Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer: a single center experience

Enhanced Recovery Protocol Versus Conventional Care in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy for Cancer: Advantages in Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to compare the clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol and conventional care in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer, which have not previously been compared.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included prospective PRO data from August 2019 to June 2021. Clinical outcomes included perioperative complications and postoperative length of stay (PLOS). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed by using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 (QLQ-C30) and esophagus-specific module (QLQ-OES18) preoperatively to 6 months postoperatively. Mixed-effects models were used to longitudinally compare quality of life (QOL) scores between the two modes.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing conventional care and ERAS were analyzed (n = 348 and 109, respectively). The ERAS group had fewer overall complications, pneumonia, arrhythmia, and a shorter PLOS than the conventional group, and outperformed the conventional group in five functional QLQ-C30 domains and five symptom QLQ-OES18 domains, including less dysphagia (p < 0.0001), trouble talking (p = 0.0006), and better eating (p < 0.0001). These advantages persisted for 3 months postoperatively. For the cervical circular stapled anastomosis, the initial domains and duration of benefit were reduced in the ERAS group.

CONCLUSIONS

The ERAS protocol has significant advantages over conventional care in terms of clinical outcomes, lowering postoperative symptom burden, and improving functional QOL in patients who have undergone esophagectomy. Selection of the optimal technique for cervical anastomosis is a key operative component of ERAS that maintains the symptom domains and duration of the advantages of PROs.

Short-term outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in minimally invasive oesophagectomy: A prospective study

BACKGROUND

Although fast-track treatment pathways are well established in colorectal surgeries, their role in oesophageal resections has not been well studied. This study aims to prospectively evaluate the short-term outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients undergoing minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIE) for oesophageal malignancy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied a prospective cohort of 46 consecutive patients from January 2019 to June 2022 who underwent MIE for oesophageal malignancy. The ERAS protocol mainly consists of pre-operative counselling, pre-operative carbohydrate loading, multimodal analgesia, early mobilisation, enteral nutrition and initiation oral feed. Principal outcome measures were the length of post-operative hospital stay, complication rate, mortality rate and 30-day readmission rate.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of patients was 49.5 (42, 62) years, and 52.2% were female. The median (IQR) post-operative day of intercoastal drain removal and initiation of oral feed was 4 (3, 4) and 4 (4, 6) days, respectively. The median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 6 (6.0, 7.25) days, with a 30-day readmission rate of 6.5%. The overall complication rate was 45.6%, with a major complication (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) rate of 10.9%. Compliance with the ERAS protocol was 86.9%, and the incidence of major complications was associated with failure to follow the protocol ( P = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocol in minimally invasive oesophagectomy is feasible and safe. This may result in early recovery with shortened length of hospital stay without an increase in complication and readmission rates.

Clinical predictors of postoperative complications in the context of enhanced recovery (ERAS) in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer

The overall frequency of postoperative complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer diverges between studies. We evaluated the frequency and assessed the relationship between complications and demographic and clinical features. For this observational study, data were extracted from the ERAS Registry managed by the University of Verona, Italy. Patients were evaluated and compared for postoperative complications according to the consensus-based classification and the Clavien-Dindo scale. The study population was 877 patients: 346 (39.5%) with esophageal and 531 (60.5%) with gastric cancer; 492 (56.2%) reported one or more postoperative complications, 213 (61.6%) of those with esophageal and 279 (52.5%) of those with gastric cancer. When stratified by consensus-based classification, patients with esophageal cancer reported general postoperative complications more frequently (p < 0.001) than those with gastric cancer, but there was no difference in postoperative surgical complications between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression models revealed an association between postoperative complications and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.36), operation time (adjusted OR, 1.08; 95% CI 1.00-1.15), and days to solid diet intake (adjusted OR, 1.39; 95% CI 1.20-1.59). Complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer are frequent, even in those treated according to ERAS principles, and are often associated with comorbidities, longer operative time, and longer time to solid diet intake.

The "Weekday Effect" on Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocol for Gastrectomy

INTRODUCTION

While enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol demonstrated to improve outcomes after gastrectomy, some papers evidenced a detrimental effect on postoperative morbidity related to the "weekday effect." We aimed to understand whether the day of gastrectomy could affect postoperative outcomes and compliance with ERAS items.

METHODS

We included all patients that underwent gastrectomy for cancer between January 2017 and September 2021. Cohort was divided considering the day of surgery: Early group (Monday-Wednesday) and Late group (Thursday-Friday). Compliance with protocol and postoperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-seven patients were included in Early group, while 154 were in Late group. The groups were comparable in preoperative characteristics. No significant difference in pre/intraoperative and postoperative ERAS items' compliance was apparent between Early and Late groups, with most items exceeding the 70% threshold. Median length of stay was 6.5 days and 6 days in Early and Late groups (p = 0.616), respectively. Morbidity was 50% in both groups, with severe complications that occurred in 13% of Early patients and 15% of Late patients. Ninety-day mortality was 2%, and it was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In a center with a standardized ERAS protocol, the weekday of gastrectomy has no significant impact on the success of each ERAS item and on postoperative surgical and oncological outcomes.

