Minimally invasive surgery in emergency surgery: a WSES survey

A Comparative Analysis between Enhanced Recovery after Surgery and Traditional Care in the Management of Obstructive Colorectal Cancer

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) represents evidence-based transformation in perioperative care, which has been demonstrated to reduce both recovery times and postoperative complication rates. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical significance of the ERAS program in comparison with conventional postoperative care. This longitudinal cohort observational study enrolled 120 consecutive patients diagnosed with intestinal obstruction caused by colorectal cancers, with 40 patients in the ERAS group and 80 patients receiving conventional postoperative care forming the non-ERAS group. Our study compares the effectiveness of ERAS protocols to non-ERAS methods, focusing on the time to first flatus, defecation, the resumption of normal diet, and early mobilization. The main endpoints are morbidity and hospitalization length. The results showed that despite a longer admission-to-surgery interval in the ERAS group, median hospitalization was significantly shorter compared to the non-ERAS group (p = 0.0002). The ERAS group showed a tendency towards a lower incidence of overall postoperative complications, indicating that implementing the ERAS protocol does not increase the risk of postoperative complications, ensuring the safety of enhanced recovery strategies for patients. Also, ERAS patients had notably fewer stomas than those in the non-ERAS group, indicating the potential effectiveness of reducing stoma necessity. This study shows that ERAS surpasses conventional care for colonic or rectal surgery patients, reducing hospital stays and costs while enhancing recovery. This highlights the comprehensive advantages of adopting ERAS in surgical settings.

Laparoscopy for emergency abdominal surgery is associated with reduced physical functional decline in older patients: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of older patients require emergency abdominal surgery for acute abdomen. They are susceptible to surgical stress and lose their independence in performing daily activities. Laparoscopic surgery is associated with faster recovery, less postoperative pain, and shorter hospital stay. However, few studies have examined the relationship between laparoscopic surgery and physical functional decline. Thus, we aimed to examine the relationship between changes in physical function and the surgical procedure.

METHODS

In this was a single-center, retrospective cohort study, we enrolled patients who were aged ≥ 65 years and underwent emergency abdominal surgery for acute abdomen between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2021. We assessed their activities of daily living using the Barthel Index. Functional decline was defined as a decrease of ≥ 20 points in Barthel Index at 28 days postoperatively, compared with the preoperative value. We evaluated an association between functional decline and surgical procedures among older patients, using multiple logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

During the study period, 852 patients underwent emergency abdominal surgery. Among these, 280 patients were eligible for the analysis. Among them, 94 underwent laparoscopic surgery, while 186 underwent open surgery. Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery showed a less functional decline at 28 days postoperatively (6 vs. 49, p < 0.001). After adjustments for other covariates, laparoscopic surgery was an independent preventive factor for postoperative functional decline (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.05-0.83; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In emergency abdominal surgery, laparoscopic surgery reduces postoperative physical functional decline in older patients. Widespread use of laparoscopic surgery can potentially preserve patient quality of life and may be important for the better development of emergency abdominal surgery.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Enhanced perioperative care in emergency general surgery: the WSES position paper

Enhanced perioperative care protocols become the standard of care in elective surgery with a significant improvement in patients' outcome. The key element of the enhanced perioperative care protocol is the multimodal and interdisciplinary approach targeted to the patient, focused on a holistic approach to reduce surgical stress and improve perioperative recovery. Enhanced perioperative care in emergency general surgery is still a debated topic with little evidence available. The present position paper illustrates the existing evidence about perioperative care in emergency surgery patients with a focus on each perioperative intervention in the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative phase. For each item was proposed and approved a statement by the WSES collaborative group.

Current status of laparoscopic emergency surgery in Korea: multicenter restrospective cohort study

Purpose

Laparoscopic surgery is a choice in several emergency settings. However, there has been no nationwide study or survey that has compared the clinical use of laparoscopic emergency surgery (LES) versus open abdominal emergency surgery (OES) in Korea. Therefore, we examined the state of LES across multiple centers in Korea and further compared this data with the global state based on published reports.

