Survival After Emergency General Surgery: What can We Learn from Enhanced Recovery Programmes?

Laparoscopic Appendectomy Combined with an "Antimicrobial-Free" Strategy for Acute Uncomplicated Appendicitis

Objective: To explore the efficacy and safety of enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) combined with laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in the treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis (AUA) without antibiotics. Methods: In this study, a total of 160 patients with AUA who underwent LA between January 2018 and December 2021 were included and divided into the antibiotic group (n = 80) or the no-antibiotic group (n = 80). The patients in the antibiotic group received the ERP combined with antimicrobials during the perioperative period, while those in the no-antibiotic group only received the ERP during the perioperative period. The clinical data of these patients were collected to compare the inflammation level and stress state before and after surgery. In addition, the incidence of postoperative complications and the recovery speed of the patients were compared between groups. Results: There were no significant differences in the inflammation level and stress state before or after surgery, the incidence of postoperative complications or the recovery speed between the antibiotic group and the no-antibiotic group (P > .05). Conclusion: The use of ERP combined with LA as an antimicrobial-free treatment scheme in the perioperative period was found to be safe and effective for patients with AUA. Therefore, this approach is clinically valuable.

Enhanced perioperative care in emergency general surgery: the WSES position paper

Enhanced perioperative care protocols become the standard of care in elective surgery with a significant improvement in patients' outcome. The key element of the enhanced perioperative care protocol is the multimodal and interdisciplinary approach targeted to the patient, focused on a holistic approach to reduce surgical stress and improve perioperative recovery. Enhanced perioperative care in emergency general surgery is still a debated topic with little evidence available. The present position paper illustrates the existing evidence about perioperative care in emergency surgery patients with a focus on each perioperative intervention in the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative phase. For each item was proposed and approved a statement by the WSES collaborative group.

Emergency General Surgery Quality Improvement: A Review of Recommended Structure and Key Issues

Emergency general surgery (EGS) accounts for 11% of hospital admissions, with more than 3 million admissions per year and more than 50% of operative mortality in the US. Recent research into EGS has ignited multiple quality improvement initiatives, and the process of developing national standards and verification in EGS has been initiated. Such programs for quality improvement in EGS include registry formation, protocol and standards creation, evidenced-based protocols, disease-specific protocol implementation, regional collaboratives, targeting of high-risk procedures such as exploratory laparotomy, focus on special populations like geriatrics, and targeting improvements in high opportunity outcomes such as failure to rescue. The authors present a collective narrative review of advances in quality improvement structure in EGS in recent years and summarize plans for a national EGS registry and American College of Surgeons verification for this under-resourced area of surgery.

Clinical application of enhanced recovery after surgery in lumbar disk herniation patients undergoing dynamic stabilization and discectomy

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been demonstrated to improve early postoperative outcomes and is becoming a crucial component of any perioperative management paradigm.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of an ERAS protocol on lumbar disk herniation (LDH) patients undergoing dynamic stabilization and discectomy.

METHODS

A total of 119 lumbar disk herniation (LDH) patients undergoing Dynesys dynamic stabilization and discectomy were divided into the ERAS (n1 = 56) and control group (n2 = 63). ERAS group received an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, and control group received a traditional care protocol.

RESULTS

Both the ERAS and control groups had significantly decreased visual analog scale (VAS) score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and increased Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score at postoperative 1 week, 1 month and 3 months compared with preoperative scores. Moreover, the ERAS group had lower postoperative VAS score and ODI and higher postoperative JOA score and rate of improved JOA score compared with the control group. Intraoperative blood loss, operation time, ambulation time and length of stay were all lower in the ERAS group than in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The ERAS protocol designed was feasible for LDH patients undergoing dynamic stabilization and discectomy with significantly improved perioperative outcomes.

Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol for acute complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are well-documented logistic programs in elective surgery but it is still uncertain whether ERAS can benefit emergency patients, because of significant challenges facing its application to emergency surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of an ERAS protocol for patients with acute appendicitis (AA), both complicated and uncomplicated.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was performed at two university hospitals in Spain, between January 2012 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were patients with diagnosis of AA, undergoing appendectomy following an ERAS protocol of perioperative care. The different items of the ERAS protocol were recorded and their implementation was separately evaluated. Analyzed variables also included postoperative complications, hospital stay and readmission rate. Levels of acute phase reactants were assessed as predictors of implementation for the ERAS protocol.