The effect of the enhanced recovery programme on long-term survival following liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery programmes are associated with improved short-term outcomes following liver surgery. The impact of enhanced recovery programmes on medium- and long-term outcomes is incompletely understood. This study aimed to assess the impact of an enhanced recovery programme on long-term survival in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal liver metastases.

METHODS

At a tertiary hepatobiliary centre, we analysed short-, medium- and long-term outcomes in consecutive patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. A five-year retrospective review was carried out comparing the enhanced recovery programme to standard care.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients were included in the analysis: 87 on standard care and 85 on an enhanced recovery programme. Open surgery was performed in 122 patients: 74 (85.1%) and 48 (56.5%) patients in the standard care and enhanced recovery programme, respectively (p < 0.001). There was a significant reduction in the median (IQR) length of hospital stay in the enhanced recovery programme compared with standard care (7 (5) days vs. 8 (3) days, p = 0.0009). There was no significant difference in survival between standard care and the Enhanced Recovery Programme at one (p = 0.818), three (p = 0.203), and five years (p = 0.247).

CONCLUSION

An enhanced recovery programme was associated with a reduced length of hospital stay. There was no effect on the one-, three- and five-year survival.

Robotic versus open Ivor–Lewis esophagectomy: A more accurate lymph node dissection without burdening the leak rate

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) combines the beneficial effects of minimally invasive surgery on postoperative complications, especially on pulmonary ones, with the safety of the anastomosis performed in open surgery. Moreover, RAMIE could allow a more accurate lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

We reviewed our database to identify all patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus treated by Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in the period January 2014 to June 2022. Patients were divided according to the thoracic approach into RAMIE and open esophagectomy (OE) groups. We compared the groups for early surgical outcomes, 90-day mortality as well as R0 rate, and the number of lymph nodes harvested.

RESULTS

We identified 47 patients in RAMIE and 159 patients in the OE group. Baseline characteristics were comparable. Operative time was significantly longer for RAMIE procedures (p < 0.01); however, we did not observe the difference in overall (RAMIE 55.5% vs. OE 61%, p = 0.76) and severe complications rate (RAMIE 17% vs. OE 22.6%, p = 0.4). The anastomotic leak rate was 2.1% after RAMIE and 6.9% after OE (p = 0.56). We did not report the difference in 90-day mortality (RAMIE 2.1% vs. OE 1.9%, p = 0.65). In the RAMIE group, we observed a significantly higher number of thoracic lymph nodes harvested, with a median of 10 lymph nodes in the RAMIE group versus 8 in the OE group (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, RAMIE has morbimortality rates comparable to OE. Moreover, it allows a more accurate thoracic lymphadenectomy which results in a higher thoracic lymph nodes retrieval rate.

State of the art of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in esophagogastric cancer surgery: the Western experience

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs provide a framework to standardize care processes and improve outcomes. The results of this multimodal and multidisciplinary approach based on actions focused on reducing physiological surgical stress in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods are beneficial in reducing morbidity and hospital stay, without increasing readmissions across different surgical settings. The implementation of ERAS in resection procedures of esophageal and gastric cancer has been challenging due to the complexity of these surgical techniques and the high risk of complications. Despite the limited evidence of ERAS in esophagectomy operations, systematic reviews and meta-analysis have confirmed a reduction of pulmonary complications and hospital stay without increasing readmissions. In gastrectomy operations, the implementation of ERAS reduces the use of nasogastric tubes and intraabdominal drains, facilitates early diet, and reduces the length of hospital stay, without increasing complications. There is, however, wide heterogeneity and absence of standardization in the number and definition of the ERAS components. The development of ERAS consensus guidelines including procedure-specific components may reduce this variability. Regardless growing evidence of the effectiveness of ERAS, the adherence rate is still low. The commitment of the multidisciplinary team and leadership is critical in the application and refinement of ERAS protocols in parallel with periodic audits. Pre- and post-habilitation methods are emerging concepts to be incorporated in ERAS protocols.

The effect of enhanced recovery after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to determine if enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) would improve outcomes for three-stage minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE).

