Laparoscopic Radical Gastrectomy for Resectable Advanced Gastric Cancer Within Enhanced Recovery Programs: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Guidelines and Hospital Length of Stay, Readmission, Complications, and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance

A comprehensive review of the evidence exploring the outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines has not been completed.

Objective

To evaluate if ERAS guidelines are associated with improved hospital length of stay, hospital readmission, complications, and mortality compared with usual surgical care, and to understand differences in estimates based on study and patient factors.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception until June 2021.

Study Selection

Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened by 2 independent reviewers. Eligible studies were randomized clinical trials that examined ERAS-guided surgery compared with a control group and reported on at least 1 of the outcomes.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were abstracted in duplicate using a standardized data abstraction form. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Risk of bias was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates for each outcome, and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity within each outcome.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcomes were hospital length of stay, hospital readmission within 30 days of index discharge, 30-day postoperative complications, and 30-day postoperative mortality.

Results

Of the 12 047 references identified, 1493 full texts were screened for eligibility, 495 were included in the systematic review, and 74 RCTs with 9076 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies presented data from 21 countries and 9 ERAS-guided surgical procedures with 15 (20.3%) having a low risk of bias. The mean (SD) Reporting on ERAS Compliance, Outcomes, and Elements Research checklist score was 13.5 (2.3). Hospital length of stay decreased by 1.88 days (95% CI, 0.95-2.81 days; I2 = 86.5%; P < .001) and the risk of complications decreased (risk ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.87; I2 = 78.6%; P < .001) in the ERAS group. Risk of readmission and mortality were not significant.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this meta-analysis, ERAS guidelines were associated with decreased hospital length of stay and complications. Future studies should aim to improve implementation of ERAS and increase the reach of the guidelines.

The effect of early oral postoperative feeding on the recovery of intestinal motility after gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Background and aims

Postoperative ileus is a frequent condition, leading to complications and a longer hospital stay. Few studies have demonstrated the benefit of early oral feeding in preventing ileus after gastrointestinal surgery. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of early versus delayed oral feeding on the recovery of intestinal motility, length of hospital stay, and complications.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials, searching PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the ClincalTrials.gov until 31 December 2022. We evaluated the first passage of the stool, the first flatus, complications, length of postoperative stay, and vomiting. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (version 2) for randomized trials and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.

Results

We included 34 studies with a median sample size of 102 participants. With a moderate certainty of the evidence, the early oral feeding may reduce the time taken for the first passage of the stool (MD -0.99 days; CI 95% -1.25, -0.72), the first flatus (MD -0.70 days; CI 95% -0.87, -0.53), and the risk of complications (RR 0.69; CI 95% 0.59-0.80), while with a low certainty of evidence, it may reduce the length of stay (MD -1.31 days; CI 95% -1.59, -1.03). However, early feeding likely does not affect the risk of vomiting (RR 0.90; CI 95% 0.68, 1.18).

Conclusion

This review suggests that early oral feeding after gastrointestinal surgery may lead to a faster intestinal recovery, shorter postoperative stays, and fewer complications. However, careful interpretation is needed due to high heterogeneity and the moderate-to-low quality of evidence. Future studies should focus on the type and starting time of early oral feeding.

The Application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Gastrectomy and Colorectal Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols not only positively affect gastrointestinal surgery outcomes but may also increase the risk of some complications. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the impact of ERAS on the recovery and complications following gastrointestinal surgery. Materials and Methods: Studies published before December 2022 were retrieved from the following databases, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, without limitations of language or race. The endpoints included lung infection, surgical site infection, postoperative ileus, length of hospitalization, urinary tract infection, readmission, anastomotic leakage, and C-reactive protein serum levels. Results: A total of 23 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that there was a decrease in incidence of the lung infection (risk ratio = 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.74, P = .002) and postoperative length of hospitalization (P < .00001). However, ERAS protocol groups had higher readmission rates, nausea, and vomiting. There was no significant difference in the incidence of anastomotic leakage, ileus, surgical site infection, and urinary tract infection between the experimental and control groups. Conclusions: ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infections, shorten hospital stays, and expedite patient recovery. Furthermore, ERAS protocols are not associated with serious complications following gastrointestinal surgeries.

