Literature DB >> 24960491

Operative time and outcome of enhanced recovery after surgery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Oliver J Harrison1, Neil J Smart2, Paul White3, Adela Brigic2, Elinor R Carlisle2, Andrew S Allison2, Jonathan B Ockrim2, Nader K Francis2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Combining laparoscopy and enhanced recovery provides benefit to short-term outcomes after colorectal surgery. Advances in training and techniques have allowed surgeons to operate on cases that are technically challenging and associated with prolonged operative time. Laparoscopic techniques improve the outcome of enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery; however, there are no specifications on the effect of prolonged operations on the outcome. The objective was to elucidate the impact of prolonged surgery and blood loss on the outcome of enhanced recovery after surgery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.
METHODS: Four-hundred patients who underwent elective colorectal resection on enhanced recovery after surgery in Yeovil District Hospital between 2002 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Delayed discharge was defined as a prolonged length of stay beyond the mean in this series (≥8 days).
RESULTS: Three-hundred eighty-five patients were included. Median operative time was 180 minutes with a median blood loss of 100 mL. Conversion was not associated with a prolonged length of stay. Operative time and blood loss correlated with length of stay in a stepwise fashion. There were 2 cutoff points of operative time at 160 minutes and 300 minutes (5 hours), where risk of prolonged stay increased significantly (odds ratio [OR] 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-3.90; P = .027), and blood loss of >500 mL (OR 3.114; 95% CI, 1.501-6.462, P = .002).
CONCLUSIONS: Total operative timing impacts negatively on the outcome of enhanced recovery after laparoscopic colorectal resections with increased risk of delayed discharge seen after ∼2.5 hours and 5-hour duration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24960491      PMCID: PMC4035638          DOI: 10.4293/108680813X13753907291918

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JSLS        ISSN: 1086-8089            Impact factor:   2.172


INTRODUCTION

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal care pathway that aims to reduce the stress response to surgery and optimize postoperative recovery by guiding perioperative management.[1] The association of ERAS with improved short-term outcomes, including reduced length of stay, reduction in morbidity, faster return of bowel function, earlier mobilization, and lower pain scores, is well documented.[2-7] The introduction of laparoscopic surgery to ERAS, compared with open procedures and standard postoperative care, has produced further reductions in morbidity and hospital stay.[8] In most well-established ERAS units, it is now anticipated that most patients would be discharged within 1 week. Advances in training and techniques in laparoscopic surgery have allowed surgeons to operate on complex cases that are technically challenging and associated with prolonged operative time.[9-12] Although it has been shown that laparoscopic techniques improve the outcome of enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery,[13,14] there are no specifications on different operative elements such as total operative time and operative blood loss on the outcome. Anecdotally, it is well perceived that prolonged operative time and major operative blood loss are associated with poorer outcomes that could lead to delayed recovery even in the presence of an established enhanced recovery program. Two recent publications from our unit examined broadly the factors associated with deviation from ERAS and prolonged hospital stay.[15,16] Our previous publications examined all perioperative factors that influence length of stay and predict delayed discharge. An additional findings included association of stoma formation with delayed discharge. Conversion to an open procedure and excision of the rectum (versus colon) were not examined. Postoperative complications were predictive of enhanced recovery program deviation and delayed discharge. The aim of this study was to examine specifically the operative factors including total operative time and blood loss and to identify the cutoff point of these markers on the outcome of ERAS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent elective colorectal resection in Yeovil District Hospital (YDH) between 2002 and 2009 was performed. Surgical procedures included in this study were right, left, or subtotal colectomies; segmental resections; sigmoid colectomy; and rectal resections performed for benign and malignant lesions. Patients were identified from a prospectively maintained database, and all patients were cared for within an enhanced recovery program. The colorectal unit at YDH has been a well-established center for enhanced recovery and laparoscopic colorectal surgery since 2002. It is a recognized training center for the national training program for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Full details of the methodology and multivariate analysis used can be found in the earlier publications from this series.[15,16] Data included patient demographics and compliance with the enhanced recovery pathway. Operative factors such as total operative time, total blood loss, and conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery were recorded. Conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery was defined as the inability to complete the dissection laparoscopically, including the vascular ligation, and usually, but not always, requiring an incision larger than that required to remove the specimen. Length of stay was based on the time spent in hospital postoperatively. This was defined as the day of operation (day 0) to the day of discharge. Patients were discharged from the hospital when they met the following criteria: the patients could tolerate normal diet and take only oral analgesia (if required); the patients were mobile; and the patients and their families agreed to the discharge. Postoperative complications and readmissions were recorded from the patients' notes up to 30 days postoperatively. Long-term follow-up was not included in this study.