METHODS

Patients with esophageal cancer undergoing MIE between March 2016 and August 2018 were consecutively enrolled, and were randomly divided into 2 groups: ERAS+group that received a guideline-based ERAS protocol, and ERAS- group that received standard care. The primary endpoint was morbidity after MIE. The secondary endpoints were the length of stay (LOS) and time to ambulation after the surgery. The perioperative results including the Surgical Apgar Score (SAS) and Visualized Analgesia Score (VAS) were also collected and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients in the ERAS+ group and 58 patients in the ERAS- group were included. Postoperatively, lower morbidity and pulmonary complication rate were recorded in the ERAS+ group (33.3% vs. 51.7%; p = 0.04, 16.7% vs. 32.8%; p = 0.04), while the incidence of anastomotic leakage remained comparable (11.7% vs. 15.5%; p = 0.54). There was an earlier ambulation (3 [2-3] days vs. 3 [3-4] days, p = 0.001), but comparable LOS (10 [9-11.25] days vs. 10 [9-13] days; p = 0.165) recorded in ERAS+ group. The ERAS protocol led to close scores in both SAS (7.80 ± 1.03 vs. 8.07 ± 0.89, p = 0.21) and VAS (1.74 ± 0.85 vs. 1.78 ± 1.06, p = 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an ERAS protocol for patients undergoing MIE resulted in earlier ambulation and lower pulmonary complications, without a change in anastomotic leakage or length of hospital stay. Further studies on minimizing leakage should be addressed in ERAS for MIE.

Impact of standardized clinical pathways on esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Esophageal surgery is historically associated with adverse postoperative outcomes. Selected high-volume centers have previously reported the effect on clinical outcomes following the adoption of a standardized clinical pathway (SCP). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the current literature to document the effect of SCP and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) on esophagectomy outcomes. A literature search was conducted through the main search engines (PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane database) in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. All eligible comparative studies (randomized control trial, prospective, retrospective, and combined) were identified and assessed based on Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies and Jadad quality criteria. Data concerning overall morbidity, early mortality, and length of stay (LOS) were primarily collected and compared. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leaks, pulmonary complications, and readmission rate. Twenty-six articles (including five randomized controlled trials and six prospective trials) were included in the analysis. Overall study quality was moderate and the included studies utilized a variable approach to SCP. No statistically significant differences were found between groups in terms of overall morbidity, postoperative mortality, anastomotic leak, and readmission rates. Significant improvements included pulmonary complications (odds ratios [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.94) and hospital LOS (OR -3.68, 95% CI -4.49 to -2.87). Previous reports of SCP within esophagectomy programs have demonstrated clinical improvements in postoperative pulmonary complications and LOS. Given the high heterogeneity historically demonstrated within SCPs, further improvement in outcomes should be expected following the adoption of standardized ERAS guidelines.

Early versus the traditional start of oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Nil by mouth is considered the standard of care during the first days following esophagectomy. However, with the routine implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery, early oral intake is more likely to be the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. The present study aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of early oral intake following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated as the effect sizes for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 1947 patients were included. Length of hospital stay (WMD =  - 3.94, CI: - 4.98 to - 2.90; P < 0.001), the time to first flatus (WMD =  - 1.13, CI: - 1.25 to - 1.01; P < 0.001) and defecation (WMD =  - 1.26, CI: - 1.82 to - 0.71; P < 0.001) favored the early oral intake group. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality (OR = 1.23, CI: 0.45 to 3.36; P = 0.69). Early oral intake also did not increase the risk of pneumonia and overall postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicates early oral intake following esophagectomy seems to be safe and effective. It may be the preferred mode of nutrition following esophagectomy. However, more high-quality studies are still needed to further validate this conclusion.

Electronic collection of patient-reported outcomes following discharge after surgery: systematic review

Background

Little is known about the electronic collection and clinical feedback of patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) following surgical discharge. This systematic review summarized the evidence on the collection and uses of electronic systems to collect PROs after discharge from hospital after surgery.

Method

Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Central were undertaken from database inception to July 2019 using terms for ‘patient reported outcomes’, ‘electronic’, ‘surgery’ and ‘at home’. Primary research of all study designs was included if they used electronic systems to collect PRO data in adults after hospital discharge following surgery. Data were collected on the settings, patient groups and specialties, ePRO systems (including features and functions), PRO data collected, and integration with health records.

Results

Fourteen studies were included from 9474 records, including two RCTs and six orthopaedic surgery studies. Most studies (9 of 14) used commercial ePRO systems. Six reported types of electronic device were used: tablets or other portable devices (3 studies), smartphones (2), combination of smartphones, tablets, portable devices and computers (1). Systems had limited features and functions such as real-time clinical feedback (6 studies) and messaging service for patients with care teams (3). No study described ePRO system integration with electronic health records to support clinical feedback.

Conclusion

There is limited reporting of ePRO systems in the surgical literature, and ePRO systems lack integration with hospital clinical systems. Future research should describe the ePRO system and ePRO questionnaires used, and challenges encountered during the study, to support efficient upscaling of ePRO systems using tried and tested approaches.

