Bernhard Haid1, Alexander Karl2, Mark Koen1, Wolfgang Mottl3, Anton Haid4, Josef Oswald5. 1. Department of Pediatric Urology, Ordensklinikum Linz, Hospital of the Sisters of Charity, Linz, Austria. 2. Department of Urology, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, Ordensklinikum Linz, Hospital of the Sisters of Charity, Linz, Austria. 4. Department of General and Thoracic Surgery, Feldkirch General Hospital, Feldkirch, Austria. 5. Department of Pediatric Urology, Ordensklinikum Linz, Hospital of the Sisters of Charity, Linz, Austria. Electronic address: josef.oswald@ordensklinikum.at.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols aim to improve recovery following urological augmentation and diversion surgery. Based on the positive experiences in adult patients, we evaluated safety and outcomes after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in children undergoing urological augmentation and diversion using small bowel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Complications, time to stool, time to flatus and total hospital stay of 15 consecutive patients (group 2) were recorded and compared to the data of 15 consecutive patients before the changes in protocol were effective (group 1). The groups were comparable in age (mean 10.93 vs 9.267 years, p = 0.33), gender (p = 0.71) and operative times (387.9 vs 336.5 minutes, p = 0.19). RESULTS: Compared to the previous protocol involving a mean ± SD of 7.9 ± 1.38 enhanced recovery after surgery items per patient, 15.9 ± 0.26 items per patient were implemented in the new protocol. In group 2 mild bowel related complications were less frequent (1 vs 5, p = 0.168). Time to stool was significantly shorter in group 2 (3.33 vs 5.53 days, p = 0.002), as was time to flatus (2.8 vs 4.73 days, p = 0.002). Total hospital stay in group 2 was 11.93 days, compared to 19.87 days in group 1 (p <0.001), mainly due to more rapid convalescence, although influenced by associated changes in the postoperative protocol as well. CONCLUSIONS: In pediatric augmentation and diversion surgery using small bowel the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol is safe and effective, reinforcing faster bowel recovery. We did not observe complications or problems after introducing the new protocol.
PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols aim to improve recovery following urological augmentation and diversion surgery. Based on the positive experiences in adult patients, we evaluated safety and outcomes after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in children undergoing urological augmentation and diversion using small bowel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Complications, time to stool, time to flatus and total hospital stay of 15 consecutive patients (group 2) were recorded and compared to the data of 15 consecutive patients before the changes in protocol were effective (group 1). The groups were comparable in age (mean 10.93 vs 9.267 years, p = 0.33), gender (p = 0.71) and operative times (387.9 vs 336.5 minutes, p = 0.19). RESULTS: Compared to the previous protocol involving a mean ± SD of 7.9 ± 1.38 enhanced recovery after surgery items per patient, 15.9 ± 0.26 items per patient were implemented in the new protocol. In group 2 mild bowel related complications were less frequent (1 vs 5, p = 0.168). Time to stool was significantly shorter in group 2 (3.33 vs 5.53 days, p = 0.002), as was time to flatus (2.8 vs 4.73 days, p = 0.002). Total hospital stay in group 2 was 11.93 days, compared to 19.87 days in group 1 (p <0.001), mainly due to more rapid convalescence, although influenced by associated changes in the postoperative protocol as well. CONCLUSIONS: In pediatric augmentation and diversion surgery using small bowel the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol is safe and effective, reinforcing faster bowel recovery. We did not observe complications or problems after introducing the new protocol.
Authors: Cory McLaughlin; Anthony I Squillaro; Shadassa Ourshaliman; Ashley Song; Ashwini Lakshmanan; Giovanni Cucchiaro; Matthew Hall; Rita V Burke; Lorraine I Kelley-Quon Journal: Clin Ther Date: 2019-08-10 Impact factor: 3.393
Authors: Mandy Rickard; Michael Chua; Jin Kyu Kim; Daniel T Keefe; Karen Milford; Jessica H Hannick; Joana Dos Santos; Martin A Koyle; Armando J Lorenzo Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Kyle O Rove; Andrew C Strine; Duncan T Wilcox; Gino J Vricella; Timothy P Welch; Brian VanderBrink; David I Chu; Rajeev Chaudhry; Rebecca S Zee; Megan A Brockel Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 2.692