Search

Background: This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care., Methods: Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS ® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. Some ERAS ® components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL., Results: Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process., Conclusions: These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS ® approach to patients undergoing EL. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies., (© 2023. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Société Internationale de Chirurgie.)

Background: This is Part 3 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses organizational aspects of care., Methods: Experts in management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations., Results: Components of organizational aspects of care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi process., Conclusions: These guidelines are based on best current available evidence for organizational aspects of an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy and include discussion of less common aspects of care for the surgical patient, including end-of-life issues. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach., Methods: Experts in aspects of management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1-Preoperative Care and Part 2-Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1., Results: Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds., Conclusions: These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have considerably improved postoperative outcomes and are in use for various types of surgery. The prospective audit system (EIAS) could be a powerful tool for large-scale outcome research but its database has not been validated yet., Methods: Swiss ERAS centers were invited to contribute to the validation of the Swiss chapter for colorectal surgery. A monitoring team performed on-site visits by the use of a standardized checklist. Validation criteria were (I) coverage (No. of operated patients within ERAS protocol; target threshold for validation: ≥ 80%), (II) missing data (8 predefined variables; target ≤ 10%), and (III) accuracy (2 predefined variables, target ≥ 80%). These criteria were assessed by comparing EIAS entries with the medical charts of a random sample of patients per center (range 15-20)., Results: Out of 18 Swiss ERAS centers, 15 agreed to have onsite monitoring but 13 granted access to the final dataset. ERAS coverage was available in only 7 centers and varied between 76 and 100%. Overall missing data rate was 5.7% and concerned mainly the variables "urinary catheter removal" (16.4%) and "mobilization on day 1" (16%). Accuracy for the length of hospital stay and complications was overall 84.6%. Overall, 5 over 13 centers failed in the validation process for one or several criteria., Conclusion: EIAS was validated in most Swiss ERAS centers. Potential patient selection and missing data remain sources of bias in non-validated centers. Therefore, simplified validation of other centers appears to be mandatory before large-scale use of the EIAS dataset.

Background: The first enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) were developed in 2012. The study aimed to assess compliance and outcomes of an ERAS protocol for PD, to study correlation between compliance and outcomes, and to identify risk factors for complications., Methods: Retrospective cohort analysis is based on a prospective database, including all consecutive patients undergoing elective PD within an ERAS program in four centers: Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland), Carolinas Medical Center (United States), Edouard Herriot Hospital (France), and University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (Germany). Patients' characteristics, postoperative outcome and ERAS compliance were assessed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of postoperative complications., Results: Between October 2012 and June 2017, 404 consecutive patients underwent PD. Median length of stay was 14 days with 11.3% readmission rate. Mean overall compliance was 62%, with pre-, intra- and postoperative compliance of 93%, 80% and 30%, respectively. Overall compliance ≥ 70% versus < 70% was significantly associated with a reduction in complications (p = 0.029) and length of stay (p < 0.001). Avoidance of postoperative nasogastric tube (OR = 0.31, p = 0.043), mobilization on day of surgery (OR = 0.28, p = 0.043), and mobilization more than 6 h on postoperative day 2 (OR = 0.45, p = 0.001) were independent predictors of reduced overall complications., Conclusions: Implementation of enhanced recovery for PD is challenging, especially in the postoperative period. Overall compliance with ERAS protocol ≥ 70% was associated with decreased complications and length of stay. Specific ERAS elements, such as avoidance of postoperative nasogastric tube and early mobilization, independently improved outcomes.

