A meta-analysis of fast track surgery for patients with gastric cancer undergoing gastrectomy

Early Return to Intended Oncologic Therapy after implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway for gastric cancer surgery

PURPOSE

Time to initiation and completion of adjuvant therapy are critical to improve postoperative oncologic outcomes. This study aims to determine whether an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway for gastric cancer surgery promotes early Return to Intended Oncologic Therapy (RIOT).

METHODS

This is a before-after intervention study including patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent surgery from January 2016 to January 2021. Two periods were denoted based upon the implementation date of our institutional ERAS pathway (June 2018). Our primary outcome was time to RIOT after surgery. Hodges-Lehmann analysis was used to estimate median differences of non-parametric outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventy patients with gastric adenocarcinoma were included (35 in pre-ERAS period and 35 in post-ERAS period). Fourteen of the pre-ERAS and twenty-two patients of the post-ERAS period received adjuvant therapy. Time to RIOT was reduced in the post-ERAS period (median 39 days, IQR 31-49) by 12 days (95% CI 3-14 days, p = 0.01) compared to the pre-ERAS period (median 51 days, IQR 42-62). Length of hospital stay (LOS) was lower in the ERAS group (6 days, IQR 5-11 vs 10 days, IQR 8-13, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Our institutional ERAS pathway for gastric cancer surgery was associated with earlier RIOT and shorter LOS.

Application and Evaluation of a Care Plan for Enhanced Recovery After Thyroidectomy

Purpose: To develop and evaluate a nursing care plan based on the ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) approach for thyroid surgery patients. Methods: A nursing care plan has been developed after the literature review and focus group discussion. The content was validated using the Delphi method. Then, a quasi-experimental study was designed. A total of 120 cases with thyroid surgery at Ruijin Hospital from March to June 2018 were divided equally into an ERAS group and a conventional group Results: The nursing care plan consisted of 13 first-level and 32 second-level indicators. (P < .001). Strikingly the outcomes, such as pain scores, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs, were significantly less in the ERAS group than those in the conventional group (P<.001), while no difference was detected in the postoperative complications rate. Conclusion: A scientific and reliable nursing care plan has been used for thyroidectomy patients to enhance recovery.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of an Enhanced Recovery Program for Gastrectomy A Retrospective Controlled Analysis

Background

Enhanced recovery programs (ERP) demonstrated decreased postoperative complication rate and reduced length of stay (LOS). Recently, data on the financial impact revealed cost reduction for colorectal, liver and pancreatic surgery. The present study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of ERP in gastric surgery.

Methods

ERP based on enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society guidelines was implemented in our institution, in June 2014. Consecutive patients undergoing gastric surgery after ERP implementation (n = 71) were compared to a control group of consecutive patients operated before ERP implementation (n = 58). Primary endpoint was cost-effectiveness including detailed perioperative costs. Secondary endpoints were postoperative complications and LOS. Standard statistical testing (means, Mann–Whitney Fisher’s exact T test or Pearson Chi-square test) was used.

Results

Both groups were comparable regarding demographic details. Mean (SD) overall costs per patient were lower in the ERP group (€33,418 (17,901) vs €39,804 (27,288), P = 0.027). Lower costs were found for anesthesia and operating room (−€2 356), intensive or intermediate care (−€8 629), medication (−€1 196)), physiotherapy (−€611), laboratory (−€1 625)) and blood transfusion (−€977). Overall complication rates in ERP and control group (51% vs 62%, P = 0.176) were similar. Mean length of stay (SD) (14(13) days vs 17(11) days, P = 0.037) was shorter in the ERP group.

Conclusion

ERP significantly reduces overall, preoperative and postoperative costs in patients undergoing major gastric surgery.

Surgical Treatment for Gastric Cancer

Surgery is an essential component of curative-intent treatment strategies for gastric cancer. However, the care of each patient with gastric cancer must be individualized based on patient and tumor characteristics. It is important that all physicians who will be caring for patient with gastric cancer understand the current best practices of surgical management to provide patients with the highest quality of care. This article aims to provide this information while acknowledging areas of surgical management that are still controversial.