Application of ERAS protocol in esophagectomy: a national survey among Italian centers performing esophageal surgery

The application of enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines for esophageal surgery in different units remains unclear. This survey intended to investigate how such protocol is applied among Italian esophageal surgery units. A survey with 40 questions was mailed to Italian centers that performed at least 10 esophagectomies per year. It included questions about the type of hospital and unit and pre-, intra- and post-operative items. Difficulties encountered were investigated. Thirteen (65%) centers answered the survey, and all met the minimal safety requirements, e.g., the presence of intensive care units and 24-h on-call operative endoscopy and radiology facilities. Fifty percent of esophagectomies with a minimally invasive approach were performed in 84.6% of the centers. Regarding pre-operative items, the highest scores were for the application of nutritional support, dysphagia palliation and presence of a multidisciplinary tumor board, whereas the lowest score was for the use of immunonutrition. Regarding intra-operative items, hypothermia prevention and the use of goal-directed fluid therapy and volatile anesthesia were diffusely adopted, whereas the rate of using abdominal drains was high. Regarding post-operative items, nausea prevention, multimodal analgesia and early mobilization were applied frequently, whereas the use of nasogastric tubes and regular transfer to intensive care units was diffused. The primary barriers in enhanced recovery after surgery protocol application were resistance and a lack of paramedic personnel. This survey's results highlight the efforts undertaken by several centers to apply enhanced recovery after surgery philosophy and in this regard, demonstrate a good standing in Italy.

Feasibility of enhanced recovery protocol in minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery has generally been applied to gastrointestinal surgeries; however, few studies have investigated minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of an enhanced recovery protocol after minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy.

METHODS

Data were collected between January 2015 and April 2020 for patients who underwent esophagectomy. Of these patients, those who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy was selected for the investigation. Perioperative outcomes and nutritional index were compared using propensity score matching between the conventional group and the enhanced recovery group.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients were enrolled in this study. Of these, 73 and 46 were treated with conventional and enhanced recovery protocol, respectively. Forty-two pairs were matched in two groups. The enhanced recovery group showed a lower rate of pulmonary complications (9.5% vs. 28.5%, p = 0.0235), abdominal dysfunctions (16.7% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.0078), and shorter hospital stay as compared with the conventional group (17.5 days vs. 23 days, p = 0.0034). The loss of body weight (6.3% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.0065) and body mass index (5.6% vs. 8.1%, p = 0.0017) were significantly lower in the enhanced recovery group than in the conventional group. In contrast, nutritional biochemistry data did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that the promotion of an enhanced recovery protocol in minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy maintains nutritional status without increasing postoperative complications.

RAMIE: tradition drives innovation-feasibility of a robotic-assisted intra-thoracic anastomosis

Due to the difficulties in the intra-thoracic esophagogastric anastomosis creation, totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE) did not encountered a large diffusion, preferring hybrid techniques or cervical anastomosis. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has gained popularity due to an easy reproducibility of the open anastomotic technique. In this feasibility study, we described the RAMIE technique introduced in our Center, providing innovative details for a mechanical end-to-end anastomosis. With patient in prone position, esophagectomy is conducted through the meso-esophagus plan. Robotic hand-sewn purse-string is realized above Azygos vein. A 4-cm thoracotomy in the fifth intercostal space is performed by enlarging the trocar incision. The tubulization is performed to create an access pouch for the introduction of the circular stapler. After the creation of the end-to-end anastomosis, the access pouch is resected and a robotic over-sewn is realized. From January 2020 until July 2020, ten patients were enrolled. No restriction in term of age, BMI, ASA grade or previous surgery were applied. Median operative time was 700 min. R0 resection was achieved in all cases with a good lymph node harvesting. No anastomotic leak or stricture were observed. One chyle leak was treated conservatively. Median length of stay was 8 days and 90 days mortality was 0%. This study evidenced how robotic surgery allowed us to perform the same anastomosis of our open technique with good oncological results and morbidity and length of stay comparable with our previous results. Of note, longer operative time has been recorded. Further studies after the completion of the learning curve are necessary to address more definite conclusions.

Routine intraoperative jejunostomy placement and minimally invasive oesophagectomy: an unnecessary step?†

OBJECTIVES

Adequate nutrition is challenging after oesophagectomy. A jejunostomy is commonly placed during oesophagectomy for nutritional support. However, some patients develop jejunostomy-related complications and the benefit over oral nutrition alone is unclear. This study aims to assess jejunostomy-related complications and the impact of intraoperative jejunostomy placement on weight loss and perioperative outcomes in patients with oesophageal cancer treated with minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy (MIE).