Background: Major surgery is a term frequently used but poorly defined. The aim of the present study was to reach a consensus in the definition of major surgery within a panel of expert surgeons from the European Surgical Association (ESA)., Methods: A 3-round Delphi process was performed. All ESA members were invited to participate in the expert panel. In round 1, experts were inquired by open- and closed-ended questions on potential criteria to define major surgery. Results were analyzed and presented back anonymously to the panel within next rounds. Closed-ended questions in round 2 and 3 were either binary or statements to be rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strong disagreement) to 5 (strong agreement). Participants were sent 3 reminders at 2-week intervals for each round. 70% of agreement was considered to indicate consensus., Results: Out of 305 ESA members, 67 (22%) answered all the 3 rounds. Significant comorbidities were the only preoperative factor retained to define major surgery (78%). Vascular clampage or organ ischemia (92%), high intraoperative blood loss (90%), high noradrenalin requirements (77%), long operative time (73%) and perioperative blood transfusion (70%) were procedure-related factors that reached consensus. Regarding postoperative factors, systemic inflammatory response (76%) and the need for intensive or intermediate care (88%) reached consensus. Consequences of major surgery were high morbidity (>30% overall) and mortality (>2%)., Conclusion: ESA experts defined major surgery according to extent and complexity of the procedure, its pathophysiological consequences and consecutive clinical outcomes.

Background: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have been shown to improve postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery. This study aimed to review the current literature to assess if ERPs in colorectal, pancreas, and liver surgery induce cost savings., Methods: A systematic review was performed including prospective and retrospective studies comparing conventional management versus ERP in terms of costs. All kinds of ERP were considered (fast-track, ERAS ® , or home-made protocols). Studies with no mention of a clear protocol and no reporting of protocol compliance were excluded., Results: Thirty-seven articles out of 144 identified records were scrutinized as full articles. Final analysis included 16 studies. In colorectal surgery, two studies were prospective (1 randomized controlled trial, RCT) and six retrospective, totaling 1277 non-ERP patients and 2078 ERP patients. Three of the eight studies showed no difference in cost savings between the two groups. The meta-analysis found a mean cost reduction of USD3010 (95% CI: 5370-650, p = 0.01) in favor of ERP. Among the five included studies in pancreas surgery (all retrospective, 552 non-ERP vs. 348 ERP patients), the mean cost reduction in favor of the ERP group was USD7020 (95% CI: 11,600-2430, p = 0.003). In liver surgery, only three studies (two retrospective and 1 RCT, 180 non-ERP vs. 197 ERP patients) were found, which precluded a sound cost analysis., Conclusions: The present systematic review suggests that ERPs in colorectal and pancreas surgery are associated with cost savings compared to conventional perioperative management. Cost data in liver surgery are scarce.

Background: The present study aimed to assess the impact of perioperative fluid management on early acute kidney injury (AKI) rate and long-term sequelae in patients undergoing elective colorectal procedures within an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP)., Methods: Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients from a prospectively maintained ERP database (2011-2015) is performed. Pre- and postoperative creatinine levels (within 24 h) were compared according to risk (preoperative creatinine rise ×1.5), injury (×2), failure (×3), loss of kidney function and end-stage kidney disease (RIFLE) criteria. Risk factors for early AKI were identified through logistic regression analysis, and long-term outcome in patients with AKI was assessed., Results: Out of 7103 patients, 4096 patients (58%) with pre- and postoperative creatinine levels were included. Of these, 104 patients (2.5%) presented postoperative AKI. AKI patients received higher amounts of POD 0 fluids (3.8 ± 2.4 vs. 3.2 ± 2 L, p = 0.01) and had increased postoperative weight gain at POD 2 (6 ± 4.9 vs. 3 ± 2.7 kg, p = 0.007). Independent risk factors for AKI were high ASA score (ASA ≥ 3: OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.5), prolonged operating time (>180 min: OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.3-2.9) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.5-4), while minimally invasive surgery was a protective factor (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4-0.9). Five patients (0.1%) developed chronic kidney disease, and two of them needed dialysis after a mean follow-up of 33.7 ± 22.4 months., Conclusions: Early AKI was very uncommon in the present cohort of colorectal surgery patients treated within an ERP, and long-term sequelae were exceptionally low.