[Enhanced recovery after surgery-Does the ERAS concept keep its promises]

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concepts or fast-track are supposed to accelerate recovery after surgery, reduce postoperative complications and shorten the hospital stay when compared to traditional perioperative treatment.

METHODS

Electronic search of the PubMed database to identify systematic reviews with meta-analysis (SR) comparing ERAS and traditional treatment.

RESULTS

The presented SR investigated 70 randomized controlled studies (RCT) with 12,986 patients and 93 non-RCT (24,335 patients) concerning abdominal, thoracic and vascular as well as orthopedic surgery. The complication rates were decreased under ERAS following colorectal esophageal, liver and pulmonary resections as well as after implantation of hip endoprostheses. Pulmonary complications were reduced after ERAS esophageal, gastric and pulmonary resections. The first bowel movements occurred earlier after ERAS colorectal resections and delayed gastric emptying was less often observed after ERAS pancreatic resection. Following ERAS fast-track esophageal resection, anastomotic leakage was diagnosed less often as well as surgical complications after ERAS pulmonary resection. The ERAS in all studies concerning orthopedic surgery and trials investigating implantation of a hip endoprosthesis or knee endoprosthesis reduced the risk for postoperative blood transfusions. Regardless of the type of surgery, ERAS shortened hospital stay without increasing readmissions.

CONCLUSION

Numerous clinical trials have confirmed that ERAS reduces postoperative morbidity, shortens hospital stay and accelerates recovery without increasing readmission rates following most surgical operations.

Early Red Flags Associated with Delayed Discharge in Patients Undergoing Gastrectomy: Analysis of Perioperative Variables and ERAS Protocol Items

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) perioperative pathways are safe and effective for patients undergoing gastrectomy. However, adherence to these protocols varies and is generally underreported. This retrospective study aimed to assess whether perioperative variables or deviation from ERAS items is associated with delayed discharge after gastrectomy.

METHODS

All patients undergoing gastrectomy at our institution were managed with a standardised perioperative pathway according to ERAS principles. The target length of stay was set as the ninth post-operative day (POD). All significant variables were derived from a bivariate analysis and were entered into a logistic regression to confirm their statistical value.

RESULTS

The study included 180 patients. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that incomplete immunonutrition, failure to extubate the patient at the end of surgery, intraoperative crystalloids >2150 ml and blood transfusion >268 ml, surgery duration >195 min, and failure to mobilise patients within 24 h from surgery were associated with delayed discharge. The logistic regression model was statistically significant (p < 0.001) and correctly classified 73.6% of cases. Sensitivity and specificity were 74.1% and 73.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These results seem clinically significant and consistent with those of previous studies. The reported perioperative variables showed a strong relationship with the length of hospital stay.

Feasibility and Safety of Early Oral Feeding in Patients with Gastric Cancer After Radical Gastrectomy

An enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is useful in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. However, its feasibility for gastric surgery remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of early oral feeding (EOF) for patients with gastric cancer after radical gastrectomy. The EOF protocol was implemented in 397 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy between 2005 and 2014 at our hospital. The protocol was common in 277 patients after distal gastrectomy (DG) and 120 patients after total gastrectomy (TG). The patients were scheduled to start drinking water in the morning of the first postoperative day and to start thin rice gruel with a liquid nutrition supplement on the second postoperative day. We analyzed the incidence of postoperative complications and surgical outcomes in these patients. Furthermore, we analyzed risk factors for dropout from the EOF protocol. All patients started drinking water, while 26 patients were unable to start eating. The EOF protocol was implemented in 371 patients (93%), and 48 patients stopped eating. Specifically, 227 patients (87%) after DG and 96 patients (88%) after TG followed the EOF protocol perfectly. The incidence of postoperative complications, including anastomotic leakage (n = 0), ileus (n = 22), and pneumonia (n = 11), was 15% and that of clinically significant events (≥ grade 3) was 4.3%. Multivariate analysis showed that the male gender, comorbidities, and intra-operative bleeding are independent risk factors for dropout from the EOF protocol. EOF can be safely implemented in patients after radical gastrectomy.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) versus standard recovery for elective gastric cancer surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been effective in improving postoperative recovery after major abdominal surgeries including colorectal cancer surgery, however its impact after gastric cancer surgery is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of ERAS after gastric cancer surgery. Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PubMed was searched from database inception to December 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS versus standard care in gastric cancer surgery were included. Outcomes included the postoperative length of stay (LOS), hospital costs, time to first flatus, defecation, oral intake, and ambulation after surgery, and complications. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. The GRADE approach assessed overall quality of evidence. 18 RCTs involving 1782 patients were included. ERAS significantly reduced the LOS (Mean Difference (MD) -1.78 days, 95%CI -2.17 to -1.40, P < 0.0001), reduced hospital costs (MD -650 U S. dollars, 95%CI -840 to -460, P < 0.0001), and reduced time to first flatus, defecation, ambulation, and oral intake. ERAS had significantly lower rates of pulmonary infections (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.48, 95%CI 0.28 to 0.82, P = 0.007), but not surgical site infections, anastomotic leaks, and postoperative complications. However, ERAS significantly increased readmissions (RR 2.43, 95%CI 1.09 to 5.43, P = 0.03). The quality of evidence was low to moderate for all outcomes. Implementation of an ERAS protocol may reduce LOS, costs, and time to return of function after gastric cancer surgery compared to conventional recovery. However, ERAS may increase the number of postoperative readmissions, albeit with no impact on the rate of postoperative complications.

