American Society for Enhanced Recovery (ASER) and Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) joint consensus statement on prevention of postoperative infection within an enhanced recovery pathway for elective colorectal surgery

Have outcomes following colectomy in the United States improved over time?

BACKGROUND

There has been tremendous effort to improve quality following colorectal surgery, including the proliferation of minimally invasive techniques, enhanced recovery protocols, and surgical site infection prevention bundles. While these programs have demonstrated improved postoperative outcomes at the institutional level, it is unclear whether similar benefits are present on a national scale.

METHODS

American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Targeted Colectomy data from 2012 to 2020 were used to identify patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or open partial colectomy (CPT 44140, 44204) or low anterior resection (CPT 44145, 44207). Chronological cohorts as well as annual trends in 30-day postoperative outcomes including surgical site infection, venous thromboembolism, and length of stay were assessed using both univariable and multivariable regression analyses.

RESULTS

261,301 patients, 135,876 (52 ​%) female, with a median age of 62 (IQR 53-72) were included. Across all years, MIS partial colectomy was the most common procedure (37 ​%), followed by MIS low anterior resection (27 ​%), open partial colectomy (24 ​%), and open low anterior resection (12 ​%). MIS increased from 59 ​% in 2012-2014 to 66 ​% in 2018-2020 (p ​< ​0.001). During this same period, postoperative length of stay decreased from a median of 5 days (IQR 4-7) in 2012-2014 to 4 days (IQR 3-6) in 2018-2020 (p ​< ​0.001). Superficial surgical site infections decreased from 5.5 ​% in 2012-2014 to 2.9 ​% in 2018-2020 (p ​< ​0.001). Deep surgical site infections similarly decreased from 1.1 ​% to 0.4 ​% between these periods (p ​< ​0.001). Pulmonary embolism also decreased from 0.6 ​% to 0.5 ​% between periods (p ​= ​0.02). 30-day mortality was unchanged at 1.7 ​% between 2012-2014 and 2018-2020 (p ​= ​0.40). After adjustment for ACS NSQIP estimated probability of morbidity and mortality, undergoing a colectomy in 2020 compared to 2012 was associated with a 14 ​% decrease in postoperative length of stay (p ​< ​0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2012 and 2020, significant improvements in postoperative outcomes after colectomy were observed in the United States. These results support the positive impact that the widespread adoption of quality improvement initiatives is having on colorectal patient care nationally.

Impact of a kidney-adjusted ERAS® protocol on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing partial nephrectomy

PURPOSE

Evaluation of a kidney-adjusted enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) protocol (kERAS) in patients undergoing nephron-sparing surgery (PN).

METHODS

The kERAS protocol is a multidimensional protocol focusing on optimized perioperative fluid and nutrition management as well as strict intraoperative and postoperative blood pressure limits. It was applied in a prospective cohort (n = 147) of patients undergoing open or robotic PN. Patients were analyzed for the development of acute postoperative renal failure (AKI), achievement of TRIFECTA criteria, upstaging or new onset of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and length of hospital stay (LOS) and compared to a retrospective cohort (n = 162) without application of the protocol.

RESULTS

Cox regression analyses could not confirm a protective effect of kERAS on the development of AKI post-surgery. A positive effect was observed on TRIFECTA achievement (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.5, p = 0.0374). Patients treated with the kERAS protocol showed less long-term CKD upstaging compared to those treated with the standard protocol (p = 0.0033). There was no significant effect on LOS and new onset of CKD.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a kERAS protocol can have a positive influence on long-term renal function in patients undergoing PN. It can be used safely without promoting AKI. Furthermore, it can be realized with a manageable amount of additional effort.

Bowel preparation before elective right colectomy: Multitreatment machine-learning analysis on 2,617 patients

BACKGROUND

In the worldwide, real-life setting, some candidates for right colectomy still receive no bowel preparation, some receive oral antibiotics alone, some receive mechanical bowel preparation alone, and some receive mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, with varying degrees of compliance to preoperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis. Previous studies mainly focused on left-sided colorectal anastomoses while less attention has been devoted to right-sided ileocolic anastomoses. When high-level evidence from randomized clinical trials is lacking, multiple-treatment propensity score weighting analysis of prospective data on the basis of generalized boosted model is superior to a simple propensity score-matching analysis and to an inverse probability weighting in terms of external validity and bias reduction.

METHODS

This is an analysis on the basis of machine-learning procedures of 2,617 patients who underwent elective right colectomies.

RESULTS

The risk of surgical-site infections (5.0% after no bowel preparation) was significantly lower after mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics (4.0%, P = .017), significantly greater after mechanical bowel preparation alone (8.6%, P = .019), and comparable after oral antibiotics alone (3.9%). The risk of anastomotic leakage (3.2% after no bowel preparation) was significantly greater after oral antibiotics alone (4.8%, P = .013). Concerning secondary outcomes, no significant differences were recorded for the risk of overall morbidity and reoperation. The risk of readmission (3.0% after no bowel preparation) was significantly reduced after mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics (1.5%, P = .046), and the risk of major morbidity (5.1% after no bowel preparation) was significantly greater after oral antibiotics alone (6.7%, P = .007).

CONCLUSION

This multitreatment machine-learning analysis, despite some limitations, showed that mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics is associated with a decrease in surgical-site infections after elective right colectomy compared with no bowel preparation.

Bowel preparation for elective colorectal resection: multi-treatment machine learning analysis on 6241 cases from a prospective Italian cohort

BACKGROUND

Current evidence concerning bowel preparation before elective colorectal surgery is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL), surgical site infections (SSIs), and overall morbidity (any adverse event, OM) after elective colorectal surgery using four different types of bowel preparation.

METHODS

A prospective database gathered among 78 Italian surgical centers in two prospective studies, including 6241 patients who underwent elective colorectal resection with anastomosis for malignant or benign disease, was re-analyzed through a multi-treatment machine-learning model considering no bowel preparation (NBP; No. = 3742; 60.0%) as the reference treatment arm, compared to oral antibiotics alone (oA; No. = 406; 6.5%), mechanical bowel preparation alone (MBP; No. = 1486; 23.8%), or in combination with oAB (MoABP; No. = 607; 9.7%). Twenty covariates related to biometric data, surgical procedures, perioperative management, and hospital/center data potentially affecting outcomes were included and balanced into the model. The primary endpoints were AL, SSIs, and OM. All the results were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

Compared to NBP, MBP showed significantly higher AL risk (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.23-2.71; p = .003) and OM risk (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10-1.72; p = .005), no significant differences for all the endpoints were recorded in the oA group, whereas MoABP showed a significantly reduced SSI risk (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.25-0.79; p = .008).

CONCLUSIONS

MoABP significantly reduced the SSI risk after elective colorectal surgery, therefore representing a valid alternative to NBP.

Oral Antibiotics Alone versus Oral Antibiotics Combined with Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matching Re-Analysis of the iCral 2 and 3 Prospective Cohorts

The evidence regarding the role of oral antibiotics alone (oA) or combined with mechanical bowel preparation (MoABP) for elective colorectal surgery remains controversial. A prospective database of 8359 colorectal resections gathered over a 32-month period from 78 Italian surgical units (the iCral 2 and 3 studies), reporting patient-, disease-, and procedure-related variables together with 60-day adverse events, was re-analyzed to identify a subgroup of 1013 cases (12.1%) that received either oA or MoABP. This dataset was analyzed using a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 20 covariates. Two well-balanced groups of 243 patients each were obtained: group A (oA) and group B (MoABP). The primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infection (SSI) rates. Group A vs. group B showed a significantly higher AL risk [14 (5.8%) vs. 6 (2.5%) events; OR: 3.77; 95%CI: 1.22-11.67; p = 0.021], while no significant difference was recorded between the two groups regarding SSIs. These results strongly support the use of MoABP for elective colorectal resections.