METHODS

From a prospectively maintained database, patients were identified who underwent MIE with gastric reconstruction. Between 2007 and 2016, a jejunostomy was routinely placed during MIE. After 2016, a jejunostomy was not utilized. Postoperative feeding was performed according to a standardized protocol and similar for both groups. The primary outcomes were jejunostomy-related complications, relative weight loss at 3 and 6 months postoperative and perioperative outcomes, including anastomotic leak, pneumonia and length of stay, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 188 patients were included, of whom 135 patients (72%) received a jejunostomy. Ten patients (7.4%) developed jejunostomy-related complications, of whom 30% developed more than 1 complication. There was no significant difference in weight loss between groups at 3 months (P = 0.73) and 6 months postoperatively (P = 0.68) and in perioperative outcomes (P-value >0.999, P = 0.591 and P = 0.513, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a routine intraoperative jejunostomy appears to be an unnecessary step in patients undergoing MIE. Intraoperative jejunostomy placement is associated with complications without improving weight loss or perioperative outcomes. Its use should be tailored to individual patient characteristics. Early oral nutrition allows patients to maintain an adequate nutritional status.

Is the placement of jejunostomy tubes in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy associated with increased inpatient healthcare utilization? An analysis of the National Readmissions Database

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing esophagectomy often receive jejunostomy tubes (j-tubes) for nutritional supplementation. We hypothesized that j-tubes are associated with increased post-esophagectomy readmissions.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified esophagectomies for malignancy with (EWJ) or without (EWOJ) j-tubes using the 2010-2015 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Outcomes include readmission, inpatient mortality, and complications. Outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Of 22,429 patients undergoing esophagectomy, 16,829 (75.0%) received j-tubes. Patients were similar in age and gender but EWJ were more likely to receive chemotherapy (24.2% vs. 15.1%, p < 0.01). EWJ was associated with decreased 180-day inpatient mortality (HR 0.72 [0.52-0.99]) but not with higher readmissions at 30- (15.2% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.16; HR 0.9 [0.77-1.05]) or 180 days (25.2% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.37; HR 0.94 [0.79-1.10]) or increased complications (p = 0.37). These results were confirmed in the PSM cohort.

CONCLUSION

J-tubes placed in the setting of esophagectomy do not increase inpatient readmissions or mortality.

Patient experiences of an electronic PRO tailored feedback system for symptom management following upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery

Purpose

Complications following upper gastrointestinal (UGI) surgery are common. Symptom-monitoring following discharge is not standardized. An electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) system providing feedback to patients and clinicians could support patients and improve outcomes. Little is known about patients’ experiences of using such systems. This qualitative sub-study explored patients’ perspectives of the benefits of using a novel ePRO system, developed as part of the mixed methods eRAPID pilot study, to support recovery following discharge after UGI surgery.

Methods

Patients completed the online ePRO symptom-report system post-discharge. Weekly interviews explored patients’ experiences of using ePRO, the acceptability of feedback generated and its value for supporting their recovery. Interviews were audio-recorded and targeted transcriptions were thematically analysed.

Results

Thirty-five interviews with 16 participants (11 men, mean age 63 years) were analysed. Two main themes were identified: (1) reassurance and (2) empowerment. Feelings of isolation were common; many patients felt uninformed regarding their expectations of recovery and whether their symptoms warranted clinical investigation. Participants were reassured by tailored feedback advising them to contact their care team, alleviating their anxiety. Patients reported feeling empowered by the ePRO system and in control of their symptoms and recovery.

Conclusion

Patients recovering at home following major cancer surgery regarded electronic symptom-monitoring and feedback as acceptable and beneficial. Patients perceived that the system enhanced information provision and provided a direct link to their care team. Patients felt that the system provided reassurance at a time of uncertainty and isolation, enabling them to feel in control of their symptoms and recovery.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-020-02539-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorised users.

A real-time electronic symptom monitoring system for patients after discharge following surgery: a pilot study in cancer-related surgery

Background

Advances in peri-operative care of surgical oncology patients result in shorter hospital stays. Earlier discharge may bring benefits, but complications can occur while patients are recovering at home. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems may enhance remote, real-time symptom monitoring and detection of complications after hospital discharge, thereby improving patient safety and outcomes. Evidence of the effectiveness of ePRO systems in surgical oncology is lacking. This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of a real-time electronic symptom monitoring system for patients after discharge following cancer-related upper gastrointestinal surgery.

Methods

A pilot study in two UK hospitals included patients who had undergone cancer-related upper gastrointestinal surgery. Participants completed the ePRO symptom-report at discharge, twice in the first week and weekly post-discharge. Symptom-report completeness, system actions, barriers to using the ePRO system and technical performance were examined. The ePRO surgery system is an online symptom-report that allows clinicians to view patient symptom-reports within hospital electronic health records and was developed as part of the eRAPID project. Clinically derived algorithms provide patients with tailored self-management advice, prompts to contact a clinician or automated clinician alerts depending on symptom severity. Interviews with participants and clinicians determined the acceptability of the ePRO system to support patients and their clinical management during recovery.

