Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is an extremely rare malignancy usually confined to the abdominal cavity. With an aggressive natural history, morbidity and mortality are consequences of progressive locoregional effects within the peritoneal cavity. The first reported case was in the early 20th century, however, due to the rare nature of the disease and a large gap in understanding of the clinicopathological effects, the next reported MPM cases were only published half a decade later. Since then, there has been exponential growth in our understanding of the disease, however, there are no prospective data and a paucity of literature regarding management. Traditionally, patients were treated with systemic therapy and the outcomes were very poor, with a median survival of less than one year. However, with the advent of cytoreductive surgery and locoregional chemotherapy, there have been significant improvements in survival. Even more recently, with an improved understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of MPM, there have been reports of improved outcomes with novel therapies. Given the disastrous natural history of MPM, the limited data, and the lack of universal treatment guidelines, an in-depth review of the past, present, and future of MPM is critical to improve treatment regimens and, subsequently, patient outcomes.

Background With recurrence rates after primary cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in excess of 50 per cent, repeat CRS is being performed increasingly, but survival outcomes have not been reported widely. This study examined the outcomes following repeat CRS for appendiceal cancer with peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM), and evaluated its feasibility and safety. Methods A retrospective cohort of patients who had surgery between 1996 and 2018 were analysed. Patients who underwent a single CRS procedure with or without heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) were compared with those who had multiple procedures with or without HIPEC. Perioperative morbidity and survival outcomes were analysed. Results Some 462 patients were reviewed, 102 of whom had repeat procedures. For high‐grade tumours, patients who had a single CRS procedure had significantly reduced overall survival (OS) compared with those who had repeat CRS (55·6 versus 90·7 months respectively; P = 0·016). For low‐grade tumours, there was no difference in OS (P = 0·153). When patients who had a single procedure were compared with those who had multiple procedures, there was no significant difference in major morbidity (P = 0·441) or in‐hospital mortality (P = 0·080). For multiple procedures, no differences were found in major morbidity (P = 0·262) or in‐hospital mortality (P = 0·502) when the first procedure was compared with the second. For low‐grade cancers, the peritoneal carcinomatosis index was a significant prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio (HR) 1·11, 95 per cent c.i. 1·05 to 1·17; P < 0·001), whereas for high‐grade cancers repeat CRS (HR 0·57, 0·33 to 0·95; P = 0·033), complete cytoreduction score (HR 1·55, 1·01 to 2·40; P = 0·046) and presence of signet ring cells (HR 2·77, 1·78 to 4·30; P < 0·001) were all significant indicators of long‐term survival. Conclusion In selected patients presenting with PSM from epithelial appendiceal neoplasms, repeat CRS performed in high‐volume centres could provide survival benefits.

Endosalpingiosis is occasionally incidentally found on histopathologic examination of gynecologic or gastrointestinal specimen, most commonly in the ovary, fallopian tube, omentum and uterus. Recently an association between endosalpingiosis and, ovarian and uterine cancer has been described. Here, we describe a rare case of appendiceal endosalpingiosis mimicking appendicitis. Further prospective studies are required to elucidate the clinical significance of appendiceal endosalpingiosis, the potential association with gynecologic malignancy and implications for management.