Search

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prehabilitation may improve postoperative clinical outcomes among patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. This study evaluated the potential effects of a high-intensity interval training (HIIT) program performed before major abdominal surgery on patients' cardiorespiratory fitness and functional ability (secondary outcomes of pilot trial NCT02953119). Methods: Patients were included before surgery to engage in a low-volume HIIT program with 3 sessions per week for 3 weeks. Cardiopulmonary exercise and 6-min walk (6MWT) testing were performed pre- and post-prehabilitation. Results: Fourteen patients completed an average of 8.6 ± 2.2 (mean ± SD) sessions during a period of 27.9 ± 6.1 days. After the program, V ˙ O2 peak (+ 2.4 ml min−1 kg−1, 95% CI 0.8–3.9, p = 0.006), maximal aerobic power (+ 16.8 W, 95% CI 8.2–25.3, p = 0.001), V ˙ O2 at anaerobic threshold (+ 1.2 ml min−1 kg−1, 95%CI 0.4–2.1, p = 0.009) and power at anaerobic threshold (+ 12.4 W, 95%CI 4.8–20, p = 0.004) were improved. These changes were not accompanied by improved functional capacity (6MWT: + 2.6 m, 95% CI (− 19.6) to 24.8, p = 0.800). Conclusion: A short low-volume HIIT program increases cardiorespiratory fitness but not walking capacity in patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery. These results need to be confirmed by larger studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Normovolemia after major surgery is critical to avoid complications. The aim of the present study was to analyze correlation between fluid balance, weight gain, and postoperative outcomes. Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing elective or emergency major abdominal surgery needing intermediate care unit (IMC) admission from September 2017 to January 2018 were included. Postoperative fluid balances and daily weight changes were calculated for postoperative days (PODs) 0–3. Risk factors for postoperative complications (30-day Clavien) and prolonged length of IMC and hospital stay were identified through uni- and multinominal logistic regression. Results: One hundred eleven patients were included, of which 55% stayed in IMC beyond POD 1. Overall, 67% experienced any complication, while 30% presented a major complication (Clavien ≥ III). For the entire cohort, median cumulative fluid balance at the end of PODs 0–1–2–3 was 1850 (IQR 1020–2540) mL, 2890 (IQR 1610–4000) mL, 3890 (IQR 2570–5380) mL, and 4000 (IQR 1890–5760) mL respectively, and median weight gain was 2.2 (IQR 0.3–4.3) kg, 3 (1.5–4.7) kg, and 3.9 (2.5–5.4) kg, respectively. Fluid balance and weight course showed no significant correlation (r = 0.214, p = 0.19). Extent of surgery, analyzed through Δ albumin and duration of surgery, significantly correlated with POD 2 fluid balances (p = 0.04, p = 0.006, respectively), as did POD 3 weight gain (p = 0.042). Prolonged IMC stay of ≥ 3 days was related to weight gain ≥ 3 kg at POD 2 (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.01–8.9, p = 0.049). Conclusion: Fluid balance and weight course showed only modest correlation. POD 2 weight may represent an easy and pragmatic tool to optimize fluid management and help to prevent fluid-related postoperative complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Training and teaching are cornerstones in developing surgical skills. The present study aimed to compare intraoperative outcomes of colonic resections among fellows, consultants, and supervised trainees.Methods: Data of consecutive colonic resections including demographics, surgical details, and intraoperative outcomes were recorded in a prospectively maintained institutional database. All procedures were standardized and divided in three groups according to the main surgeons experience (fellow or consultant) and whether the procedure was taught. After weighting by inverse treatment probability, intraoperative adverse events including reactive conversion, blood loss, and operating time were compared between these three groups.Results: Six hundred sixty-four colectomies were analyzed between January 2014 and October 2017. Among them, 289 (43.5%) were taught. After weighted propensity score analysis, there was no difference between the three groups (fellow taken as reference), for intraoperative adverse event rate (odd ratio (OR) consultant 1.448 (IQR 0.728-2.878), p = 0.282; OR teaching 0.689 (IQR 0.295-1.609), p = 0.381), operating time (beta coefficient 0.76 (− 21.91-23.42), p = 0.947; beta coefficient − 10.79 (− 28.34-6.75), p = 0.919), conversion rates (OR 0.748 (0.329-1.515), p = 0.412; OR 1.025 (0.537-1.954), p = 0.940), pre-emptive conversion (OR 1.994 (0.198-20.032), p = 0.552; OR 0.659 (0.145-2.991), p = 0.583), intraoperative blood loss (beta coefficient 21.19 (− 25.87-68.25), p = 0.368; beta coefficient − 12.34 (− 56.13-31.44), p = 0.573), intraoperative transfusion (OR 1.962 (0.813-4.735), p = 0.127; OR 0.670 (0.260-1.727), p = 0.397), and rates of unusual bleeding (OR 1.273 (0.698-2.321), p = 0.422; OR 0.572 (0.290-1.126), p = 0.099). Time to preemptive conversion was shorter when procedures were performed by consultants (beta coefficient − 25.51 (− 47.71 to − 3.31), p = 0.025), while no difference was found for the teaching group (beta coefficient 4.48 (− 30.95-40.62), p = 0.788).Conclusion: Within a standardized teaching environment, colonic resections were safely performed regardless of the surgical setting in the present cohort. Teaching does not