Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
https://bjan-sba.org/journal/rba/article/doi/10.1016/j.bjane.2018.01.007
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
Scientific Article

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol versus conventional perioperative care in colorectal surgery. A single center cohort study

Aceleração da recuperação após protocolo cirúrgico versus cuidados perioperatórios convencionais em cirurgia colorretal. Um estudo de coorte em centro único

Javier Ripollés-Melchor; María Luisa de Fuenmayor Varela; Susana Criado Camargo; Pablo Jerez Fernández; Álvaro Contreras del Barrio; Eugenio Martínez-Hurtado; Rubén Casans-Francés; Alfredo Abad-Gurumeta; José Manuel Ramírez-Rodríguez; José María Calvo-Vecino

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2018.01.007 Braz J Anesthesiol, vol.68, n4, p.358-368, 2018
PDF English
PDF Português
Downloads: 0
Views: 769

Abstract

Abstract Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols consist of a set of perioperative measures aimed at improving patient recovery and decreasing length of stay and postoperative complications. We assess the implementation and outcomes of an ERAS program for colorectal surgery. Methods Single center observational study. Data were collected from consecutive patients undergoing open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery during 2 time periods, 3 years before (Pre-ERAS) and 2 years after (Post-ERAS) the implementation of an ERAS protocol. Baseline characteristics of both groups were compared. The primary outcome was the number of patients with 180 days follow-up with moderate or severe complications; secondary outcomes were postoperative length of stay, and specific complications. Data were extracted from patient records. Results There were 360 patients in the Pre-ERAS group and 319 patients in the Post-ERAS Group. 214 (59.8%) patients developed at least one complication in the pre ERAS group, versus 163 patients in the Post-ERAS group (51.10%). More patients in the Pre-ERAS group developed moderate or severe complications (31.9% vs. 22.26%, p = 0.009); and severe complications (15.5% vs. 5.3%; p < 0.0001). The median length of stay was 13 (17) days in Pre-ERAS Group and 11 (10) days in the Post-ERAS Group (p = 0.034). No differences were found on mortality rates (4.7% vs. 2.5%; p = 0.154), or readmission (6.39% vs. 4.39%; p = 0.31). Overall ERAS protocol compliance in the Post-ERAS cohort was 88%. Conclusions The implementation of ERAS protocol for colorectal surgery was associated with a significantly reduction of postoperative complications and length of stay.

Keywords

Perioperative, Enhanced recovery after surgery, Postoperative complications

Resumo

Resumo Justificativa O protocolo ERAS - do Inglês Enhanced Recovery After Surgery - consiste em um conjunto de medidas perioperatórias destinadas a melhorar a recuperação do paciente e diminuir o tempo de internação e as complicações pós-operatórias. Avaliamos a implantação e os resultados de um protocolo ERAS para cirurgia colorretal. Métodos Estudo observacional em centro único. Os dados foram coletados de pacientes consecutivos submetidos à cirurgia colorretal aberta ou laparoscópica durante dois períodos: três anos antes (pré-ERAS) e dois anos após (pós-ERAS) a implantação de um protocolo ERAS. As características basais de ambos os grupos foram comparadas. O desfecho primário foi o número de pacientes com 180 dias de acompanhamento com complicações moderadas ou graves. Os desfechos secundários foram tempo de internação pós-cirurgia e complicações específicas. Os dados foram extraídos de prontuários dos pacientes. Resultados O grupo pré-ERAS foi composto por 360 pacientes e o grupo pós-ERAS por 319. No grupo pré ERAS, 214 pacientes (59,8%) desenvolveram pelo menos uma complicação versus 163 (51,10%) no grupo pós-ERAS. Um número maior de pacientes do grupo pré-ERAS desenvolveu complicações moderadas ou graves (31,9% vs. 22,26%, p = 0,009); e complicações graves (15,5% vs. 5,3%; p < 0,0001). A mediana do tempo de internação foi de 13 (17) dias no grupo pré-ERAS e de 11 (10) dias no grupo pós-ERAS (p = 0,034). Não houve diferença nas taxas de mortalidade (4,7% vs. 2,5%; p = 0,1554) ou de reinternação (6,39% vs. 4,39%; p = 0,31). A conformidade geral do protocolo ERAS na coorte pós-ERAS foi de 88%. Conclusões A implantação do protocolo ERAS para cirurgia colorretal foi associada a uma redução significativa das complicações pós-operatórias e do tempo de internação.

Palavras-chave

Perioperatório, Aceleração da recuperação pós-operatória, Complicações pós-operatórias

References

Alves A, Panis Y, Mathieu P. Postoperative mortality and morbidity in French patients undergoing colorectal surgery: results of a prospective multicenter study. Arch Surg. 2005;140:278-83.

Longo WE, Virgo KS, Johnson FE. Risk factors for morbidity and mortality after colectomy for colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:83-91.

Tevis SE, Carchman EH, Foley EF. Postoperative ileus-more than just prolonged length of stay?. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19:1684-90.

de Silva S, Ma C, Proulx MC. Postoperative complications and mortality following colectomy for ulcerative colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:972-80.