Risk factors analysis of surgical site infections in postoperative colorectal cancer: a nine-year retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients undergoing surgery are at a high risk of developing surgical site infections (SSIs), which contribute to increased morbidity, prolonged hospitalization, and escalated healthcare costs. Understanding the incidence, risk factors, and impact of SSIs is crucial for effective preventive strategies and improved patient outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed data from 431 CRC patients who underwent surgery at Huangshan Shoukang Hospital between 2014 and 2022. The clinical characteristics and demographic information were collected. The incidence and impact of SSIs were evaluated, and independent risk factors associated with SSIs were identified using multivariable logistic regresison. A nomogram plot was constructed to predict the likelihood of SSIs occurrence.

RESULTS

The overall incidence rate of SSIs was 7.65% (33/431). Patients with SSIs had significantly longer hospital stays and higher healthcare costs. Risk factors for SSIs included elevated Body Mass Index (BMI) levels (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.23; P = 0.017), the presence of diabetes (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% CI, 1.42 - 9.48; P = 0.01), as well as specific surgical factors such as open surgical procedures (odds ratio, 2.39; 95% CI [1.09; 5.02]; P = 0.031), longer surgical duration (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% CI [1.01; 1.84]; P = 0.046), and the presence of a colostomy/ileostomy (odds ratio, 3.17; 95% CI [1.53; 6.62]; P = 0.002). Utilizing multivariable regression analysis, which encompassed factors such as open surgical procedures, the presence of diabetes and colostomy/ileostom, the nomogram plot functions as a visual aid in estimating the individual risk of SSIs for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for SSIs included higher BMI levels, the presence of diabetes, open surgical procedures, longer surgical duration, and the presence of colostomy/ileostomy. The nomogram plot serves as a valuable tool for risk assessment and clinical decision-making.

Region-specific protection effect of preoperative oral antibiotics combined with mechanical bowel preparation before laparoscopic colorectal resection: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Oral antibiotics (OA) combined with mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) significantly decrease the rate of surgical site infections (SSIs). However, the prophylactic effects in region-specific colorectal surgery have not been assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-centre, single-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted from 2019 to 2022. Patients were eligible if they were diagnosed with nonmetastatic colorectal malignancy, and laparoscopic colorectal surgery was indicated. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to the experimental (OA+MBP preparation) or control group (MBP preparation). The randomization was further stratified by resected region. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSIs. Patients were followed up for 1 month postoperatively, and all complications were recorded.

RESULT

Between 2019 and 2022, 157 and 152 patients were assigned to the experimental and control groups, respectively, after 51 patients were excluded. The incidence of SSIs in the control group (27/152) was significantly higher than that in the experimental group (13/157; P =0.013), as was the incidence of superficial SSIs (5/157 vs. 14/152, P =0.027) and deep SSIs (7/157 vs. 16/152, P =0.042). After redistribution according to the resected region, the incidence of SSIs was significantly higher in the control group with left-sided colorectal resection (descending, sigmoid colon, and rectum) (9/115 vs. 20/111, P =0.022) but was similar between the groups with right-sided colon resection (ascending colon) (3/37 vs. 7/36, P =0.286). No differences were noted between the groups in terms of other perioperative complications.

CONCLUSION

OA+MBP before colorectal surgery significantly reduced the incidence of SSIs. Such a prophylactic effect was particularly significant for left-sided resection. This preparation mode should be routinely adopted before elective left-region colorectal surgeries.

Leveraging a nationwide infection surveillance program to implement a colorectal surgical site infection reduction bundle: a pragmatic, prospective, and multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Bundled interventions usually reduce surgical site infection (SSI) when implemented at single hospitals, but the feasibility of their implementation at the nationwide level and their clinical results are not well established.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pragmatic interventional study to analyze the implementation and outcomes of a colorectal surgery care bundle within a nationwide quality improvement program. The bundle consisted of antibiotic prophylaxis, oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OAP), mechanical bowel preparation, laparoscopy, normothermia, and a wound retractor. Control group (CG) and Intervention group (IG) were compared. Overall SSI, superficial (S-SSI), deep (D-SSI), and organ/space (O/S-SSI) rates were analyzed. Secondary endpoints included microbiology, 30-day mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 37 849 procedures were included, 19 655 in the CG and 18 194 in the IG. In all, 5462 SSIs (14.43%) were detected: 1767 S-SSI (4.67%), 847 D-SSI (2.24%), and 2838 O/S-SSI (7.5%). Overall SSI fell from 18.38% (CG) to 10.17% (IG), odds ratio (OR) of 0.503 [0.473-0.524]. O/S-SSI rates were 9.15% (CG) and 5.72% (IG), OR of 0.602 [0.556-0.652]. The overall SSI rate was 16.71% when no measure was applied and 6.23% when all six were used. Bundle implementation reduced the probability of overall SSI (OR: 0.331; CI 95 : 0.242-0.453), and also O/S-SSI rate (OR: 0.643; CI 95 : 0.416-0.919). In the univariate analysis, all measures except normothermia were associated with a reduction in overall SSI, while only laparoscopy, OAP, and mechanical bowel preparation were related to a decrease in O/S-SSI. Laparoscopy, wound retractor, and OAP decreased overall SSI and O/S-SSI in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort study, the application of a specific care bundle within a nationwide nosocomial infection surveillance system proved feasible and resulted in a significant reduction in overall and O/S-SSI rates in the elective colon and rectal surgery. The OR for SSI fell between 1.5 and 3 times after the implementation of the bundle.

MICROBIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF ABDOMINAL CAVITY EXUDATE, BLOOD AND AFFECTED TISSUES SAMPLES FROM PATIENTS WITH INTRA-ABDOMINAL ABSCESSES IN COMPLICATED INFECTION OF ABDOMINAL CAVITY

OBJECTIVE

The aim: To conduct an analysis of the results of a microbiological examination of biological samples taken from patients with intra-abdominal abscesses.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: Material for microbiological examination was collected from 60 patients during surgery and transported to laboratory at the same day. Isolation and identification of microbial pure cultures were performed by standard microbiological methods. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica software.

RESULTS

Results: Analyzing the microbiological research results indicated importance of the sample collecting time (first or repeated surgery). In pa¬tient's blood taken during first surgery it was found a statistically significant predominance of no growth of microflora. In abdominal cav¬ity exudates anaerobic cultures increased statistically significantly in repeated surgery. It was noted that in samples taken during first sur¬gery mixed pathogens were represented mainly by facultative anaerobic cocci, then in repeated surgery anaerobic microorganisms were predominant. Examination of liver abscess content found that monoculture was isolated in 85.7 %. Blood and affected tissue samples in such patients were sterile. Investigation of samples from patients with multiple abdominal cavity abscesses revealed anaerobic microorganisms in 16.7 %. Blood samples of that patients in 40 % were sterile.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: An analysis showed that in appendicular abscesses content gram-negatives were predominant. Gram-positive bacteria dominated in paravesical abscesses with 65 % isolates from gallbladder and 66.7 % from the affected tissue samples. In liver abscesses gram-positive cocci were isolated in 57.1 %. In multiple abdominal abscesses due to bowel perforation rod-shaped microflora was predominant (76 %) and represented by either obligate aerobes or obligate and facultative anaerobes.

Association of bowel preparation with surgical-site infection in gynecologic oncology surgery: Post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relationship between bowel preparation and surgical-site infection (SSI) incidence following colorectal resection during gynecologic oncology surgery.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis used data from a randomized controlled trial of patients enrolled from 03/01/2016-08/20/2019 with presumed gynecologic malignancy investigating negative-pressure wound therapy among those requiring laparotomy. Patients were treated preoperatively without bowel preparation, oral antibiotic bowel preparation (OABP), or OABP plus mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) per surgeon preference. Univariate and multivariable analyses with stepwise model selection for SSI were performed for confirmed gynecologic malignancies requiring colorectal resection.

RESULTS

Of 161 cases, 15 (9%) had no preparation, 39 (24%) OABP only, and 107 (66%) OABP+MBP. The overall SSI rate was 19% (n = 31)-53% (n = 8/15) in the no preparation, 21% (n = 8/39) in the OABP alone, and 14% (n = 15/107) in the OABP+MBP groups (P = 0.003). The difference between OABP and OABP+MBP was non-significant (P = 0.44). The median length of stay was 9 (range, 6-12), 6 (range, 5-8), and 7 days (range, 6-10), respectively (P = 0.045). The overall complication rate (34%; n = 54) did not significantly vary by preparation type (P = 0.23). On univariate logistic regression analysis, OABP (OR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.06-0.80) and OABP+MBP (OR, 0.14; 95% CI: 0.04-0.45) were associated with decreased SSI risk compared to no preparation (P = 0.004). On multivariate analysis, both methods of preparation retained a significant impact on SSI rates (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Bowel preparation is associated with reduced SSI incidence and is beneficial for patients undergoing gynecologic oncology surgery with anticipated colorectal resection. Further investigation is needed to determine whether OABP alone is sufficient.