Background: The prevention of post-operative pulmonary complications (PPC) is targeted by several enhanced recovery (ERAS) items including early mobilisation, prevention of fluid overload and omission of routine nasogastric tubes. The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of ERAS on PPC., Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of an institutional database including consecutive colorectal ERAS procedures from May 2011 until May 2017. Multiple logistic regressions were performed to identify risk factors for PPC among demographic, surgical characteristics and items related to the ERAS protocol., Results: In total, 1298 patients were included; among them 120 (9.2%) had one or more PPC. Multivariable analysis retained minimally invasive surgery [odds ratio (OR) 0.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15-0.46] and compliance to the ERAS protocol of ≥ 70% (OR 0.53; CI 0.30-0.94) as protective factors. Emergency surgery (OR 2.70; CI 1.20-6.01), blood loss of ≥ 200 mL (OR 2.06; CI 1.20-3.53) and ASA score of ≥ 3 (OR 2.00; CI 1.12-3.57) were independent risk factors. Median length of hospital stay was significantly longer in patients who experienced respiratory complications (21 [4-183] vs. 6 [1-95] days, p ≤ 0.001)., Conclusions: Minimally invasive surgery and high compliance with the ERAS protocol can help to prevent PPC.

Background: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is widely accepted in current surgical practice due to its positive impact on patient outcomes. The successful implementation of ERAS is challenging and compliance with protocols varies widely. Continual staff education is essential for successful ERAS programmes. Teaching modalities exist, but there remains no agreement regarding the optimal training curriculum or how its effectiveness is assessed. We aimed to draw consensus from an expert panel regarding the successful training and implementation of ERAS., Methods: A modified Delphi technique was used; three rounds of questionnaires were sent to 58 selected international experts from 11 countries across multiple ERAS specialities and multidisciplinary teams (MDT) between January 2016 and February 2017. We interrogated opinion regarding four topics: (1) the components of a training curriculum and the structure of training courses; (2) the optimal framework for successful implementation and audit of ERAS including a guide for data collection; (3) a framework to assess the effectiveness of training; (4) criteria to define ERAS training centres of excellence., Results: An ERAS training course must cover the evidence-based principles of ERAS with team-oriented training. Successful implementation requires strong leadership, an ERAS facilitator and an effective MDT. Effectiveness of training can be measured by improved compliance. A training centre of excellence should show a willingness to teach and demonstrable team working., Conclusions: We propose an international expert consensus providing an ERAS training curriculum, a framework for successful implementation, methods for assessing effectiveness of training and a definition of ERAS training centres of excellence.

Background: The success of enhanced recovery (ERAS) pathways depends on the actual application of the intended protocol (adherence), but its full implementation remains challenging. In order to potentially streamline the pathway, it is indispensable to know the impact of individual items and the entire protocol on clinical outcomes., Methods: Retrospective analysis including all consecutive colorectal ERAS patients since implementation (May 2011) until February 2014; demographics, adherence and outcomes were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Primary outcome was the impact of individual item and of the entire protocol on complications (overall and major) and length of hospital stay. Statistical analysis included logistic multivariate regression and adjustment for confounding factors., Results: There were 328 patients with complete data sets analyzed. A minimally invasive approach [odd ratio (OR) 0.62; confidence interval (CI) 0.4-0.9] was significantly associated with less overall complications. In contrast, the use of prophylactic nasogastric tubes (OR 3.18; CI 1.4-7.4), prophylactic abdominal and pelvic drains (OR 1.96; 1.2-3.2) and intraoperative thoracic epidural analgesia (OR 1.76; CI 1.3-2.4) were associated with more overall complications. Minimal invasive approach was further associated with reduced hospital stay (OR 0.5; CI 0.4-0.7) and less major complications (OR 0.58; CI 0.4-0.8). Higher adherence to the entire ERAS protocol was associated with significantly less complications (P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Minimally invasive surgery was the single most important component of the ERAS pathway while nasogastric tubes, drains and epidurals should be avoided. Overall, increasing adherence with the protocol was associated with better outcomes and should be the goal.

