Surgical technical evidence review for gynecologic surgery conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery

Application of single-port procedure and ERAS management in the laparoscopic myomectomy

OBJECTIVE

Advances in surgical techniques and perioperative management are the two major contributing factors to improved surgical outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to compare the efficacy of single-port surgery and perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) management in laparoscopic myomectomy.

METHODS

The present study included 120 patients undergoing laparoscopic myomectomy in the Gynecological Ward of Quzhou Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University. According to the traditional perioperative management mode and ERAS management, multi-port and single-port procedures, all patients were assigned to the Conventional-SPLS (Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery with conventional perioperative care) group (n = 34), Conventional-Multi (multi-port laparoscopic surgery with conventional perioperative care) group (n = 47), and ERAS (multi-port laparoscopic surgery with ERAS perioperative care) group (n = 39). The surgical outcomes of the three groups were compared operation time, intraoperative blood loss, variations in postoperative hemoglobin, postoperative walking time, postoperative flatus expelling time, postoperative hospital stay, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores at 6 and 12 h following surgery.

RESULTS

The ERAS group recovered the quickest in terms of postoperative walking time and flatus expelling duration. The ERAS group also recovered the shortest postoperative hospital stay (3.85 ± 1.14 days), which differed significantly from that in the Conventional-Multi group, but not significantly from that in the Conventional-SPLS group. In terms of VAS scores at 6 and 12 h after surgery, the ERAS group had the lowest pain intensity, which differed significantly from that of the other two groups. The effect of surgical procedures or postoperative care on hospital stay was assessed using multiple regression analysis. The results demonstrated that ERAS was an important independent contributor to reducing postoperative hospital stay (β = 0.270, p = 0.002), while single-port surgery did not affect this index (β = 0.107, p = 0.278).

CONCLUSION

In laparoscopic myomectomy, perioperative ERAS management could control postoperative pain and shorten hospital stay. Single-port surgery could speed up the recovery of gastrointestinal function and postoperative walking time, but it did not affect postoperative pain management or the length of hospital stay. Thus, the most effective approach to improving postoperative outcomes in laparoscopic myomectomy was the application of perioperative ERAS management.

Cost analysis of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol applied in advanced ovarian cancer: A secondary outcome of the PROFAST trial

INTRODUCTION

A randomised trial implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for high complexity advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) surgery (PROFAST) demonstrated a reduction of median length of stay and hospital readmissions when compared to patients managed conventionally. One secondary objective was to determine if an ERAS pathway in the perioperative management of advanced ovarian cancer patients led to cost savings.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Secondary objective of a prospective randomised trial of patients with suspected or diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer allocated to conventional or ERAS perioperative management, carried out at a referral centre from June 2014 to March 2018. Treatment was determined by a computer-generated random allocation system.

METHODS

Gross counting was employed to estimate the cost of hospitalisation in wards, intensive care unit (ICU) and surgical care, while micro-costing was used to obtain image and laboratory test costs. Mean costs between trial arms were considered. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients (n = 50 ERAS group, n = 49 Conventional group) were included. Mean costs per patient were 10,719€ in the ERAS group and 11,028€ in the conventional group, leading to an average saving of 309€ per patient. These results were based on 96 patients, excluding 3 extreme outliers mainly related with very high ICU costs. Savings, which were significant for hospital ward costs (-33% total; 759€ per patient in first hospitalisation, and 914€ per partient/day of readmission) were found as robust in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an ERAS pathway leads to cost savings when compared to conventional management after AOC surgery.

AUGS-IUGA Joint Clinical Consensus Statement on Enhanced Recovery After Urogynecologic Surgery: Developed by the Joint Writing Group of the International Urogynecological Association and the American Urogynecologic Society. Individual writing group members are noted in the Acknowledgements section

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) evidence-based protocols for perioperative care can lead to improvements in clinical outcomes and cost savings. This article aims to present consensus recommendations for the optimal perioperative management of patients undergoing urogynecological surgery.

METHODS

A review of meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials, large nonrandomized studies, and review articles was conducted via PubMed and other databases for ERAS and urogynecological surgery. ERAS protocol components were established, and then quality of the evidence was both graded and used to form consensus recommendations for each topic. These recommendations were developed and endorsed by the writing group, which is comprised of the American Urogynecologic Society and the International Urogynecological Association members.

RESULTS

All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented accordingly. The components of ERAS with a high level of evidence to support their use include fasting for 6 h and taking clear fluids up to 2 h preoperatively, euvolemia, normothermia, surgical site preparation, antibiotic and antithrombotic prophylaxis, strong antiemetics and dexamethasone to reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting, multimodal analgesia and restrictive use of opiates, use of chewing gum to reduce ileus, removal of catheter as soon as feasible after surgery and avoiding systematic use of drains/vaginal packs.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base and recommendations for a urogynecology-relevant ERAS perioperative care pathway are presented in this consensus review. There are several elements of ERAS with strong evidence of benefit in urogynecological surgery.

