Anne Kummer1, Juliette Slieker1, Fabian Grass1, Dieter Hahnloser1, Nicolas Demartines2, Martin Hübner1. 1. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV), Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV), Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland. demartines@chuv.ch.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery (ERAS) guidelines do not differentiate between left- and right-sided colectomies, but differences in recovery have been reported for the two procedure types. We aimed to compare compliance with the ERAS protocol and outcomes after right versus left colectomy. METHODS: Between June 2011 and September 2014, all patients undergoing elective colonic resection were treated according to a standardized ERAS protocol and entered a prospective database. This retrospective analysis compared right and left colectomy regarding application of the ERAS pathway, bowel recovery, complications, and hospital stay. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients with right colectomy matched well with 138 left-sided resections for baseline demographics. Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was 76 % for right versus 77 % for left colectomy patients (p = 0.492). First flatus occurred at postoperative day 2 in both groups (p = 0.057); first stool was observed after a median of 3 (right) and 2 days (left), respectively (p = 0.189). Twenty patients (24 %) needed postoperative nasogastric tube after right colectomy compared to 11 patients (8 %) after left colectomy (p = 0.002). Overall complication rates were 49 and 37 % for right and left colectomy, respectively (p = 0.071). Median postoperative length of stay was 6 days (IQR 4-9) after right and 5 days (IQR 4-7.5) after left colectomy (p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Overall compliance with the protocol was equally high in both groups showing that ERAS protocol was applicable for right and left colectomy. Functional recovery however, tended to be slower after right colectomy, and postoperative ileus rate was significantly higher. More cautious early feeding after right colectomy should be considered.
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery (ERAS) guidelines do not differentiate between left- and right-sided colectomies, but differences in recovery have been reported for the two procedure types. We aimed to compare compliance with the ERAS protocol and outcomes after right versus left colectomy. METHODS: Between June 2011 and September 2014, all patients undergoing elective colonic resection were treated according to a standardized ERAS protocol and entered a prospective database. This retrospective analysis compared right and left colectomy regarding application of the ERAS pathway, bowel recovery, complications, and hospital stay. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients with right colectomy matched well with 138 left-sided resections for baseline demographics. Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was 76 % for right versus 77 % for left colectomy patients (p = 0.492). First flatus occurred at postoperative day 2 in both groups (p = 0.057); first stool was observed after a median of 3 (right) and 2 days (left), respectively (p = 0.189). Twenty patients (24 %) needed postoperative nasogastric tube after right colectomy compared to 11 patients (8 %) after left colectomy (p = 0.002). Overall complication rates were 49 and 37 % for right and left colectomy, respectively (p = 0.071). Median postoperative length of stay was 6 days (IQR 4-9) after right and 5 days (IQR 4-7.5) after left colectomy (p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Overall compliance with the protocol was equally high in both groups showing that ERAS protocol was applicable for right and left colectomy. Functional recovery however, tended to be slower after right colectomy, and postoperative ileus rate was significantly higher. More cautious early feeding after right colectomy should be considered.
Authors: A M Wolthuis; G Bislenghi; S Fieuws; A de Buck van Overstraeten; G Boeckxstaens; A D'Hoore Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Ankur R Rana; Jamie A Cannon; Gamal Mostafa; Alfredo M Carbonell; Kent W Kercher; H James Norton; B Todd Heniford Journal: Surg Innov Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.058
Authors: Damian Bragg; Ahmed M El-Sharkawy; Emmanouil Psaltis; Charles A Maxwell-Armstrong; Dileep N Lobo Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2015-01-31 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: Zhobin Moghadamyeghaneh; Grace S Hwang; Mark H Hanna; Michael Phelan; Joseph C Carmichael; Steven Mills; Alessio Pigazzi; Michael J Stamos Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-05-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Lise Courtot; Bertrand Le Roy; Ricardo Memeo; Thibault Voron; Nicolas de Angelis; Nicolas Tabchouri; Francesco Brunetti; Anne Berger; Didier Mutter; Johan Gagniere; Ephrem Salamé; Denis Pezet; Mehdi Ouaïssi Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2018-05-07 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Aleksandar Resanovic; Darko Zdravkovic; Vladimir Resanovic; Borislav Toskovic; Miroslav Djordjevic Journal: World J Surg Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Andrea Carolina Quiroga-Centeno; Kihara Alejandra Jerez-Torra; Pedro Antonio Martin-Mojica; Sergio Andrés Castañeda-Alfonso; María Emma Castillo-Sánchez; Oscar Fernando Calvo-Corredor; Sergio Alejandro Gómez-Ochoa Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Piotr Małczak; Michał Wysocki; Hanna Twardowska; Alicja Dudek; Justyna Tabiś; Piotr Major; Magdalena Pisarska; Michał Pędziwiatr Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 4.129