Definitions

Total operative time was defined as the time taken from skin incision to completion of skin closure. Total blood loss was defined as the volume of blood collected in the suction bag and estimated from swabs at the end of the operation. Delayed discharge was defined as a prolonged length of stay of beyond 8 days in the absence of major surgical or medical complications, as in a well-established ERAS unit it is anticipated that patients with uneventful recovery should be discharged within 1 week.[6,17] The mean length of stay in this study was 8 days, which was used as a cutoff. For this reason, the operationally dependent variable in the following analyses is length of stay dichotomized into stays of up to 1 week (≤7 days) or >1 week (≥8 days). This form of the dependent variable removes possible weekend or day of week effects that might influence precise length of stay and ensures that the statistical impact of any unusually long stays is minimized to help establish robust conclusions.

Statistical Analysis

The data were recorded in an Excel spreadsheet and analyzed using SPSS statistical software (version 19; SPSS Inc, Chicago, Illinois). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.[15,16] In addition, χ2 testing was used to identify relationships between variables and outcomes, and assumptions made to valid applications of the test were examined and justified. The magnitude of effect was quantified with odds ratios (OR), and confidence intervals for these were derived. Two-sided tests of statistical hypotheses with P < .05 to indicate statistical significance were used throughout.

RESULTS

Four hundred patients underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resections within the enhanced recovery program at YDH between 2002 and 2009. Fifteen patients were excluded because notes were unobtainable for data extraction. A total of 385 patient records were included in the analysis. Of those 385, 276 (72%) had surgery for malignancy and 189 (49%) were men. The mean age was 68 years (range, 15–94), with 82 patients (21%) >80 years. illustrates patient demographics and operations. Overall, median postoperative stay was 6 days (range, 2–49) with a mean of 8 days. The 30-day readmission rate was 8% (n = 31). Patient Demographic and Operational Data (n = 385)[a] ASA, acetylsalicylic acid; BMI, body mass index. Unless otherwise indicated, data are n (%). Of the 385 patients analyzed, the compliance rate was >85% in all pre- and intraoperative elements of ERAS (. Median operative time was 180 minutes with a median blood loss of 100 mL. Rectal resection or pelvic dissection was required in 36% of cases. The first surgeon was listed as a consultant in 331 (86%) cases. Conversion to open procedures occurred in 17.9% of cases, while 8.3% were unsuitable for laparoscopic resections and therefore surgical open procedures were performed. Conversion to open surgery was not associated with a prolonged length of stay. Compliance and Deviation With Elements of ERAS[a] ERAS, enhanced recovery after surgery; IV, intravenous. Data are percentages. Postoperative complications are displayed in and included anastomotic leak (1.6%), return to theater (7.5%), wound infection (10.1%), intra-abdominal collection (2.1%), medical complications (5.9%), and death (1%). Complications of Surgery Data on operative time was available for 365 (94.8%) patients. Operative time was seen to adopt a stepped relationship to the risk of prolonged hospital stay with critical times at 160 minutes and 300 minutes (5 hours), where risk of prolonged stay increased significantly (. Resections of the rectum or pelvic dissection had a mean operative time of 230 minutes versus 178 minutes for all other operations. Operative time of ≥5 hours was associated with length of stay >1 week (OR = 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05–3.90; P = .027) (. Similarly, data on blood loss were available for 335 (87.0%) patients, and that data indicated that with an operative blood loss of 500 mL, patients had an increase in risk of prolonged length of stay (. The association between patients with a blood loss of >500 mL and a length of stay >1 week was significant (OR = 3.114; 95% CI, 1.501–6.462; P = .002) (. Five-point smoothed average line plots showing the relationship between operative time and percentage of patients staying >1 week. Operative Time and Length of Stay Five-point smoothed average line plots showing the relationship between blood loss and percentage of patients staying >1 week. Blood Loss and Length of Stay