Early and Standard Urinary Catheter Removal After Gynecological Surgery for Benign Lesions: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Patients undergoing gynecological surgery commonly receive indwelling transurethral Foley catheters, however duration of catheterization is associated with risk of urinary tract infections and other adverse effects. Early removal of catheters is encouraged, however optimal timing postsurgery remains unclear. This quasi-experimental study compared outcomes for women after removal of a Foley catheter at two different times following benign gynecological surgery. Participants received either early catheter removal, within 6 hours of surgery (n = 38) or standard catheter removal, within 12 to 24 hours of surgery (n = 45). There were no significant differences in outcomes for discomfort scores or re-catheterization rates between groups. However, the early removal group had a significantly shorter time to first ambulation and shorter hospital stays. Early removal of Foley catheters in patients who underwent gynecological surgery did not increase adverse events. Early removal of catheters after gynecological surgery may decrease re-catheterization rates and increase patient satisfaction.

Cancer prehabilitation—a short review

Cancer prehabilitation uses the pretreatment time period to prevent a treatment-related functional decline and its subsequent consequences, and therefore occurs between the time of cancer diagnosis and the beginning of acute cancer treatment. This intervention has been shown to improve functional status, physical and psychological health outcomes and decrease overall health care costs. Currently there are several unimodal and one multimodal cancer prehabilitation regimens. Unimodal cancer prehabilitation includes exercise only, and multimodal cancer prehabilitation regimens are combinations of different interventions such as exercise, patient information and education, nutrition, psychologic counseling such as psycho-oncology, smoking cessation and reduction of alcohol consumption. Both approaches have the goal to improve physical capacity and mental health and to enable cancer patients to cope with the upcoming stress of the specific cancer-related treatment they need. Furthermore, cancer prehabilitation can support cancer patients to better participate in cancer rehabilitation after cancer treatment and maintain their ability to engage in premorbid activities. A growing body of scientific evidence confirms the importance of cancer prehabilitation. Further research is needed to study effectiveness and efficiency as well as clinical aspects of unimodal and multimodal cancer prehabilitation interventions.

Implementing ERAS: how we achieved success within an anesthesia department

Background

The Massachusetts General Hospital is a large, quaternary care institution with 58 operating rooms, 164 anesthesiologists, 76 certified nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), an anesthesiology residency program that admits 25 residents annually, and 35 surgeons who perform laparoscopic, vaginal, and open hysterectomies. In March of 2018, our institution launched an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing hysterectomy. To implement the anesthesia bundle of this pathway, an intensive 14-month educational endeavor was created and put into effect. There were no subsequent additional educational interventions.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed records of 2570 patients who underwent hysterectomy between October 2016 and March 2020 to determine adherence to the anesthesia bundle of the ERAS Hysterectomy pathway. RESULTS: Increased adherence to the four elements of the anesthesia bundle (p < 0.001) was achieved during the intervention period. Compliance with the pathway was sustained in the post-intervention period despite no additional actions.

Conclusions

Implementing the anesthesia bundle of an ERAS pathway in a large anesthesia group with diverse providers successfully occurred using implementation science-based approach of intense interventions, and these results were maintained after the intervention ceased.

When to Remove the Indwelling Catheter After Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy? CARESS (CAtheter REmoval after Sacrocolpopexy Surgery)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine the best practice guidelines regarding the use of indwelling catheters after minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

METHODS

Multicenter (3 sites) randomized control trial comparing the standard overnight indwelling urethral catheterization (group 2) with removal of catheter immediately after surgery (group 1). Our primary outcome is the need for recatheterization. Secondary outcomes include the number of patients discharged with a catheter, length of hospital stay, number of urinary tract infections, patient satisfaction/pain scores, and whether patients would use the same treatment again.

RESULTS

There were 32 patients (43.8%) in group 1 and 41 patients (56.2%) in group 2. On average, patients in group 1 required straight catheterization 0.8 (SD = 0.9) times versus 0.6 (SD = 0.9) times for group 2 (P = 0.239). The number of days with a catheter between the 2 groups was not statistically significant. There was no statistical significance between group 1 and group 2 in terms of operative time, times to leave the operating room, and hospital. Zero patients in group 1 and 2 patients in group 2 had a urinary tract infection. After dividing the groups based on whether or not they underwent a transvaginal tape procedure, the final results were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not observe a difference in the risk of recatheterization or discharge home with a urinary catheter between the 2 groups. Addition of transvaginal tape to sacrocolpopexy did not show a difference in the risk of recatheterization. One reason for the lack of difference between the 2 groups could be due to a lack of power in our study.

