Case, S. No	PCI	CCS	Cytoreductive procedures done							Morbidity mortality
Case, S. No	PCI	CCS	TAH+BS O+ RPLND +TD+TO	Pelvic peritonectomy	Diaphragm peritonectomy	Bowel resection anastomosis (RA)	Mesenteric deposits excision	Splene ctomy	Abdominal peritonectomy	Morbidity mortality
1	13	2	Yes	Yes						Died on POD5, PTE
2	19	0	yes	Yes	Yes	Appen dicectomy	Yes		Yes
3	14	1	yes	Yes					Yes	Died on POD3, MI
4	10	0	yes	Yes
5	34	2	yes	Yes	Yes		Yes		Yes
6	21	1	yes	Yes	Yes		Yes
7	18	3	yes			IIeal- RA				SSI
8	21	2	yes			Appen dicectomy
9	21	2	yes	Yes		Appen dicectomy
10	15	1	Yes	Yes	Yes	Appen dicectomy				SSI
11	15	1	Yes	Yes		Appen dicectomy			Yes
12	17	0	Yes	Yes	Yes			Yes	Yes
13	5	0	Yes	Yes
14	12	0	Yes	Yes	Yes
15	6	0	Yes	Yes
16	13	0	Yes	Yes	Yes	Appen dicectomy
17	17	1	Yes	Yes	Yes	Trans. colon -RA
18	18	1	Yes	Yes	Yes	Appen dicectomy			Yes	SSI
19	9	1	Yes	Yes					Yes
20	7	0	Yes
21	14	2	Yes
22	8	0	Yes
23	13	1	Yes
24	7	0	Yes
25	11	1	Yes	Yes
26	4	0	Yes	Yes
27	5	0	Yes
28	9	0	Yes	Yes					Yes
29	9	1	Yes	Yes
30	10	1	Yes
31	7	0	TD+BSO+ TO			Appendicectomy
32	13	1	Yes	Yes
33	6	0	Yes
34	11	1	Yes	Yes					Yes
35	16	2	Yes			Cholecystectomy	Yes
36	10	1	Yes	Yes
37	11	1	Yes		Yes
38	9	1	Yes	Yes
39	7	0	Yes	Yes
40	4	0	Yes
41	18	2	Yes				Yes
42	11	1	Yes			Rectosigmoid-RA
43	12	1	Yes			Ileal -RA
44	5	0	Yes			Appendicectomy
45	13	1	Yes			Rectosigmoid-RA				SSI
46	11	1	Yes	Yes
47	14	1	Yes		Yes				Yes
48	19	3	Yes				Yes
49	12	2	Yes	Yes	Yes
50	3	0	Yes
51	15	1	Yes	Yes					Yes

Table 1: The details of PCI, CCS and cytoreductive surgeries done

Surgical procedures									Number
Gynaecological procedures: Tumour debulking with TAHBSO with RPLND and total omentectomy									51
Pelvic peritonectomy ( bladder and pouch of Douglas)									29
Abdominal (para colic) peritonectomy									11
Diaphragm stripping/resection with or without liver surface tumor excision									12
Appendicectomy									09
Mesenteric deposit excision/fulguration									06
Large Bowel resection anastomosis									03
Small bowel resection anastomosis									02
Cholecystectomy with porta hepatis tumor debulking									01
Splenectomy									01

Score	Principle	Progressiveness/Aim	Advantages	Disadvantages
Eisenkop score [15]	Score from 0 to 15; 5 anatomical regions; ranks from 0 to 3 per region	Ovary; prediction survival	Includes pelvic and para-aortic lymph nodes	Less precise than the PCI
Fagotti score [16]	Score from 0 to 14; 7 anatomical structures; 0/2 points per region	Ovary; prediction resectability	Concise	Based on laparoscopy
Fagotti-modified score [17]	Score from 0 to 8; 4 anatomical structures; 0/2 points per region	Ovary; prediction resectability	Concise	Based on laparoscopy
Gilly classification [18]	G0-G4; information regarding location of carcinomatosis (locally, disseminated)	Colorectal tumors	Concise	Imprecise localization of the lesions
P-Score of the Japanese Research Society of Gastric Cancer [19]	P0-P3; information about the location of the metastases	Gastric carcinoma	Specially for gastric carcinoma	Imprecise localization and sizing of the lesions only for gastric carcinoma
PCI [12]	Score from 0 to 39; 13 abdominal and pelvic regions, per region LS 0-3	Gastrointestinal tumors; management standardized	Very precise description of the peritoneal carcinomatosis, can be universally used	Lymph nodes not included
Simplified PCI [20]	Score from 0 to 21; 7 abdominal and pelvic regions, per region LS 0-3	Colorectal and appendix tumors; staging	Concise	Less precise than the PCI