Background: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel intraperitoneal drug delivery method of low-dose chemotherapy as a pressurized aerosol in patients affected by peritoneal cancer of primary or secondary origin. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with the aim of assessing the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of PIPAC. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using Medline and Web of Science databases from 1 January 2011, to inception, to 31 December 2021. Data were independently extracted by two authors. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality and risk of bias of studies. Meta-analysis was performed for pathological response, radiological response, PCI variation along treatment, and for patients undergoing three or more PIPAC. Pooled analyses were performed using the Freeman–Tukey double arcsine transformation, and 95% CIs were calculated using Clopper–Pearson exact CIs in all instances. Results: A total of 414 papers on PIPAC were identified, and 53 studies considering 4719 PIPAC procedure in 1990 patients were included for analysis. The non-access rate or inability to perform PIPAC pooled rate was 4% of the procedures performed. The overall proportion of patients who completed 3 or more cycles of PIPAC was 39%. Severe toxicities considering CTCAE 3–4 were 4% (0% to 38.5%). In total, 50 studies evaluated deaths within the first 30 postoperative days. In the included 1936 patients were registered 26 deaths (1.3%). The pooled analysis of all the studies reporting a pathological response was 68% (95% CI 0.61–0.73), with an acceptable heterogeneity (I² 28.41%, p = 0.09). In total, 10 papers reported data regarding the radiological response, with high heterogeneity and a weighted means of 15% (0% to 77.8%). PCI variation along PIPAC cycles were reported in 14 studies. PCI diminished, increased, or remained stable in eight, one and five studies, respectively, with high heterogeneity at pooled analysis. Regarding survival, there was high heterogeneity. The 12-month estimated survival from first PIPAC for colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, gynecological cancer and hepatobiliary/pancreatic cancer were, respectively, 53%, 25%, 59% and 37%. Conclusions: PIPAC may be a useful treatment option for selected patients with PM, with acceptable grade 3 and 4 toxicity and promising survival benefit. Meta-analysis showed high heterogeneity of data among up-to-date available studies. In a subset analysis per primary tumor origin, pathological tumor regression was documented in 68% of the studies with acceptable heterogeneity. Pathological regression seems, therefore, a reliable outcome for PIPAC activity and a potential surrogate endpoint of treatment response. We recommend uniform selection criteria for patients entering a PIPAC program and highlight the urgent need to standardize items for PIPAC reports and datasets.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNENs) are relatively rare, but their incidence has increased significantly in the last decades. Precise diagnosis and prognostic stratification are crucial for proper patient management. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is the modality of choice for diagnosis of solid pancreatic tumors, showing a higher tumor detection rate than other imaging modalities, especially for small size lesions. EUS also serves as a guide for preoperative sampling and other interventions. EUS-tissue acquisition is a safe and highly accurate technique for cyto/histological diagnosis of PanNENs with a well-demonstrated correlation between Ki-67 proliferation index values and tumor grading on EUS and surgical specimens according to the WHO 2017 classification. Furthermore, the possibility of a preoperative EUS-guided fine needle tattooing or fiducial markers placement may help the surgeon to locate small and deep tumors, thus avoiding formal pancreatic resections in favor of parenchymal-sparing surgery. Finally, locoregional ablative treatments using either ethanol injection or radiofrequency ablation have been proposed in recent studies with promising results in order to control symptoms or reduce tumor burden in selected patients unfit for surgery with functioning or non-functioning PanNENs. This article review highlights the current role of EUS in PanNENs management, focusing on the present and future applications of EUS-guided interventions.

Despite the efforts made, a serum marker reliable for the screening and follow-up of patients with gastric cancer has not yet been identified. The aim of this preliminary study was to test the role of pro-inflammatory cytokines interleukin 1beta, interleukin 8 and tumour necrosis factor alpha in patients with gastric cancer and in control groups. The statistical analysis of cytokines serum levels in the group with gastric cancer versus control groups has shown considerable differences (p < 0.001) in their mean rates. The results indicate that the cytokines interleukin 1beta, interleukin 8 and tumour necrosis factor alpha might perhaps act as diagnostic markers in patients with gastric cancer. Therefore, it is hypothesized that after more extended trials, their use in the screening and prognostic assessment of these patients could be a possibility.

Introduction: Gastric cancer is the fourth/fifth most common malignancy worldwide, with only a quarter of patients achieving a 5-year survival rate. It has been estimated that 15–50% or more of patients have peritoneal disease upon surgical exploration. Until the early 1990s, peritoneal metastasis was considered as terminal stage of the disease; in the late 1990s, selected patients with peritoneal metastasis were recategorized as local disease. Over the past two decades, the treatment of peritoneal involvement has transformed, and cytoreductive surgery plus intraperitoneal therapy have drastically altered the natural course of several malignancies. Areas covered: We performed a review of studies available on PubMed from 1 January 2014 to 31 July 2019 and the analysis of their reference citations. We describe the most current intraperitoneal chemotherapy opportunities in the treatment of gastric cancer: hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), laparoscopic hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (LHIPEC), neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS), LHIPEC + NIPS, extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage (EIPL), early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC), and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Expert opinion: Comprehensive treatment consisting of CRS combined with perioperative intraperitoneal/systemic chemotherapy can, today, be considered an effective strategy to improve the long-term survival of gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis.

The reiteration of surgical cytoreduction (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients affected by recurrent peritoneal metastases is still questioned regarding safety and effectiveness. This study evaluates the safety, efficacy, and associated factors of iterative CRS combined with HIPEC. This multicentric retrospective study collected data from four surgical oncology centers, on iterative HIPEC. We gathered data on patient and cancer characteristics, the peritoneal cancer index (PCI), completeness of cytoreduction (CC), postoperative complications, and overall survival (OS). In the study period, 141 CRS-plus-HIPECs were performed on 65 patients. Nine patients underwent three iterative procedures, and one underwent five. No increased incidence of complications after the second or third procedure was observed. Furthermore, operative time and hospitalization stay were significantly shorter after the second than after the first procedure (p < 0.05). Optimal cytoreduction was achieved in more than 90% of cases in each procedure, whether first, second, or third. A five-year (5 y) OS represented 100% of the cases of diffuse malignant-peritoneal-mesotheliomas, 81.39% of pseudomyxoma peritonei, 34.67% of colorectal cancer (CRC), and 52.50% of ovarian cancer. During the second CRS combined with HIPEC, we observed a lower rate of complete cytoreduction and a non-significantly better survival in cases with complete cytoreduction (5 y−OS CC−0 56.51% vs. 37.82%, p = 0.061). Concomitant hepatic-CRC-metastasis did not compromise the CRS-plus-HIPEC safety and efficacy. This multicentric experience encourages repeated CRS-plus-HIPEC, showing promising results.