Background: Enhanced recovery (ERAS) guidelines do not differentiate between left- and right-sided colectomies, but differences in recovery have been reported for the two procedure types. We aimed to compare compliance with the ERAS protocol and outcomes after right versus left colectomy., Methods: Between June 2011 and September 2014, all patients undergoing elective colonic resection were treated according to a standardized ERAS protocol and entered a prospective database. This retrospective analysis compared right and left colectomy regarding application of the ERAS pathway, bowel recovery, complications, and hospital stay., Results: Eighty-five patients with right colectomy matched well with 138 left-sided resections for baseline demographics. Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was 76 % for right versus 77 % for left colectomy patients (p = 0.492). First flatus occurred at postoperative day 2 in both groups (p = 0.057); first stool was observed after a median of 3 (right) and 2 days (left), respectively (p = 0.189). Twenty patients (24 %) needed postoperative nasogastric tube after right colectomy compared to 11 patients (8 %) after left colectomy (p = 0.002). Overall complication rates were 49 and 37 % for right and left colectomy, respectively (p = 0.071). Median postoperative length of stay was 6 days (IQR 4-9) after right and 5 days (IQR 4-7.5) after left colectomy (p = 0.020)., Conclusion: Overall compliance with the protocol was equally high in both groups showing that ERAS protocol was applicable for right and left colectomy. Functional recovery however, tended to be slower after right colectomy, and postoperative ileus rate was significantly higher. More cautious early feeding after right colectomy should be considered.

Background: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal pathway developed to overcome the deleterious effect of perioperative stress after major surgery. In colorectal surgery, ERAS pathways reduced perioperative morbidity, hospital stay and costs. Similar concept should be applied for liver surgery. This study presents the specific ERAS Society recommendations for liver surgery based on the best available evidence and on expert consensus., Methods: A systematic review was performed on ERAS for liver surgery by searching EMBASE and Medline. Five independent reviewers selected relevant articles. Quality of randomized trials was assessed according to the Jadad score and CONSORT statement. The level of evidence for each item was determined using the GRADE system. The Delphi method was used to validate the final recommendations., Results: A total of 157 full texts were screened. Thirty-seven articles were included in the systematic review, and 16 of the 23 standard ERAS items were studied specifically for liver surgery. Consensus was reached among experts after 3 rounds. Prophylactic nasogastric intubation and prophylactic abdominal drainage should be omitted. The use of postoperative oral laxatives and minimally invasive surgery results in a quicker bowel recovery and shorter hospital stay. Goal-directed fluid therapy with maintenance of a low intraoperative central venous pressure induces faster recovery. Early oral intake and mobilization are recommended. There is no evidence to prefer epidural to other types of analgesia., Conclusions: The current ERAS recommendations were elaborated based on the best available evidence and endorsed by the Delphi method. Nevertheless, prospective studies need to confirm the clinical use of the suggested protocol.

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) reduces complications and hospital stay in colorectal surgery. Thereafter, ERAS principles were extended to liver surgery. Previous implementation of an ERAS program in colorectal surgery may influence patients undergoing liver surgery in a non-ERAS setting, on the same ward. This study aimed to test this hypothesis., Methods: Retrospective analysis based on prospective data of the adherence to the institutional ERAS-liver protocol (compliance) in three cohorts of consecutive patients undergoing elective liver surgery, between June 2010 and July 2014: before any ERAS implementation (pre-ERAS n = 50), after implementation of ERAS in colorectal (intermediate n = 50), and after implementation of ERAS in liver surgery (ERAS-liver n = 74). Outcomes were functional recovery, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and readmissions., Results: The three groups were comparable for demographics; laparoscopy was more frequent in ERAS-liver (p = 0.009). Compliance with the enhanced recovery protocol increased along the three periods (pre-ERAS, intermediate, and ERAS-liver), regardless of the perioperative phase (pre-, intra-, or postoperative). ERAS-liver group displayed the highest overall compliance rate with 73.8 %, compared to 39.9 and 57.4 % for pre-ERAS and intermediate groups (p = 0.072/0.056). Overall complications were unchanged (p = 0.185), whereas intermediate and ERAS-liver groups showed decreased major complications (p = 0.034). Consistently, hospital stay was reduced by 2 days (p = 0.005) without increased readmissions (p = 0.158)., Conclusions: The previous implementation of an ERAS protocol in colorectal surgery may induce a positive impact on patients undergoing non-ERAS-liver surgery on the same ward. These results suggest that ERAS is safely applicable in liver surgery and associated with benefits.

