Eva Myriokefalitaki1,2, M Smith3, A S Ahmed3. 1. Gynaecological Oncology, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, UK. evamyriokefalitaki@mycosmos.gr. 2. Gynaecological Oncology, University Hospitals of South Manchester, Manchester, UK. evamyriokefalitaki@mycosmos.gr. 3. Gynaecological Oncology, University Hospitals of South Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) implementation in a gynaecological oncology centre. METHOD: Non-randomised control trial, evaluating morbidity outcomes, before and after implementation of ERAS programme. All consecutive major gynaecological oncology operations performed during two specified periods were included. Data were collected prospectively for a study group in the initial 7.5 months of ERAS implementation and compared with a consecutive historic control group from the exact same period, the year before. Patients' characteristics and perioperative outcomes were compared. Further analysis stratified abdominal and laparoscopic surgery. RESULTS: In total, 265 cases identified; 99 patients followed ERAS and 99 historic controls, managed with a traditional peri-operative approach, the exact same period the year before (vulval surgery excluded, 67 cases). Groups were comparable in demographics and co-morbidities (age, BMI, ASA, WHO), level of surgery and 30 days post-operative complication (grading Clavien-Dindo classification) and readmission rates (p > 0.05). Overall, the post-operative length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly reduced for patients who followed ERAS (4.29 ± 2.78 days versus 7.23 ± 5.68 days, p < 0.001). Stratification to subgroups was based on the type of surgery, abdominal versus laparoscopic. Those who underwent abdominal surgery and followed ERAS benefited the maximum (LOS: 5.09 ± 2.74 days versus 8.70 ± 5.75, p < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: ERAS programme is feasible and safe in Gynae-oncology. In this study, there was a reduction of 3.61 (SE: 0.78, CI 95 %) days in the total LOS, in major abdominal Gynae-oncology surgery (level 3 and 4) without affecting complication or readmission rates.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) implementation in a gynaecological oncology centre. METHOD: Non-randomised control trial, evaluating morbidity outcomes, before and after implementation of ERAS programme. All consecutive major gynaecological oncology operations performed during two specified periods were included. Data were collected prospectively for a study group in the initial 7.5 months of ERAS implementation and compared with a consecutive historic control group from the exact same period, the year before. Patients' characteristics and perioperative outcomes were compared. Further analysis stratified abdominal and laparoscopic surgery. RESULTS: In total, 265 cases identified; 99 patients followed ERAS and 99 historic controls, managed with a traditional peri-operative approach, the exact same period the year before (vulval surgery excluded, 67 cases). Groups were comparable in demographics and co-morbidities (age, BMI, ASA, WHO), level of surgery and 30 days post-operative complication (grading Clavien-Dindo classification) and readmission rates (p > 0.05). Overall, the post-operative length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly reduced for patients who followed ERAS (4.29 ± 2.78 days versus 7.23 ± 5.68 days, p < 0.001). Stratification to subgroups was based on the type of surgery, abdominal versus laparoscopic. Those who underwent abdominal surgery and followed ERAS benefited the maximum (LOS: 5.09 ± 2.74 days versus 8.70 ± 5.75, p < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: ERAS programme is feasible and safe in Gynae-oncology. In this study, there was a reduction of 3.61 (SE: 0.78, CI 95 %) days in the total LOS, in major abdominal Gynae-oncology surgery (level 3 and 4) without affecting complication or readmission rates.
Entities:
Keywords:
Complication; Enhanced recovery; Gynae-oncology; Hospital stay; Morbidity; Readmission; Surgery