Literature DB >> 30724809

Comment on "Does a Combination of Laparoscopic Approach and Full Fast Track Multimodal Management Decrease Postoperative Morbidity?"

Li Yun1, Jiang Zhiwei, Henrik Kehlet, Wang Gang, Liu Jiang, Li Jieshou.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30724809      PMCID: PMC6369873          DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002848

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor: We read with great interest the article by Le’on Maggiori et al.[1] In order to assess the postoperative outcomes of combination of laparoscopic approach and full fast track multimodal (FFT) management, the authors assigned patients with colorectal cancer into 2 groups: FFT and LFT (limited fast track program), the latter of which was established as a control. No differences in length of stay (LOS) or postoperative morbidity were, however, obtained between the 2 groups in that study. The fast track (FT) care program, also known as Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program, is a multimodal approach that aims to minimize the physiologic impact of surgery and anesthesia.[2] As recommended by several guidelines with regard to clinical practice of ERAS protocol in perioperative management, there are 15 to 25 recommended items that might contribute to the improvement of clinical outcome.[3-5] The relative significance of each element, however, remains unknown because of the lack of definitive support from evidence-based medicine.[6] Moreover, the complete implementation of all these recommended items, which could result in the poor compliance of patients, is very unrealistic in clinical practice among most of the surgical world. Generally speaking, the ERAS program for gastrointestinal surgery consists of the following essential components in postoperative recovery phase: early oral feeding, early mobilization, multimodal analgesia, limited perioperative fluid infusion, discard of nasogastric tube and minimally invasive surgery,[7] and mostly included in the study,[1] although no exact data on total fluid administration on day 0 were presented. It was found that the difference of postoperative morbidity, mortality, and theoretical and effective LOS between the 2 groups was not of significance neither regarding the overall cohort, nor in the colon or rectal cancer subgroups. In addition, the authors have pointed out that a full multimodal FT care program had no benefit in patients with rectal cancer, which was attributed to the routine use of a diverting stoma. It was suggested in that article that an FT care program had limited benefits in patients with temporary diverting stoma. The role of fecal diversion using a diverting stoma in anterior rectal resection and anastomosis is, however, still controversial at present.[8] Gumbau et al[9] reported that the association of a loop ileostomy and multimodal FT care program did not extend the LOS nor increases the rate of complications in patients that underwent a rectal resection with anastomosis. The most important problem with the article is, however, the reported long LOS (approximately 8 days in the colonic cancer subgroup and approximately 10–11 days in the rectal group), which is impossible to interpret in relation to the information about the FFT programs, both regarding the theoretical LOS and the effective LOS. Also, the LOS is much longer than reported in other FFT series with full implementation.[10,11] Consequently, the application of the essential elements of ERAS protocol combined with laparoscopic technique in colorectal cancer surgery obviously is appropriate, but interpretation of such studies requires detailed information not only about the components and compliance with the FFT program, but also information “Why in hospital?” when LOS is longer than reported in other fully implemented FFT programs.
  11 in total

1.  Towards optimizing perioperative colorectal care: outcomes for 1,000 consecutive laparoscopic colon procedures using enhanced recovery pathways.

Authors:  Conor P Delaney; Karen Brady; Donya Woconish; Stavan P Parmar; Bradley J Champagne
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 2.  Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection.

Authors:  K C H Fearon; O Ljungqvist; M Von Meyenfeldt; A Revhaug; C H C Dejong; K Lassen; J Nygren; J Hausel; M Soop; J Andersen; H Kehlet
Journal:  Clin Nutr       Date:  2005-04-21       Impact factor: 7.324

Review 3.  Consensus review of optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Group recommendations.

Authors:  Kristoffer Lassen; Mattias Soop; Jonas Nygren; P Boris W Cox; Paul O Hendry; Claudia Spies; Maarten F von Meyenfeldt; Kenneth C H Fearon; Arthur Revhaug; Stig Norderval; Olle Ljungqvist; Dileep N Lobo; Cornelis H C Dejong
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2009-10

Review 4.  Diverting ileostomy in colorectal surgery: when is it necessary?

Authors:  Mark H Hanna; Alessio Vinci; Alessio Pigazzi
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 3.445

5.  Commentary: Fast track surgery: the need for improved study design.

Authors:  Karem Slim; Henrik Kehlet
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.788

6.  Does a Combination of Laparoscopic Approach and Full Fast Track Multimodal Management Decrease Postoperative Morbidity?: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Léon Maggiori; Eric Rullier; Jérémie H Lefevre; Jean-Marc Régimbeau; Stéphane Berdah; Mehdi Karoui; Jérome Loriau; Arnaud Alvès; Eric Vicaut; Yves Panis
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Functional recovery after open versus laparoscopic colonic resection: a randomized, blinded study.

Authors:  Linda Basse; Dorthe Hjort Jakobsen; Linda Bardram; Per Billesbølle; Claus Lund; Torben Mogensen; Jacob Rosenberg; Henrik Kehlet
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 8.  Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A Review.

Authors:  Olle Ljungqvist; Michael Scott; Kenneth C Fearon
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 14.766

9.  What Is "Enhanced Recovery," and How Can I Do It?

Authors:  Bradford J Kim; Thomas A Aloia
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Impact of a diverting stoma in an enhanced recovery programme for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Verónica Gumbau; Juan García-Armengol; Antonio Salvador-Martínez; Purificación Ivorra; María José García-Coret; Vicente García-Rodríguez; José Vicente Roig
Journal:  Cir Esp       Date:  2014-05-27       Impact factor: 1.653

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.