Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program with robotic surgery in high-risk patients obtains optimal results after colorectal resections

Efficacy and Safety of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Pathway in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been proven valuable for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who received traditional surgery. While for those receiving minimally invasive surgery (MIS), its efficacy and safety remain debatable. Materials and Methods: Databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane libraries, and Web of science, were searched for relevant articles from their inception to February 23, 2022. Eligible articles were subjected to quality assessment and data extraction. The comparison between ERAS and traditional care (TC) was performed. Primary outcomes of this study were postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, and mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation, time to the first anal exhaust, and defecation. Results: Thirteen cohort studies covering 4308 patients were included. Patients in the ERAS group had significantly shorter LOS (weight mean differences [WMD]: -1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.33 to -1.45; P < .001), lower incidence of postoperative complications (risk ratios [RR]: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.5-0.88; P < .001), lower 30-day readmission rate (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61-0.92; P < .05), and shorter time to the first defecation (WMD: -1.93; 95% CI: -3.26 to -0.59; P < .001), but unimproved mortality, reoperation rate, and time to the first anal exhaust (P > .05) compared with those in the TC group. Conclusions: ERAS was effective and safe for CRC patients receiving MIS from a real-world perspective. Hence, the implementation of ERAS should be recommended for minimally invasive CRC surgery. Clinical Trial Registration Number: CRD42022321333.

Implementation of multi-mode nursing insulation program for patients receiving surgery for spine tumor: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Spinal tumor surgery usually involved long operation time, large area of soft tissue resection and long wound, and was prone to hypothermia during the operation. Therefore, actively promoting insulation and optimizing the intraoperative insulation program have great potential in reducing the incidence of hypothermia and reducing the incidence of postoperative complications. In this study, we compared patients who did not implement multi-mode nursing insulation program (MNIP) with those who implemented MNIP, observing and comparing clinical outcomes, and complications in both groups, with the aim of developing an optimal management plan for the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods, respectively.

METHODS

We selected 2 periods of 1 year, before (n = 120 patients) and after MINP implementation (n = 120 patients). Data were collected on patient demographics, operative, perioperative details, temperature changes, anesthesia recovery effect, incidence of postoperative wound infection, length of hospital stay and complications. PS analyses were used for dealing with confounding bias in this retrospective observational study.

RESULTS

After PS matching, the outcomes of 120 well-balanced pairs of patients were compared (No-MNIP vs MNIP). There was no significant difference concerning the satisfaction survey. The results indicated that the MNIP had better insulation effect at 90 min, 120 min, 150 min after anesthesia induction and after surgery. There were 16 cases of complications in the No-MNIP group and 5 cases in the MNIP group postoperative, which have significant statistical difference.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the incidence of intraoperative hypothermia was effectively reduced by adopting the multi-mode insulation scheme, thus reducing the incidence of incision infection and shortening the length of hospital stay of patients.