Results

Ninety-one patients were approached, of which 40 consented to participate (27 male, mean age 64 years). Symptom-report response rates were high (range 63–100%). Of 197 ePRO completions analysed, 76 (39%) triggered self-management advice, 72 (36%) trigged advice to contact a clinician, 9 (5%) triggered a clinician alert and 40 (20%) did not require advice. Participants found the ePRO system reassuring, providing timely information and advice relevant to supporting their recovery. Clinicians regarded the system as a useful adjunct to usual care, by signposting patients to seek appropriate help and enhancing their understanding of patients’ experiences during recovery.

Conclusion

Use of the ePRO system for the real-time, remote monitoring of symptoms in patients recovering from cancer-related upper gastrointestinal surgery is feasible and acceptable. A definitive randomised controlled trial is needed to evaluate the impact of the system on patients’ wellbeing after hospital discharge.

Nasogastric tube utilization after esophagectomy: an unnecessary gesture?

INTRODUCTION

Nasogastric decompressive tube utilization has been accepted as one of the basic perioperative care measures after esophageal resection surgery. However, with the development of multimodal rehabilitation programs and without clear evidence to support their use, the systematic indication of this measure may be controversial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective, descriptive and comparative study of patients who had undergone Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in our center -from January 2015 to December 2018- with placement (Group S), or without placement (Group N) of a decompressive tube in gastroplasty during postoperative period. Epidemiological variables and differences between groups in post-surgical morbidity and mortality, hospital stay, onset of oral tolerance and the need for nasogastric tube placement were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients were included in this study, with a median age of 61 years, being 86% male. 46.5% were hypertensive, 25.5% had lung disease and 16.3% had diabetes mellitus. The median length of hospital stay was 9 days in group S versus 11.5 days in group N, with no differences in the onset of oral tolerance. Anastomotic dehiscence rate was 5% and 0% respectively. The overall mortality was 2.3% in the first 90 days, without differences between the groups. Placement of nasogastric tube during postoperative period was required only in 1 patient (4.3%) of the group N.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-use of nasogastric tube during postoperative period of an Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is a safe measure, as it is not associated with a higher rate of complications or hospital stay. This fact may be able to improve patients' comfort and postoperative recovery.

The effect of early oral feeding after esophagectomy on the incidence of anastomotic leakage: an updated review

OBJECTIVE

Early oral feeding (EOF) is considered to be an important component of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), but raises the concern of increased risk of anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients receiving esophagectomy. This review aimed to elucidate the correlation of EOF and the incidence of AL after esophageal resection.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar from their inception to February 2020 for published articles that compared AL after EOF (oral feeding initiated within postoperative day [POD] 3) vs. conventional feeding regimen (nil-by-mouth with enteral tube nutrition support, until oral feeding since POD 4 and beyond) following esophagectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 11 full articles were included in this review, including 5 registered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 6 observational studies that compared EOF with conventional care after esophagectomy. Meta-analysis was not possible due to significant heterogeneity, bias, and small sample sizes. Among the 11 included studies, 9 (including the 5 RCTs) showed that EOF did not increase AL rate, whereas the other 2 retrospective studies indicated that delayed oral feeding resulted in fewer AL.

CONCLUSIONS

EOF after esophagectomy probably does not increase the incidence of AL, and it is a promising strategy in line with the essence of ERAS. However, more and better evidence from high-quality RCTs are still needed.

Optimal timing and route of nutritional support after esophagectomy: A review of the literature

Some controversy surrounds the postoperative feeding regimen utilized in patients who undergo esophagectomy. Variation in practices during the perioperative period exists including the type of nutrition started, the delivery route, and its timing. Adequate nutrition is essential for this patient population as these patients often present with weight loss and have altered eating patterns after surgery, which can affect their ability to regain or maintain weight. Methods of feeding after an esophagectomy include total parenteral nutrition, nasoduodenal/nasojejunal tube feeding, jejunostomy tube feeding, and oral feeding. Recent evidence suggests that early oral feeding is associated with shorter LOS, faster return of bowel function, and improved quality of life. Enhanced recovery pathways after surgery pathways after esophagectomy with a component of early oral feeding also seem to be safe, feasible, and cost-effective, albeit with limited data. However, data on anastomotic leaks is mixed, and some studies suggest that the incidence of leaks may be higher with early oral feeding. This risk of anastomotic leak with early feeding may be heavily modulated by surgical approach. No definitive data is currently available to definitively answer this question, and further studies should look at how these early feeding regimens vary by surgical technique. This review aims to discuss the existing literature on the optimal route and timing of feeding after esophagectomy.