Enhanced Recovery Protocols Reduce Mortality Across Eight Surgical Specialties at Academic and University-affiliated Community Hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To determine if implementation of a simplified ERP across multiple surgical specialties in different hospitals is associated with improved short and long-term mortality. Secondary aims were to examine ERP effect on length of stay, 30-day readmission, discharge disposition, and complications.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Enhanced recovery after surgery and various derivative ERPs have been successfully implemented. These protocols typically include elaborate sets of multimodal and multidisciplinary approaches, which can make implementation challenging or are variable across different specialties. Few studies have shown if a simplified version of ERP implemented across multiple surgical specialties can improve clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A simplified ERP with 7 key domains (minimally invasive surgical approach when feasible, pre-/intra-operative multimodal analgesia, postoperative multimodal analgesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis, early diet advancement, early ambulation, and early removal of urinary catheter) was implemented in 5 academic and community hospitals within a single health system. Patients who underwent nonemergent, major orthopedic or abdominal surgery including hip/knee replacement, hepatobiliary, colorectal, gynecology oncology, bariatric, general, and urological surgery were included. Propensity-matched, retrospective case-control analysis was performed on all eligible surgical patients between 2014 and 2017 after ERP implementation or in the 12 months preceding ERP implementation (control population).

RESULTS

A total of 9492 patients (5185 ERP and 4307 controls) underwent ERP eligible surgery during the study period. Three thousand three hundred sixty-seven ERP patients were matched by surgical specialty and hospital site to control non-ERP patients. Short and long-term mortality was improved in ERP patients: 30 day: ERP 0.2% versus control 0.6% ( P = 0.002); 1-year: ERP 3.9% versus control 5.1% ( P < 0.0001); 2-year: ERP 6.2% versus control 9.0% ( P < 0.0001). Length of stay was significantly lower in ERP patients (ERP: 3.9 ± 3.8 days; control: 4.8 ± 5.0 days, P < 0.0001). ERP patients were also less likely to be discharged to a facility (ERP: 11.3%; control: 14.8%, P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference for 30-day readmission. All complications except venous thromboembolism were significantly reduced in the ERP population (P < 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

A simplified ERP can uniformly be implemented across multiple surgical specialties and hospital types. ERPs improve short and long-term mortality, clinical outcomes, length of stay, and discharge disposition to home.

The application of enhanced recovery after surgery in minimally invasive gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for patients with gastric cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS).

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, VIP, WanFang, and CBM for relevant RCTs from the database inception until December 2021, for studies that compared the ERAS and traditional care (TC) in MIS for gastric cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 25 RCTs comprising 2809 patients were included in this study. When compared with the traditional care TC group, the ERAS group had a shorter postoperative hospital stay [MD = -1.88,95%CI (-2.22, -1.55), P < 0.00001] and an earlier time at first postoperative flatus [MD = -18.12,95%CI (-21.45,-14.80), P < 0.00001] along with lower medical costs [SMD = -0.64, 95% CI (-0.85, -0.43), P < 0.00001] and an overall reduction in postoperative complication rates [RR = 0.55, 95% CI (0.44, 0.69), P < 0.00001]. However, the difference in the readmission rates    was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS can shorten the postoperative hospital stay, hasten the first postoperative flatus and reduce medical costs and overall postoperative complication rate without increasing readmission rates. Therefore, the ERAS protocol is preferable for gastric cancer patients undergoing MIS.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) versus standard recovery for gastric cancer patients: The evidences and the issues

The significant advances that have been reached, in the last decades, in the treatment of gastric cancer, contributed to the concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) with the aim to reduce the surgical stress, accelerate postoperative recovery, and reduce the length of hospital stay. The most important items included in the ERAS protocols are the pre-operative patient education, early mobilization and immediate oral intake from the first postoperative day. The aim of this narrative review is to focus the attention on the possible advantages of ERAS program on perioperative functional recovery outcomes after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Short-term Outcomes of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery and Conventional Care in Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy (GISSG1901)

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effects of ERAS and conventional programs on short-term outcomes after LDG.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Currently, the ERAS program is broadly applied in surgical areas. Although several benefits of LDG with the ERAS program have been covered, high-level evidence is still limited, specifically in advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

The present study was designed as a randomized, multicenter, unblinded trial. The enrollment criteria included histologically confirmed cT2-4aN0-3M0 gastric adenocarcinoma. Postoperative complications, mortality, readmission, medical costs, recovery, and laboratory outcomes were compared between the ERAS and conventional groups.

