Comparison of recovery and outcome after left and right colectomy

AIM

The present study aimed to compare functional recovery and surgical outcomes after left and right colectomies.

METHOD

Consecutive elective left and right colon resections for benign and malignant indications, performed between 2011 and 2016 and recorded in a prospectively maintained enhanced recovery database, were analysed. Demographic and surgical items, as well as functional recovery and 30-day complications, were compared between left-sided and right-sided colectomies. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify risk factors for postoperative ileus (POI).

RESULTS

In total, 1001 left and 1041 right colectomies were comparable regarding demographic factors; only body mass index (BMI) was higher in patients undergoing left-sided resections (> 30 kg/m² : 33% vs 27%, P = 0.004). Malignancy (29% vs 67%, P < 0.001) and Crohn's disease (1% vs 31%, P < 0.001) were preponderant in right colectomies, whereas diverticular disease (68% vs 1%, P < 0.001) was the most common indication for left colectomy. Compliance with the enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) was comparable. While the minimally invasive approach was the preferred approach for both sides (61% vs 64%, P = 0.158), left colectomies took longer (180 ± 80 min vs 150 ± 70 min, P < 0.001), needed more perioperative fluids (3.1 ± 1.4 l vs 2.7 ± 1.5 l, P < 0.001) and resulted in greater postoperative weight gain (3.9 ± 6.5 kg vs 2.6 ± 6 kg, P = 0.025). Crohn's disease (OR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.27-5.46) and fluid overload (OR = 2.02, 95% CI: 1.06-3.82) were independent risk factors for POI.

CONCLUSION

Despite equal ERP compliance, postoperative ileus was higher after right-sided colectomies. This finding was associated with Crohn's disease and fluid overload.

Impact of enhanced recovery on oncological outcomes following minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncological outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer depend on the quality of surgical and oncological management. Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) have yet to be assessed for their oncological impact when used in combination with minimally invasive surgery. This study assessed outcomes with or without an ERP in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of all consecutive adult patients who underwent elective minimally invasive surgery for primary rectal adenocarcinoma with curative intent between February 2005 and April 2018. Both laparoscopic and robotic procedures were included. Short-term morbidity and overall survival were compared between patients treated according to the institutional ERP and those who received conventional care.

RESULTS

A total of 600 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery, of whom 320 (53·3 per cent) were treated according to the ERP and 280 (46·7 per cent) received conventional care. ERP was associated with less overall morbidity (34·7 versus 54·3 per cent; P < 0·001). Patients in the ERP group had improved overall survival on univariable (91·4 versus 81·7 per cent at 5 years; hazard ratio (HR) 0·53, 95 per cent c.i. 0·28 to 0·99) but not multivariable (HR 0·78, 0·41 to 1·50) analysis. Multivariable analysis revealed age (HR 1·46, 1·17 to 1·82), male sex (HR 1·98, 1·05 to 3·70) and complications (HR 2·23, 1·30 to 3·83) as independent risk factors for compromised overall survival. Disease-free survival was comparable for patients who had ERP or conventional treatment (80·5 versus 84·6 per cent at 5 years respectively; P = 0·272).

CONCLUSION

Treatment within an ERP was associated with a lower morbidity risk that may have had a subtle impact on overall but not disease-specific survival.

Outcomes after implementation of a multimodal standard care pathway for laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to assess which aspects of an enhanced recovery programme are associated with better outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A database of laparoscopic colorectal procedures performed in 2011 was reviewed. Elements of the enhanced recovery programme and compliance were evaluated for short-term (30-day) outcomes. Individual elements included gabapentin, celecoxib, intrathecal analgesia, diet, postoperative fluids, and paracetamol/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug pain management.

RESULTS

Five hundred and forty-one consecutive procedures were included. Compliance with the enhanced recovery programme elements ranged from 82.4 to 99.3 per cent. Median length of hospital stay was 3 (i.q.r. 2-5) days, with 25.9 per cent of patients discharged within 48 h. Patients without complications had a median length of stay of 3 (i.q.r. 2-4) days if compliant and 3 (3-5) days if not (P < 0.001). Low oral opiate intake (oral morphine equivalent of less than 30 mg) (odds ratio (OR) 1.97, 95 per cent confidence interval 1.29 to 3.03; P = 0.002), full compliance (OR 2.36, 1.42 to 3.90; P < 0.001) and high surgeon volume (more than 100 cases per year) (OR 1.50, 1.19 to 1.89; P < 0.001) were associated with discharge within 48 h. Compliance with the elements of oral intake and fluid management in the first 48 h was associated with a reduced rate of complications (8.1 versus 19.6 per cent; P = 0.001). Median oral opiate intake was 37.5 (i.q.r. 0-105) mg in 48 h, with 26.2 per cent of patients receiving no opiates.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with an enhanced recovery pathway was associated with less opiate use, fewer complications and a shorter hospital stay.

Case-matched series of enhanced versus standard recovery pathway in minimally invasive colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Accelerated recovery pathways may reduce length of hospital stay after surgery but there are few data on minimally invasive colorectal operations.

METHODS

An enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) was instituted, including preoperative analgesia, limited intravenous fluids and opiates, and early feeding. Intrathecal analgesia was administered as needed, but epidural analgesia was not used. The first 66 patients subjected to the ERP were case-matched by surgeon, procedure and age (within 5 years) with patients treated previously in a fast-track pathway (FTP). Short-term and postoperative outcomes to 30 days were compared.

RESULTS

Hospital stay was shorter with the ERP than the FTP: median (interquartile range, i.q.r.) 3 (2-3) versus 3 (3-5) days (P < 0·001). A 2-day hospital stay was achieved in 44 and 8 per cent of patients respectively (P < 0·001). Patients in the ERP had a shorter time to recovery of bowel function: median (i.q.r.) 1 (1-2) versus 2 (2-3) days (P < 0·001). Thirty-day complication rates were similar (32 per cent ERP, 27 per cent FTP; P = 0·570). Readmissions within 30 days were more common with ERP, but the difference was not statistically significant (10 versus 5 patients; P = 0·170). Total hospital stay for those readmitted was shorter in the ERP group (18 versus 23 days).

CONCLUSION

ERP decreased the length of hospital stay after minimally invasive colorectal surgery.