The Use of Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Call for Change in Practice

Elective colorectal surgery is associated with one of the highest rates of surgical site infections (SSIs), which result in prolonged length of stay, morbidity, and mortality for these patients and have a significant financial burden to healthcare systems. In an effort to reduce the frequency of SSI rates associated with colorectal surgery, the 2018 World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines recommend the routine use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OAP) in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. However, this recommendation remains a topic of debate internationally. The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines, last revised in 2019, recommend against the routine use of MBP and do not address the issue of OAP. In this communication, we reviewed the current guidelines and examined the most recent evidence from randomised-control trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses on the effect of MBP and OAP on SSI rates since the 2019 NICE guideline review. This recent evidence clearly demonstrated an SSI-risk-reduction benefit with the additional use of OAP and the combination of MBP and OAP in this group of patients, and we therefore highlight the need for change of the current NICE guidelines.

Trends in infectious complications after partial colectomy for colon cancer over a decade: A national cohort study

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program helps participating hospitals track and report surgical complications with the goal of improving patient care. We sought to determine whether postoperative infectious complications after elective colectomy for malignancy improved among participating centers over time.

METHODS

Patients with colon malignancies who underwent elective partial colectomy with primary anastomosis (categorized as low or non-low) were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2011-2019). Thirty-day postoperative infectious complications analyzed by year included superficial, deep, and organ space surgical site infections, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, and sepsis. Trends in patient and treatment characteristics were investigated using log-linear regression along with their association with infectious outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 78,827 patients identified, 51% were female, and the median age was 68. The majority (84%) underwent partial colectomy without a low anastomosis. There was a decrease in all infectious complications except for organ space infections which increased 35% overall from 2.0 to 2.7% (P = .037), driven by patients without a low anastomosis (1.9%-2.7%, P = .01). There was no change in most patient factors associated with organ space infections, except for a notable increase in American Society of Anesthesiologists class III and IV-V patients over time, both associated with organ space infections (P < .001; P = .002).

CONCLUSION

Infectious complications have decreased significantly overall after colectomy for colon cancer, whereas there has been an increase in organ space infection rates specifically. Although changing patient characteristics may contribute to this observed trend, further study is needed to better understand its etiology to help mitigate this complication.

Monocyte response after colorectal surgery: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Tumor resection is the common approach in patients with colorectal malignancy. Profound insight into inflammatory changes that accompany the normal post-operative stress response will establish reference parameters useful for identification of putative complications. Alterations in circulating monocytes might be indicative as these cells are considered to be the most responsive leukocytes to trauma. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the monocyte subset kinetic and phenotypic changes in response to surgery.

METHODS

Fifty patients undergoing colorectal tumor resection were included in a multicenter prospective cohort study. Blood samples were collected early in the morning prior to surgery and the next days through postoperative day three for flowcytometric analysis. Leukocyte subtypes were identified and expression of activation stage-related markers by monocyte subsets was quantified.

RESULTS

Changes in leukocyte subset composition and monocyte subset phenotypes were most prominent at the first day postoperatively, after which these parameters typically returned to normal or near-normal preoperative values. The immunophenotypic alterations after surgery were most notable in classical and intermediate monocytes. These included up-regulation of activation markers CD64 and CD62L, but down-regulation of HLA-DR and CD54. Markers of de-activation, CD163 and CD206, were consistently increasingly expressed.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

The current study gives detailed insight into the peripheral blood leukocyte response after colorectal cancer surgery. This form of short-term stress induces a rapid and significant redistribution of immune cells. Immunophenotypic alterations in monocytes as a response to surgery suggest a mixed profile of cellular activation and de-activation.

Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis Lowers Surgical Site Infection in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Results of a Pragmatic Cohort Study in Catalonia

BACKGROUND

The role of oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OAP) and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) in the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) after colorectal surgery is still controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of a bundle including both measures in a National Infection Surveillance Network in Catalonia.

METHODS

Pragmatic cohort study to assess the effect of OAP and MBP in reducing SSI rate in 65 hospitals, comparing baseline phase (BP: 2007-2015) with implementation phase (IP: 2016-2019). To compare the results, a logistic regression model was established.

RESULTS

Out of 34,421 colorectal operations, 5180 had SSIs (15.05%). Overall SSI rate decreased from 18.81% to 11.10% in BP and IP, respectively (OR 0.539, CI95 0.507-0.573, p < 0.0001). Information about bundle implementation was complete in 61.7% of cases. In a univariate analysis, OAP and MBP were independent factors in decreasing overall SSI, with OR 0.555, CI95 0.483-0.638, and OR 0.686, CI95 0.589-0.798, respectively; and similarly, organ/space SSI (O/S-SSI) (OR 0.592, CI95 0.494-0.710, and OR 0.771, CI95 0.630-0.944, respectively). However, only OAP retained its protective effect at both levels at multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

oral antibiotic prophylaxis decreased the rates of SSI and O/S-SSI in a large series of elective colorectal surgery.

Systemic versus Oral and Systemic Antibiotic Prophylaxis (SOAP) study in colorectal surgery: prospective randomized multicentre trial

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus regarding the role of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OABP) in reducing postoperative complications in colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of OABP given in addition to MBP in the setting of a prospective randomized trial.

METHODS

Patients awaiting elective colorectal surgery in four Hungarian colorectal centres were included in this multicentre, prospective, randomized, assessor-blinded study. Patients were randomized to receive MBP with or without OABP (OABP+ and OABP- groups respectively). The primary endpoints were surgical-site infection (SSI) and postoperative ileus. Secondary endpoints were anastomotic leak, mortality, and hospital readmission within 30 days.

RESULTS

Of 839 patients assessed for eligibility between November 2016 and June 2018, 600 were randomized and 529 were analysed. Trial participation was discontinued owing to adverse events in seven patients in the OABP+ group (2.3 per cent). SSI occurred in eight patients (3.2 per cent) in the OABP+ and 27 (9.8 per cent) in the OABP- group (P = 0.001). The incidence of postoperative ileus did not differ between groups. Anastomotic leakage occurred in four patients (1.6 per cent) in the OABP+ and 13 (4.7 per cent) in the OABP- (P = 0.02) group. There were no differences in hospital readmission (12 (4.7 per cent) versus 10 (3.6 per cent); P = 0.25) or mortality (3 (1.2 per cent) versus 4 (1.4 per cent); P = 0.39).

CONCLUSION

OABP given with MBP reduced the rate of SSI and AL after colorectal surgery with anastomosis, therefore routine use of OABP is recommended.

Impact of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol versus standard of care on postoperative Acute Kidney Injury (AKI): A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common postoperative complication with an incidence of nearly 15%. Relatively balanced fluid management, flexible use of vasoactive drugs, multimodal analgesia containing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are fundamental to ERAS protocols. However, these basic tenants may lead to an increased incidence of postoperative AKI.

METHODS

A search was done in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and reference lists to identify relevant studies from inception until May 2020 to be included in this study. Effects were summarized using pooled risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (Cls) with random effect model. Heterogeneity assessment, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias were performed.