Enhanced recovery protocol in esophagectomy, is it really worth it? A cost analysis related to team experience and protocol compliance

Application of enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) in esophageal surgery seems to lead an advantage in terms of length of hospital staying and outcomes, but only few data exist on its cost effectiveness. Previous literature analyzed pre- and post-ERP groups, finding a cost reduction with the introduction of the pathway. We aimed to study the influence on costs of accumulating experience and compliance in an ERP group. Seventy-one patients have been treated at our institution from January 2014 to June 2017 with our ERP for Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. Direct costs were divided into subcategories and were analyzed as a function of calendar year and compliance. Factor affecting costs were searched. Univariable analysis highlighted a significant reduction in costs over time. Increase in compliance led to a progressive cost reduction for each ERP item completed (€14 852-€11 045). While age was not found to significantly influence the cost (p = 0.341), complications seemed to nullify the effect of experience: the median was €11 507 in uncomplicated patients, and increased to €13 791 in Clavien-Dindo 3-4 (CD3-4) patients. Compliance and CD3-4 remained significant also in multivariable analysis, accomplished by quantile regression, while year of surgery lost its significance. Our results evidence how accumulating experience in ERP led to a cost reduction over time, which was mainly mediated by an increase in compliance. Indeed, compliance was the main factor in reducing ERP cost while CD3-4 complications were the most important factor in cost increasing, nullifying the benefit of compliance.

Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?

The morbidity and mortality benefits of performing high-risk operations in high-volume centers by high-volume surgeons are evident. Regionalization is a proposed strategy to leverage high-volume centers for esophagectomy to improve quality outcomes. Internationally, regionalization occurs under national mandates. Those mandates do not exist in the United States and spontaneous regionalization of esophagectomy has only modestly occurred in the U.S. Regionalization must strike a careful balance and not limit access to optimal oncologic care to our most vulnerable cancer patient populations in rural and disadvantaged socioeconomic areas. We reviewed the recent literature highlighting: the justification of hospital and surgeon annual esophagectomy volumes for regionalization; how safety performance metrics could influence regionalization; whether regionalization is occurring in the US; what impact regionalization may have on esophagectomy costs; and barriers to patients traveling to receive oncologic treatment at regionalized centers of excellence.

Comparative clinical features and short-term outcomes of gastric and small intestinal gastrointestinal stromal tumours: a retrospective study

Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumours of the gastrointestinal tract. Recent research has shown that small intestinal GISTs exhibit more aggressive features than gastric GISTs. To compare the clinical features of gastric and small intestinal GISTs for the further prediction of different prognoses, we conducted a retrospective study. 43 patients in the small intestine group and 97 in the gastric group were collected between January 2016 and December 2017. Data on demographics, preoperative lab results, clinicopathological results and surgical management were compared between groups. Significant elements were subsequently included in logistic regression analysis for further identification. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to calculate the relapse-free survival (RFS) rate and cumulative survival rate. Univariable analysis demonstrated that underlying disease, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, lymphocyte count, haemoglobin (Hb), albumin (ALB), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), thrombin time (TT), National Institutes of Health (NIH) category, Dog1, surgical procedure types and postoperative hospitalization were different between the two groups. Among these factors, logistic regression analysis identified that patients in small intestinal group exhibited significantly higher GI bleeding rate (p = 0.022), NIH category (p = 0.031), longer postoperative hospitalization time (p = 0.001) with lower TT value (p = 0.030) than those in gastric group. The log-rank test indicated that the location of the GIST (p = 0.022), GIST with GI bleeding (p = 0.027) and NIH category (p = 0.031) were independent prognostic predictors for poor outcome regarding RFS. Regarding cumulative survival, only the location of the GIST (p = 0.027) was an independent prognostic predictor for poor outcome. Thus, we concluded that small intestine GISTs were associated with lower TT, recurrent GI bleeding, advanced NIH category and extended postoperative hospitalization. Nevertheless, future multicentre prospective study are expected to validate our results.

Jejunostomy-technique and controversies

Malnutrition is quite common in patients with esophageal cancer, and can be secondary to tumor related dysphagia or treatment side effects. Traditionally, open feeding jejunostomy tube was performed in all patients undergoing surgical treatment of esophageal cancer. With the advent of minimally invasive approaches, placement of the jejunostomy tube can be currently accomplished with either robotic or laparoscopic assistance. Here, we discuss the technical aspects as well as the pros and cons of a minimally invasive jejunostomy feeding tube placement.