Recovery expectancies impact postdischarge recovery 42 days after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine if recovery expectancies were associated with actual postdischarge recovery after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

METHODS

Study subjects (N = 167) undergoing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy were asked to preoperatively predict the likelihood of a prolonged postdischarge recovery (> 42 days). Low, medium, and high recovery expectancy groups were created from responses to the likelihood of prolonged postdischarge recovery question. Previously established predictors of actual recovery 42 days after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy included age, body mass index, Charlson co-morbidity index, short form (SF)-36 bodily pain scores, doctors' and others' health locus of control, and sick role investment. One parsimonious hierarchical linear and logistic regression model was constructed to determine if preoperative recovery expectancies were independently associated with PSR13 scores and "significant" postdischarge recovery after controlling for previously established predictors.

RESULTS

Study subjects with high recovery expectancies had higher PSR13 scores than subjects with low recovery expectancies (82.32 ± 15.34 vs 73.30 ± 15.30, mean difference 9.01, 95%CI 1.08-16.94). Study subjects with low recovery expectancies scored 7.7 points lower on the PSR13 scale (minimally important difference = 5), which translated into a 73% reduction in the likelihood of being "significantly" recovered 42 days after surgery, after controlling for previously established predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

A low recovery expectancy has a negative impact on actual recovery 42 days after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Our findings are important because preoperative recovery expectancies are modifiable predictors, making them a candidate for an expectancy manipulation intervention designed to optimize recovery after pelvic reconstructive surgery.

High-intensity interval training in the prehabilitation of cancer patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on health-related outcome parameters in the prehabilitation of patients diagnosed with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on HIIT in cancer prehabilitation conducted by screening standard databases from their inception to March 30, 2020. Outcomes of interest included cardiorespiratory fitness, feasibility, safety, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 855 identified studies, 8 articles met the inclusion criteria (7 randomized, 1 non-randomized controlled trial) with a total of 896 patients. The study protocols were heterogeneous, but the methodological quality ranged from good to high according to PEDro scale. Meta-analysis revealed a significant improvement of peak oxygen consumption (VO₂peak) achieved with HIIT compared to usual care. Furthermore, HIIT was feasible and safe, showing low risk of adverse events and positive effects on health-related outcomes in prehabilitative settings.

CONCLUSION

In the phase of prehabilitation, HIIT has potential health benefits in patients diagnosed with cancer and is feasible and safe to perform. Nonetheless, larger randomized controlled trials focusing on long-term effects (such as cancer recurrence or survival rates) are missing, to underline the potential relevance of HIIT for cancer patients.

A systematic review comparing early with late removal of indwelling urinary catheters after pelvic organ prolapse surgery

BACKGROUND

An indwelling catheter is routinely used after pelvic organ prolapse surgery to prevent urinary retention. However, the timing of catheter removal remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the optimal timing of catheter removal following prolapse surgery.

METHODS

Electronic databases including the Cochrane Center Controlled Test Center, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science and CNKI were searched up to January 2010. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different timings of catheter removal after prolapse surgery were eligible. Results from RCTs comparing early versus late removal were pooled, and different durations of catheterization were divided into three sub-comparisons (≤ 2 days versus > 2 days; ≤ 1 day versus 2 days; < 1 day versus 1 day). Primary outcomes were urinary tract infection (UTI) and re-catheterization. Secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs with 964 women were involved in the analysis. Early catheter removal was associated with a reduced incidence of UTI (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.9) but an increased risk of re-catheterization (RR 2.67, 95% CI 1.6 to 4.48). Significant differences in primary outcomes were found in the sub-comparison of ≤ 2 days versus > 2 days. Three of six trials found a significantly shorter length of hospital stay in the early removal group. The results for postoperative pain were mixed.

CONCLUSION

Among patients following pelvic organ prolapse surgery, early catheter removal is preferred. Moreover, the timing for removal is preferably within 2 days postoperatively.

Use of bowel preparation does not reduce postoperative infectious morbidity following minimally invasive or open hysterectomies

BACKGROUND

Literature on the use of bowel preparation in gynecologic surgery is scarce and limited to minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. The decision on the use of bowel preparation before benign or malignant hysterectomies is mostly driven by extrapolating data from the colorectal literature.