RESULTS

A systematic review of nineteen cohort studies covering 17,205 patients, comparing impact of ERAS with conventional care on postoperative AKI was performed. Notably, the ERAS regimen did not increase the incidence of postoperative AKI compared with standard care (RR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.52; I2 = 53%). Both goal-directed fluid therapy (RR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.99-1.61; I2 = 55%) and restrictive fluid management (RR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.57-1.98; I2 = 60%) had no significant effect on the incidence of postoperative AKI. There was no significant statistical difference between different AKI diagnostic criteria (P = 0.43; I2 = 0%). ERAS group had significantly shorter hospital stay (MD: -1.54; 95% CI: -1.91 to -1.17; I2 = 66%). There was no statistical difference in 30-day readmission rate (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.20; I2 = 42%), 30-day reoperation rate (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.34; I2 = 42%) and mortality (RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that ERAS protocols do not increase readmission or reoperation rates and mortality while significantly reducing LOS. Most importantly, the ERAS protocol was shown to have no promoting effect on the incidence of postoperative AKI. Even GDFT and restrictive fluid management cannot avoid the occurrence of postoperative AKI, and the ERAS protocol is still worth recommending and its safety is further confirmed.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery: History, Key Advancements and Developments in Transplant Surgery

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) aims to improve patient outcomes by controlling specific aspects of perioperative care. The concept was introduced in 1997 by Henrik Kehlet, who suggested that while minor changes in perioperative practise have no significant impact alone, incorporating multiple changes could drastically improve outcomes. Since 1997, significant advancements have been made through the foundation of the ERAS Society, responsible for creating consensus guidelines on the implementation of enhanced recovery pathways. ERAS reduces length of stay by an average of 2.35 days and healthcare costs by $639.06 per patient, as identified in a 2020 meta-analysis of ERAS across multiple surgical subspecialties. Carbohydrate loading, bowel preparation and patient education in the pre-operative phase, goal-directed fluid therapy in the intra-operative phase, and early mobilisation and enteral nutrition in the post-operative phase are some of the interventions that are commonly implemented in ERAS protocols. While many specialties have been quick to incorporate ERAS, uptake has been slow in the transplantation field, leading to a scarcity of literature. Recent studies reported a 47% reduction in length of hospital stay (LOS) in liver transplantation patients treated with ERAS, while progress in kidney transplantation focuses on pain management and its incorporation into enhanced recovery protocols.

Mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation versus no bowel preparation in right and left colectomy: subgroup analysis of MOBILE trial

BACKGROUND

In retrospective series, mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MOABP) has been reported to reduce surgical-site infections (SSIs) after colectomy compared with no bowel preparation (NBP).

METHOD

This was a subgroup analysis of a multicentre randomized trial that included patients scheduled for elective colectomy. The MOABP group underwent mechanical bowel preparation, and took 2 g neomycin and 2 g metronidazole orally during the day before surgery. The NBP group did not undergo bowel preparation. Patients were categorized according to the side of resection (right versus left colectomy), and these subgroups compared for postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 217 patients undergoing right colectomy (106 in MOABP and 111 in NBP group), SSI was detected in seven (7 per cent) and 10 (9 per cent) patients (odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95 per cent c.i. 0.26 to 1.95; P = 0.510), anastomotic dehiscence in two (2 per cent) and two (2 per cent) patients (OR 1.05, 0.15 to 7.58; P = 1.000), and the mean(s.d.) Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) score was 9.4(12.9) and 10.5(18.0) (mean difference -1.09; 95 per cent c.i. -5.29 to 3.11; P = 0.608) in the MOABP and NBP groups respectively. Among 164 patients undergoing left colectomy (84 in MOABP and 80 in NBP group), SSI was detected in five (6 per cent) and eight (10 per cent) patients (OR 0.57, 0.18 to 1.82; P = 0.338), anastomotic dehiscence in four (5 per cent) and five (6 per cent) patients (OR 0.75, 0.19 to 2.90; P = 0.742), and the CCI score was 10.2(13.1) and 6.5(11.0) (mean difference 3.68, -0.06 to 7.42; P = 0.053) in the MOABP and NBP groups respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

MOABP did not decrease the rate of SSI or complications in patients undergoing either right or left colectomy compared with NBP.

Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotic Agents for Selective Decontamination in Colorectal Surgery: Current Practice, Perspectives, and Trends in Australia and New Zealand, 2019-2020

Background: There has been much debate as to the importance of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotic agents (OAB) prior to elective colorectal surgery over the past two decades. There is no consensus between international guidelines. Methods: The Australia and New Zealand Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotics (ANZ-MBP-OAB) questionnaire was distributed to colorectal surgeons after institutional board approval assessing specialist attitudes toward 18 enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) interventions. Data were analyzed using a rating scale and graded response model in item response theory (IRT) on Stata MP, version 15 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX). Specialist attitudes toward the effectiveness of MBP and OAB strategies in providing better short-term outcomes was ranked alongside other ERAS interventions. This was followed by specific questions examining current practice, perspectives, and trends. Results: Ninety-five of 300 (31.7%) colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand participated in the survey. Statistical modeling was achieved in 13 ERAS interventions. Compared with other ERAS interventions, the use of MBP with OAB and MBP alone ranked nine of 13 and 10 of 13, respectively, in order of effectiveness in providing better short-term outcomes after colorectal surgery. Oral antibiotic agents alone was not considered effective. Mechanical bowel preparation with OAB was considered to be the best strategy in both colon (37%) and rectal surgery (48%) but current practice varied substantially from perspective. Mechanical bowel preparation alone was strongly favored in rectal surgery (81%) with only 14% using MBP with OAB. In colon surgery, only 10% used MBP with OAB, with MBP alone (45%) and no preparation (45%) being equally the most commonly used strategies. Conclusions: Among Australian and New Zealand colorectal surgeons, MBP with OAB was considered the best bowel preparation strategy. However, despite an awareness of its benefits, MBP with OAB has yet to be widely adopted into clinical practice or guidelines in Australia and New Zealand.

The gut microbiota and colorectal surgery outcomes: facts or hype? A narrative review

BACKGROUND

The gut microbiota (GM) has been proposed as one of the main determinants of colorectal surgery complications and theorized as the "missing factor" that could explain still poorly understood complications. Herein, we investigate this theory and report the current evidence on the role of the GM in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

We first present the findings associating the role of the GM with the physiological response to surgery. Second, the change in GM composition during and after surgery and its association with colorectal surgery complications (ileus, adhesions, surgical-site infections, anastomotic leak, and diversion colitis) are reviewed. Finally, we present the findings linking GM science to the application of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, for the use of oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation and for the administration of probiotics/synbiotics.

RESULTS

According to preclinical and translational evidence, the GM is capable of influencing colorectal surgery outcomes. Clinical evidence supports the application of an ERAS protocol and the preoperative administration of multistrain probiotics/synbiotics. GM manipulation with oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation still has uncertain benefits in right-sided colic resection but is very promising for left-sided colic resection.

CONCLUSIONS

The GM may be a determinant of colorectal surgery outcomes. There is an emerging need to implement translational research on the topic. Future clinical studies should clarify the composition of preoperative and postoperative GM and the impact of the GM on different colorectal surgery complications and should assess the validity of GM-targeted measures in effectively reducing complications for all colorectal surgery locations.

Postoperative Ileus and Postoperative Gastrointestinal Tract Dysfunction: Pathogenic Mechanisms and Novel Treatment Strategies Beyond Colorectal Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols

Postoperative ileus (POI) and postoperative gastrointestinal tract dysfunction (POGD) are well-known complications affecting patients undergoing intestinal surgery. GI symptoms include nausea, vomiting, pain, abdominal distention, bloating, and constipation. These iatrogenic disorders are associated with extended hospitalizations, increased morbidity, and health care costs into the billions and current therapeutic strategies are limited. This is a narrative review focused on recent concepts in the pathogenesis of POI and POGD, pipeline drugs or approaches to treatment. Mechanisms, cellular targets and pathways implicated in the pathogenesis include gut surgical manipulation and surgical trauma, neuroinflammation, reactive enteric glia, macrophages, mast cells, monocytes, neutrophils and ICC's. The precise interactions between immune, inflammatory, neural and glial cells are not well understood. Reactive enteric glial cells are an emerging therapeutic target that is under intense investigation for enteric neuropathies, GI dysmotility and POI. Our review emphasizes current therapeutic strategies, starting with the implementation of colorectal enhanced recovery after surgery protocols to protect against POI and POGD. However, despite colorectal enhanced recovery after surgery, it remains a significant medical problem and burden on the healthcare system. Over 100 pipeline drugs or treatments are listed in Clin.Trials.gov. These include 5HT4R agonists (Prucalopride and TAK 954), vagus nerve stimulation of the ENS-macrophage nAChR cholinergic pathway, acupuncture, herbal medications, peripheral acting opioid antagonists (Alvimopen, Methlnaltexone, Naldemedine), anti-bloating/flatulence drugs (Simethiocone), a ghreline prokinetic agonist (Ulimovelin), drinking coffee, and nicotine chewing gum. A better understanding of the pathogenic mechanisms for short and long-term outcomes is necessary before we can develop better prophylactic and treatment strategies.