Multimodal Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program is the Optimal Perioperative Care in Patients Undergoing Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The application of ERAS protocol has widely gained acceptance after gastrointestinal surgery. Well-designed, randomized, control trials are needed to evaluate fully its safety and efficacy in the field of gastric cancer. This study aims to compare the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol and the conventional perioperative care program after totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) in gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with gastric cancer indicated for TLDG were randomly assigned to either the ERAS group or the conventional group. The ERAS protocol included short fasting time, fluid restriction, early oral feeding, immediate mobilization, and use of epidural patient-controlled analgesia. Primary endpoint was recovery time, which was defined with the criteria of tolerable diet, safe ambulation, no requirement of additional analgesics, and afebrile state. Hospital stay, pain score, complications, and readmission rate were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 97 patients who underwent TLDG from October 2012 to August 2014 were enrolled (ERAS = 46, conventional = 51). The ERAS group had faster recovery time (111.6 ± 34.3 vs. 126.7 ± 30.7 h; p = 0.026) and significantly less pain through postoperative days 1-4. Possible hospital stay also was faster in the ERAS group (5.0 ± 1.9 vs. 5.7 ± 1.6 days, p = 0.038), but there was no difference in actual hospital stay. No difference was found in complication, and there was no mortality or readmission in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS is safe and enhances postoperative recovery after TLDG in gastric cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01938313).

Enhanced recovery after surgery in gastric cancer: which are the main achievements from the Italian experience?

In the last years, the concept of 'enhanced recovery after surgery' (ERAS) has become a routine in the perioperative care of patients undergoing colorectal resection. The application of ERAS programs in gastric surgery had a more difficult penetration into clinical practice, mainly for the introduction of radical changes in the traditional postoperative management. The aim of the study was to analyze the rate of compliance to a standardized ERAS protocol in different Italian centers and evaluate the results in terms of postoperative outcomes. From April 2015 to July 2017, a prospective observational study was conducted among seven centers participating in the Italian Group for Research for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG), in patient candidates to elective gastrectomy for cancer. A standardized ERAS perioperative protocol was approved by all centers. Compliance to the protocol was then evaluated and postoperative outcomes (morbidity and mortality rate, duration of hospital stay and readmission rate) were analyzed. Two-hundred and seventy unselected patients operated on for gastric cancer were enrolled. The median age was 73 years; 40.4% of patients were female; 24.1% had a nutritional risk score ≥ 3. Perioperative chemotherapy was used in 23.7% of cases. Total gastrectomy was performed in 57.4% of patients; minimally invasive approach was adopted in 28.1% of patients. Adherence to the protocol varied between 23 and 88% for single items. It was quite low for pre- and intraoperative items, mainly for items related to nutritional care. Postoperative complications occurred in 35.5% of patients, mortality was 0.7%. Median length of hospital stay was 8 days (range 4-72) and the readmission rate was 6.3%. There is a growing attention on the implementation of ERAS protocol for gastric cancer surgery, but several elements of this protocol are still not routinely adopted, among them items regarding nutritional care.