OBJECTIVE

Bowel preparation is a controversial element within enhanced recovery protocols, and literature investigating its efficacy in gynecologic surgery is scarce. Our aim was to determine if mechanical bowel preparation alone, oral antibiotics alone, or a combination are associated with decreased rates of surgical site infections or anastomotic leaks compared to no bowel preparation following benign or malignant hysterectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified women who underwent hysterectomy between January 2006 and July 2017 using OptumLabs, a large US commercial health plan database. Inverse propensity score weighting was used separately for benign and malignant groups to balance baseline characteristics. Primary outcomes of 30-day surgical site infection, anastomotic leaks, and major morbidity were assessed using multivariate logistic regression that adjusted for race, census region, household income, diabetes, and other unbalanced variables following propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

A total of 224,687 hysterectomies (benign, 186,148; malignant, 38,539) were identified. Median age was 45 years for the benign and 54 years for the malignant cohort. Surgical approach was as follows: benign: laparoscopic/robotic, 27.2%; laparotomy, 32.6%; vaginal, 40.2%; malignant: laparoscopic/robotic, 28.8%; laparotomy, 47.7%; vaginal, 23.5%. Bowel resection was performed in 0.4% of the benign and 2.8% of the malignant cohort. Type of bowel preparation was as follows: benign: none, 93.8%; mechanical bowel preparation only, 4.6%; oral antibiotics only, 1.1%; mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, 0.5%; malignant: none, 87.2%; mechanical bowel preparation only, 9.6%; oral antibiotics only, 1.8%; mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, 1.4%. Use of bowel preparation did not decrease rates of surgical site infections, anastomotic leaks, or major morbidity following benign or malignant hysterectomy. Among malignant abdominal hysterectomies, there was no difference in the rates of infectious morbidity between mechanical bowel preparation alone, oral antibiotics alone, or mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, compared to no preparation.

CONCLUSION

Bowel preparation does not protect against surgical site infections or major morbidity following benign or malignant hysterectomy, regardless of surgical approach, and may be safely omitted.

Optimizing Preanesthesia Care for the Gynecologic Patient

In the past, best practices for perioperative management have been based as much on dogma as science. The creation of optimized perioperative pathways, known as enhanced recovery after surgery, has been shown to simultaneously improve patient outcomes and reduce cost. In this article, we critically review interventions (and omission of interventions) that should be considered by every surgical team to optimize preanesthesia care. This includes patient education, properly managing existing medical comorbidities, optimizing nutrition, and the use of medications before incision that have been shown to reduce surgical stress, opioid requirements, and postoperative complications. Anesthetic techniques, the use of adjunct medications administered after incision, and postoperative management are beyond the scope of this review. When possible, we have relied on randomized trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews to support our recommendations. In some instances, we have drawn from the general and colorectal surgery literature if evidence in gynecologic surgery is limited or of poor quality. In particular, hospital systems should aim to adhere to antibiotic and thromboembolic prophylaxis for 100% of patients, the mantra, "nil by mouth after midnight" should be abandoned in favor of adopting a preoperative diet that maintains euvolemia and energy stores to optimize healing, and bowel preparation should be abandoned for patients undergoing gynecologic surgery for benign indications and minimally invasive gynecologic surgery.

Comprehensive functional exercises with patient education for the prevention of venous thrombosis after major gynecologic surgery: A randomized controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the functional exercises of deep breathing and lower limb motions for the prevention of venous thrombosis in patients undergoing major surgery for gynecologic malignancy.

METHODS

All eligible patients admitted to the gynecologic oncology unit were randomized into the study and control groups. A comprehensive set of functional exercises was provided to the study group under the instruction and supervision of medical staff. All patients received pre- and postoperative educational material, followed by questionnaires about the patient's perception and satisfaction of the material, and all indicated prophylactic medications were administered.

RESULTS

In total, 132 patients were randomized, and 62 and 53 patients in the study and control groups, respectively, were included in the final analysis. Venous thrombosis, identified by symptoms and/or postoperative ultrasound, was found in 9 (17.0%) and 2 (3.2%) patients in the control and study groups, respectively, which was significantly different (p = 0.012), and most of these instances (9/11, 81.8%) were intramuscular vein thrombosis. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was not significantly different (1 [1.9%] versus 1 [1.6%]) between the two groups. In the regression model, functional exercise was the only factor associated with venous thrombosis (odds ratio 0.170, 95% confidence interval 0.035-0.815, p = 0.032) adjusted with diagnosis and surgical parameters. The detailed educational material had improved the perception and satisfaction of patients about the prevention of VTE.

CONCLUSION

In a phase 3, single-center randomized controlled study, a comprehensive set of functional exercises combining deep breathing and lower limb motions would significantly decrease the risk of venous thrombosis in patients undergoing major surgery for gynecologic malignancy, especially the risk of intravascular thrombosis.