#PAGE_PARAMS# #ADS_HEAD_SCRIPTS# #MICRODATA#
CS
proLékaře.cz / Journals / Perspectives in Surgery / 2020 - 12

Enhanced recovery after surgery and mini-invasive approaches in rectal cancer surgery – short-term outcomes

Czech version

Authors: P. Kocian 1;  F. Pazdírek 1;  M. Vjaclovský 1;  M. Bockova 1;  P. Přikryl 2;  T. Vymazal 2;  A. Whitley 3,4;  J. Hoch 1
Authors‘ workplace: Chirurgická klinika 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice Motol, Praha 1;  Klinika anesteziologie, resuscitace a intenzivní medicíny 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice, Motol, Praha 2;  Chirurgická klinika 3. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice Královské Vinohrady, Praha 3;  Ústav anatomie 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy, Praha 4
Published in: Rozhl. Chir., 2020, roč. 99, č. 12, s. 539-547.
Category: Original articles

Overview

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate short-term outcomes of patients undergoing mini-invasive rectal resection within an ERAS (enhanced recovery after surgery) protocol.

Methods: A prospectively managed database of patients undergoing rectal operations performed at our department between January 2015 and April 2020 was retrospectively analyzed. An ERAS protocol was implemented into clinical practice at our department in April 2016 and mini-invasive rectal procedures in May 2016. The ERAS group consisted of all patients who underwent mini-invasive rectal resections or amputations within the ERAS protocol. The control group consisted of patients who underwent open procedures and received standard perioperative care. The extracted data included basic patient characteristics, surgical data, postoperative recovery parameters, 30-day morbidity, length of postoperative stay and 30-day rehospitalization.

Results: A total of 110 patients were included in the study: 67 patients in the ERAS group and 43 in the control group. Within the ERAS group 47 patients underwent robotic procedures and 20 had laparoscopic procedures. Patients in the ERAS group had significantly better clinical and laboratory recovery parameters except for postoperative nausea and vomiting. A significantly lower incidence of paralytic ileus (20.9% vs. 3%) and a shorter length of postoperative stay (13 days vs. 9 days) was found in the ERAS group. The rehospitalization rate and 30-day morbidity were not different between the ERAS and control group.

Conclusions: Implementation of the ERAS protocol in combination with mini-invasive approaches leads to better short-term postoperative outcomes after rectal surgery.

Keywords:

rectal cancer – laparoscopy − robotic surgery – enhanced recovery − short-term outcomes