DISCUSSION

The impact of increased operative time and blood loss on outcomes in laparoscopic colorectal surgery is multifactorial and difficult to quantify and has not been evaluated in detail previously. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of prolonged surgery and major blood loss on recovery within a well-established ERAS program after elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Average length of stay in uncomplicated cases in our institution has previously been reported at between 4 and 5 days.[15,16] In the present study for patients with an operative time of <120 minutes, the average length of stay was 6.4 days. We specifically investigated those patients with prolonged operative time and increased blood loss to elucidate the impact of this factor on the outcome of ERAS, as measured by length of stay. This study identified a critical operative time of >5 hours and blood loss of >500 mL, even in uneventful recovery, as being associated with prolonged lengths of stay.

Operative Time

Operation time of >5 hours was associated with delayed discharge and is likely to be a surrogate marker of surgical difficulty. This retrospective cohort of consecutive patients who have undergone elective colorectal resections performed at YDH included patients who had surgery for advanced rectal cancer after long-course radiotherapy and pouch reconstruction. Similar results have been noted in other series undergoing laparoscopic colorectal[18] and advanced laparoscopic urological surgery,[19] indicating that operative times of >4.5 and 5 hours, respectively, are associated with prolonged lengths of stay. However, while our study supports the finding that operative time of >5 hours was associated with prolonged lengths of stay, this was not necessarily associated with postoperative complications. Our institution has offered laparoscopic colorectal resections routinely to most patients since 2002. Open cases are usually selected preoperatively or occasionally converted intraoperatively where completion laparoscopically would be difficult. Mean operative time for our open cases was 207 minutes. Conversion of difficult laparoscopic cases would likely skew this figure and is thus unrepresentative of our selected open case operative time. However, 3 large randomized controlled trials of open versus laparoscopic colorectal resections quote average operative times for open procedures of between 95 and 135 minutes.[20-22] Uneventful prolonged surgery >5 hours, with no major postoperative complications such as anastomotic leak or return to theater, still resulted in prolonged lengths of stay in this series despite a well-established enhanced recovery program in our institution. Although the conversion rate in this series was 17.9%, it was not associated with delayed discharge. We hypothesize that for those patients with prolonged surgery, an earlier conversion might have avoided their delayed discharge. The underlying mechanism of delayed discharge after prolonged surgery can be explained in part by the complexity of the pathology requiring surgical intervention and in part by the prolonged exposure to anesthetic agents.[23] The combination of these factors is manifested clinically in the postoperative deviation from ERAS and results in delayed discharge.[24] Theoretically, prolonged operative time may indicate excessive intravenous fluid administration, but in our practice, we have adopted a goal-directed fluid therapy to control administration of fluid. In addition, prolonged operations are likely to be rectal procedures during which a steep, head-down position is required to allow exposure of the operative field. The negative cardiorespiratory effects of prolonged pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position are well documented.[25-27] Increased central venous and pulmonary artery pressures with reciprocal decreases in cardiac output and lung compliance potentially increase the risk of adverse outcomes in patients with pre-existing diseases. The risk of periorbital edema increases in prolonged laparoscopic surgery with the Trendelenburg position.[23] In addition, cases of lower limb compartment syndrome have been reported after prolonged laparoscopic procedures with steep positional changes. Therefore, avoidance of prolonged Trendelenburg positioning in colorectal surgery has been recommended.[28] The metabolic effects of pneumoperitoneum are well documented. Hypercarbia produces a respiratory acidosis in a time-dependent manner that persists with increased minute ventilation.[29-31] Acidosis suppresses myocardial function, causes pulmonary vasoconstriction, and might worsen right ventricular heart failure.[32] Sympathetic stimulation and increased afterload may represent a challenge to patients with borderline cardiac reserve.[33] PaCO2 values appear to normalize ∼1 hour after the release of pneumoperitoneum.[34] Our data demonstrate that the risk of delayed discharge begins to increase with operative times of >160 and 300 minutes. Consequently, in our institution, a policy of pausing the operation at a surgically convenient point at between 2 and 2.5 hours has been adopted. The pneumoperitoneum is released and the patient's position is corrected for up to 20 minutes before the surgery continues. The theoretical aims are to correct the adverse metabolic and cardiorespiratory effects of laparoscopy in the Trendelenburg position and to reduce the risk of lower limb compartment syndrome. We hypothesize that releasing the pneumoperitoneum at this time allows partial correction of the acidosis and reduces the likelihood of delayed discharge. Further studies are required to validate this, since the relationship between pneumoperitoneum-associated acidosis and impact on delayed discharge has not been established.