Current status of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in gastrointestinal surgery

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is an evidence-based paradigm shift in perioperative care, proven to lower both recovery time and postoperative complication rates. The role of ERAS in several surgical disciplines was reviewed. In colorectal surgery, ERAS protocol is currently well established as the best care. In gastric surgery, 2014 saw an establishment of ERAS protocol for gastrectomies with resulting meta-analysis showing ERAS effectiveness. ERAS has also been shown to be beneficial in liver surgery with many centers starting implementation. The advantages of ERAS in pancreatic surgery have been strongly established, but there is still a need for large-scale, multicenter randomized trials. Barriers to implementation were analyzed, with recent studies concluding that successful implementation requires a multidisciplinary team, a willingness to change and a clear understanding of the protocol. Additionally, the difficulty in accomplishing necessary compliance to all protocol items calls for new implementation strategies. ERAS success in different patient populations was analyzed, and it was found that in the elderly population, ERAS shortened the length of hospitalization and did not lead to a higher risk of postoperative complications or readmissions. ERAS utilization in the emergency setting is possible and effective; however, certain changes to the protocol may need to be adapted. Therefore, further research is needed. There remains insufficient evidence on whether ERAS actually improves patients’ course in the long term. However, since most centers started to implement ERAS protocol less than 5 years ago, more data are expected.

Application of enhanced recovery after gastric cancer surgery: An updated meta-analysis

AIM

To provide an updated assessment of the safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in elective gastric cancer (GC) surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, World Health Organization International Trial Register, and Cochrane Library were searched up to June 2017 for all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS protocols and standard care (SC) in GC surgery. Thirteen RCTs, with a total of 1092 participants, were analyzed in this study, of whom 545 underwent ERAS protocols and 547 received SC treatment.

RESULTS

No significant difference was observed between ERAS and control groups regarding total complications (P = 0.88), mortality (P = 0.50) and reoperation (P = 0.49). The incidence of pulmonary infection was significantly reduced (P = 0.03) following gastrectomy. However, the readmission rate after GC surgery nearly tripled under ERAS (P = 0.009). ERAS protocols significantly decreased the length of postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.00001) and medical costs (P < 0.00001), and accelerated bowel function recovery, as measured by earlier time to the first flatus (P = 0.0004) and the first defecation (P < 0.0001). Moreover, ERAS protocols were associated with a lower level of serum inflammatory response, higher serum albumin, and superior short-term quality of life (QOL).

CONCLUSION

Collectively, ERAS results in accelerated convalescence, reduction of surgical stress and medical costs, improved nutritional status, and better QOL for GC patients. However, high-quality multicenter RCTs with large samples and long-term follow-up are needed to more precisely evaluate ERAS in radical gastrectomy.

The Impact of Postoperative Enteral Immunonutrition on Postoperative Complications and Survival in Gastric Cancer Patients - Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Immunomodulating enteral nutrition in the perioperative period may reduce postoperative complications in cancer patients. Little is known if this effect translates to the better survival. The aim of study was to assess the impact of postoperative immunomodulating enteral nutrition on postoperative complications and survival of gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

A group of 98 gastric cancer patients was randomly assigned for postoperative immunomodulating enteral nutrition n = 44 (Reconvan, Fresenius Kabi, Bad Homburg, Germany), or standard enteral nutrition n = 54 (Peptisorb, Nutricia, Schipol, The Netherlands). Postoperative complications, mortality, 6-mo and 1-yr survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall postoperative morbidity did not differ between the groups. The rate of pulmonary complications (excluding pneumonia) was significantly lower in immunomodulation group (0% vs 9.3%, p = 0.044), as well as 60-day mortality (0% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.037). There was no difference in 6-mo and 1-yr survival between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative immunomodulating enteral nutrition may reduce respiratory complications and postoperative mortality in comparison to standard enteral nutrition. Despite this effect, it did not improve 6-mo and 1-yr survival in immunomodulation group. Probably the beneficial effect of immunomodulating enteral nutrition is too weak to be significant in such a number of patients.

Is ERAS effective and safe in laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma? A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is still unclear whether enhanced recovery after surgery is effective and safe in laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma.

