J Slieker1, P Frauche2, J Jurt2, V Addor1, C Blanc3, Nicolas Demartines4, M Hübner1. 1. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Faculty of Medicine, UNIL University, Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland. demartines@chuv.ch.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway includes recovery goals requiring active participation of the patients; this may be perceived as "aggressive" care in older patients. The aim of the present study was to assess whether ERAS was feasible and beneficial in older patients. METHODS: Since June 2011, all consecutive colorectal patients were included in an ERAS pathway and documented in a dedicated prospective database. This retrospective analysis included 513 patients, 311 younger patients (<70 years) and 202 older patients (≥70 years). Outcomes were adherence to the ERAS pathway, functional recovery, postoperative complications, and hospital stay. RESULTS: Older patients had significantly more diabetes, malignancies, cardiac, and respiratory co-morbidities; both groups underwent similar surgical procedures. Overall adherence to the ERAS pathway was in median 78 % in younger and 74 % in older patients (P = 0.86). In older patients, urinary drains were kept longer (P = 0.001), and oral fluid intake was reduced from day 0 to day 3 (P < 0.001). There were no differences in mobilization and intake of nutritional supplements. Postoperative complications were similar for both comparative groups (51.5 vs. 46.6 %, P = 0.32). Median length of stay was 7 days (IQR 5-13) in older patients vs. 6 days (IQR 4-10) in the younger group (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Adherence to the ERAS pathway was equally high in older patients. Despite more co-morbidities, older patients did not experience more complications. Recovery was similar and hospital stay was only 1 day longer than in younger patients. ERAS pathway is of value for all patients and does not need any adaptation for the elderly.
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway includes recovery goals requiring active participation of the patients; this may be perceived as "aggressive" care in older patients. The aim of the present study was to assess whether ERAS was feasible and beneficial in older patients. METHODS: Since June 2011, all consecutive colorectalpatients were included in an ERAS pathway and documented in a dedicated prospective database. This retrospective analysis included 513 patients, 311 younger patients (<70 years) and 202 older patients (≥70 years). Outcomes were adherence to the ERAS pathway, functional recovery, postoperative complications, and hospital stay. RESULTS: Older patients had significantly more diabetes, malignancies, cardiac, and respiratory co-morbidities; both groups underwent similar surgical procedures. Overall adherence to the ERAS pathway was in median 78 % in younger and 74 % in older patients (P = 0.86). In older patients, urinary drains were kept longer (P = 0.001), and oral fluid intake was reduced from day 0 to day 3 (P < 0.001). There were no differences in mobilization and intake of nutritional supplements. Postoperative complications were similar for both comparative groups (51.5 vs. 46.6 %, P = 0.32). Median length of stay was 7 days (IQR 5-13) in older patients vs. 6 days (IQR 4-10) in the younger group (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Adherence to the ERAS pathway was equally high in older patients. Despite more co-morbidities, older patients did not experience more complications. Recovery was similar and hospital stay was only 1 day longer than in younger patients. ERAS pathway is of value for all patients and does not need any adaptation for the elderly.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adherence; Colorectal surgery; Enhanced recovery after surgery; Postoperative complications in elderly
Authors: Paul M Verheijen; Anthony W H Vd Ven; Paul H P Davids; Bryan J M Vd Wall; Apollo Pronk Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2011-11-12 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Massimiliano Greco; Giovanni Capretti; Luigi Beretta; Marco Gemma; Nicolò Pecorelli; Marco Braga Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Julio F Fiore; Andrea Bialocerkowski; Laura Browning; Ian G Faragher; Linda Denehy Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: U O Gustafsson; M J Scott; W Schwenk; N Demartines; D Roulin; N Francis; C E McNaught; J Macfie; A S Liberman; M Soop; A Hill; R H Kennedy; D N Lobo; K Fearon; O Ljungqvist Journal: World J Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Krishna K Varadhan; Keith R Neal; Cornelius H C Dejong; Kenneth C H Fearon; Olle Ljungqvist; Dileep N Lobo Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2010-01-29 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: D Roulin; A Donadini; S Gander; A-C Griesser; C Blanc; M Hübner; M Schäfer; N Demartines Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Mikhail Kisialeuski; Michał Pędziwiatr; Maciej Matłok; Piotr Major; Marcin Migaczewski; Damian Kołodziej; Anna Zub-Pokrowiecka; Magdalena Pisarska; Piotr Budzyński; Andrzej Budzyński Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 1.195
Authors: Ana C De Roo; Sarah P Shubeck; Anne H Cain-Nielsen; Edward C Norton; Scott E Regenbogen Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2022-05-01 Impact factor: 4.412
Authors: Michał Pędziwiatr; Judene Mavrikis; Jan Witowski; Alexandros Adamos; Piotr Major; Michał Nowakowski; Andrzej Budzyński Journal: Med Oncol Date: 2018-05-09 Impact factor: 3.064
Authors: Michał Nowakowski; Piotr Małczak; Magdalena Mizera; Mateusz Rubinkiewicz; Anna Lasek; Mateusz Wierdak; Piotr Major; Andrzej Budzyński; Michał Pędziwiatr Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2018-10-27 Impact factor: 4.241