Blood Loss

Increased intraoperative blood loss correlates with increased length of stay in association with confounding factors such as conversion rate in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.[17,35] Laparoscopic surgery is known to be technically challenging and may be prolonged by operative complexity, the need for conversion, and unexpected intraoperative findings that delay progression.[24,36,37] With the advances in technology of laparoscopic equipment, such as tissue energizers, minimal blood loss is anticipated during elective colorectal resections. Blood loss of >500 mL is most likely an indication of increased operative complexity and prolonged surgery; hence, its association with delayed discharge. Delayed discharge following excessive intraoperative blood loss and subsequent blood transfusion in open colorectal surgery has been documented previously.[38] Administration of a blood transfusion, however, is an independent predictor of increased morbidity and length of stay for surgical patients, including colorectal patients, although literature specific to laparoscopy is sparse.[39,40]

Risk Stratification

Lengths of postoperative stay for elective laparoscopic colorectal resections as short as 24 hours have been achieved,[41,42] but the factors that determine successful candidates for this approach have not been clearly defined. Although a median operative time of 73 minutes was reported for 10 successful patients, no reference to blood loss was made by the investigators.[41] Conversely for those patients with prolonged operative times of >5 hours and/or blood loss of >500 mL, a modified operative and postoperative care pathway with a different expectation (of day of discharge) could be beneficial. The modified postoperative pathway should be tailored to enhance the restoration of gut function after relative hypoperfusion and prolonged anesthetic, both of which increase the risk of developing postoperative ileus. Mechanisms to combat this could include aggressive physiotherapy to mobilize the patient, optimizing and continuing analgesic regimens (such as epidurals) for >48 hours postoperatively, and the use of chewing gum, which is a form of “sham feeding” that enhances gastrointestinal motility through cephalic-vagal stimulation.[43] Further studies are required to validate this modified postoperative care pathway for those patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Operative timing impacts negatively on the outcome of enhanced recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. A prolonged operative time of >5 hours is significantly associated with delayed discharge of >1 week. Total blood loss of >500 mL is also associated with delayed discharge. For those patients, a modified postoperative care pathway may be considered.
Table 1.