METHODS

Cochrane library databases, Medline, Embase, and Pubmed were searched from January 1, 1986, to December 31, 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fast-track recovery with conventional recovery strategies in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma were included. The main outcomes measured were postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus, hospital charge, and overall complication rate.

RESULTS

Six RCTs with 400 patients were included in this study. Fast-track surgery has shorter postoperative hospital stays (weighted mean difference (WMD) - 2.65; 95% CI, - 4.01 to - 1.29, z = 3.82, P < 0.01) and less hospitalization expenditure (WMD - 523.43; 95% CI, - 799.79 to - 247.06, z = 3.71, P < 0.01) than conventional recovery strategies. There was no significant difference with respect to duration to first flatus (WMD - 17.72; 95% CI, - 39.46-4.02, z = 1.60, P = 0.11) and complication rate (OR 1.57; 95% CI, 0.82-2.98, z = 1.37, P = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced recovery after surgery is effective and safe and is thus recommended in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma.

Efficacy of fast track surgery in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer:a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of efficacy and security of fast track surgery (FTS) in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Databases and supplemented by other searches to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the comparison of fast track surgery combined with laparoscopy versus laparoscopy separately used in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer before December 2016. After screening for inclusion, data extraction, and quality assessment, meta-analysis was conducted by the Review Manager 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 6 RCTs, involving 464 patients, were included. There were 232 patients in the FTS group and conventional care group separately. Compared with the conventional care group, patients of FTS group had shorter postoperative hospital stay [WMD = -1.85, 95%CI: (-2.60, -1.11), P < .00001], earlier first flatus [WMD = -9.33, 95%CI: (-13.74, -4.91), P < .0001], lower level of C-reactive protein (CRP) at postoperative day 4 [WMD = -13.94, 95%CI: (-22.74, -5.15), P = .002], and less hospitalization fees [SMD = -1.12, 95%CI: (-2.07, -0.18), P = .02]. There were no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, the FTS protocol is safe and effective in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Due to the limitations of our study, further larger and multicenter studies are needed to validate our findings.

Influence of enhanced recovery after surgery programs on laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

Background

This meta-analysis is aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs in gastric cancer patients undergoing laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG).

Methods

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized control trials involving either enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)/fast track surgery (FTS) for patients underwent LAG. EMBASE, Pubmed, Web of science, and Cochrane Library were searched. Primary outcomes included the length of postoperative hospital stay, cost of hospitalization, postoperative complications, and readmission rate.

Results

Five randomized control trials were eligible for analysis. There were 159 cases in FTS group and 156 cases in conventional care group. Compared with conventional care group, FTS group relates to shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD − 2.16; 95% CI − 3.05 to − 1.26, P < 0.00001), less cost of hospitalization (WMD − 4.72; 95% CI − 6.88 to − 2.55, P < 0.00001), shorter time to first flatus (WMD − 9.72; 95% CI − 13.75 to − 5.81, P < 0.00001), lower level of C-reaction protein on postoperative days 3 or 4 (WMD − 19.66; 95% CI − 28.98 to − 10.34, P < 0.00001), higher level of albumin on postoperative day 4 (WMD 3.45; 95% CI 2.01 to 4.89, P < 0.00001), and postoperative day 7 (WMD 5.63; 95% CI 1.01 to 10.24, P = 0.02). Regarding postoperative complications, no significant differences were observed between FTS group and conventional care group (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.09, P = 0.10). The readmission rate of FTS group was comparable to conventional care group (WMD 3.14; 95% CI 0.12 to 81.35, P = 0.49).

Conclusions

Among patients undergoing LAG, FTS is associated with shorter postoperative hospital stay, rapid postoperative recovery, and decreased cost without increasing complications or readmission rate. The combined effects of the two methods could further accelerate clinical recovery of gastric cancer patients.

