Ideal nozzle position during pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in an ex vivo model

JINLAN PIAO; SOO JIN PARK; HEESU LEE; JUNSIK KIM; SUNWOO PARK; NARA LEE; SE IK KIM; MARIA LEE; GWONHWA SONG; JUNG CHAN LEE; HEE SEUNG KIM

doi:10.21873/anticanres.15362

Ideal nozzle position during pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in an ex vivo model

JINLAN PIAO
, SOO JIN PARK
, HEESU LEE
, JUNSIK KIM
, SUNWOO PARK
, NARA LEE
, SE IK KIM
, MARIA LEE
, GWONHWA SONG
, JUNG CHAN LEE
, HEE SEUNG KIM^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background/Aim: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is known to show uneven distribution and penetration of agents based on the nozzle position. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the ideal nozzle position for maximizing drug delivery during PIPAC. Materials and Methods: We created 2 cm-, 4 cm- and 8 cmex vivo models according to the distance from the bottom to the nozzle using 21×15×16 cm-sized sealable plastic boxes. After each set of eight normal peritoneal tissues from swine were placed at eight different points (A to H), we performed PIPAC, compared the methylene blue staining areas to investigate the distribution, and estimated the depth of concentrated diffusion (DCD) and the depth of maximal diffusion (DMD) of doxorubicin. Results: In terms of distribution, the 4 cm- and 8 cm-ex vivo models showed more stained faces than the 2 cm-ex vivo model. Regarding the penetration depth, the 4 cm- ex vivo model showed the highest DCD (mean; 244.1 μm, C; 105.1 μm, D; 80.9 μm, E; 250.2 μm, G; 250.2 μm, H) and DMD (mean; 174.8 μm, D; 162.7 μm, E; 511.7 μm, F; 522.2 μm, G; 528.1 μm, H) in the most points corresponding to 62.5%. Conclusion: The ideal nozzle position during PIPAC might be halfway between the nozzle inlet and the bottom in the ex vivo model.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	5489-5498
Number of pages	10
Journal	Anticancer research
Volume	41
Issue number	11
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.15362
Publication status	Published - 2021 Nov

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This research was supported by Grants from the Seoul National University (No. 800-20170249; 800-20180201) and Seoul National University Hospital (No. 0620173250). Moreover, this study was supported by a grant from the Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group (No. KGOG-SNU-004).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research. All rights reserved.

Keywords

Ex vivo model
Intraperitoneal chemotherapy
Nozzle
Peritoneal metastasis
Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Oncology
Cancer Research

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.21873/anticanres.15362

Cite this

@article{742590be2a8440959e30cda987bf068d,

title = "Ideal nozzle position during pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in an ex vivo model",

abstract = "Background/Aim: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is known to show uneven distribution and penetration of agents based on the nozzle position. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the ideal nozzle position for maximizing drug delivery during PIPAC. Materials and Methods: We created 2 cm-, 4 cm- and 8 cmex vivo models according to the distance from the bottom to the nozzle using 21×15×16 cm-sized sealable plastic boxes. After each set of eight normal peritoneal tissues from swine were placed at eight different points (A to H), we performed PIPAC, compared the methylene blue staining areas to investigate the distribution, and estimated the depth of concentrated diffusion (DCD) and the depth of maximal diffusion (DMD) of doxorubicin. Results: In terms of distribution, the 4 cm- and 8 cm-ex vivo models showed more stained faces than the 2 cm-ex vivo model. Regarding the penetration depth, the 4 cm- ex vivo model showed the highest DCD (mean; 244.1 μm, C; 105.1 μm, D; 80.9 μm, E; 250.2 μm, G; 250.2 μm, H) and DMD (mean; 174.8 μm, D; 162.7 μm, E; 511.7 μm, F; 522.2 μm, G; 528.1 μm, H) in the most points corresponding to 62.5\%. Conclusion: The ideal nozzle position during PIPAC might be halfway between the nozzle inlet and the bottom in the ex vivo model.",

keywords = "Ex vivo model, Intraperitoneal chemotherapy, Nozzle, Peritoneal metastasis, Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy",

author = "JINLAN PIAO and PARK, \{SOO JIN\} and HEESU LEE and JUNSIK KIM and SUNWOO PARK and NARA LEE and KIM, \{SE IK\} and MARIA LEE and GWONHWA SONG and LEE, \{JUNG CHAN\} and KIM, \{HEE SEUNG\}",

note = "Funding Information: This research was supported by Grants from the Seoul National University (No. 800-20170249; 800-20180201) and Seoul National University Hospital (No. 0620173250). Moreover, this study was supported by a grant from the Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group (No. KGOG-SNU-004). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research. All rights reserved.",

year = "2021",

month = nov,

doi = "10.21873/anticanres.15362",

language = "English",

volume = "41",

pages = "5489--5498",

journal = "Anticancer research",

issn = "0250-7005",

publisher = "International Institute of Anticancer Research",

number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ideal nozzle position during pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in an ex vivo model