Sources
  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492.
  2. Brouwer NPM, Bos ACRK, Lemmens VEPP, et al. An overview of 25 years of incidence, treatment and outcome of colorectal cancer patients. Int J Cancer 2018;143(11):2758–2766. doi: 10.1002/ijc.31785.
  3. Khreiss W, Huebner M, Cima RR, et al. Improving conventional recovery with enhanced recovery in minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2014;57(5):557–563. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000101.
  4. Huibers CJA, de Roos MAJ, Ong KH. The effect of the introduction of the ERAS protocol in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012;27(6):751–757. doi: 10.1007/s00384-011-1385-3.
  5. Tong G, Zhang G, Liu J, et al. A meta-ana­lysis of short-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery on colorectal carcinoma. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96(48):e8957.
  6. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1324–1332. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1414882.
  7. Nygren J, Thacker J, Carli F, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective rectal/pelvic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) Society recommendations. World J Surg. 2013;37(2):285-305. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1787-6.
  8. Kolfschoten NE, van Leersum NJ, Gooiker GA, et al. Successful and safe introduction of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in Dutch hospitals. Ann Surg. 2013;257(5):916−921. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31825d0f37.
  9. Yeo H, Niland J, Milne D, et al. Incidence of minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery at National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;107(1):362. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju362.
  10. Hoogerboord CM, Levy AR, Hu M, et al. Uptake of elective laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer in Canada from 2004/05 to 2014/15: a descriptive ana­lysis. CMAJ Open. 2018;6(3):E384−E390. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20180002.
  11. Kim NK, Kang J. Optimal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the role of robotic surgery from an expert‘s view. J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2010;26(6):377−387. doi: 10.3393/jksc.2010.26.6.377.
  12. Martínek L, Dostalík J, Guňka I. Miniinvazivní chirurgie v České republice. Rozhl Chir. 2008;87(11):563−566.
  13. Ryska O, Šerclová Z, Antoš F. Jak jsou dodržovány postupy moderní perioperační péče (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) na chirurgických pracovištích v ČR – výsledky národní ankety. Rozhl Chir. 2013;92:435−442.
  14. Rejholec J. 15 let robotické chirurgie v ČR. Prezentováno na konferenci Zdravotnictví 4.0 věnované oboru Robotika ve zdravotnictví 23.5.2019; Praha. Dostupné na: http://www.top-expo.cz/domain/top-expo/files/smart-city/smart-city-2019/zdravotnictvi-4.0/prezentace/rejholec_jan.pdf.
  15. Vather R, Trivedi S, Bissett I. Defining postoperative ileus: results of a systematic review and global survey. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17:962–972. doi: 10.1007/s11605-013-2148-y.
  16. Kocián P, Whitley A, Přikryl P, et al. Enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery: the clinical and economic benefit in elderly patients. Eur Surg - Acta Chir Austriaca 2019;51(4):183–188. doi:10.1007/s10353-019-0595-8.
  17. Watt DG, McSorley ST, Horgan PG, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94(36):e1286. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001286.
  18. Almeida AB, Faria G, Moreira H, et al. Elevated serum C-reactive protein as a predictive factor for anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Int J Surg. 2012;10(2):87–91. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.12.006.
  19. den Dulk M, Witvliet MJ, Kortram K, et el. The DULK (Dutch leakage) and modified DULK score compared: actively seek the leak. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(9):e528–533. doi: 10.1111/codi.12379.
  20. Quiroga-Centeno AC, Jerez-Torra KA, Martin-Mojica PA, et al. Risk factors for prolonged postoperative ileus in colorectal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg. 2020;44(5):1612–1626. doi: 10.1007/s00268-019-05366-4.
  21. Vather R, Josephson R, Jaung R, et al. Development of a risk stratification system for the occurrence of prolonged postoperative ileus after colorectal surgery: a prospective risk factor analysis. Surgery 2015;157(4):764-773. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.12.005.
  22. Tevis SE, Carchman EH, Foley EF, et al. Postoperative ileus-more than just prolonged length of stay? J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19:1684–1690. doi: 10.1007/s11605-015-2877-1.
  23. Iyer S, Saunders WB, Stemkowski S. Economic burden of postoperative ileus associated with colectomy in the United States. J Manag Care Pharm. 2009;15(6):485–494. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2009.15.6.485.
  24. Grass F, Slieker J, Jurt J, et al. Postoperative ileus in an enhanced recovery pathway – a retrospective cohort study. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2017;32(5):675–681. doi: 10.1007/s00384-017-2789-5.
  25. Guay J, Nishimori M, Kopp S. Epidural local anaesthetics versus opioid-based analgesic regimens for postoperative gastrointestinal paralysis, vomiting and pain after abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;7(7):CD001893. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001893.pub2.
  26. Ng WQ, Neill J. Evidence for early oral feeding of patients after elective open colorectal surgery: a literature review. J Clin Nurs. 2006;15(6):696–709. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01389.x.
  27. Yuan L, O’Grady G, Milne T, et al. Prospective comparison of return of bowel function after left versus right colectomy. ANZ J Surg. 2018;88:E242–E247. doi: 10.1111/ans.13823.
  28. Kummer A, Slieker J, Grass F, et al. Enhanced recovery pathway for right and left colectomy: Comparison of functional recovery. World J Surg. 2016;40:2519–2527. doi: 10.1007/s00268-016-3563-5.
  29. Pędziwiatr M, Pisarska M, Kisielewski M, et al. ERAS protocol in laparoscopic surgery for colonic versus rectal carcinoma: are there differences in short-term outcomes? Med Oncol. 2016;33(6):56. doi: 10.1007/s12032-016-0772-6.
  30. Martin AN, Berry PS, Frie CHM, et al. Impact of minimally invasive surgery on short-term outcomes after rectal resection for neoplasm within the setting of an enhanced recovery program. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(5):2517−2524. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5956-4.
  31. Colov EP, Klein M, Gögenur I. Wound complications and perineal pain after extralevator versus standard abdominoperineal excision: A nationwide study. Dis Colon Rectum 2016;59(9):813–821. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000639.
  32. Rouanet P, Mermoud A, Jarlier M, et al. Combined robotic approach and enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for optimization of costs in patients undergoing proctectomy. BJS Open 2020;4(3):516–523. doi: 10.1002/bjs5.50281.
  33. Bennedsen ALB, Eriksen JR, Gögenur I. Prolonged hospital stay and readmission rate in an enhanced recovery after surgery cohort undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2018;20(12):1097−1108. doi: 10.1111/codi.14446.
Labels
Surgery Orthopaedics Trauma surgery
Oncosurgery in the Czech Republic
PIPAC – overview of the method and first use in the Czech Republic
Technical modifications of appendiceal transection during laparoscopic appendectomy
P.F. 2021
Ženy a muži v české, převážně lůžkové chirurgii
Wunderlich‘s syndrome in patient with sporadic bilateral angiomyolipomas – case report
Anus perinei ventralis in adulthood – case report
Transfemoral amputation for infected secondary lymphoedema – a case report
Začátky mladého chirurga
Article was published in

Perspectives in Surgery

Issue 12
2020 Issue 12
Most read in this issue
Topics Journals
Login
Forgotten password

Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.

Login

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account

#ADS_BOTTOM_SCRIPTS#