King PM, Blazeby JM, Ewings P. Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg. 2006;93:300-8.

Lovely JK, Maxson PM, Jacob AK. Case-matched series of enhanced versus standard recovery pathway in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2012;99:120-6.

Keane C, Savage S, McFarlane K. Enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional care in colonic and rectal surgery. ANZ J Surg. 2012;82:697-703.

Wind J, Vlug MS, Hollmann MW. Perioperative strategy in colonic surgery; laparoscopy and/or FAst track multimodal management versus standard care (LAFA trial). BMC Surg. 2006;6:16.

Scott MJ, Baldini G, Fearon KCH. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for gastrointestinal surgery, part 1: pathophysiological considerations. Acta Anesthesiol Scand. 2015;59:1212-31.

Casans Frances R, Ripolles Melchor J, Abad-Gurumeta A. The role of the anesthesiologist in enhanced recovery programs. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2016;63:273-88.

Ripolles Melchor J, Casans Frances R, Abad-Gurumeta A. Spanish survey on enhanced recovery after surgery. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2016;63:376-83.

Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg. 2011;146:571-7.

Boulind CE, Yeo M, Burkill C. Factors predicting deviation from an enhanced recovery programme and delayed discharge after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:e103-10.

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M. STROBE initiative. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg. 2014;12:1495-9.

Nygren J, Thacker J, Carli F. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective rectal/pelvic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(R)) Society recommendations. Clin Nutr. 2012;31:801-16.

Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Schwenk W. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colonic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(R)) Society recommendations. Clin Nutr. 2012;31:783-800.

Apfel CC, Greim CA, Haubitz I. A risk score to predict the probability of postoperative vomiting in adults. Acta Anesthesiol Scand. 1998;42:495-501.

Jammer I, Wickboldt N, Sander M. European Society of Anesthesiology (ESA) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM); European Society of Anesthesiology; European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Standards for definitions and use of outcome measures for clinical effectiveness research in perioperative medicine: European Perioperative Clinical Outcome (EPCO) definitions: a statement from the ESA-ESICM joint taskforce on perioperative outcome measures. Eur J Anesthesiol. 2015;32:88-105.

Tevis SE, Kennedy GD. Postoperative complications: looking forward to a safer future. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2016;29:246-52.

Greco M, Capretti G, Beretta L. Enhanced recovery program in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surg. 2014;38:1531-41.

Ripolles Melchor J, Casans-Frances R, Espinosa A. Goal directed hemodymanic therapy based in esophageal doppler flow parameters: a systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2016;63:384-405.

Brandstrup B, Tønnesen H, Beier-Holgersen R. Effects of intravenous fluid restriction on postoperative complications: comparison of two perioperative fluid regimens: a randomized assessor-blinded multicenter trial. Ann Surg. 2003;238:641-8.

Silva JMJ, de Oliveira AM, Nogueira FA. The effect of excess fluid balance on the mortality rate of surgical patients: a multicenter prospective study. Crit Care. 2013;17:R288.

Rollins KE, Lobo DN. Intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy in elective major abdominal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2016;263:465-76.

Ripolles Melchor J, Chappell D, Aya HD. Fluid therapy recommendations for major abdominal surgery. Via RICA recommendations revisited. Part II: Goal directed hemodynamic therapy. Rationale for optimising intravascular volume. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2017;64:339-47.

The impact of enhanced recovery protocol compliance on elective colorectal cancer resection: results from an international registry. Ann Surg. 2015;261:1153-9.

Navarro LHC, Kramer GC. Goal directed hemodynamic therapy: the time to implement is now. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2016;63:373-5.

Ripolles Melchor J, Espinosa A. Goal directed fluid therapy controversies in non-cardiac surgery. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2014;61:477-80.

Messenger DE, Curtis NJ, Jones A. Factors predicting outcome from enhanced recovery programmes in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:2050-71.

Moonesinghe SR, Mythen MG, Grocott MPW. High-risk surgery: epidemiology and outcomes. Anesth Analg. 2011;112:891-901.

Simpson JC, Moonesinghe SR, Grocott MPW. National Enhanced Recovery Partnership Advisory Board. Enhanced recovery from surgery in the UK: an audit of the enhanced recovery partnership programme 2009-2012. Br J Anesth. 2015;115:560-8.

Veziant J, Raspado O, Entremont A. Large-scale implementation of enhanced recovery programs after surgery. A francophone experience. J Visc Surg. 2017;154:159-66.

Maessen J, Dejong CH, Hausel J. A protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection. Br J Surg. 2007;94:224-31.

Phan TD, Kluger R, Wan C. Minimally invasive cardiac output monitoring: agreement of oesophageal Doppler, LiDCOrapid and Vigileo FloTrac monitors in non-cardiac surgery. Anesth Intensive Care. 2016;44:382-90.

5dcc2cdd0e8825a77cbf58f1 rba Articles
Links & Downloads
2352-2291 (Electronic) 0104-0014 (Printed)
Braz J Anesthesiol ©2024 All rights reserved.

Braz J Anesthesiol

Share this page
Page Sections