pp 1-8 | Cite as

Peritoneal Surface Malignancy

  • Davide Bellini
  • Paolo Sammartino
  • Andrea Laghi
Part of the Medical Radiology book series


The term peritoneal surface malignancies comprises any cancer originated from the peritoneum itself (primary peritoneal malignancy) or metastasized to the peritoneum from a different primary site (secondary peritoneal malignancy). A major problem in treating peritoneal metastases (PM) originating from the various intra-abdominal tumors (gastric, colorectal, ovarian) is how to identify these malignant implants early so as to stage patients accurately (Cotte et al. 2010). Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) is considered the imaging modality of choice for the evaluation of these patients. An accurate depiction of peritoneal implants and staging is essential to guide patients’ management.


Conflict of Interest

Davide Bellini, Paolo Sammartino, and Andrea Laghi have no conflicts of interest to disclose.


  1. Ataseven B et al (2016) Prognostic impact of port-site metastasis after diagnostic laparoscopy for epithelial ovarian cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 23(Suppl 5):834–840Google Scholar
  2. Awai K et al (2002) Aortic and hepatic enhancement and tumor-to-liver contrast: analysis of the effect of different concentrations of contrast material at multi-detector row helical CT. Radiology 224(3):757–763Google Scholar
  3. Awai K et al (2016) The optimal body size index with which to determine iodine dose for hepatic dynamic CT: a prospective multicenter study. Radiology 278(3):773–781Google Scholar
  4. Bae KT (2010) Intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing at CT: considerations and approaches. Radiology 256(1):32–61Google Scholar
  5. Bonastre J et al (2008) Cost-effectiveness of intraperitoneal chemohyperthermia in the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer. Value Health 11(3):347–353Google Scholar
  6. Botsikas D et al (2016) Value of liver computed tomography with iodixanol 270, 80 kVp and iterative reconstruction. World J Radiol 8(7):693–699Google Scholar
  7. Bozzetti F et al (2008) Locoregional treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol 98(4):273–276Google Scholar
  8. Canbay E et al (2014) Outcome data of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric origin treated by a strategy of bidirectional chemotherapy prior to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in a single specialized center in Japan. Ann Surg Oncol 21(4):1147–1152Google Scholar
  9. Chang MC et al (2013) PET or PET/CT for detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis: a meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med 38(8):623–629Google Scholar
  10. Coakley FV et al (2002) Peritoneal metastases: detection with spiral CT in patients with ovarian cancer. Radiology 223(2):495–499Google Scholar
  11. Cotte E et al (2010) Selection of patients and staging of peritoneal surface malignancies. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2(1):31–35Google Scholar
  12. Di Giorgio A, Pinto E (eds) (2018) Treatment of peritoneal surface malignancies—State of the art and perspectives. Springer, MilanGoogle Scholar
  13. Esquivel J et al (2008) Consensus statement on the loco regional treatment of colorectal cancer with peritoneal dissemination. J Surg Oncol 98(4):263–267Google Scholar
  14. Esquivel J et al (2010) Accuracy and clinical relevance of computed tomography scan interpretation of peritoneal cancer index in colorectal cancer peritoneal carcinomatosis: a multi-institutional study. J Surg Oncol 102(6):565–570Google Scholar
  15. Fagotti A et al (2013) A multicentric trial (Olympia-MITO 13) on the accuracy of laparoscopy to assess peritoneal spread in ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 209(5):462.e1–462.e11Google Scholar
  16. Forstner R, Hricak H, White S (1995) CT and MRI of ovarian cancer. Abdom Imaging 20(1):2–8Google Scholar
  17. Glockzin G, Schlitt HJ, Piso P (2009) Peritoneal carcinomatosis: patients selection, perioperative complications and quality of life related to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. World J Surg Oncol 7:5Google Scholar
  18. Goere D et al (2013) Is there a possibility of a cure in patients with colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis amenable to complete cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy? Ann Surg 257(6):1065–1071Google Scholar