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.

Outcomes after Early versus Delayed Urinary Bladder Catheter Removal after Proctectomy for Benign and Malignant Disease in 2,429 Patients: An Observational Cohort Study

Background: There currently is no standard practice for optimal urinary catheter removal after rectal resection (proctectomy). Delayed removal may increase urinary tract infection risk, an important hospital quality metric. This study aimed to assess the effect of catheter duration on urinary tract infection rate. We hypothesized that early removal would be associated with fewer infections. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent proctectomy from January 2007 to December 2017 with urinary catheter placement in our colorectal surgery department. The main outcome measures were urinary tract infection, post-operative urinary retention, and length of stay. Patients were divided into early (post-operative day one or two) and late (day three or later) removal groups. Results: A series of 2,429 patients were included; 1,176 in the early and 1,253 in the late group. The early group had a shorter median length of stay (5.26 versus 7 days). The urinary tract infection (n = 77) multivariable logistic regression model showed no association between timing of removal and infection; however, females had more infections (odds ratio [OR] 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.65-4.41). The post-operative urinary retention model (n = 280) showed no association between the timing of removal and retention; however, patients who underwent pre-operative radiation (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.15-2.09) or total proctocolectomy (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.21-2.49) or were male (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.02-1.78) were more likely to have retention. When analyzed by specific removal day, each one-day delay in removal increased the odds of infection by 21% (OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.09-1.35] and decreased the odds of retention by 12% (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80-0.97] with a cross-over at 9 days. Patients who experienced retention were not more likely to have infection. Conclusion: Early urinary catheter removal after proctectomy was associated with a lower urinary tract infection rate and a shorter hospital stay.

Investigation of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol outcome on post colectomy patients

BACKGROUND

An enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol was implemented to improve quality and cost effectiveness of surgical care in elective colorectal procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted from July 2017 to June 2018. The ERAS protocol was initiated on 9 July 2018 and retrospectively reviewed in July 2019 by chart review, the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database and risk stratification using Clavien-Dindo classification for all elective colorectal procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 109 patients, 55 (pre-ERAS) and 54 (post-ERAS) are included in the final analysis. There were no differences in complications were recorded (p = 0.37) and 30-day readmissions (p = 0.785). The mean hospital stay was 5.89 ± 2.62 days in pre-ERAS and 4.94 ± 2.27 days in post-ERAS group which was statistically significant (p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

An ERAS protocol for colorectal surgery harmonised perioperative care and decreased length of stay.

Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes after Ostomy Reversal in Infants Less than Six Months Old

The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors for 30-day complications, reoperation, and readmission after ostomy reversal in infants less than six months old. Infants aged two weeks to six months who underwent ostomy reversal were identified in the 2012 to 2016 ACS NSQIP Pediatric database. Demographics, comorbidities, and 30-day outcomes were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the independent effects of clinical variables on risk of 30-day complications, reoperation, and readmission. Among 1021 infants, 163 (16%) suffered a 30-day complication. SSIs were the most common complication (5.7%), followed by unplanned reintubation (5.2%) and bleeding (3%). Mortality was 0.4 per cent. Dependence on nutritional support and hematologic disorders were independently associated with postoperative complications. Forty-five children (4.4%) required reoperation and 22 (2.2%) were readmitted for conditions related to the procedure. Younger age and preoperative dependence on oxygen or nutritional support were associated with increased length of stay. SSI, unplanned reintubation, and bleeding are the most frequent complications after ostomy takedown in infants less than six months old. Attention to risk factors predisposing to these complications, including dependence on nutritional support and hematologic disorders, may contribute to improved surgical outcomes.

Preoperative opioid use is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications within a colorectal-enhanced recovery protocol

BACKGROUND

As the opioid epidemic escalates, preoperative opioid use has become increasingly common. Recent studies associated preoperative opioid use with postoperative morbidity. However, limited study of its impact on patients within enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) exists. We assessed the impact of preoperative opioid use on postoperative complications among colorectal surgery patients within an ERP, hypothesizing that opioid-exposed patients would be at increased risk of complications.

METHODS

Elective colorectal cases from August 2013 to June 2017 were reviewed in a retrospective cohort study comparing preoperative opioid-exposed patients to opioid-naïve patients. Postoperative complications were defined as a composite of complications captured by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Logistic regression identified risk factors for postoperative complications.

RESULTS

707 patients were identified, including 232 (32.8%) opioid-exposed patients. Opioid-exposed patients were younger (57.9 vs 61.9 years; p < 0.01) and more likely to smoke (27.6 vs 17.1%; p < 0.01). Laparoscopic procedures were less common among opioid-exposed patients (44.8 vs 58.1%; p < 0.01). Median morphine equivalents received were higher in opioid-exposed patients (65.0 vs 20.1 mg; p < 0.01), but compliance to ERP elements was otherwise equivalent. Postoperative complications were higher among opioid-exposed patients (28.5 vs 15.0%; p < 0.01), as was median length of stay (4.0 vs 3.0 days; p < 0.01). Logistic regression identified multiple patient- and procedure-related factors independently associated with postoperative complications, including preoperative opioid use (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative opioid use is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications in elective colorectal surgery patients within an ERP. These results highlight the negative impact of opioid use, suggesting an opportunity to further reduce the risk of surgical complications through ERP expansion to include preoperative mitigation strategies for opioid-exposed patients.

Do Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Benefit from an Enhanced Recovery Pathway?

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) have been shown to reduce length of stay (LOS), complications, and costs after colorectal surgery; yet, little data exists regarding patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We hypothesized that implementation of ERP for IBD patients is associated with shorter LOS and improved economic outcomes.

METHODS

An IRB-approved prospective clinical database was used to identify consecutive patients from 2015 to 2017. Patients were grouped as "pre-ERP" and "post-ERP" based on the date of implementation of a comprehensive ERP. Ileostomy closures, redo pouch operations, and outpatient operations were excluded. The relationship between ERP, LOS, and secondary outcomes was assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, a total of 671 patients were included: 345 (51.4%) with Crohn's disease (CD) and 326 (48.6%) with ulcerative colitis (UC). Of these, 425 were pre-ERP (63.4%), and 246 were post-ERP (36.6%). The groups did not differ in terms of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores, comorbidities, estimated blood loss, or ostomy construction. The post-ERP group had a significantly higher mean body mass index (BMI), more patients with CD, longer operative time, and more minimally invasive surgery (MIS; all P < 0.05). The post-ERP group had a significantly shorter LOS (6 vs 4.5 days, median), whereas mean hospital costs decreased by 15.7%. There was no difference in readmissions or complications. On multivariate analysis, MIS and ERP use were both associated with a shorter LOS.

CONCLUSION

Inflammatory bowel disease patients benefit from the use of ERP, demonstrating decreased LOS and costs without an increase in complications and readmissions. Enhanced recovery pathways should be routinely implemented in this often challenging patient population.

Potential Association Between Perioperative Fluid Management and Occurrence of Postoperative Ileus

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus remains an issue after colorectal surgery delaying recovery and increasing the length of hospital stay and costs.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of perioperative fluid management on ileus occurrence after colorectal surgery within a fully implemented enhanced recovery pathway.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained institutional database.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a tertiary academic facility with fully implemented standardized enhanced recovery pathway over the entire study period.