Patient Demographic and Operational Data (n = 385)[a]

Age, y, median (range)68 (15–94)
Sex, n196 female, 189 male
BMI, median (range)26 (17–44)
ASA
    171 (18.4)
    2236 (61.3)
    375 (19.5)
    Not recorded3 (0.8)
Operative approach
    Laparoscopic283 (73.5)
    Laparoscopic converted to open69 (17.9)
    Open32 (8.3)
    Not recorded1 (0.3)
Operation
    Ileocolic/right/extended right/transverse128 (33.2)
    Left20 (5.2)
    Sigmoid75 (19.5)
    Hartmann/Hartmann reversal15 (3.9)
    Subtotal colectomy10 (2.6)
    Total colectomy and proctectomy14 (3.6)
    Anterior resection106 (27.6)
    Abdominoperineal excision17 (4.4)

ASA, acetylsalicylic acid; BMI, body mass index.

Unless otherwise indicated, data are n (%).

Table 2.

Compliance and Deviation With Elements of ERAS[a]

ComplianceDeviation
Preoperative
    Patient counseling1000
    No premedication1000
    Avoidance of bowel prep928
    Carbohydrate loading982
    No starvation991
Intraoperative
    Short-acting anesthesia946
    Minimum incision length8614
    No routine nasogastric tube or drains919
    High inspired oxygen fraction946
    Postoperative
    Discontinuation of IV fluids29.770.3
    Epidural76.123.9
    Mobilization83.116.9
    Nasogastric tube89.110.9
    Catheterization90.19.9

ERAS, enhanced recovery after surgery; IV, intravenous.

Data are percentages.

Table 3.

Complications of Surgery

Complicationn (%)
Anastomotic leak (all managed operatively)6 (1.6)
Return to theater29 (7.5)
    Refashioning of stoma5 (1.5)
    Defunctioning stoma3 (0.8)
    Examination under anesthesia2 (0.5)
    Laparotomy for small-bowel obstruction6 (1.6)
    Laparotomy and redo anastomosis4 (1.0)
    Laparotomy and washout for sepsis or hematoma6 (1.6)
    Wound dehiscence3 (0.8)
Wound infection39 (10.1)
Intra-abdominal collections8 (2.1)
Atrial fibrillation7 (1.8)
Deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism1 (0.3)
Pneumonia7 (1.8)
Acute renal failure4 (1.0)
Urinary tract infection2 (0.5)
Clostridium difficile infection2 (0.5)
Death4 (1.0)
Table 4.

Operative Time and Length of Stay

Length of Stay
Total
≤7 Days≥8 Days
Operation time<5 hCount22797324
Percentage70.129.9100.0
≥5 hCount221941
Percentage53.746.3100.0
TotalCount249116365
Percentage68.231.8100.0
Table 5.

Blood Loss and Length of Stay

Length of Stay
Total
≤7 Days≥8 Days
Blood loss≤500Count21884302
Percentage72.227.8100.0
>500Count151833
Percentage45.554.5100.0
TotalCount233102335
Percentage69.630.4100.0
  40 in total

1.  Evaluation of the technical difficulty performing laparoscopic resection of a rectosigmoid carcinoma: visceral fat reflects technical difficulty more accurately than body mass index.

Authors:  Y Seki; M Ohue; M Sekimoto; S Takiguchi; I Takemasa; M Ikeda; H Yamamoto; M Monden
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-02-07       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Effects of blood transfusion with leucocyte depletion on length of hospital stay, respiratory assistance and survival after curative surgery for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Jan Skånberg; Kent Lundholm; Eva Haglind
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.089

Review 3.  Enhanced recovery in colorectal resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  C J Walter; J Collin; J C Dumville; P J Drew; J R Monson
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2009-02-04       Impact factor: 3.788

Review 4.  Gum chewing reduces postoperative ileus? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Emma J Noble; Ros Harris; Ken B Hosie; Steve Thomas; Stephen J Lewis
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2009-01-31       Impact factor: 6.071

Review 5.  Consensus review of optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Group recommendations.

Authors:  Kristoffer Lassen; Mattias Soop; Jonas Nygren; P Boris W Cox; Paul O Hendry; Claudia Spies; Maarten F von Meyenfeldt; Kenneth C H Fearon; Arthur Revhaug; Stig Norderval; Olle Ljungqvist; Dileep N Lobo; Cornelis H C Dejong
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2009-10

6.  Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial.