RESULTS

Eight hundred fifty patients were included; 498 males (58.5%) and 302 females (41.5%), with a mean age of 34.95 ± 17 years. The implementation of all the items of the protocol was achieved in 770 patients (90.6%), 86.8% of patients with complicated AA and 93.1% of patients with uncomplicated AA (p = 0.02). Higher preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were significantly associated with the impossibility of implementing all the items of the ERAS protocol (p < 0.001), establishing a cut-off point at CRP = 13.5 mg/dl.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of ERAS protocols is safe and feasible in patients with AA. Although the implementation rate of all the items is lower in patients with complicated AA, it can be completed in 86.8% of these patients. CRP levels over 13.5 mg/dl are predictors of difficulties in the implementation of all the items of ERAS protocols.

Adapted ERAS Pathway Versus Standard Care in Patients Undergoing Emergency Small Bowel Surgery: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Emergency laparotomy for small bowel pathologies comprises a significant number of all emergency surgeries. Application of evidence-based adapted enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol can potentially improve the perioperative outcome in these procedures.

AIMS

To determine the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of adapted ERAS pathway in emergency small bowel surgery.

METHODOLOGY

This was a single-center, prospective, open-labeled, superiority, randomized controlled trial. Patients suspected to have small bowel pathology by the emergency surgical team were randomized preoperatively into standard care and adapted ERAS group. Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologist class ≥ 3, polytrauma patients with associated other intra-abdominal organ injuries, duodenal ulcer perforations, patients presenting with refractory shock, and pregnant patients were excluded. Primary outcome parameter was the length of hospitalization (LOH). Morbidity and other functional recovery parameters were also assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were included in the adapted ERAS and standard care group. The laboratory and demographic variables were comparable. Patients in the ERAS group had significantly earlier recovery (days) in terms of first fluid diet (1.48 ± 0.18, p < 0.001), solid diet (2.11 ± 0.17, p < 0.001), time to first flatus (1.25 ± 0.24, p < 0.001), and first stool (1.8 ± 0.27, p < 0.001). Postoperative nausea, vomiting (RR 0.69, p = 0.19), pulmonary complications (RR 0.38, p = 0.16), superficial (RR 0.79, p = 0.33), and deep surgical site infections (RR 0.65, p = 0.39) were similar. Compared with the standard care group, ERAS group had significantly shorter LOH (8 ± 0.38 vs. 10.83 ± 0.42; Mean difference, 2.83 ± 0.56; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adapted ERAS pathways are feasible, safe, and significantly reduces the LOH in select patients undergoing emergency small bowel surgery.

Evaluation of enhanced recovery after surgery program components implemented in laparoscopic appendectomy: prospective randomized clinical study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) is a widely used surgical procedure. Patients often suffer from considerable postoperative pain and indigestion, which prolongs their in-hospital stay. Almost 10% of patients develop postoperative complications. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program has proven its efficacy in elective surgery and could hypothetically improve LA outcomes. Currently, there is no ERAS program for LA.

METHODS

A modified ERAS (mERAS) protocol was studied in a prospective, randomized nonblinded clinical trial. The mERAS group consisted of 50 patients; the control group, of 54 patients. The mERAS protocol included a patient information brochure; minimizing drain use; local anesthesia; low-pressure pneumoperitoneum; early mobilization and oral diet. The primary outcome was postoperative length of stay (pLOS).

RESULTS

Modified protocol reduced median pLOS to 1.25 days vs 2 days in the controls (p < 0.0001). Twenty-one (42%) mERAS patients and 4 (7.4%) controls were discharged within 24 h (p < 0.001) after surgery; 0 readmissions were reported. Postoperative pain intensity assessed on the visual analogue scale was significantly lower in the mERAS group [mERAS vs control 0 h, 2 h, 6 h, 12 h and 24 h after surgery: 2.33 ± 2.12 vs 4.19 ± 2.08 (p < 0.0001), 2.27 ± 1.91 vs 4.02 ± 1.89 (p < 0.0001), 2.28 ± 1.98 vs 3.70 ± 1.57 (p = 0.0001), 1.98 ± 1.72 vs 3.43 ± 1.54 (p < 0.0001) and 1.80 ± 1.74 vs 3.00 ± 1.27 (p = 0.032), respectively)]. The severity of shoulder and neck pain was lower but its incidence was similar. Peristalsis recovery was achieved earlier in the study group (median (min-max))-mERAS 7 (2-34) h vs control 11 (3-43) h; p = 0.009) but did not affect the time of the first flatus 23 (2-72) h vs 29 (6-70) h, respectively; p = 0.499).

CONCLUSIONS

The modified ERAS program for LA has advantages over the traditional approach.

REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03754777 (27/11/2018).