PATIENTS

All of the consecutive elective major colorectal resections for benign or malign indications between 2011 and 2016 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative ileus was defined as the need for nasogastric tube reinsertion. Perioperative fluid management and surgical outcome were compared between patients presenting with ileus and those without. Potential risk factors for ileus were identified through multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Postoperative ileus occurred in 377 (9%) of 4205 included patients at day 4 (interquartile range, 2-5 d). Intraoperatively, ileus patients received 3.2 ± 2.6 L of fluids, whereas the remaining patients received 2.5 ± 1.7 L (p < 0.001). Weight gain was 3.8 ± 7.1 kg in ileus patients versus 3.0 ± 6.6 kg (p = 0.272) in the remaining patients at postoperative day 1, 4.4 ± 6.5 kg versus 3.1 ± 7.0 kg (p = 0.028) at postoperative day 2, and 1.8 ± 6.0 kg versus 0.0 ± 6.0 kg at discharge (p = 0.002). The multivariable model including all significant (p < 0.05) demographic, fluid management-related, and surgical parameters retained postoperative day 0 fluids of >3 L (OR = 1.65 (95% CI, 1.13-2.41); p = 0.009), postoperative day 2 weight gain of >2.5 kg (OR = 1.49 (95% CI, 1.01-2.21); p = 0.048), and occurrence of postoperative complications (OR = 2.00 (95% CI, 1.39-2.90); p < 0.001) as independent risk factors for ileus.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design. Fluid management depends on patient-, disease-, and surgery-related factors and cannot be generalized and extrapolated.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluid overload and occurrence of postoperative complications were independent risk factors for postoperative ileus. This calls for action to keep perioperative fluids below suggested thresholds. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B54. ASOCIACIÓN POTENCIAL ENTRE EL MANEJO DEL LÍQUIDO PERIOPERATORIO Y EL SUCESO DE ÍLEO POSTOPERATORIO: El íleo postoperatorio sigue siendo un problema después de una cirugía colorrectal que retrasa la recuperación y aumenta la duración de la estancia hospitalaria y los costos.Analizar el impacto del manejo del líquido perioperatorio en la incidencia de íleo después de la cirugía colorrectal dentro de una vía de recuperación mejorada totalmente implementada.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo de una base de datos institucional mantenida prospectivamente.Centro académico terciario con una ruta de recuperación mejorada estandarizada completamente implementada durante todo el período del estudio.Se incluyeron todas las resecciones colorrectales mayores electivas consecutivas para indicaciones benignas o malignas entre 2011 y 2016.El íleo postoperatorio se definió como la necesidad de reinserción de la sonda nasogástrica. El manejo del líquido perioperatorio y el resultado quirúrgico se compararon entre los pacientes con íleo y los que no. Los posibles factores de riesgo para el íleo se identificaron mediante regresión logística multinominal.El íleo postoperatorio se ocurrió en 377 (9%) de los 4205 pacientes incluidos al cuarto día (RIC 2-5). Intraoperatoriamente, los pacientes con íleo recibieron 3.2 ± 2.6 L de líquidos, mientras que los pacientes restantes recibieron 2.5 ± 1.7 L (p < 0.001). El aumento de peso fue de 3.8 ± 7.1 kg en pacientes con íleo versus 3 ± 6.6 kg (p = 0.272) en los pacientes restantes en el día postoperatorio 1, 4.4 ± 6.5 kg vs. 3.1 ± 7 kg (p = 0.028) en el día postoperatorio 2 y 1.8 ± 6 kg versus a 0 ± 6 kg al tiempo de alta hospitalaria (p = 0.002). El modelo multivariable que incluye todos los parámetros demográficos, del manejo de líquidos y quirúrgicos significativos (p <0.05) mantuvo líquidos del día 0 después de la operación de> 3L (proporción de probabilidad 1.65, intervalo de confianza del 95% 1.13-2.41, p = 0.009), ganancia de peso de > 2.5 kg en el dia postoperatorio 2 (proporción de probabilidad 1.49, 95% intervalo de confianza 1.01-2.21, p = 0.048) y aparición de complicaciones postoperatorias (proporción de probabilidad 2, 95% intervalo de confianza 1.39-2.9, p <0.001) como factores de riesgo independientes para íleo.Diseño retrospectivo. El manejo de líquidos depende de factores relacionados con el paciente, la enfermedad y la cirugía, y no puede generalizarse ni extrapolarse.La sobrecarga de líquidos y la aparición de complicaciones postoperatorias fueron factores de riesgo independientes para el íleo postoperatorio. Esto requiere medidas para mantener los líquidos perioperatorios por debajo de los umbrales sugeridos. Vea el Video del Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B54.

Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol Is Associated With On-Time Initiation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Delayed initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy negatively impacts long-term survival in patients with colorectal cancer. Colorectal enhanced recovery protocols result in decreased complications and length of stay; however, the impact of enhanced recovery on the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify factors associated with on-time delivery of adjuvant chemotherapy after colorectal cancer surgery, hypothesizing that implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol would result in more patients receiving on-time chemotherapy.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study comparing the rate of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy delivery after colorectal cancer resection before and after implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a large academic medical center.

PATIENTS

All of the patients who underwent nonemergent colorectal cancer resections for curative intent from January 2010 to June 2017, excluding patients who had no indication for adjuvant chemotherapy, had received preoperative systemic chemotherapy, or did not have medical oncology records available were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients before and enhanced recovery were compared, with the rate of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy delivery as the primary outcome. Adjuvant chemotherapy delivery was considered on time if initiated ≤8 weeks postoperatively, and treatment was considered delayed or omitted if initiated >8 weeks postoperatively (delayed) or never received (omitted). Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of on-time chemotherapy delivery.

RESULTS

A total of 363 patients met inclusion criteria, with 189 patients (52.1%) undergoing surgery after enhanced recovery implementation. Groups differed in laparoscopic approach and median procedure duration, both of which were higher after enhanced recovery. Significantly more patients received on-time chemotherapy after enhanced recovery implementation (p = 0.007). Enhanced recovery was an independent predictor of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.014).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its retrospective and nonrandomized before-and-after design.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced recovery was associated with receiving on-time adjuvant chemotherapy. As prompt initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in colorectal cancer, future investigation of long-term oncologic outcomes is necessary to evaluate the potential impact of enhanced recovery on survival. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B21. LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE UN PROTOCOLO DE RECUPERACIÓN ACELERADA SE ASOCIA CON EL INICIO A TIEMPO DE QUIMIOTERAPIA ADYUVANTE EN CÁNCER COLORRECTAL:: El inicio tardío de la quimioterapia adyuvante afecta negativamente la supervivencia a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer colorrectal. Los protocolos de recuperación acelerada colorrectales dan lugar a una disminución de las complicaciones y la duración de estancia hospitalaria; sin embargo, el impacto de la recuperación acelerada en el momento de inicio de quimioterapia adyuvante sigue siendo desconocido.Este estudio tuvo como objetivo identificar los factores asociados con la administración a tiempo de la quimioterapia adyuvante después de la cirugía de cáncer colorrectal, con la hipótesis de que la implementación de un protocolo de recuperación acelerada daría lugar a que más pacientes reciban quimioterapia a tiempo.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo que compara la tasa de administración de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo después de la resección del cáncer colorrectal antes y después de la implementación de un protocolo de recuperación acelerada.Centro médico académico grande.Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a resecciones de cáncer colorrectal no emergentes con intención curativa desde enero de 2010 hasta junio de 2017, excluyendo a los pacientes que no tenían indicación de quimioterapia adyuvante, que recibieron quimioterapia sistémica preoperatoria o no tenían registros médicos de oncología disponibles.Los pacientes se compararon antes y después de la implementación de la recuperación acelerada, con la tasa de administración de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo como el resultado primario. La administración de quimioterapia adyuvante se consideró a tiempo si se inició ≤8 semanas después de la operación, y el tratamiento se consideró retrasado / omitido si se inició> 8 semanas después de la operación (retrasado) o nunca fue recibido (omitido). La regresión logística multivariable identificó predictores de administración de quimioterapia a tiempo.363 pacientes cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión, con 189 (52.1%) pacientes sometidos a cirugía después de la implementación de recuperación acelerada. Los grupos difirieron en el abordaje laparoscópico y la duración media del procedimiento; ambos factores fueron mayores después de la recuperación acelerada. Significativamente más pacientes recibieron quimioterapia a tiempo después de la implementación de recuperación acelerada (p = 0.007). La recuperación acelerada fue un factor predictivo independiente de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo (p = 0.014).Diseño retrospectivo, tipo ¨antes y después¨ no aleatorizado.La recuperación acelerada se asoció con la recepción de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo. Debido a que el inicio rápido de la quimioterapia adyuvante mejora la supervivencia en el cáncer colorrectal, en el futuro será necesario investigar los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo para evaluar el impacto potencial de la recuperación acelerada en la supervivencia. Vea el Resumen en Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B21.