Background: The use of a robotic surgical system is claimed to allow precise traction and counter-traction, especially in a narrow pelvis. Whether this translates to improvement of the quality of the resected specimen is not yet clear. The aim of the study was to compare the quality of the TME and the short-term oncological outcome between robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer resections., Methods: 20 consecutive robotic TME performed in a single institution for rectal cancer (Rob group) were matched 1:2 to 40 laparoscopic resections (Lap group) for gender, body mass index (BMI), and distance from anal verge on rigid proctoscopy. The quality of TME was assessed by 2 blinded and independent pathologists and reported according to international standardized guidelines., Results: Both samples were well matched for gender, BMI (median 25.9 vs. 24.2 kg/m(2), p = 0.24), and level of the tumor (4.1 vs. 4.8 cm, p = 0.20). The quality of the TME was better in the Robotic group (complete TME: 95 vs. 55 %; p = 0.0003, nearly complete TME 5 vs. 37 %; p = 0.04, incomplete TME 0 vs. 8 %, p = 0.09). A trend for lower positive circumferential margin was observed in the Robotic group (10 vs. 25 %, p = 0.1)., Conclusions: These results suggest that robotic-assisted surgery improves the quality of TME for rectal cancer. Whether this translates to better oncological outcome needs to be further investigated.

Background: To study the 'metabolic profile' of different surgical procedures and correlate it with pertinent surgical details and postoperative complications., Methods: We conducted a prospective pilot study of 70 patients, ten for each of the seven following groups: (1) laparoscopic cholecystectomy, (2) incisional hernia repair, (3) laparoscopic and (4) open colon surgery, (5) upper gastrointestinal, (6) hepatic, and (7) pancreatic resections. Biochemical assessment included white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), glucose, triglycerides (TG), albumin (Alb), and pre-albumin (Pre-Alb), from the day before surgery until 5 days thereafter. Biological markers were compared for major versus minor surgery groups, which were defined on a clinical basis. Univariable analysis was used to identify risk factors for postoperative complications and p < 0.05 was the significance threshold., Results: Common findings in all surgery groups were the acute inflammatory response (↑: WBC, CRP, ↓: TG, Alb, pre-Alb). Using cut-off values of 240 min operative (OR) time and 300 ml estimated blood loss (EBL), laparoscopic cholecystectomy, incisional hernia repair, and laparoscopic colectomy could be distinguished from open colectomy, upper gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreas resections. In a biochemical level, increased CRP and reduced postoperative Alb levels were highly discriminative of all types of 'major surgery.' Significant risk factors for postoperative complications were age, male gender, malignancy, longer OR time, higher blood loss, high CRP, and low Alb levels., Conclusions: Biochemically, CRP and Alb levels can help quantify the magnitude of the surgical trauma, which is correlated with adverse outcomes.

Background: Despite progress in multidisciplinary treatment of esophageal cancer, oncologic esophagectomy is still the cornerstone of therapeutic strategies. Several scoring systems are used to predict postoperative morbidity, but in most cases they identify nonmodifiable parameters. The aim of this study was to identify potentially modifiable risk factors associated with complications after oncologic esophagectomy., Methods: All consecutive patients with complete data sets undergoing oncologic esophagectomy in our department during 2001-2011 were included in this study. As potentially modifiable risk factors we assessed nutritional status depicted by body mass index (BMI) and preoperative serum albumin levels, excessive alcohol consumption, and active smoking. Postoperative complications were graded according to a validated 5-grade system. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify preoperative risk factors associated with the occurrence and severity of complications., Results: Our series included 93 patients. Overall morbidity rate was 81 % (n = 75), with 56 % (n = 52) minor complications and 18 % (n = 17) major complications. Active smoking and excessive alcohol consumption were associated with the occurrence of severe complications, whereas BMI and low preoperative albumin levels were not. The simultaneous presence of two or more of these risk factors significantly increased the risk of postoperative complications., Conclusions: A combination of malnutrition, active smoking and alcohol consumption were found to have a negative impact on postoperative morbidity rates. Therefore, preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation counseling and monitoring and improving the nutritional status are strongly recommended.