Challenges in optimising recovery after emergency laparotomy

Standardised peri-operative care pathways for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy or laparoscopy for non-traumatic pathologies have been shown to be inadequate and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recent research has highlighted this problem and showed that simple pathways with 'rescue' interventions have been associated with reduced mortality when implemented successfully. These rescue pathways have focused on early diagnosis and surgery, specialist surgeon and anaesthetist involvement, goal-directed therapy and intensive or intermediary postoperative care for high-risk patients. In elective surgery, enhanced recovery has resulted in reduced length of stay and morbidity by the application of procedure-specific, evidence-based interventions inside rigorously implemented patient pathways based on multidisciplinary co-operation. The focus has been on attenuation of peri-operative stress and pain management to facilitate early recovery. Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy are a heterogeneous group consisting mostly of patients with intestinal perforations and/or obstruction with varying levels of comorbidity and frailty. However, present knowledge of the different pathophysiology and peri-operative trajectory of complications in these patient groups is limited. In order to move beyond rescue pathways and to establish enhanced recovery for emergency laparotomy, it is essential that research on both the peri-operative pathophysiology of the different main patient groups - intestinal obstruction and perforation - and the potentially differentiated impact of interventions is carried out. Procedure- and pathology-specific knowledge is lacking on key elements of peri-operative care, such as: multimodal analgesia; haemodynamic optimisation and fluid management; attenuation of surgical stress; nutritional optimisation; facilitation of mobilisation; and the optimal use and organisation of specialised wards and improved interdisciplinary collaboration. As such, the future challenges in improving peri-operative patient care in emergency laparotomy are moving from simple rescue pathways to establish research that can form a basis for morbidity- and procedure-specific enhanced recovery protocols as seen in elective surgery.

Modern perioperative medicine - past, present, and future

Modern perioperative medicine has dramatically altered the care for patients undergoing major surgery. Anaesthetic and surgical practice has been directed at mitigating the surgical stress response and reducing physiological insult. The development of standardised enhanced recovery programmes combined with minimally invasive surgical techniques has lead to reduction in length of stay, morbidity, costs, and improved outcomes. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) society and its national chapters provide a means for sharing best practice in this field and developing evidence based guidelines. Research has highlighted persisting challenges with compliance as well as ensuring the effectiveness and sustainability of ERAS. There is also a growing need for increasingly personalised care programmes as well as complex geriatric assessment of frailer patients. Continuous collection of outcome and process data combined with machine learning, offers a potentially powerful solution to delivering bespoke care pathways and optimising individual management. Long-term data from ERAS programmes remain scarce and further evaluation of functional recovery and quality of life is required.

Twenty-year study of in-hospital and postdischarge mortality following emergency general surgical admission

Background

Emergency general surgery (EGS) patients have a higher mortality than those having elective surgery. Few studies have investigated changes in EGS-associated mortality over time or explored mortality rates after discharge. The aim of this study was to conduct a comprehensive, population-based analysis of mortality in EGS patients over a 20-year time frame.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study of all adult EGS admissions in Scotland between 1996 and 2015. Data were obtained from national records. Co-morbidities were defined by Charlson Co-morbidity Index, and operations were coded by OPCS-4 classifications. Linear and multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate changes over time.

Results

Among 1 450 296 patients, the overall inpatient, 30-day, 90-day and 1-year mortality rates were 1·8, 3·8, 6·4 and 12·5 per cent respectively. Mortality was influenced by age at admission, co-morbidity, operation performed and date of admission (all P < 0·001), and improved with time on subgroup analysis by age, co-morbidity and operation status. Medium-term mortality was high: the 1-year mortality rate in patients aged over 75 years was 35·6 per cent. The 1-year mortality rate in highly co-morbid patients decreased from 75·1 to 57·1 per cent over the time frame of the study (P < 0·001).

Conclusion

Mortality after EGS in Scotland has reduced significantly over the past 20 years. This analysis of medium-term mortality after EGS admission demonstrates strikingly high rates, and postdischarge death rates are higher than is currently appreciated.

[Comparison of standard and fast track rehabilitation in patients with acute appendicitis. Intermediate results of multicenter prospective randomized trial]

AIM

To analyze outcomes of fast track rehabilitation in patients with acute appendicitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective, randomized multi-center trial including 86 patients was conducted. There were 38 patients in the main group and 48 in the control group. All patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy under endotracheal anesthesia. Protocol included informing, no premedication, glucose infusion prior to surgery, antibiotics administration, mesoappendix excision, limited deployment of drainage tubes, intraabdominal prolonged anesthesia, minimal pneumoperitoneum, limited irrigation, minimum power monopolar electrocautery, antiemetics, early activation and eating (2 and 6 hours after surgery). Pain was evaluated by visual-analogue scale. Auscultative peristalsis was considered every 2 hours after surgery. Cortisol level was assessed preoperatively, in 6 and 12-24 hours after surgery in 11 (29%) and 15 (31%) patients of the main and control groups respectively. Discharge criteria: no leukocytosis, fever and pain syndrome requiring anesthesia, no signs of complications and patient's consent.

