Literature DB >> 31286257

A successful clinical pathway protocol for minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Robert E Merritt1, Peter J Kneuertz2, Desmond M D'Souza2, Kyle A Perry3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity, which can substantially influence the hospital length of stay for patients. Anastomotic leak is the most devastating complication. Minimizing major postoperative complications can facilitate adherence to a clinical pathway protocol and can decrease hospital length of stay.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 130 patients who underwent an elective laparoscopic and thoracoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma between August 2014 and June 2018. A total of 112 patients (86%) underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation. All of the 130 patients underwent a laparoscopic gastric devascularization procedure a median of 15 days prior to the esophagectomy. The target discharge date was postoperative day number 8.
RESULTS: Thirty patients (23.08%) had postoperative complications. Atrial fibrillation (20 patients) [15.38%] was the most frequent complication. Four patients (3.1%) developed an anastomotic leak. There was one postoperative death (0.77%) in the cohort of patients. The median length of stay was 8 days. The mean length of stay for patients without complications was 8 days ± 1.2 days and 12.4 days ± 7.1 days for patients with one or more complications (p = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: The development of postoperative complications after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy significantly increases hospital length of stay. Performing the operation with a specialized tandem surgical team and including preoperative ischemic preconditioning of the stomach minimizes overall and anastomotic complications and facilitates on time hospital discharge as defined by a perioperative clinical pathway protocol.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophageal carcinoma; Ischemic preconditioning; Minimally invasive esophagectomy; Rapid recovery protocol

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31286257     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06946-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  15 in total

1.  Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients.

Authors:  James D Luketich; Arjun Pennathur; Omar Awais; Ryan M Levy; Samuel Keeley; Manisha Shende; Neil A Christie; Benny Weksler; Rodney J Landreneau; Ghulam Abbas; Matthew J Schuchert; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Variation in esophagectomy outcomes in hospitals meeting Leapfrog volume outcome standards.

Authors:  Thomas K Varghese; Douglas E Wood; Farhood Farjah; Brant K Oelschlager; Rebecca G Symons; Kara E MacLeod; David R Flum; Carlos A Pellegrini
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities in different geographic regions of the world.

Authors:  Farin Kamangar; Graça M Dores; William F Anderson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-05-10       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  The effect of formalizing enhanced recovery after esophagectomy with a protocol.

Authors:  J M Findlay; E Tustian; J Millo; A Klucniks; B Sgromo; R E K Marshall; R S Gillies; M R Middleton; N D Maynard
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2014-05-18       Impact factor: 3.429

5.  Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Pathway in Esophagectomy: Is a Reasonable Prediction of Hospital Stay Possible?

Authors:  Paolo Parise; Carlo Ferrari; Andrea Cossu; Francesco Puccetti; Ugo Elmore; Stefano De Pascale; Leonardo Garutti; Uberto Romario Fumagalli; Mariaclelia Stefania Di Serio; Riccardo Rosati
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Fast tracking after Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy.

Authors:  Robert James Cerfolio; Ayesha S Bryant; Cynthia S Bass; Jeana R Alexander; Alfred A Bartolucci
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 9.410

7.  Preventing anastomotic complications: early results of laparoscopic gastric devascularization two weeks prior to minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  David S Strosberg; Robert E Merritt; Kyle A Perry
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  The impact of complications on outcomes after resection for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma.

Authors:  Nabil P Rizk; Peter B Bach; Deborah Schrag; Manjit S Bains; Alan D Turnbull; Martin Karpeh; Murray F Brennan; Valerie W Rusch
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 9.  Enhanced recovery pathways lead to an improvement in postoperative outcomes following esophagectomy: systematic review and pooled analysis.

Authors:  S R Markar; A Karthikesalingam; D E Low
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 3.429

Review 10.  Systematic review of enhanced recovery after gastro-oesophageal cancer surgery.

Authors:  E H Gemmill; D J Humes; J A Catton
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.891

View more
  1 in total

1.  Analysis of the Influence of Comprehensive Nursing Intervention on Vital Signs and Negative Emotions of Patients with Gastrointestinal Polyps Treated by Digestive Endoscopy.

Authors:  Yaer Shi; Jianzhong Sang; Yimao Sang
Journal:  Comput Intell Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-24
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.