan G, et al. Are neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio and platelet–lymphocyte ratio as effective as Fournier’s gangrene severity index for predicting the number of debridements in Fourner’s gangrene? Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2014;20:107–12.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Loonen AJ, de Jager CP, Tosserams J, et al. Biomarkers and molecular analysis to improve bloodstream infection diagnostics in an emergency care unit. PLoS One. 2014;9:e87315.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
33.
de Jager CP, van Wijk PT, Mathoera RB, de Jongh-Leuvenink J, van der Poll T, Wever PC. Lymphocytopenia and neutrophil–lymphocyte count ratio predict bacteremia better than conventional infection markers in an emergency care unit. Crit Care. 2010;14:R192.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
34.
35.
36.
Barbic J, Ivic D, Alkhamis T, et al. Kinetics of changes in serum concentrations of procalcitonin, interleukin-6, and C-reactive protein after elective abdominal surgery. Can it be used to detect postoperative complications? Coll Antropol. 2013;37:195–201.PubMed
37.
Scepanovic MS, Kovacevic B, Cijan V, et al. C-reactive protein as an early predictor for anastomotic leakage in elective abdominal surgery. Tech Coloproctol. 2013;17:541–7.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Nason GJ, Barry BD, Obinwa O, McMacken E, Rajaretnam NS, Neary PC. Early rise in C-reactive protein is a marker for infective complications in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2014;24:57–61.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Warschkow R, Beutner U, Steffen T, et al. Safe and early discharge after colorectal surgery due to C-reactive protein: a diagnostic meta-analysis of 1832 patients. Ann Surg. 2012;256:245–50.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Montagnana M, Minicozzi AM, Salvagno GL, et al. Postoperative variation of C-reactive protein and procalcitonin in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Clin Lab. 2009;55:187–92.PubMed
41.
Ruiz-Iban MA, Diaz Heredia J, Cebreiro Martinez Val I, et al. Evolution of C-reactive protein values in the first month after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: reference values. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013 [Epub ahead of print].
Metadata
Title
Postoperative Time Course and Utility of Inflammatory Markers in Patients with Ovarian Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Cytoreductive Surgery, and HIPEC
Authors
F. J. Medina Fernández, MD
F. C. Muñoz-Casares, MD, PhD
A. Arjona-Sánchez, MD, PhD
A. Casado-Adam, MD
I. Gómez-Luque, MD
D. J. Garcilazo Arismendi, MD
H. Thoelecke, MD
S. Rufián Peña, MD, PhD
J. Briceño Delgado, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-04-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 4/2015
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4096-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2015

Annals of Surgical Oncology 4/2015 Go to the issue

Colorectal Cancer

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Comparison of the Operative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes

Healthcare Policy and Outcomes

Development and Assessment of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center’s Surgical Secondary Events Grading System

Urologic Oncology

Prognostic Significance of Lymphovascular Invasion in Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma is Influenced by Tumor Location

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Port-Site Metastases is an Independent Prognostic Factor in Patients with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Endocrine Tumors

Navigating the Management of Follicular Variant Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma Subtypes: A Classic PTC Comparison

Hepatobiliary Tumors

Salvage Radiation Therapy for Isolated Local Recurrence of Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma After Radical Surgery: A Retrospective Study