Rates of PaC resection remain low in Europe and USA with great international variations. Further studies are warranted to explore reasons for these variations.

In this national, unselected and consecutive cohort of patients with BDI repaired by early HJ we found a considerable risk of long-term complications (e.g. 30% stricture rate) and mortality in both the short- and the long-term perspective.

Background:Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a laparoscopy-guided administration of aerosolized chemotherapy. PIPAC seems to improve objective tumor response, survival and quality of life in patients with peritoneal metastasis. We assessed feasibility and efficacy of PIPAC in patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM).Methods:Patients were included in a prospective PIPAC protocol. Patients with colorectal PM were treated with oxaliplatin, patients with other primary tumors were treated with cisplatin and doxorubicin. Any chemotherapy exposure for healthcare workers was monitored by environmental and biological sampling. Feasibility was quantified by completion and complication rates. Response evaluation was documented by the peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) and by peritoneal lavage cytology. Biopsy sites were marked by clips. Quality of life questionnaires were collected at baseline and after 60, 120 and 180 days.Results:A total of 35 patients with PM were treated with a median of three PIPAC procedures (range 1–9). Intraperitoneal access and completion of PIPAC was achieved in all patients. Few complications and adverse events were noted. There was no risk of chemotherapy exposure for healthcare workers. The mean PRGS was reduced significantly and a reduction of the PRGS was seen in 67% of the patients. Conversion from positive to negative cytology was achieved in 23% of the patients. Quality of life was stabilized from baseline to day 60.Conclusions:PIPAC is feasible and well tolerated, may stabilize the quality of life in patients with end-stage PM and may induce histological and cytological regression.This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02320448].

EUS, EUS-FNA and EUS-guided intervention are safe techniques, but severe and lethal complications do occur. The EUS procedures can be performed with a high level of patient satisfaction and with low levels of pain, discomfort and anxiety.

Aims The four‐tiered peritoneal regression grading score (PRGS) assesses the response to chemotherapy in peritoneal metastasis (PM). The PRGS is used, for example, to assess the response to pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). However, the reproducibility of the PRGS is currently unknown. We aimed to evaluate the inter‐ and intraobserver variability of the PRGS. Methods and results Thirty‐three patients who underwent at least three PIPAC treatments as part of the PIPAC‐OPC1 or PIPAC‐OPC2 clinical trials at Odense University Hospital, Denmark, were included. Prior to each therapy cycle, peritoneal quadrant biopsies were obtained and three haematoxylin and eosin (H&E)‐stained step sections were scanned and uploaded to a pseudonymised web library. For determining interobserver variability, eight pathologists assessed the PRGS for each quadrant biopsy, and Krippendorff's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated. For determining intraobserver variability, three pathologists repeated their own assessments and Cohen's kappa and ICCs were calculated. A total of 331 peritoneal biopsies were analysed. Interobserver variability for PRGS of each biopsy and for the mean and maximum PRGS per biopsy set was moderate to good/substantial. The intraobserver variability for PRGS of each biopsy and for the mean and maximum PRGS per biopsy set was good to excellent/almost perfect. Conclusions Our data support the PRGS as a reproducible and useful tool to assess response to intraperitoneal chemotherapy in PM. Future studies should evaluate the prognostic and predictive role of the PRGS.