Association of the Addition of Oral Antibiotics to Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Left Colon and Rectal Cancer Resections With Reduction of Surgical Site Infections

Importance

Surgical site infections (SSIs) after colorectal surgery remain a significant complication, particularly for patients with cancer, because they can delay the administration of adjuvant therapy. A combination of oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is a potential, yet controversial, SSI prevention strategy.

Objective

To determine the association of the addition of oral antibiotics to MBP with preventing SSIs in left colon and rectal cancer resections and its association with the timely administration of adjuvant therapy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective review was performed of 89 patients undergoing left colon and rectal cancer resections from October 1, 2013, to December 31, 2016, at a single institution. A bowel regimen of oral antibiotics and MBP (neomycin sulfate, metronidazole hydrochloride, and magnesium citrate) was implemented August 1, 2015. Patients receiving MBP and oral antibiotics and those undergoing MBP without oral antibiotics were compared using univariate analysis. Multivariable logistic regression controlling for factors that may affect SSIs was used to evaluate the association between use of oral antibiotics and MBP and the occurrence of SSIs.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Surgical site infections within 30 days of the index procedure and time to adjuvant therapy.

Results

Of the 89 patients (5 women and 84 men; mean [SD] age, 65.3 [9.2] years) in the study, 49 underwent surgery with MBP but without oral antibiotics and 40 underwent surgery with MBP and oral antibiotics. The patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP were younger than those who received only MBP (mean [SD] age, 62.6 [9.1] vs 67.5 [8.8] years; P = .01), but these 2 cohorts of patients were otherwise similar in baseline demographic, clinical, and cancer characteristics. Surgical approach (minimally invasive vs open) and case type were similarly distributed; however, the median operative time of patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP was longer than that of patients who received MBP only (391 minutes [interquartile range, 302-550 minutes] vs 348 minutes [interquartile range, 248-425 minutes]; P = .03). The overall SSI rate was lower for patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP than for patients who received MBP only (3 [8%] vs 13 [27%]; P = .03), with no deep or organ space SSIs or anastomotic leaks in patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP compared with 9 organ space SSIs (18%; P = .004) and 5 anastomotic leaks (10%; P = .06) in patients who received MBP only. Despite this finding, there was no difference in median days to adjuvant therapy between the 2 cohorts (60 days [interquartile range, 46-73 days] for patients who received MBP only vs 72 days [interquartile range, 59-85 days] for patients who received oral antibiotics and MBP; P = .13). Oral antibiotics and MBP (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.86; P = .04) and minimally invasive surgery (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.05-0.89; P = .03) were independently associated with reduced odds of SSIs.

Conclusions and Relevance

The combination of oral antibiotics and MBP is associated with a significant decrease in the rate of SSIs and should be considered for patients undergoing elective left colon and rectal cancer resections.

Mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation versus no bowel preparation for elective colectomy (MOBILE): a multicentre, randomised, parallel, single-blinded trial

BACKGROUND

Decreased surgical site infections (SSIs) and morbidity have been reported with mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MOABP) compared with no bowel preparation (NBP) in colonic surgery. Several societies have recommended routine use of MOABP in patients undergoing colon resection on the basis of these data. Our aim was to investigate this recommendation in a prospective randomised context.

METHODS

In this multicentre, parallel, single-blinded trial, patients undergoing colon resection were randomly assigned (1:1) to either MOABP or NBP in four hospitals in Finland, using a web-based randomisation technique. Randomly varying block sizes (four, six, and eight) were used for randomisation, and stratification was done according to centre. The recruiters, treating physicians, operating surgeons, data collectors, and analysts were masked to the allocated treatment. Key exclusion criteria were need for emergency surgery; bowel obstruction; colonoscopy planned during surgery; allergy to polyethylene glycol, neomycin, or metronidazole; and age younger than 18 years or older than 95 years. Study nurses opened numbered opaque envelopes containing the patient allocated group, and instructed the patients according to the allocation group to either prepare the bowel, or not prepare the bowel. Patients allocated to MOABP prepared their bowel by drinking 2 L of polyethylene glycol and 1 L of clear fluid before 6 pm on the day before surgery and took 2 g of neomycin orally at 7 pm and 2 g of metronidazole orally at 11 pm the day before surgery. The primary outcome was SSI within 30 days after surgery, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all patients who were randomly allocated to and underwent elective colon resection with an anastomosis) along with safety analyses. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02652637, and EudraCT, 2015-004559-38, and is closed to new participants.

FINDINGS

Between March 17, 2016, and Aug 20, 2018, 738 patients were assessed for eligibility. Of the 417 patients who were randomised (209 to MOABP and 208 to NBP), 13 in the MOABP group and eight in the NBP were excluded before undergoing colonic resection; therefore, the modified intention-to-treat analysis included 396 patients (196 for MOABP and 200 for NBP). SSI was detected in 13 (7%) of 196 patients randomised to MOABP, and in 21 (11%) of 200 patients randomised to NBP (odds ratio 1·65, 95% CI 0·80-3·40; p=0·17). Anastomotic dehiscence was reported in 7 (4%) of 196 patients in the MOABP group and in 8 (4%) of 200 in the NBP group, and reoperations were necessary in 16 (8%) of 196 compared with 13 (7%) of 200 patients. Two patients died in the NBP group and none in the MOABP group within 30 days.

INTERPRETATION

MOABP does not reduce SSIs or the overall morbidity of colon surgery compared with NBP. We therefore propose that the current recommendations of using MOABP for colectomies to reduce SSIs or morbidity should be reconsidered.

FUNDING

Vatsatautien Tutkimussäätiö Foundation, Mary and Georg Ehrnrooth's Foundation, and Helsinki University Hospital research funds.

Early Acute Kidney Injury Within an Established Enhanced Recovery Pathway: Uncommon and Transitory

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to assess the impact of perioperative fluid management on early acute kidney injury (AKI) rate and long-term sequelae in patients undergoing elective colorectal procedures within an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients from a prospectively maintained ERP database (2011-2015) is performed. Pre- and postoperative creatinine levels (within 24 h) were compared according to risk (preoperative creatinine rise ×1.5), injury (×2), failure (×3), loss of kidney function and end-stage kidney disease (RIFLE) criteria. Risk factors for early AKI were identified through logistic regression analysis, and long-term outcome in patients with AKI was assessed.

RESULTS

Out of 7103 patients, 4096 patients (58%) with pre- and postoperative creatinine levels were included. Of these, 104 patients (2.5%) presented postoperative AKI. AKI patients received higher amounts of POD 0 fluids (3.8 ± 2.4 vs. 3.2 ± 2 L, p = 0.01) and had increased postoperative weight gain at POD 2 (6 ± 4.9 vs. 3 ± 2.7 kg, p = 0.007). Independent risk factors for AKI were high ASA score (ASA ≥ 3: OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.5), prolonged operating time (>180 min: OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.3-2.9) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.5-4), while minimally invasive surgery was a protective factor (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4-0.9). Five patients (0.1%) developed chronic kidney disease, and two of them needed dialysis after a mean follow-up of 33.7 ± 22.4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Early AKI was very uncommon in the present cohort of colorectal surgery patients treated within an ERP, and long-term sequelae were exceptionally low.

The Role of Oral Antibiotic Preparation in Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the impact of the use of oral antibiotics (OAB) with or without mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on outcome in elective colorectal surgery.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Meta-analyses have demonstrated that MBP does not impact upon postoperative morbidity or mortality, and as such it should not be prescribed routinely. However, recent evidence from large retrospective cohort and database studies has suggested that there may be a role for combined OAB and MBP, or OAB alone in the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI).

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies including adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, receiving OAB with or without MBP was performed. The outcome measures examined were SSI, anastomotic leak, 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, development of ileus, reoperation and Clostridium difficile infection.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies with 69,517 patients (28 randomized controlled trials, n = 6437 and 12 cohort studies, n = 63,080) were included. The combination of MBP+OAB versus MBP alone was associated with a significant reduction in SSI [risk ratio (RR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46-0.56, P < 0.00001, I = 13%], anastomotic leak (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55-0.70, P < 0.00001, I = 0%), 30-day mortality (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44-0.76, P < 0.0001, I = 0%), overall morbidity (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.63-0.71, P < 0.00001, I = 0%), and development of ileus (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52-0.98, P = 0.04, I = 36%), with no difference in Clostridium difficile infection rates. When a combination of MBP+OAB was compared with OAB alone, no significant difference was seen in SSI or anastomotic leak rates, but there was a significant reduction in 30-day mortality, and incidence of postoperative ileus with the combination. There is minimal literature available on the comparison between combined MBP+OAB versus no preparation, OAB alone versus no preparation, and OAB versus MBP.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests a potentially significant role for OAB preparation, either in combination with MBP or alone, in the prevention of postoperative complications in elective colorectal surgery. Further high-quality evidence is required to differentiate between the benefits of combined MBP+OAB or OAB alone.

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.

The role of mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics for left-sided laparoscopic and open elective restorative colorectal surgery with and without faecal diversion

BACKGROUND

There is significant variation in the use of mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics prior to left-sided elective colorectal surgery. There has been no consensus internationally.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of the 2015 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were divided into four groups: those who had mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, mechanical bowel preparation alone, oral antibiotics alone and no preparation. The main outcome measures included overall, superficial, deep and organ/space surgical site infections. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leak, ileus and rate of Clostridium difficile.

RESULTS

A total of 5729 patients were included for analysis. The overall surgical site infection rate (any superficial, deep or organ/space infection) was significantly lower in the mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics approach when compared to no preparation (OR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.36-0.59, P < 0.0001). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics maintained a lower risk of overall surgical site infections. MBP and OAB also had a protective effect on anastomotic leak in both the laparoscopic and open cohorts (laparoscopic multivariable adjusted OR = 0.42 (0.19-0.94), P = 0.035; open multivariable adjusted OR = 0.3 (0.12-0.77), P = 0.012). Mechanical bowel preparation alone and oral antibiotics alone was not associated with a significant decrease in surgical site infections. There was no increase in C. difficile occurrences with the use of oral antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

Mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics significantly minimised surgical site infections and anastomotic leak following both laparoscopic and open left-sided restorative colorectal surgery. Mechanical bowel preparation alone did not reduce surgical site infections. There was a trend to reduction in surgical site infections with oral antibiotics alone.

Association of Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotics Before Elective Colorectal Surgery With Surgical Site Infection: A Network Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

There has been a resurgence of interest in the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotics (OAB) before elective colorectal surgery. Until now, clinical trials and meta-analyses have not compared all 4 approaches (MBP with OAB, OAB only, MBP only, or no preparation) simultaneously.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a network meta-analysis to clarify which approach in colorectal surgery is associated with the lowest rate of surgical site infection (SSI).

DATA SOURCES

Five electronic databases were searched, including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ACP Journal Club. and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness from database inception to November 27, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

Only data from randomized clinical trials were included. Inclusion criteria were RCTs that reported on SSI rates or other complications based on MBP or OAB status. Quality of studies was appraised by the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Total, incisional, and organ/space SSI rates. Secondary outcomes included rates of anastomotic leak, mortality, readmissions/reoperations, urinary tract infection, and pulmonary complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight randomized clinical trials among 8458 patients (52.1% male) were included, providing 4 direct comparisons and 2 indirect comparisons for 8 outcome measures. On Bayesian analysis, MBP with OAB vs MBP only was associated with reduced SSI (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% equal-tail credible interval [CrI], 0.57-0.88). There was no significant difference between MBP with OAB vs OAB only (OR, 0.95; 95% CrI, 0.56-1.62). Oral antibiotics without MBP was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in SSI compared with any other group (except for a risk reduction in organ/space SSI when indirectly compared with no preparation) (OR, 0.13; 95% CrI, 0.02-0.55). There was no difference in SSI between MBP only vs no preparation (OR, 0.84; 95% CrI, 0.69-1.02).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, MBP with OAB was associated with the lowest risk of SSI. Oral antibiotics only was ranked as second best, but the data available on this approach were limited. There was no difference between MBP only vs no preparation. In addition, there was no difference in rates of anastomotic leak, readmissions, or reoperations between any groups.

Acute Kidney Injury in the Age of Enhanced Recovery Protocols

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury is a prevalent complication after abdominal surgery. With increasing adoption of enhanced recovery protocols, concern exists for concomitant increase in acute kidney injury.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated effects of enhanced recovery on acute kidney injury through identification of risk factors.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study comparing acute kidney injury rates before and after implementation of enhanced recovery protocol.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a large academic medical center.

PATIENTS

All of the patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2010 and 2016, excluding patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease, were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients before and after enhanced recovery implementation were compared, with rate of acute kidney injury as the primary outcome. Acute kidney injury was defined as a rise in serum creatinine ≥1.5 times baseline within 30 days of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression identified risk factors for acute kidney injury.

RESULTS

A total of 900 cases were identified, including 461 before and 439 after enhanced recovery; 114 cases were complicated by acute kidney injury, including 11.93% of patients before and 13.44% after implementation of enhanced recovery (p = 0.50). Five patients required hemodialysis, with 2 cases after protocol implementation. Multivariable logistic regression identified hypertension, functional status, ureteral stents, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, operative time >200 minutes, and increased intravenous fluid administration on postoperative day 1 as predictors of acute kidney injury. Laparoscopic surgery decreased the risk of acute kidney injury. The enhanced recovery protocol was not independently associated with acute kidney injury.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its retrospective and nonrandomized before-and-after design.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference in rates of acute kidney injury was detected before and after implementation of a colorectal enhanced recovery protocol. Independent predictors of acute kidney injury were identified and could be used to alter the protocol in high-risk patients. Future study is needed to determine whether protocol modifications will further decrease rates of acute kidney injury in this population. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A568.

Enhanced recovery after surgery in children: Promising, evidence-based multidisciplinary care

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal approach to the care of the surgical patient focused on reducing the stress response and associated physiologic changes that accompany surgery. Over the past 20 years, ERAS programs have been found to result in reduced LOS and complications in adult patients. Despite abundant adult literature describing implementation and outcomes of enhanced recovery programs, pediatric data in this area is sparse. This educational review describes the history and elements of ERAS protocols, reviews the available evidence in adult and pediatric populations, compares and contrasts ERAS with the PSH, and offers strategies for implementation and ideas for future directions of ERAS in children.

Zusanli (ST36) Acupoint Injection with Neostigmine for Paralytic Postoperative Ileus following Radical Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: The Zusanli (ST36) acupoint has been associated with treatment of various gastrointestinal conditions. There have been no studies of acupuncture therapy for paralytic postoperative ileus (PPOI). Materials and methods: Patients with PPOI following gastrectomy for gastric cancer were randomized to receive ST36 acupoint injection with neostigmine, gluteal intramuscular injection with 1.0 mg neostigmine, ST36 acupuncture alone, or standard therapy. The main outcome was the effectiveness rate for recovery of peristalsis. Secondary outcomes were time to bowel sound recovery, time to first flatus, and time to first defecation. Tertiary outcomes were drug-related adverse events, including abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, tearing, delirium, seizure, and anxiety. Results: ST36 acupoint injection with neostigmine and gluteal intramuscular injection of neostigmine gave a higher rate of peristalsis recovery, and the ST36 acupoint injection group showed significantly higher total effectiveness rate than that of the intramuscular injection group. These interventions gave significantly shorter times to bowel sound recovery, shorter times to first flatus and first defecation compared with ST36 acupuncture and standard post-operative therapy (P < 0.01). ST36 acupoint injection group gave shorter time to bowel sound recovery, shorter time to first flatus and first defecation than those of the intramuscular injection group (P < 0.01). Drug-related adverse events in the intramuscular injection group were more serious than in the ST36 acupoint injection group (P < 0.05). Conclusion: ST36 acupoint injection with neostigmine is safe and effective for treatment of PPOI.