AU - PIAO, JINLAN

AU - PARK, SOO JIN

AU - LEE, HEESU

AU - KIM, JUNSIK

AU - PARK, SUNWOO

AU - LEE, NARA

AU - KIM, SE IK

AU - LEE, MARIA

AU - SONG, GWONHWA

AU - LEE, JUNG CHAN

AU - KIM, HEE SEUNG

N1 - Funding Information: This research was supported by Grants from the Seoul National University (No. 800-20170249; 800-20180201) and Seoul National University Hospital (No. 0620173250). Moreover, this study was supported by a grant from the Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group (No. KGOG-SNU-004). Publisher Copyright: © 2021 International Institute of Anticancer Research. All rights reserved.

PY - 2021/11

Y1 - 2021/11

N2 - Background/Aim: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is known to show uneven distribution and penetration of agents based on the nozzle position. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the ideal nozzle position for maximizing drug delivery during PIPAC. Materials and Methods: We created 2 cm-, 4 cm- and 8 cmex vivo models according to the distance from the bottom to the nozzle using 21×15×16 cm-sized sealable plastic boxes. After each set of eight normal peritoneal tissues from swine were placed at eight different points (A to H), we performed PIPAC, compared the methylene blue staining areas to investigate the distribution, and estimated the depth of concentrated diffusion (DCD) and the depth of maximal diffusion (DMD) of doxorubicin. Results: In terms of distribution, the 4 cm- and 8 cm-ex vivo models showed more stained faces than the 2 cm-ex vivo model. Regarding the penetration depth, the 4 cm- ex vivo model showed the highest DCD (mean; 244.1 μm, C; 105.1 μm, D; 80.9 μm, E; 250.2 μm, G; 250.2 μm, H) and DMD (mean; 174.8 μm, D; 162.7 μm, E; 511.7 μm, F; 522.2 μm, G; 528.1 μm, H) in the most points corresponding to 62.5%. Conclusion: The ideal nozzle position during PIPAC might be halfway between the nozzle inlet and the bottom in the ex vivo model.

AB - Background/Aim: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is known to show uneven distribution and penetration of agents based on the nozzle position. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the ideal nozzle position for maximizing drug delivery during PIPAC. Materials and Methods: We created 2 cm-, 4 cm- and 8 cmex vivo models according to the distance from the bottom to the nozzle using 21×15×16 cm-sized sealable plastic boxes. After each set of eight normal peritoneal tissues from swine were placed at eight different points (A to H), we performed PIPAC, compared the methylene blue staining areas to investigate the distribution, and estimated the depth of concentrated diffusion (DCD) and the depth of maximal diffusion (DMD) of doxorubicin. Results: In terms of distribution, the 4 cm- and 8 cm-ex vivo models showed more stained faces than the 2 cm-ex vivo model. Regarding the penetration depth, the 4 cm- ex vivo model showed the highest DCD (mean; 244.1 μm, C; 105.1 μm, D; 80.9 μm, E; 250.2 μm, G; 250.2 μm, H) and DMD (mean; 174.8 μm, D; 162.7 μm, E; 511.7 μm, F; 522.2 μm, G; 528.1 μm, H) in the most points corresponding to 62.5%. Conclusion: The ideal nozzle position during PIPAC might be halfway between the nozzle inlet and the bottom in the ex vivo model.

KW - Ex vivo model

KW - Intraperitoneal chemotherapy

KW - Nozzle

KW - Peritoneal metastasis

KW - Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85118799625

U2 - 10.21873/anticanres.15362

DO - 10.21873/anticanres.15362

M3 - Article

C2 - 34732419

AN - SCOPUS:85118799625

SN - 0250-7005

VL - 41

SP - 5489

EP - 5498

JO - Anticancer research

JF - Anticancer research

IS - 11

ER -

Ideal nozzle position during pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy in an ex vivo model

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this