RESULTS

Between April 2019 and May 2020, 400 consecutive patients who met the enrollment criteria were enrolled. They were randomly allocated to either the ERAS group (n = 200) or the conventional group (n = 200). After excluding patients who did not undergo surgery or gastrectomy, 370 patients were analyzed. The patient demographic characteristics were not different between the 2 groups. The conventional group had a significantly longer allowed day of discharge and postoperative hospital stay (6.96 vs 5.83 days, P < 0.001; 8.85 vs 7.27 days, P < 0.001); a longer time to first flatus, liquid intake and ambulation (3.37 vs 2.52 days, P < 0.001; 3.09 vs 1.13 days, P < 0.001; 2.85 vs 1.38 days, P < 0.001, respectively); and higher medical costs (6826 vs 6328 $, P = 0.027) than the ERAS group. Additionally, patients in the ERAS group were more likely to initiate adjuvant chemotherapy earlier (29 vs 32 days, P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications or in the mortality or readmission rates. Regarding laboratory outcomes, the procalcitonin and C-reactive protein levels on postoperative day 3 were significantly lower and the hemoglobin levels on postoperative day 5 were significantly higher in the ERAS group than in the conventional group.

CONCLUSION

The ERAS program provides a faster recovery, a shorter postoperative hospitalization length, and lower medical costs after LDG without increasing complication and readmission rates. Moreover, enhanced recovery in the ERAS group enables early initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Enhanced Recovery After Major Gastrectomy for Cancer

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have gained increasing popularity over the past 10 years, and its overarching objectives are to improve perioperative morbidity and reduce postoperative length of stay. Consensus guidelines from the ERAS Society specific to major gastrectomy were published in 2014, however since that time, prospective and retrospective studies have expanded the collective evidence for both the content and efficacy of ERAS pathways for gastrectomy. This objective of this review was to summarize recent data pertinent to the preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative management of gastrectomy patients along an ERAS pathway.

Comparing the surgical outcomes of dual-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and three-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Purpose

Many studies have demonstrated that single-incision or reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is a feasible method compared to conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Using rigid-type laparoscope and right-side approach, we could perform dual-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (DPLDG) for gastric cancer. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of DPLDG to those of 3-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TPLDG).

Methods

From March 2017 to December 2019, this retrospective study included 218 patients with gastric cancer who underwent DPLDG (106 patients) or TPLDG (112 patients) at SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center. Surgical outcomes were compared between 2 operation methods.

Results

Operation time was similar between DPLDG and TPLDG (158.9 ± 33.4 minutes vs. 154.0 ± 31.1 min, P = 0.787). The number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the 2 groups (35.3 ± 14.6 vs. 37.0 ± 13.5, P = 0.415). The complication rate in DPLDG and TPLDG groups was 10.4% and 8.9%, respectively (P = 0.894). The time to first flatus, time to first diet, and postoperative hospital stay were similar between the 2 groups. There were no reoperation or mortality cases. The cost of trocars was 359.9 US dollars (USD) in DPLDG and 291–391.4 USD in TPLDG.

Conclusion

The surgical outcomes of DPLDG and TPLDG did not differ. Regarding fewer incisions, DPLDG can be an alternative option for TPLDG.

Critically ill patients with cancer: A clinical perspective

Cancer patients account for 15% of all admissions to intensive care unit (ICU) and 5% will experience a critical illness resulting in ICU admission. Mortality rates have decreased during the last decades because of new anticancer therapies and advanced organ support methods. Since early critical care and organ support is associated with improved survival, timely identification of the onset of clinical signs indicating critical illness is crucial to avoid delaying. This article focused on relevant and current information on epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of the main clinical disorders experienced by critically ill cancer patients.

Global updates in the treatment of gastric cancer: a systematic review. Part 2: perioperative management, multimodal therapies, new technologies, standardization of the surgical treatment and educational aspects

Gastric cancer is the fifth malignancy and the third cause of cancer death worldwide, according to the global cancer statistics presented in 2018. Its definition and staging have been revised in the eight edition of the AJCC/TNM classification, which took effect in 2018. Novel molecular classifications for GC have been recently established and the process of translating these classifications into clinical practice is ongoing. The cornerstone of GC treatment is surgical, in a context of multimodal therapy. Surgical treatment is being standardized, and is evolving according to new anatomical concepts and to the recent technological developments. This is leading to a massive improvement in the use of mini-invasive techniques. Mini-invasive techniques aim to be equivalent to open surgery from an oncologic point of view, with better short-term outcomes. The persecution of better short-term outcomes also includes the optimization of the perioperative management, which is being implemented on large scale according to the enhanced recovery after surgery principles. In the era of precision medicine, multimodal treatment is also evolving. The long-time-awaited results of many trials investigating the role for preoperative and postoperative management have been published, changing the clinical practice. Novel investigations focused both on traditional chemotherapeutic regimens and targeted therapies are currently ongoing. Modern platforms increase the possibility for further standardization of the different treatments, promote the use of big data and open new possibilities for surgical learning. This systematic review in two parts assesses all the current updates in GC treatment.