  19. Goere D et al (2015) Extent of colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis: attempt to define a threshold above which HIPEC does not offer survival benefit: a comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol 22(9):2958–2964Google Scholar
  20. Gonzalez-Moreno S et al (2009) Imaging of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancer J 15(3):184–189Google Scholar
  21. Heiken JP et al (1995) Dynamic incremental CT: effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology 195(2):353–357Google Scholar
  22. Ho LM, Nelson RC, Delong DM (2007) Determining contrast medium dose and rate on basis of lean body weight: does this strategy improve patient-to-patient uniformity of hepatic enhancement during multi-detector row CT? Radiology 243(2):431–437Google Scholar
  23. Jacquet P, Sugarbaker PH (1996) Clinical research methodologies in diagnosis and staging of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancer Treat Res 82:359–374Google Scholar
  24. Kondo H et al (2011) Aortic and hepatic enhancement at multidetector CT: evaluation of optimal iodine dose determined by lean body weight. Eur J Radiol 80(3):e273–e277Google Scholar
  25. Laghi A et al (2017) Diagnostic performance of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for detecting peritoneal metastases: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiol Med 122(1):1–15Google Scholar
  26. Matoba M et al (2009) Depiction of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma with 64-MDCT: comparison of moderate- and high-concentration contrast material with and without saline flush. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(3):738–744Google Scholar
  27. Nunez MF et al (2014) Port-site metastases is an independent prognostic factor in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Ann Surg Oncol 22(4):1267–1273Google Scholar
  28. Pannu HK et al (2003) Multidetector CT of peritoneal carcinomatosis from ovarian cancer. Radiographics 23(3):687–701Google Scholar
  29. Pomel C et al (2005) The role of laparoscopy to evaluate candidates for complete cytoreduction of peritoneal carcinomatosis and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Eur J Surg Oncol 31(5):540–543Google Scholar
  30. Portilla AG et al (2008) The intraoperative staging systems in the management of peritoneal surface malignancy. J Surg Oncol 98(4):228–231Google Scholar
  31. Rengo M et al (2011) The optimal contrast media policy in CT of the liver. Part I: Technical notes. Acta Radiol 52(5):467–472Google Scholar
  32. Sadeghi B et al (2000) Peritoneal carcinomatosis from non-gynecologic malignancies: results of the EVOCAPE 1 multicentric prospective study. Cancer 88(2):358–363Google Scholar
  33. Sugarbaker PH (1998) Intraperitoneal chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery for the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis and sarcomatosis. Semin Surg Oncol 14(3):254–261Google Scholar
  34. Sugarbaker PH (1999a) Peritoneal carcinomatosis: principles of management. Kluwer Academic Publisher, BostonGoogle Scholar
  35. Sugarbaker PH (1999b) Management of peritoneal-surface malignancy: the surgeon’s role. Langenbecks Arch Surg 384(6):576–587Google Scholar
  36. Sugarbaker PH (2017) The seven best from PSOGI 2016. Ann Surg Oncol 24(4):870–874Google Scholar
  37. Valle M, Federici O, Garofalo A (2012) Patient selection for cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy, and role of laparoscopy in diagnosis, staging, and treatment. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 21(4):515–531Google Scholar
  38. Walkey MM et al (1988) CT manifestations of peritoneal carcinomatosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 150(5):1035–1041Google Scholar
  39. Yan TD et al (2005) Abdominal computed tomography scans in the selection of patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma for comprehensive treatment with cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Cancer 103(4):839–849Google Scholar
  40. Yanaga Y et al (2008) Optimal contrast dose for depiction of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma at dynamic CT using 64-MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190(4):1003–1009Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Davide Bellini
    • 1
  • Paolo Sammartino
    • 2
  • Andrea Laghi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncological and Pathological SciencesUniversity of Rome “Sapienza”LatinaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Surgery ‘P. Valdoni’Sapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations