Comparison of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Pathway Versus Standard Care in Patients Undergoing Elective Stoma Reversal Surgery- A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Colostomy
Enhanced recovery pathway
Ileostomy
Length of hospitalization
Journal
Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract
ISSN: 1873-4626
Titre abrégé: J Gastrointest Surg
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9706084
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2023
11 2023
Historique:
received:
04
06
2023
accepted:
05
08
2023
medline:
27
11
2023
pubmed:
25
8
2023
entrez:
24
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Practices such as prolonged preoperative fasting, bowel preparation, delayed ambulation and resumption of orals result in morbidity in 15-20% of stoma reversal cases which can be improved by Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways. To evaluate the safety, feasibility and efficacy of ERAS pathway in patients undergoing elective loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal surgery METHODS: This was an open-labeled, superiority randomized controlled trial in which patients undergoing loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal were randomized to standard or ERAS care. Patients with ASA class ≥3, needing laparotomy for stoma reversal, cardiac, renal and neurological illnesses were excluded. Components of ERAS protocol included pre-operative carbohydrate loading, avoidance of mechanical bowel preparation, goal directed fluid therapy, avoidance of long-acting opioid anesthetics or analgesics, avoidance of drains, urinary catheter or nasogastric tube, early mobilization and early enteral feeding. The primary outcome was length of stay (LOS) while the secondary outcomes were postoperative recovery and morbidity parameters. Forty patients each were randomized to standard care and ERAS. Demographic and laboratory parameters between the two groups were comparable. ERAS group patients had significantly reduced LOS (5.3 ± 0.3 vs 7 ± 2.6; mean difference: 1.73 ± 0.98; p=0.0008). Functional recovery was earlier in the ERAS group compared to the standard care group, such as early resolution of ileus (median-2 days; p<0.001), time to first stool (median-3 days; p=0.0002), time to the resumption of liquid diet (median-3 days; p<0.001) and solid diet (median-4 days; p<0.001). Surgical site infections (SSI) were significantly lesser in ERAS group (12.5% vs 32.5%; p=0.03) while postoperative nausea/vomiting (p=0.08), pulmonary complications (p=0.17) and urinary tract infections (p=0.56) were comparable in both groups. ERAS pathways are feasible, safe and significantly reduces LOS in patients undergoing elective loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal surgery.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Practices such as prolonged preoperative fasting, bowel preparation, delayed ambulation and resumption of orals result in morbidity in 15-20% of stoma reversal cases which can be improved by Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways.
AIM
To evaluate the safety, feasibility and efficacy of ERAS pathway in patients undergoing elective loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal surgery METHODS: This was an open-labeled, superiority randomized controlled trial in which patients undergoing loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal were randomized to standard or ERAS care. Patients with ASA class ≥3, needing laparotomy for stoma reversal, cardiac, renal and neurological illnesses were excluded. Components of ERAS protocol included pre-operative carbohydrate loading, avoidance of mechanical bowel preparation, goal directed fluid therapy, avoidance of long-acting opioid anesthetics or analgesics, avoidance of drains, urinary catheter or nasogastric tube, early mobilization and early enteral feeding. The primary outcome was length of stay (LOS) while the secondary outcomes were postoperative recovery and morbidity parameters.
RESULTS
Forty patients each were randomized to standard care and ERAS. Demographic and laboratory parameters between the two groups were comparable. ERAS group patients had significantly reduced LOS (5.3 ± 0.3 vs 7 ± 2.6; mean difference: 1.73 ± 0.98; p=0.0008). Functional recovery was earlier in the ERAS group compared to the standard care group, such as early resolution of ileus (median-2 days; p<0.001), time to first stool (median-3 days; p=0.0002), time to the resumption of liquid diet (median-3 days; p<0.001) and solid diet (median-4 days; p<0.001). Surgical site infections (SSI) were significantly lesser in ERAS group (12.5% vs 32.5%; p=0.03) while postoperative nausea/vomiting (p=0.08), pulmonary complications (p=0.17) and urinary tract infections (p=0.56) were comparable in both groups.
CONCLUSION
ERAS pathways are feasible, safe and significantly reduces LOS in patients undergoing elective loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal surgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37620661
doi: 10.1007/s11605-023-05803-9
pii: S1091-255X(24)00058-1
doi:
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2667-2675Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract.
Références
Patel HR, Cerantola Y, Valerio M, Persson B, Jichlinski P, Ljungqvist O, Hubner M, Kassouf W, Müller S, Baldini G, Carli F, Naesheim T, Ytrebo L, Revhaug A, Lassen K, Knutsen T, Aarsaether E, Wiklund P, Catto JW. Enhanced recovery after surgery: are we ready, and can we afford not to implement these pathways for patients undergoing radical cystectomy? Eur Urol 2014;65(2):263-6.
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.011
pubmed: 24183418
Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 1997;78(5):606-617.
doi: 10.1093/bja/78.5.606
pubmed: 9175983
Ljungqvist O. ERAS-enhanced recovery after surgery: moving evidence-based perioperative care to practice. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2014;38(5):559-566.
doi: 10.1177/0148607114523451
pubmed: 24567343
Durrand JW, Batterham AM, Danjoux GR. Pre-habilitation. I: aggregation of marginal gains. Anaesthesia 2014;69(5):403-406.
doi: 10.1111/anae.12666
pubmed: 24738795
Eskicioglu C, Forbes SS, Aarts MA, Okrainec A, McLeod RS. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for patients having colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Gastrointest Surg 2009;13(12):2321-2329.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-009-0927-2
pubmed: 19459015
Lee Y, Yu J, Doumouras AG, Li J, Hong D. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) versus standard recovery for elective gastric cancer surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Oncol 2020;32:75-87.
doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2019.11.004
pubmed: 31786352
Parise P, Turi S, Talavera-Urquijo E, Carresi A, Barbieri L, Cossu A, Elmore U, Puccetti F, Rosati R. Application of ERAS protocol in esophagectomy: a national survey among Italian centers performing esophageal surgery. Updates Surg 2021;73(1):297-303.
doi: 10.1007/s13304-020-00963-8
pubmed: 33439468
Zhou J, Du R, Wang L, Wang F, Li D, Tong G, Wang W, Ding X, Wang D. The Application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obes Surg 2021;31(3):1321-1331.
doi: 10.1007/s11695-020-05209-5
pubmed: 33420977
Pirzada MT, Naseer F, Haider R, Haider J, Ahmed MJ, Alam SN, Siddique SS. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in stoma reversals. J Pak Med Assoc 2017;67(11):1674-1678.
pubmed: 29171558
Peacock O, Law CI, Collins PW, Speake WJ, Lund JN, Tierney GM. Closure of loop ileostomy: potentially a daycare procedure?. Tech Coloproctol 2011;15(4):431-437.
doi: 10.1007/s10151-011-0781-6
pubmed: 22033543
Bracey E, Chave H, Agombar A, Sleight S, Dukes S, Bryan S, Branagan G. Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting. Colorectal Dis 2015;17(10):917-921.
doi: 10.1111/codi.12989
pubmed: 25950922
Ottaviano K, Brookover R, Canete JJ, Ata A, Sheehan J, Valerian BT, David Chismark A, Lee EC. The Impact of an Enhanced Recovery Program on Loop Ileostomy Closure. Am Surg 2021;87(12):1920-1925.
doi: 10.1177/0003134820982847
pubmed: 33377796
Slieker J, Hübner M, Addor V, Duvoisin C, Demartines N, Hahnloser D. Application of an enhanced recovery pathway for ileostomy closure: a case-control trial with surprising results. Tech Coloproctol 2018;22(4):295-300.
doi: 10.1007/s10151-018-1778-1
pubmed: 29721637
Nygren J, Thorell A, Ljungqvist O. Preoperative oral carbohydrate nutrition: an update. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2001;4(4):255-259.
doi: 10.1097/00075197-200107000-00002
pubmed: 11458017
Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, Rockall TA, Young-Fadok TM, Hill AG, Soop M, de Boer HD, Urman RD, Chang GJ, Fichera A, Kessler H, Grass F, Whang EE, Fawcett WJ, Carli F, Lobo DN, Rollins KE, Balfour A, Baldini G, Riedel B, Ljungqvist O. Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS
doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4844-y
pubmed: 30426190
Li Y, Wei X, Zhang S, Zhou L, Zhang J. A Meta-Analysis of Palonosetron for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting in Adults. J Perianesth Nurs 2015;30(5):398-405.
doi: 10.1016/j.jopan.2015.05.116
pubmed: 26408514
Pragatheeswarane M, Muthukumarassamy R, Kadambari D, Kate V. Early oral feeding vs. traditional feeding in patients undergoing elective open bowel surgery-a randomized controlled trial. J Gastrointest Surg 2014;18(5):1017-23.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-014-2489-1
pubmed: 24627256
Haefeli M, Elfering A. Pain assessment. Eur Spine J 2006;15 Suppl 1 (Suppl 1):S17-S24.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-005-1044-x
pubmed: 16320034
Mohsina S, Shanmugam D, Sureshkumar S, Kundra P, Mahalakshmy T, Kate V. Adapted ERAS pathway vs standard care in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer-A randomized controlled trial. J Gastrointest Surg 2018;22:107–16
doi: 10.1007/s11605-017-3474-2
pubmed: 28653239
Saurabh K, Sureshkumar S, Mohsina S, Mahalakshmy T, Kundra P, Kate V. Adapted ERAS Pathway Versus Standard Care in Patients Undergoing Emergency Small Bowel Surgery: a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Gastrointest Surg 2020;24(9):2077-2087.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-020-04684-6
pubmed: 32632732
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004;240(2):205-213
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
pubmed: 15273542
pmcid: 1360123
Gonenc M, Dural AC, Celik F, Akarsu C, Kocatas A, Kalayci MU, Dogan Y, Alis H. Enhanced postoperative recovery pathways in emergency surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Am J Surg 2014; 207: 807–14
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.07.025
pubmed: 24119887
Greco M, Capretti G, Beretta L, Gemma M, Pecorelli N, Braga M. Enhanced recovery program in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Surg 2014;38(6):1531-1541.
doi: 10.1007/s00268-013-2416-8
pubmed: 24368573
Joh YG, Lindsetmo RO, Stulberg J, Obias V, Champagne B, Delaney CP. Standardized postoperative pathway: accelerating recovery after ileostomy closure. Dis Colon Rectum 2008;51(12):1786– 1789.
doi: 10.1007/s10350-008-9399-9
pubmed: 18575937
Baraza W, Wild J, Barber W, Brown S. Postoperative management after loop ileostomy closure: are we keeping patients in hospital too long? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2010;92(1):51-5.
doi: 10.1308/003588410X12518836439209
pubmed: 20056062
pmcid: 3024618
Chow A, Tilney HS, Paraskeva P, Jeyarajah S, Zacharakis E, Purkayastha S. The morbidity surrounding reversal of defunctioning ileostomies: a systematic review of 48 studies including 6,107 cases. Int J Colorectal Dis 2009;24(6):711-723.
doi: 10.1007/s00384-009-0660-z
pubmed: 19221766
Borchardt RA, Tzizik D. Update on surgical site infections: The new CDC guidelines. JAAPA 2018;31(4):52-54.
doi: 10.1097/01.JAA.0000531052.82007.42
pubmed: 30973535
Markides GA, Wijetunga IU, Brown SR, Anwar S. Meta-analysis of handsewn versus stapled reversal of loop ileostomy. ANZ J Surg 2015;85(4):217-224.
doi: 10.1111/ans.12684
pubmed: 24920298