Clinical Pathways for Oncological Gastrectomy: Are They a Suitable Instrument for Process Standardization to Improve Process and Outcome Quality for Patients Undergoing Gastrectomy? A Retrospective Cohort Study

(1) Background: Oncological gastrectomy requires complex multidisciplinary management. Clinical pathways (CPs) can potentially facilitate this task, but evidence related to their use in managing oncological gastrectomy is limited. This study evaluated the effect of a CP for oncological gastrectomy on process and outcome quality. (2) Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing oncological gastrectomy before (n = 64) or after (n = 62) the introduction of a CP were evaluated. Assessed parameters included catheter and drain management, postoperative mobilization, resumption of diet and length of stay. Morbidity, mortality, reoperation and readmission rates were used as indicators of outcome quality. (3) Results: Enteral nutrition was initiated significantly earlier after CP implementation (5.0 vs. 7.0 days, p < 0.0001). Readmission was more frequent before CP implementation (7.8% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.05). Incentive spirometer usage increased following CP implementation (100% vs. 90.6%, p = 0.11). Mortality, morbidity and reoperation rates remained unchanged. (4) Conclusions: After implementation of an oncological gastrectomy CP, process quality improved, while indicators of outcome quality such as mortality and reoperation rates remained unchanged. CPs are a promising tool to standardize perioperative care for oncological gastrectomy.

Enhanced recovery after surgery for gastric cancer (ERAS-GC): optimizing patient outcome

Significant advances were achieved, in last decades, in the management of surgical patients with gastric cancer. This has led to the concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) with the objective of reducing the length of hospital stay, accelerating postoperative recovery and reducing the surgical stress. The ERAS protocols have many items, including the pre-operative patient education, early mobilization and feeding starting from the first postoperative day. This review aims to highlight possible advantages on postoperative functional recovery outcomes after gastrectomy in patients undergoing an ERAS program, current lack of evidences and future perspectives.

The application of enhanced recovery after surgery for upper gastrointestinal surgery: Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has made great progress in the field of surgery, the guidelines point to the lack of high-quality evidence in upper gastrointestinal surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials in four electronic databases that involved ERAS protocols for upper gastrointestinal surgery were searched through December 12, 2018. The primary endpoints were lung infection, urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, postoperative anastomotic leakage and ileus. The secondary endpoints were postoperative length of stay, the time from end of surgery to first flatus and defecation, and readmission rates. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that there was a decrease in rates of lung infection (RR = 0.50, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.75), postoperative length of stay (MD = -2.53, 95%CI: - 3.42 to - 1.65), time until first postoperative flatus (MD = -0.64, 95%CI: - 0.84 to - 0.45) and time until first postoperative defecation (MD = -1.10, 95%CI: - 1.74 to - 0.47) in patients who received ERAS, compared to conventional care. However, other outcomes were not significant difference. There was no significant difference between ERAS and conventional care in rates of urinary tract infection (P = 0.10), surgical site infection (P = 0.42), postoperative anastomotic leakage (P = 0.45), readmissions (P = 0.31) and ileus (P = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infection and accelerating patient recovery time. Nevertheless, we should also consider further research ERAS should be performed undergoing gastrectomy and esophagectomy.

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.

Application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in radical gastrectomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the safety and efficiency of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in radical gastrectomy.

METHODS

Studies published before February 2019 were searched from EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Quanfang databases without language and region restrictions. A total of 15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 1216 participants were included in the analysis, of whom 605 underwent ERAS protocol and 611 received traditional perioperative treatment for radical gastrectomy.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in pulmonary infection (p=0.02) after radical gastrectomy. Further, there was a significant decrease in the length of postoperative hospital days (p<0.00001), first passage time of defection and flatus (p<0.00001), and medical cost (p<0.0001) in the group that received the ERAS protocol. However, the ERAS protocol group had a higher risk for readmission (p=0.007), vomiting (p=0.002) and gastric retention (p=0.0003) compared with the traditional treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocol application for radical gastrectomy accelerated postoperative recovery, shortened postoperative hospital days and first passage time of defection and flatus, and saved on medical costs, and did not increase the occurrence rate of severe complications.