Background: Enhanced recovery protocols have been proven to decrease complications and hospital stay following elective colorectal surgery. However, these principles have not yet been reported for urgent surgery procedures. We aimed to assess our initial experience with urgent colectomies performed within an established enhanced recovery pathway., Methods: In a prospective cohort study, all patients undergoing colonic resection between April 2012 and March 2013 were treated according to a standardized enhanced recovery protocol. Urgent surgeries were compared with the elective procedures with regards to baseline characteristics, compliance with enhanced recovery items, and clinical outcome., Results: Patients (N = 28) requiring urgent colonic resection were included and compared with patients undergoing elective colectomy (N = 63). Overall compliance with the protocol was 57% for the urgent compared with 77% for the elective procedures (p = 0.006). The pre-operative compliance was 64 versus 96% (p < 0.001), the intra-operative compliance was 77 versus 86% (p = 0.145), and the post-operative compliance was 49 versus 67% (p = 0.015), for the urgent and elective resections, respectively. Overall, 18 urgent patients (64%) and 32 elective patients (51%) developed postoperative complications (p = 0.261). Median postoperative length of stay was 8 days in the urgent setting compared with 5 days in the elective setting (p = 0.006)., Conclusions: Many of the intra-operative and post-operative enhanced recovery items can also be applied to urgent colectomy, entailing outcomes that approach the results achieved in the elective setting.

Background: The present study was designed to evaluate surgeons' strategies and adherence to preventive measures against surgical site infections (SSIs)., Materials and Methods: All surgeons participating in a prospective Swiss multicentric surveillance program for SSIs received a questionnaire developed from the 2008 National (United Kingdom) Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines on prevention and treatment of SSIs. We focused on perioperative management and surgical technique in hernia surgery, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and colon surgery (COL)., Results: Forty-five of 50 surgeons contacted (90%) responded. Smoking cessation and nutritional screening are regularly propagated by 1/3 and 1/2 of surgeons, respectively. Thirty-eight percent practice bowel preparation before COL. Preoperative hair removal is routinely (90%) performed in the operating room with electric clippers. About 50% administer antibiotic prophylaxis within 30 min before incision. Intra-abdominal drains are common after COL (43%). Two thirds of respondents apply nonocclusive wound dressings that are manipulated after hand disinfection (87%). Dressings are usually changed on postoperative day (POD) 2 (75%), and wounds remain undressed on POD 2-3 or 4-5 (36% each)., Conclusions: Surgeons' strategies to prevent SSIs still differ widely. The adherence to the current NICE guidelines is low for many procedures regardless of the available level of evidence. Further research should provide convincing data in order to justify standardization of perioperative management.

Background: Chronic neuropathy after hernia repair is a neglected problem as very few patients are referred for surgical treatment. The aim of the present study was to assess the outcome of standardized surgical revision for neuropathic pain after hernia repair., Methods: In a prospective cohort study we evaluated all patients admitted to our tertiary referral center for surgical treatment of persistent neuropathic pain after primary herniorrhaphy between 2001 and 2006. Diagnosis of neuropathic pain was based on clinical findings and a positive Tinel's sign. Postoperative pain was evaluated by a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a pain questionnaire up to 12 months after revision surgery., Results: Forty-three consecutive patients (39 male, median age 35 years) underwent surgical revision, mesh removal, and radical neurectomy. The median operative time was 58 min (range: 45-95 min). Histological examination revealed nerve entrapment, complete transection, or traumatic neuroma in all patients. The ilioinguinal nerve was affected in 35 patients (81%); the iliohypogastric nerve, in 10 patients (23%). Overall pain (median VAS) decreased permanently after surgery within a follow-up period of 12 months (preoperative 74 [range: 53-87] months versus 0 [range: 0-34] months; p<0.0001)., Conclusions: The results of this cohort study suggest that surgical mesh removal with ilioinguinal and iliohypogastric neurectomy is a successful treatment in patients with neuropathic pain after hernia repair.