RESULTS

Terms of disease, gender, age and comorbidities were similar in all patients. Duration of surgery under minimal pneumoperitoneum and standard pressure was also similar: 69.2±3.98 and 70.9±3.89 min (p=0.762). Pain syndrome grade and need for analgesics were significantly lower in the main group within entire follow-up. Pain syndrome was absent at the 1^st postoperative day in 16 (42%) and 2 (4.1%) patients of both groups, respectively (score 0-1). Phrenic nerve syndrome was observed in 36.8% of the main group and 60.4% of the control group (p=0.05). Incidence of dyspepsia and terms of peristalsis onset were similar. Length of hospital-stay was 1.45 days in the main group and 3.15 days in the control group (p=0.002). In the main group 18 (47%) patients were discharged on the first day after surgery. There were only 4 (8.3%) patients with similar hospital-stay in the control group (p<0.001). There were no repeated hospitalizations. Postoperative cortisol concentration was similar in both groups as well as in complicated and uneventful postoperative period. In the main group postoperative intestinal paresis (Clavien-Dindo grade 2) occurred in 1 patient. In the control group 7 patients had postoperative infiltrate and 1 patient - intestinal paresis (Clavien-Dindo grade 2). Postoperative drainage tube was deployed in 3 out of 7 patients with postoperative infiltrates and 6 of them received antibiotic therapy. Medication was successfully applied in all patients with complications.

CONCLUSION

There are some advantages of FTR for AA including reduced pain syndrome, morbidity and less length of hospital-stay. Issue of cortisol concentration requires further trials.

[Fast-track rehabilitation for acute cholecystitis: intermediate outcomes of prospective randomized trial]

AIM

To analyze an efficacy of FT-protocol in patients with acute cholecystitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective randomized study included 102 patients (45 of main group (FT) and 57 of control groups). Patients did not differ by TG13 severity index. The protocol included information, antibiotic prophylaxis, restriction of drainage, intraperitoneal anesthesia with long-term anesthetics, low pressure pneumoperitoneum, antiemetics in the presence of risk factors, early activation and feeding of the patient. Pain was assessed by VAS immediately after surgery, and 2, 6 and 12-24 hours postoperatively.

RESULTS

Surgery time was similar in both groups. Need for anesthesia and pain severity were significantly lower in the FT group. A total absence of pain (VAS 0-1) on the 1^st postoperative day was noted in 8 (17.7%) of the FT group and 2 (3.5%) patients of the control group (p=0.038). Shoulder pain developed in 4 (8.9%) cases of the main and 22 (38.6%) cases of the control group (p=0.001). Postoperative nausea developed in 13% of the FT group vs 40.5% in the control group (p=0.05). Hospital-stay was 1.29±0.7 days and 2.7±1.6 (p<0.0001), respectively. The time of the first stool was similar. Twenty-four (53.5%) patients of the FT group and 8,9% of the control group were discharged on 1^st postoperative day. There were 2 (IIIA) complications in the main group and 3 - in the control group (IIIA, IIIB and IV). There were no mortality and readmissions.

CONCLUSION

FT protocol in AC reduce postoperative pain, dyspepsia, shoulder pain and in-hospital stay with equal number of postoperative complications.

Adapted ERAS Pathway vs. Standard Care in Patients with Perforated Duodenal Ulcer-a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of ERAS pathways in patients undergoing emergency simple closure of perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU).

METHODS

This single-center, prospective, open-labeled, superiority, RCT was carried out from August 2014 to July 2016. Patients of PDU undergoing open simple closure were randomized preoperatively in 1:1 ratio into standard care and adapted ERAS group. Patients with refractory shock, ASA class ≥3, and perforation size ≥1 cm were excluded. Primary outcome was the length of hospitalization (LOH). Secondary outcomes were functional recovery parameters and morbidity.

RESULTS

Forty-nine and 50 patients were included in standard care and ERAS group, respectively. Patients in ERAS group had a significantly early functional recovery (days) for the time to first flatus (1.47 ± 0.18; p < 0.001), first stool (2.25 ± 0.20; p < 0.001), first fluid diet (2.72 ± 0.38; p < 0.001), and solid diet (3.70 ± 0.44; p < 0.001). LOH in ERAS group was significantly shorter (mean difference of 4.41 ± 0.64 days; p < 0.001). There was a significant reduction in postoperative morbidity such as superficial SSI (RR 0.35, p = 0.02), postoperative nausea and vomiting (RR 0.28, p < 0.0001), and pulmonary complications (RR 0.24, p = 0.04) in the ERAS vs. standard care group with similar leak rates (1/50 vs.2/49).