Association Between Compliance to an Enhanced Recovery Protocol and Outcome After Elective Surgery for Gastric Cancer. Results from a Western Population-Based Prospective Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

The association between compliance to an enhanced recovery protocol (ERAS) and outcome after surgery for gastric cancer has been poorly investigated, particularly in Western patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the rate of adherence to the ERAS program was correlated with outcome and time of discharge.

METHODS

A prospective, observational, multicenter study was designed to be performed at Italian referral centers for gastric surgery. The protocol was discussed and approved by the Italian Research Group on Gastric Cancer. Twenty-three ERAS domains were applied. A multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between ERAS compliance and overall and major complication rates. The Poisson regression model (measured as mean ratios) was used to assess the association of ERAS compliance rate and length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Eight centers participated and 290 subjects with a median age of 73 years were enrolled. The overall rates of adherence to pre-, intra-, and postoperative ERAS items were 69.8%, 60.3%, and 82.5%, respectively. At the multivariate model, there was an association between overall rate of morbidity and an overall ERAS compliance rate greater than 70% (OR 0.413; 95% CI 0.235-0.7240; P 0.002). A similar association was found for major complications (OR 0.328; 95% CI 0.151-0.709; P 0.005). The Poisson regression showed that in patients with ERAS compliance rate >70%, LOS was reduced of approximately 20% (mean ratio 0.812; 95% CI 0.694-0.950; P 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest a moderate compliance to an ERAS program and a significant association between adherence and outcomes.

The efficacy and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program in laparoscopic digestive system surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program has been applied to a variety of surgeries. However, the efficacy and safety of the ERAS program in laparoscopic digestive system surgery remain unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the ERAS program and traditional perioperative care (TPC) in laparoscopic digestive system surgery.

METHODS

We searched five electronic databases for eligible trials. STATA version 14.0 and Revman version 5.3 were used to analyze the data. The results were presented and analyzed by weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) at their 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Twenty-five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 2219 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The results revealed that the postoperative hospital stay (PHS) (WMD: 2.13 day, 95% CI: 2.56 to -1.70, p = 0.000), time to first flatus (WMD: 12.68 h, 95% CI: 15.95 to -9.41, p = 0.000), and time to defecation (WMD: 34.35 h, 95% CI: 46.82 to -21.88, p = 0.000) were significantly shorter in the ERAS group compared to the TPC group. Additionally, the overall postoperative complication rate (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.88, p = 0.000) was markedly lower in patients using the ERAS program.

CONCLUSION

The results indicated that the ERAS program is associated with faster postoperative rehabilitation, shorter PHS, and better postoperative complication rates. The use of the ERAS program for laparoscopic digestive system surgery is more effective and safe than TPC, and it should be recommended. (PROSPERO registration number:CRD42018118551).

Enhanced recovery versus conventional care in gastric cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been successfully integrated into peri-operative management of different cancer surgeries such as colorectal cancer. Their value for gastric cancer surgery, however, remains uncertain.

METHODS

A search for randomized and observational studies comparing ERAS versus conventional care in gastric cancer surgery was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses with inverse variance weighting were conducted, and quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale (PROSPERO: CRD42017080888).

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies involving 2686 patients were included. ERAS was associated with reduced length of hospital stay (WMD-2.47 days, 95% CI - 3.06 to - 1.89, P < 0.00001), time to flatus (WMD-0.70 days, 95% CI - 1.02 to - 0.37, P < 0.0001), and hospitalization costs (WMD-USD$ 4400, 95% CI - USD$ 5580 to - USD$ 3210, P < 0.00001), with consistent results across open and laparoscopic surgery. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day mortality were similar, although a higher rate of readmission was observed in the ERAS group (RR = 1.95, 95% CI 1.03-3.67, P = 0.04). Patients in the ERAS arm had significantly attenuated C-reactive protein levels on days 3/4 and 7, interleukin-6 levels on days 1, and 3/4, and tumor necrosis factor-α levels on days 3/4 postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Compared to conventional care, ERAS reduces hospital stay, costs, surgical stress response and time to return of gut function, without increasing post-operative morbidity in gastric cancer surgery. However, precaution is necessary to reduce the increased risk of hospital readmission when adopting ERAS.