Methods

Data of 2,122 patients who received abdominal emergency surgery between 2014 and 2019 in three hospitals in Korea were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Several clinical factors were investigated and analyzed.

Results

Of the patients, 1,280 (60.3%) were in the OES group and 842 (39.7%) were in the LES group. The most commonly operated organ in OES was the small bowel (25.8%), whereas that for LES was the appendix. In appendectomy and cholecystectomy, 93.7% and 88.0% were in the LES group. In small bowel surgery, gastric surgery, and large bowel surgery, 89.4%, 92.0%, and 79.1% were in the OES group. The severity-related factors of patient status demonstrated statistically significant limiting factors of selection between LES and OES.

Conclusion

Although our study has several limitations, compared to the LES data from other countries, the general LES state was similar in appendectomies, cholecystectomies, and small bowel surgeries. However, in gastric and colorectal surgeries, the LES state was different from those of other countries. This study demonstrated the LES state and limiting factors of selection between LES and OES in various operated organs. Further studies are required to analyze these differences and the various limiting factors.

Implementing Enhanced Perioperative Care in Emergency General Surgery: A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

ERAS pathway has been proposed as the standard of care in elective abdominal surgery. Guidelines on ERAS in emergency surgery have been recently published; however, few evidences are still available in the literature. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of an enhanced recovery protocol in a large cohort of patients undergoing emergency surgery and to identify possible factors impacting postoperative protocol compliance.

METHODS

This is a prospective multicenter observational study including patients who underwent major emergency general surgery for either intra-abdominal infection or intestinal obstruction. The primary endpoint of the study is the adherence to ERAS postoperative protocol. Secondary endpoints are 30-day mortality and morbidity rates, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 589 patients were enrolled in the study, 256 (43.5%) of them underwent intestinal resection with anastomosis. Major complications occurred in 92 (15.6%) patients and 30-day mortality was 6.3%. Median adherence occurred on postoperative day (POD) 1 for naso-gastric tube removal, on POD 2 for mobilization and urinary catheter removal, and on POD 3 for oral intake and i.v. fluid suspension. Laparoscopy was significantly associated with adherence to postoperative protocol, whereas operative fluid infusion > 12 mL/Kg/h, preoperative hyperglycemia, presence of a drain, duration of surgery and major complications showed a negative association.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study supports that an enhanced recovery protocol in emergency surgery is feasible and safe. Laparoscopy was associated with an earlier recovery, whereas preoperative hyperglycemia, fluid overload, and abdominal drain were associated with a delayed recovery.

Training curriculum in minimally invasive emergency digestive surgery: 2022 WSES position paper

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including laparoscopic and robotic approaches, is widely adopted in elective digestive surgery, but selectively used for surgical emergencies. The present position paper summarizes the available evidence concerning the learning curve to achieve proficiency in emergency MIS and provides five expert opinion statements, which may form the basis for developing standardized curricula and training programs in emergency MIS.

METHODS

This position paper was conducted according to the World Society of Emergency Surgery methodology. A steering committee and an international expert panel were involved in the critical appraisal of the literature and the development of the consensus statements.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies regarding the learning curve in emergency MIS were selected. All but one study considered laparoscopic appendectomy. Only one study reported on emergency robotic surgery. In most of the studies, proficiency was achieved after an average of 30 procedures (range: 20-107) depending on the initial surgeon's experience. High heterogeneity was noted in the way the learning curve was assessed. The experts claim that further studies investigating learning curve processes in emergency MIS are needed. The emergency surgeon curriculum should include a progressive and adequate training based on simulation, supervised clinical practice (proctoring), and surgical fellowships. The results should be evaluated by adopting a credentialing system to ensure quality standards. Surgical proficiency should be maintained with a minimum caseload and constantly evaluated. Moreover, the training process should involve the entire surgical team to facilitate the surgeon's proficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence exists concerning the learning process in laparoscopic and robotic emergency surgery. The proposed statements should be seen as a preliminary guide for the surgical community while stressing the need for further research.