The application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)/fast-track surgery in gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) with conventional care in gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Search strategy from Pubmed, Embase, Web of science, Cochrane library and reference lists was performed. The collected studies were randomized controlled trials and published only in English, and undergoing ERAS in gastrectomy for gastric cancer from January 1994 to August 2016.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies including 801 patients were included. There were 399 cases in the ERAS and 402 cases in the conventional care groups. Meta-analysis showed that time to first passage of flatus (weighted mean difference (WMD) -14.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) -20.31 to -8.83, p<0.00001), level of C-reaction protein (WMD -19.46; 95 % CI -21.74 to -17.18, p<0.00001) and interleukin-6 (WMD-32.16; 95 % CI -33.86 to -30.46,p<0.00001) on postoperative days, postoperative hospital stay (WMD -1.85; 95 % CI -2.35 to -1.35, p<0.00001), hospital charge (WMD -0.94, 95 % CI, -1.40 to 0.49, p<0.0001) were significantly decreased for ERAS, but increased readmission rates (odds ratio (OR), 3.42, 95 % CI, 1.43 to 8.21, P=0.006). There were no statistically significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, operation time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, duration of foley catheter and postoperative complications (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS is considered to be safe and effective in gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Further larger, multicenter and randomized trials were needed to beresearched.

[Application Effect of Fast Track Surgery for Patients with Lung Cancer: A Meta-analysis]

BACKGROUND

Fast track surgery (FTS) can accelerate rehabilitation and reduce postoperative hospital stay. It has been effectively applied to several surgical diseases. However, the safety and effectiveness of FTS for patients with lung cancer in China is unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of FTS undergoing lung cancer surgery in China.

METHODS

Using home and abroad databases to search all documents required. The deadline of retrieval was January 31, 2016. Then the studies were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were analyzed by RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 clinical controlled trials (CCTs) with 1,241 patients were eligible for analysis. Compared with control group, FTS group can significantly shorten postoperative hospital time (MD=-3.61, 95%CI: -5.05--2.16, P<0.000,01) and chest tube duration (MD=-2.62, 95%CI: -3.07-2.17, P<0.000,01), reduce incidence of postoperative complications (OR=0.30, 95%CI: 0.19-0.47, P<0.000,01) and hospitalization costs (MD=-0.92, 95%CI: -1.19--0.65, P<0.000,01).

CONCLUSIONS

FTS can safely and effectively accelerate the recovery of patients with lung cancer in China, it exhibits important clinical values.

Enhanced recovery pathway in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy: a case-matched study

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery (ER) pathways have improved outcomes across multiple surgical specialties, but reports concerning their application in distal pancreatectomy (DP) are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess compliance with an ER protocol and its impact on short-term outcomes in patients undergoing DP.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were reviewed. One hundred consecutive patients undergoing DP were treated within an ER pathway comprising 18 care elements. Each patient was matched 1:1 with a patient treated with usual perioperative care. Match criteria were age, BMI, ASA score, lesion site, and type of disease.

RESULTS

Adherence to ER items ranged from 15% for intraoperative restrictive fluids to 100% for intraoperative warming, antibiotic and anti-thrombotic prophylaxis. Patients in ER group experienced earlier recovery of gastrointestinal function (2 vs. 3 days, p < 0.001), oral intake (2 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001), and suspension of intravenous infusions (3 vs. 5 days, p < 0.001). Overall morbidity was similar in the two groups (72% vs. 78%). Length of hospital stay (LOS) was reduced in ER patients without postoperative complications (6.7 ± 1.2 vs. 7.6 ± 1.6 days, p = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

An ER pathway for DP yielded an earlier postoperative recovery and shortened LOS in uneventful patients. Postoperative morbidity and readmissions were similar in both groups.

Enhanced recovery protocols for major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