Integrating perioperative medicine with anaesthesia in India: Can the best be achieved? A review

Integrating perioperative medicine with anaesthesia is the need of the hour. Evolution of a new superspeciality called perioperative anaesthesia can improve surgical outcomes by quality perioperative care and guarantee imminent escalation of influence and power for anaesthesiologists. All original peer-reviewed manuscripts pertaining to surgery-specific perioperative surgical home models involving preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative initiatives spanning the past 5 years have been reviewed using PubMed and Google Scholar. Whether the perioperative surgical home model is feasible or still a distant dream in the Indian perspective has been analysed.

Practicality and short-term outcomes of intracorporeal gastroduodenostomy in totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A single-centre retrospective study

Objective:

Totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) with intracorporeal anastomosis is feasible because of improved approaches to laparoscopic surgery and the availability of a variety of surgical instruments. This study was designed to evaluate the practicality, safety and short-term operative outcomes of intracorporeal gastroduodenostomy in TLDG for gastric cancer.

Materials and Methods:

Medical records of patients with primary distal gastric cancer undergoing Billroth I (B-I) (n = 37) or B-II anastomosis (n = 41) in TLDG from February 2010 to November 2015 were retrospectively analysed. Perioperative data including the extent of lymph node dissection, number of stapler cartridges used, time required to create the anastomosis, operative time, estimated blood loss, proximal and distal margin length, and number of lymph nodes harvested were collected. Short-term post-operative outcomes evaluated during the initial 30 days after surgery included time to first flatus and earliest liquid consumption, length of post-operative hospital stay and incidence of post-operative complications.

Results:

B-I anastomosis was mainly applied to patients with carcinoma in the lower third of the gastric body (B-I, 81.08% vs. B-II, 31.71%; P < 0.001). Mean operating (B-I, 153.57 ± 18.25 min vs. B-II, 120.17 ± 11.74 min; P = 0.004) and anastomosis (B-I, 31.92 ± 6.10 min vs. B-II, 25.29 ± 3.84 min; P = 0.01) times were significantly longer for B-I anastomosis compared to B-II anastomosis. There were no significant differences in the number of stapler cartridges used, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus and liquid consumption, length of hospital stay or incidence of complications between these groups.

Conclusions:

TLDG with B-I or B-II anastomosis is safe and feasible for gastric cancer. B-II anastomosis may require less time than B-I anastomosis.

Laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: where are we now and where are we going?

INTRODUCTION

Minimally-invasive surgery is gaining increasing popularity for the management of gastric cancer (GC). Areas covered: The authors hereby comprehensively and systematically reviewed the randomized and/or prospective evidence on laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for GC. For early GC located in the distal stomach, various randomized trials have demonstrated the superiority/non-inferiority of LG especially in reducing surgical trauma and enhancing postoperative recovery without compromising surgical safety and oncologic efficacy. For advanced GC, while multicenter large-scale randomized evidence has demonstrated the safety and feasibility of LG by experienced hands, the long-term survival which is to be clarified by several ongoing trials are crucial to determine whether a more widespread application is acceptable. Randomized evidence regarding the application of laparoscopic total or proximal gastrectomy, which is technically challenging, is scarce. Various attempts in modification of the traditional laparoscopic approach to further reduce the trauma have been evaluated, such as single-incision and totally LG. LG is becoming increasingly individualized and precise. Expert commentary: The current randomized and/or prospective evidence supports the non-inferiority of laparoscopic surgery especially for the management of early GC located in the distal stomach, while the definitive efficacy of the laparoscopic approach for more surgically challenging situations remains largely explorative and investigative.

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.

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.

Right-Side Approach-Duet Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy (R-Duet TLDG) Using a Three-Port to Treat Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is commonly treated via minimally invasive surgery. The present study explored the feasibility of right-side approach-duet (R-duet) totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy using a three-port compared with a four- or five-port.

METHODS

A total of 251 patients who underwent curative totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer (72 R-duet, 74 four-port, and 105 five-port) at the Catholic Medical Center were enrolled. All operations were performed using conventional laparoscopic instruments. The clinicopathological characteristics, operative details, and postoperative short-term outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The clinicopathological characteristics did not differ significantly among the groups, except that the N stage was higher in the five-port group. The operating time was significantly longer in the four-port than the R-duet group (R-duet, four-port, and five-port 148.2 ± 30.7, 162.4 ± 30.6, and 159.9 ± 31.5 min, respectively; p = 0.024). The estimated blood loss did not differ significantly. Postoperatively, the times to flatus and to soft diet consumption and the hospital stay were significantly longer in the five-port group. The extent of postoperative complications did not differ among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

R-duet totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is a reliable form of reduced-port surgery when used to treat gastric cancer; no special instruments are required.

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.