The evolution of fast track protocols after oesophagectomy

Fast track is a standardised goal directed patient's care pathway that aims to facilitate recovery following surgery. Currently, there are large variations in the fast track protocols used in oesophagectomy due to the complexity of the procedure. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the evolution of fast track protocols following oesophagectomy since its implementation and the resulting effect on postoperative outcomes. Relevant electronic databases were searched for studies assessing the clinical outcome from fast track in oesophagectomy and also those assessing the effects of the individual key components in fast track protocols. The search yielded twenty-three publications regarding fast track implementation in oesophagectomy. A pattern of consistent evolution in fast-track protocols was clearly demonstrated and these have shown variations in the core-identified components across the studies. However, evolution in fast track protocols over time showed, an overall improvement in length of stay, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications and mortality over time. Thirty publications were included that evaluated specific components of fast track protocols, with an increasing trend towards addressing the nutritional aspect in oesophagectomy care in more recent years. The variations in the key components of fast track protocol of care identify the need for continued assessment and identification for areas of improvement. In the future incremental gains through focused improvements in key components will lend itself to even better postoperative outcomes and patient experience during oesophageal cancer treatment.

Pain management within an enhanced recovery program after thoracic surgery

Evidence for ERAS within thoracic surgery (ERATS) is building. The key to enabling early recovery and ambulation is ensuring that postoperative pain is well controlled. Surgery on the chest is considered to be one of the most painful of surgical procedures for both open and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approaches. Increasing use of MIS and improved perioperative care pathways has resulted in shorter length of stay (LOS), requiring patients to achieve optimal pain control earlier and meet discharge criteria sooner, sometimes on the same day as surgery. This requires optimizing pain control earlier in the postoperative recovery phase in order to enable ambulation and a better recovery profile, as well as to minimize the risk for development of chronic persistent postoperative pain (CPPP). This review will focus on the options for pain management protocols within an ERAS program for thoracic surgery patients (ERATS).

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for esophagectomy protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer is one of the worst malignant digestive neoplasms with poor treatment outcomes. Esophagectomy plays an important role and offers a potential curable chance to these patients. However, esophagectomy with radical lymphadenectomy is known as one of the most invasive digestive surgeries which are associated with high morbidity and mortality. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is a patient-centered, surgeon-led system combining anesthesia, nursing, nutrition, and psychology, which is designed for reducing complications, promoting recovery, and improving treatment outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis is aiming at how beneficial, and to what extent ERAS really will be.

METHODS

A systematic literature search will be performed through January 2018 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for relevant articles published in any language. Randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and propensity-matched comparative studies will be included. All meta-analyses will be performed using Review Manager software. The quality of the studies will be evaluated using the guidelines listed in the Cochrane Handbook. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statements will be followed until the findings of the systematic review and meta-analysis are reported.

RESULTS

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

CONCLUSION

Our study will draw an objective conclusion of the comparisons between ERAS and conventional care in aspects of perioperative outcomes and provide level I evidences for clinical decision makings.

Nutritional aspects of enhanced recovery after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) aims to accelerate recovery by a set of multimodality management strategies. For esophagectomy, several nutritional elements of ERAS can be safely introduced and are advised in routine practice, including preadmission counseling to screen and treat for potential malnutrition, shortened preoperative fasting, and carbohydrate loading. However, the timing of oral intake and the use of routine nasogastric decompression remain matter of debate after esophagectomy. Furthermore, more research is needed on future developments such as perioperative immunonutrition.

The Development of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Across Surgical Specialties

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS^®) principles have gained traction in variety of surgical disciplines. The promise of a reduced length of stay without compromising patient safety or increasing readmission rates has produced a body of literature examining the implementation of ERAS in the care of general, thoracic, urologic, and gynecologic surgery patients.

METHODS

We performed a review of the literature pertaining to studies of ERAS implementation across colorectal surgery, general surgery, thoracic surgery, urology, and gynecology. The extent of ERAS implementation and reported outcomes across key studies as well as systematic reviews and meta-analyses in each field were summarized.

RESULTS

The implementation of ERAS protocols has not been uniform across surgical specialties. Despite this, ERAS has produced improvements in patient outcomes. The most commonly described benefit of ERAS application has been reduced length of stay; complication and readmission rates are most consistently decreased in the colorectal literature. Studies have started to measure more nuanced measures of postoperative patient well-being. Efforts are growing to standardize ERAS protocols across diverse fields and call attention to the need for quality control.

CONCLUSIONS

Challenges remain in the study and execution of ERAS. Controlling for adherence to ERAS components and implementing uniform ERAS protocols across studies are burgeoning topics that have significant implications for study design. The practice of ERAS and its benefits to patients are expected to evolve. Assessing improvements in postdischarge quality of life, timing of return to work and independent living, and adherence to scheduled delivery of adjuvant treatments will strengthen future ERAS investigations.