'Fast-track surgery' or 'enhanced recovery protocol' or 'fast-track rehabilitation', incorporating one or more elements of preoperative education, pain relief, early mobilisation, enteral nutrition and growth factors, may improve health-related quality of life and reduce length of hospital stay and costs. The role of enhanced recovery protocols in major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgery is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of enhanced recovery protocols compared with standard care (or usual practice) in major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Cochrane Library; 2015, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Science Citation Index Expanded until March 2015 to identify randomised trials. We also searched the references of included trials to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) performed in people undergoing major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgery, irrespective of language, blinding or publication status for inclusion in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified trials and independently extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models using Review Manager 5, based on available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria for the review, and nine studies provided information on one or more outcomes for the review. A total of 1014 participants were randomly assigned to the enhanced recovery protocol (499 participants) or standard care (515 participants) in the nine RCTs. Most of the trials included low anaesthetic risk participants with high performance status undergoing different upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgeries. Eight trials incorporated more than one element of the enhanced recovery protocol. All of the trials were at high risk of bias. The overall quality of evidence was low or very low.None of the trials reported long-term mortality, medium-term health-related quality of life(three months to one year), time to return to normal activity, or time to return to work. The difference between the enhanced recovery protocol and standard care were imprecise for short-term mortality (enhanced recovery protocol: 4/425 (adjusted proportion = 0.6%); standard care: 1/443 (0.2%); seven trials; 868 participants; RR 2.79; 95% CI 0.44 to 17.73; very low quality evidence), proportion of people with serious adverse events (enhanced recovery protocol: 4/157 (adjusted proportion = 0.6%); standard care: 0/184 (0.0%); two trials; 341 participants; RR 5.57; 95% CI 0.68 to 45.89; very low quality evidence), number of serious adverse events (enhanced recovery protocol: 34/421 (8 per 100 participants); standard care: 46/438 (11 per 100 participants); seven trials; 859 participants; rate ratio 0.72; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.13; very low quality evidence), health-related quality of life (four trials; 373 participants; SMD 0.29; 95% CI -0.04 to 0.62; very low quality evidence) and hospital readmissions (enhanced recovery protocol: 14/355 (adjusted proportion = 3.3%); standard care: 9/378 (2.4%); seven trials; 733 participants; RR 1.4; 95% CI 0.69 to 2.87; very low quality evidence). The enhanced recovery protocol group had a lower proportion of people with mild adverse events (enhanced recovery protocol: 31/254 (adjusted proportion = 10.9%); standard care: 51/271 (18.8%); four trials; 525 participants; RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.85; low quality evidence), fewer number of mild adverse events (enhanced recovery protocol: 69/499 (13 per 100 participants); standard care: 128/515 (25 per 100 participants); nine trials; 1014 participants; rate ratio 0.52; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.70; low quality evidence), shorter length of hospital stay (nine trials; 1014 participants; MD -2.19 days; 95% CI -2.53 to -1.85; low quality evidence) and lower costs (four trials; 282 participants; MD USD -6300; 95% CI -8400 to -4200; low quality evidence) than standard care group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low quality evidence, enhanced recovery protocols may reduce length of hospital stay and costs (primarily because of reduction in hospital stay) in people undergoing major upper gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic surgeries. However, the validity of the results is uncertain because of the risk of bias in the trials and the way the outcomes were measured. Future RCTs should be conducted with low risk of bias, and measure clinically important outcomes for including the three months to one year period.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of enhanced recovery programmes in gastric cancer surgery

This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine the influence of enhanced recovery programmes (ERPs) on outcomes after gastric cancer surgery. Medline, Embase, the Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies on outcomes of gastrectomy in enhanced recovery or fast-track programmes. The primary outcome measure was post-operative duration of hospital stay (LOHS), and secondary outcome measures were selected based inclusion in two or more studies. Statistical analysis was performed using standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) as the summary statistics. Fourteen studies, totalling 1676 patients with gastric cancer were analysed, including nine randomized trials. LOHS was significantly shorter after ERP when compared with control patients (CON, SMD -1.10, 95% confidence interval -1.56 to -0.65, p < 0.001), but with significant heterogeneity between studies (I(2) = 93%, p < 0.001). ERP was also associated with reduced serum inflammatory response (CRP: SMD -0.68 (-1.16 to -0.19), p = 0.007; IL-6: SMD -0.62 (-0.94 to -0.29), p < 0.001), less weight loss (SMD -0.79 (-1.11 to -0.46), p < 0.001), and lower cost (SMD -1.02 (-1.59 to -0.45), p < 0.001), as well as a trend toward shorter duration of intravenous infusion (SMD -2.70 (-5.35 to -0.05), p = 0.05). Inclusion in an ERP was not associated with increased post-operative morbidity (OR 0.83 (0.65 to 1.06), p = 0.13) or hospital readmission (OR 1.67 (0.88 to 3.19), p = 0.12). From this review the authors concluded that multimodal, standardized perioperative gastrectomy care appears feasible, safe and cost effective.