Risk factors for gastric perforation after cytoreductive surgery in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis: Splenectomy and increased body mass index.

Background: Gastric perforation after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) is an infrequent complication. There is lack of evidence regarding the risk factors for this postoperative complication. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of postoperative gastric perforation in patients undergoing CRS for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) and to evaluate risk factors predisposing to this complication.
Methods: We designed a unicentric retrospective study to identify all patients who underwent an open upfront or interval CRS after a primary diagnosis of PC of different origins between March 2007 and December 2018 at a French Comprehensive Cancer Center. The main outcome was the occurrence of postoperative gastric perforation.
Results: Five hundred thirty-three patients underwent a CRS for PC during the study period and 13 (2.4%) presented a postoperative gastric perforation with a mortality rate of 23% (3/13). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 283 (53.1%) patients and 99 (18.6%) received hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). In the univariate analysis, body mass index (BMI), peritoneal cancer index, splenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, and histology were significantly associated with postoperative gastric perforation. After multivariate analysis, BMI (OR [95%CI] = 1.13 [1.05-1.22], p = 0.002) and splenectomy (OR [95%CI] = 26.65 [1.39-509.67], p = 0.029) remained significantly related to the primary outcome.
Conclusions: Gastric perforation after CRS is a rare event with a high rate of mortality. While splenectomy and increased BMI are risk factors associated with this complication, HIPEC does not seem to be related. Gastric perforation is probably an ischemic complication due to a multifactorial process. Preventive measures such as preservation of the gastroepiploic arcade and prophylactic suture of the greater gastric curvature require further assessment.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.