BACKGROUND: The feasibility of the use of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients with gastric cancer remains unclear. METHODS: This study was a single-center, prospective randomized trial involving patients with gastric cancer undergoing curative gastrectomy. The primary end point was the length of postoperative hospital stay. Secondary end points were the postoperative complication rate, admission costs, weight loss, and amount of physical activity. RESULTS:From July 2013 to June 2015, we randomized 148 patients into an ERAS protocol group (n = 73) and a conventional protocol group (n = 69); six patients withdrew from the study. The hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ERAS protocol group than in the conventional protocol group (9 days vs 10 days; P = 0.037). The ERAS protocol group had a significantly lower rate of postoperative complications of grade III or higher (4.1% vs 15.4%; P = 0.042) and reduced costs of hospitalization (JPY 1,462,766 vs JPY 1,493,930; P = 0.045). The ratio of body weight to preoperative weight at 1 week and 1 month after the operation was higher in the ERAS protocol group (0.962 vs 0.957, P = 0.020, and 0.951 vs 0.937, P = 0.021, respectively). The ERAS protocol group recorded more physical activity in the first week after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The ERAS protocol is safe and efficient, and seems to improve the postoperative course of patients with gastric cancer.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The feasibility of the use of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients with gastric cancer remains unclear. METHODS: This study was a single-center, prospective randomized trial involving patients with gastric cancer undergoing curative gastrectomy. The primary end point was the length of postoperative hospital stay. Secondary end points were the postoperative complication rate, admission costs, weight loss, and amount of physical activity. RESULTS: From July 2013 to June 2015, we randomized 148 patients into an ERAS protocol group (n = 73) and a conventional protocol group (n = 69); six patients withdrew from the study. The hospital stay was significantly shorter in the ERAS protocol group than in the conventional protocol group (9 days vs 10 days; P = 0.037). The ERAS protocol group had a significantly lower rate of postoperative complications of grade III or higher (4.1% vs 15.4%; P = 0.042) and reduced costs of hospitalization (JPY 1,462,766 vs JPY 1,493,930; P = 0.045). The ratio of body weight to preoperative weight at 1 week and 1 month after the operation was higher in the ERAS protocol group (0.962 vs 0.957, P = 0.020, and 0.951 vs 0.937, P = 0.021, respectively). The ERAS protocol group recorded more physical activity in the first week after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The ERAS protocol is safe and efficient, and seems to improve the postoperative course of patients with gastric cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Enhanced recovery after surgery; Gastric cancer; Perioperative care
Authors: M Degiuli; M Sasako; M Calgaro; M Garino; F Rebecchi; M Mineccia; D Scaglione; D Andreone; A Ponti; F Calvo Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Jin Chen Hu; Li Xin Jiang; Li Cai; Hai Tao Zheng; San Yuan Hu; Hong Bing Chen; Guo Chang Wu; Yi Fei Zhang; Zhong Chuan Lv Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Pietro Maria Lombardi; Michele Mazzola; Alessandro Giani; Sara Baleri; Marianna Maspero; Paolo De Martini; Monica Gualtierotti; Giovanni Ferrari Journal: Updates Surg Date: 2021-05-20
Authors: Luca Gianotti; Uberto Fumagalli Romario; Stefano De Pascale; Jacopo Weindelmayer; Valentina Mengardo; Marta Sandini; Andrea Cossu; Paolo Parise; Riccardo Rosati; Lapo Bencini; Andrea Coratti; Giovanni Colombo; Federica Galli; Stefano Rausei; Francesco Casella; Andrea Sansonetti; Dario Maggioni; Andrea Costanzi; Davide P Bernasconi; Giovanni De Manzoni Journal: World J Surg Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Larissa A Meyer; Javier Lasala; Maria D Iniesta; Alpa M Nick; Mark F Munsell; Qiuling Shi; Xin Shelley Wang; Katherine E Cain; Karen H Lu; Pedro T Ramirez Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 7.661