increase intraoperative adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Postoperative ileus (POI) is a frequent complication after abdominal surgery; nonetheless, it remains poorly defined. Our aim was to achieve an international consensus among leading colorectal surgeons on definition, prevention, and treatment of POI. Methods: Thirty-five experts from five continents participated in a three-round Delphi process. Round 1 contained open-ended questions on POI and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Round 2 included closed-ended questions. Round 3 measured agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined when items were rated as agree or strongly agree by at least 70 % of the experts. Results: Experts reached following consensus: POI is a temporary inhibition (86 %) of gastrointestinal motility after surgical intervention due to non-mechanical causes (89 %) and prevents sufficient oral intake (96 %). Abdominal distension/tenderness are the most relevant clinical signs (71 %). Nasogastric tube placement is not mandatory (78 %) but can be removed without previous clamping (81 %)/gastrointestinal contrast study (100 %). Preventive measures are recommended to decrease the risk of POI (96 %): narcotic sparing analgesia (89 %) and fluid optimization (74 %). Treatment of POI should include stimulation of ambulation (96 %) and stop of opioids (74 %). Total parenteral nutrition is recommended from the 7th day without sufficient oral intake (81 %). There was no consensus on the ranking of POI's symptoms, on the imaging modality of choice for the diagnosis of POI, neither on the difference between POI and PONV. Conclusions: This Delphi study achieved consensus on the definition, relevant clinical signs, prevention, treatment, and supportive care of POI. Areas of non-consensus were identified (necessity and modality of radiologic imaging to establish the diagnosis, difference between POI and PONV), giving opportunity for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims: The aim of the current study was to assess the postoperative evolution of nutritional status and to relate it with postoperative outcomes. Methods: Demographic, surgical and nutritional parameters were assessed 10 days preoperatively (d-10) and 30 days postoperatively (d30) in 146 patients. Risk factors responsible for perioperative (>5% between d-10 and d30) weight loss were identified. Overall, severe (Clavien 3-5) and infectious complications were compared in patients with and without perioperative weight loss (>5%). Results: Nutritional status worsened beyond the postoperative period as reflected by decreasing weight (67 ± 13 kg at d-10 vs. 63 ± 13 kg at d30, p < 0.001), body mass index (23.4 ± 4 vs. 22.2 ± 4 kg/m 2, p < 0.001) and mid upper-arm muscle circumference (MAMC, 241 ± 32 vs. 232 ± 30 mm, p < 0.001). Fifty-two patients (46%) lost >5% of their body weight between d-10 and d30. Patients who presented overall (63 vs. 36%, p = 0.004) and major (27 vs. 10%, p = 0.016) postoperative complications were at significantly higher risk to deteriorate postoperative nutritional status. Multivariate analysis identified low preoperative lean body mass (OR 3.2; 95% CI 1.2-8.9, p = 0.023) and low preoperative MAMC (OR 2.5; 95% CI 0.9-6.8, p = 0.066) as independent risk factors for perioperative weight loss. Conclusions: These data suggest continuing nutritional follow- up after the index hospitalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Surgical stress during major surgery may be related to adverse clinical outcomes and early quantification of stress response would be useful to allow prompt interventions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the acute phase protein albumin in the context of the postoperative stress response. Methods. This prospective pilot study included 70 patients undergoing frequent abdominal procedures of different magnitude. Albumin (Alb) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were measured once daily starting the day before surgery until postoperative day (POD) 5. Maximal Alb decrease (Alb Δ min) was correlated with clinical parameters of surgical stress, postoperative complications, and length of stay. Results. Albumin values dropped immediately after surgery by about 10 g/L (42.2±4.5 g/L preoperatively versus 33.8±5.3 g/L at day 1, P<0.001). Alb Δ min was correlated with operation length (Pearson ρ=0.470, P<0.001), estimated blood loss (ρ=0.605, P<0.001), and maximal CRP values (ρ=0.391, P=0.002). Alb Δ min levels were significantly higher in patients having complications (10.0±5.4 versus 6.1±5.2, P=0.005) and a longer hospital stay (ρ=0.285, P<0.020). Conclusion. Early postoperative albumin drop appeared to reflect the magnitude of surgical trauma and was correlated with adverse clinical outcomes. Its promising role as early marker for stress response deserves further prospective evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of the current study was to assess whether widely used nutritional parameters are correlated with the nutritional risk score (NRS-2002) to identify postoperative morbidity and to evaluate the role of nutritionists in nutritional assessment. Methods: A randomized trial on preoperative nutritional interventions (NCT00512213) provided the study cohort of 152 patients at nutritional risk (NRS-2002 ≥3) with a comprehensive phenotyping including diverse nutritional parameters (n=17), elaborated by nutritional specialists, and potential demographic and surgical (n=5) confounders. Risk factors for overall, severe (Dindo-Clavien 3-5) and infectious complications were identified by univariate analysis; parameters with P<0.20 were then entered in a multiple logistic regression model. Results: Final analysis included 140 patients with complete datasets. Of these, 61 patients (43.6%) were overweight, and 72 patients (51.4%) experienced at least one complication of any degree of severity. Univariate analysis identified a correlation between few (≤3) active co-morbidities (OR=4.94; 95% CI: 1.47-16.56, p=0.01) and overall complications. Patients screened as being malnourished by nutritional specialists presented less overall complications compared to the not malnourished (OR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.22-0.97, p=0.043). Severe postoperative complications occurred more often in patients with low lean body mass (OR=1.06; 95% CI: 1-1.12, p=0.028). Few (≤3) active co-morbidities (OR=8.8; 95% CI: 1.12-68.99, p=0.008) were related with postoperative infections. Patients screened as being malnourished by nutritional specialists presented less infectious complications (OR=0.28; 95% CI: 0.1-0.78), p=0.014) as compared to the not malnourished. Multivariate analysis identified few co-morbidities (OR=6.33; 95% CI: 1.75-22.84, p=0.005), low weight loss (OR=1.08; 95% CI: 1.02-1.14, p=0.006) and low hemoglobin concentration (OR=2.84; 95% CI: 1.22-6.59, p=0.021) as independent risk factors for overall postoperative complications. Compliance with nutritional supplements (OR=0.37; 95% CI: 0.14-0.97, p=0.041) and supplementation of malnourished patients as assessed by nutritional specialists (OR=0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.69, p=0.009) were independently associated with decreased infectious complications. Conclusions: Nutritional support based upon NRS-2002 screening might result in overnutrition, with potentially deleterious clinical consequences. We emphasize the importance of detailed assessment of the nutritional status by a dedicated specialist before deciding on early nutritional intervention for patients with an initial NRS-2002 score of ≥3. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preoperative malnutrition is a major risk factor for increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Definition and diagnosis of malnutrition and its treatment is still subject for controversy. Furthermore, practical implementation of nutritionrelated guidelines is unknown. Methods. A review of the available literature and of current guidelines on perioperative nutrition was conducted. We focused on nutritional screening and perioperative nutrition in patients undergoing digestive surgery, and we assessed translation of recent guidelines in clinical practice. Results and Conclusions. Malnutrition is a well-recognized risk factor for poor postoperative outcome. The prevalence of malnutrition depends largely on its definition; about 40% of patients undergoing major surgery fulfil current diagnostic criteria of being at nutritional risk. The Nutritional Risk Score is a pragmatic and validated tool to identify patients who should benefit from nutritional support. Adequate nutritional intervention entails reduced (infectious) complications, hospital stay, and costs. Preoperative oral supplementation of a minimum of five days is preferable; depending on the patient and the type of surgery, immune-enhancing formulas are recommended. However, surgeons' compliance with evidence-based guidelines remains poor and efforts are necessary to implement routine nutritional screening and nutritional support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent data has suggested that excessive perioperative weight gain may be associated with adverse outcomes after abdominal surgery, but this observation remains unexplored following liver surgery. The present study aimed to investigate the predictive value of perioperative weight fluctuation in predicting complications after liver surgery. Retrospective monocentric analysis of consecutive patients undergoing liver surgery between 2010 and 2016. Patients without available perioperative weight were excluded. Test variable was postoperative weight change (ΔWeight) measured on day 2 (POD2). Primary outcome was postoperative major morbidity according to Clavien classification (grades III–IV). Secondary outcomes were overall complications, Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) and length of hospital stay (LoS). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and logistic regression with multivariable analysis were performed. A total of 181 patients met the inclusion criteria. Major and overall postoperative complications were reported in 25 (14%) and 87 (48%) patients, respectively. On POD2, median ΔWeight was 2.6 Kg (IQR: 1.1–4.0). Patients with major complications showed increased ΔWeight of 4.2 Kg (IQR: 2.7–5.7), compared to 2.3 Kg (IQR: 0.9–3.7) in patients without major complications (p < 0.001). AUROC of ΔWeight for major complications was 0.74, determining an optimal cut-off of 3.5 Kg, which yielded a negative predictive value of 94%. Multivariable analysis identified ΔWeight ≥3.5 Kg as independent predictor of major complications (OR, 4.73; 95% CI, 1.51–14.80; p = 0.008). ΔWeight ≥3.5 Kg was independently associated with major complications after liver surgery. Perioperative fluctuation of weight appears as an important predictor of adverse outcomes after liver surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]