CONCLUSION

ERAS pathways are safe and feasible in select patients undergoing emergency simple closure of PDU.

Essential Elements of Multimodal Analgesia in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Guidelines

Perioperative multimodal analgesia uses combinations of analgesic medications that act on different sites and pathways in an additive or synergistic manner to achieve pain relief with minimal or no opiate consumption. Although all medications have side effects, opiates have particularly concerning, multisystemic, long-term, and short-term side effects, which increase morbidity and prolong admissions. Enhanced recovery is a systematic process addressing each aspect affecting recovery. This article outlines the evidence base forming the current multimodal analgesia recommendations made by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society (ERAS). We describe current evidence and important future directions for effective perioperative multimodal analgesia in enhanced recovery pathways.

Proceedings of resources for optimal care of acute care and emergency surgery consensus summit Donegal Ireland

BACKGROUND

Opportunities to improve emergency surgery outcomes exist through guided better practice and reduced variability. Few attempts have been made to define optimal care in emergency surgery, and few clinically derived key performance indicators (KPIs) have been published. A summit was therefore convened to look at resources for optimal care of emergency surgery. The aim of the Donegal Summit was to set a platform in place to develop guidelines and KPIs in emergency surgery.

METHODS

The project had multidisciplinary global involvement in producing consensus statements regarding emergency surgery care in key areas, and to assess feasibility of producing KPIs that could be used to monitor process and outcome of care in the future.

RESULTS

Forty-four key opinion leaders in emergency surgery, across 7 disciplines from 17 countries, composed evidence-based position papers on 14 key areas of emergency surgery and 112 KPIs in 20 acute conditions or emergency systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The summit was successful in achieving position papers and KPIs in emergency surgery. While position papers were limited by non-graded evidence and non-validated KPIs, the process set a foundation for the future advancement of emergency surgery.

Multidisciplinary perioperative protocol in patients undergoing acute high-risk abdominal surgery

Background

Acute high-risk abdominal (AHA) surgery carries a very high risk of morbidity and mortality and represents a massive healthcare burden. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of a standardized multidisciplinary perioperative protocol in patients undergoing AHA surgery.

Methods

The AHA study was a prospective single-centre controlled study in consecutive patients undergoing AHA surgery, defined as major abdominal pathology requiring emergency laparotomy or laparoscopy including reoperations after elective gastrointestinal surgery. Consecutive patients were included after initiation of the AHA protocol as standard care. The intervention cohort was compared with a predefined, consecutive historical cohort of patients from the same department. The protocol involved continuous staff education, consultant-led attention and care, early resuscitation and high-dose antibiotics, surgery within 6 h, perioperative stroke volume-guided haemodynamic optimization, intermediate level of care for the first 24 h after surgery, standardized analgesic treatment, early postoperative ambulation and early enteral nutrition. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality.

Results

Six hundred patients were included in the study and compared with 600 historical controls. The unadjusted 30-day mortality rate was 21·8 per cent in the control cohort compared with 15·5 per cent in the intervention cohort (P = 0·005). The 180-day mortality rates were 29·5 and 22·2 per cent respectively (P = 0·004).

Conclusion

The introduction of a multidisciplinary perioperative protocol was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative mortality in patients undergoing AHA surgery. NCT01899885 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Future Perspectives of ERAS: A Narrative Review on the New Applications of an Established Approach

ERAS approach (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) is a multimodal, perioperative pathway designed to achieve early recovery after surgery. ERAS has shown documented efficacy in elective surgery, and the concept of "multimodal" and "multidisciplinary" approach seems still to be of higher importance than each single item within ERAS protocols. New perspectives include the use of ERAS in emergency surgery, where efficacy and safety on outcome have been documented, and flexibility of traditional items may add benefits for traditionally high-risk patients. Obstetric surgery, as well, may open wide horizons for future research, since extremely poor data are currently available, and ERAS benefits may translate even on the baby. Finally, the concept of "outcome" may be extended when considering the specific setting of cancer surgery, in which variables like cancer recurrence, early access to adjuvant therapies, and, finally, long-term survival are as important as the reduced perioperative complications. In this perspective, different items within ERAS protocols should be reinterpreted and eventually integrated towards "protective" techniques, to develop cancer-specific ERAS approaches keeping pace with the specific aims of oncologic surgery.