Authors:  Ruben Veldkamp; Esther Kuhry; Wim C J Hop; J Jeekel; G Kazemier; H Jaap Bonjer; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio M Lacy
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 41.316

7.  The influence of an enhanced recovery programme on clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  P M King; J M Blazeby; P Ewings; R J Longman; R M Kipling; P J Franks; J P Sheffield; L B Evans; M Soulsby; S H Bulley; R H Kennedy
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.788

8.  Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Pierre J Guillou; Philip Quirke; Helen Thorpe; Joanne Walker; David G Jayne; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 May 14-20       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  23-hour-stay laparoscopic colectomy.

Authors:  B F Levy; M J P Scott; W J Fawcett; T A Rockall
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 4.585

10.  Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for patients having colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Authors:  Cagla Eskicioglu; Shawn S Forbes; Mary-Anne Aarts; Allan Okrainec; Robin S McLeod
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-05-21       Impact factor: 3.452

View more
  16 in total

1.  Protocol for enhanced recovery after surgery improves short-term outcomes for patients with gastric cancer: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Ryo Tanaka; Sang-Woong Lee; Masaru Kawai; Keitaro Tashiro; Satoshi Kawashima; Syuji Kagota; Kotaro Honda; Kazuhisa Uchiyama
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 7.370

2.  Impact of laparoscopy on adherence to an enhanced recovery pathway and readiness for discharge in elective colorectal surgery: Results from the PeriOperative Italian Society registry.

Authors:  Marco Braga; Felice Borghi; Marco Scatizzi; Giancarlo Missana; Marco Azzola Guicciardi; Stefano Bona; Ferdinando Ficari; Marianna Maspero; Nicolò Pecorelli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Does the number of operating specialists influence the conversion rate and outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery?

Authors:  Nader K Francis; Nathan J Curtis; Louise Crilly; Emma Noble; Tamsin Dyke; Rob Hipkiss; Richard Dalton; Andrew Allison; Emad Salib; Jonathan Ockrim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  The robotic approach significantly reduces length of stay after colectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Ahmed M Al-Mazrou; Codruta Chiuzan; Ravi P Kiran
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Epidural analgesia in the era of enhanced recovery: time to rethink its use?

Authors:  Ahmed M Al-Mazrou; James M Kiely; Ravi P Kiran
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Active and passive compliance in an enhanced recovery programme.

Authors:  Christopher C Thorn; Ian White; Jennie Burch; George Malietzis; Robin Kennedy; John T Jenkins
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resections for rectal and rectosigmoid cancer: an institutional experience.

Authors:  Noel E Donlon; Tim S Nugent; Ross Free; Adnan Hafeez; Resa Kalbassi; Paul C Neary; Diarmuid S O'Riordain
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 1.568

8.  Readmission Rate and Causes at 90-Day after Radical Cystectomy in Patients on Early Recovery after Surgery Protocol.

Authors:  Emanuela Altobelli; Maurizio Buscarini; Harcharan S Gill; Eila C Skinner
Journal:  Bladder Cancer       Date:  2017-01-27

9.  Comparison of efficacy of simo decoction and acupuncture or chewing gum alone on postoperative ileus in colorectal cancer resection: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Yang Yang; Hong-Qun Zuo; Zhao Li; Yu-Zhou Qin; Xian-Wei Mo; Ming-Wei Huang; Hao Lai; Liu-Cheng Wu; Jian-Si Chen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Economic burden of cancer among patients with surgical resections of the lung, rectum, liver and uterus: results from a US hospital database claims analysis.

Authors:  Iftekhar Kalsekar; Chia-Wen Hsiao; Hang Cheng; Sashi Yadalam; Brian Po-Han Chen; Laura Goldstein; Andrew Yoo
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2017-06-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.