Search

The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility and impact of an intraoperative surgical site infection prevention bundle for emergency appendectomy. Consecutive adult patients undergoing emergency appendectomy were prospectively included during a 10-year study period (2011-2020). The care bundle was implemented as of November 1, 2018, and focused on 4 intraoperative items (disinfection, antibiotic prophylaxis, induction temperature control >36.5°C, and intracavity lavage). The primary outcome was the compliance to bundle items. Thirty-day surgical site infections were assessed by the independent Swiss National SSI Surveillance Program (2011 to October 2018) and by an institutional audit (November 2018-2020). Independent risk factors for surgical site infection were identified through multinominal logistic regression analysis. Of 1,901 patients, 449 (23.6%) were included after bundle implementation. Overall surgical site infection rate was 111 (5.8%). In 42 patients with surgical site infection (37.8%), antibiotic treatment alone was done, and additional surgical management was necessary in 31 patients (27.9%), computed tomography-guided drainage in 30 patients (27%), and bedside wound opening in 9 cases (8.1%). Overall compliance to the bundle was 79.9%. Overall surgical site infection rates were decreased after bundle implementation (17/449 [3.8%] vs 94/1,452 [6.5%], P = .038), mainly due to a decrease in superficial incisional infections (P = .014). Independent risk factors for surgical site infection were surgical duration ≥60 minutes (odds ratio: 1.66, P = .018), contamination class IV (odds ratio: 2.64, P < .001), and open or converted approach (odds ratio: 4.0, P < .001), and the bundle was an independent protective factor (odds ratio: 0.58, P = .048). Implementation of an intraoperative surgical site infection prevention bundle was feasible and might have a beneficial impact on surgical site infection rates after emergency appendectomy.

Background The clinical and economic impacts of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been demonstrated extensively. Whether ERAS protocols also have a biological effect remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the biological impact of an ERAS programme in patients undergoing liver surgery. Methods A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing liver surgery (2010–2018) was undertaken. Patients operated before and after ERAS implementation in 2013 were compared. Surrogate markers of surgical stress were monitored: white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, albumin concentration, and haematocrit. Their perioperative fluctuations were defined as Δvalues, calculated on postoperative day (POD) 0 for Δalbumin and Δhaematocrit and POD 2 for ΔWBC and ΔCRP. Results A total of 541 patients were included, with 223 and 318 patients in non-ERAS and ERAS groups respectively. Groups were comparable, except for higher rates of laparoscopy (24.8 versus 11.2 per cent; P Conclusion Compared with conventional management, implementation of ERAS was associated with an attenuated stress response in patients undergoing liver surgery.

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. 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. 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). Minimally invasive surgery and high compliance with the ERAS protocol can help to prevent PPC.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and minimally invasive surgery are both in the limelight due to their potential positive effects on surgical outcome. Large randomized trials and meta-analyses validated the use of both, laparoscopy and ERAS protocol, as individual measures. A synergistic effect of both entities might contribute to even better outcomes. This review hence assessed the literature upon up-to-date studies combining both methods.

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. 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. 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). 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.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols advocate no nasogastric tubes after colorectal surgery, but postoperative ileus (POI) remains a challenging clinical reality. The aim of this study was to assess incidence and risk factors of POI. This retrospective analysis included all consecutive colorectal surgical procedures since May 2011 until November 2014. Uni- and multivariate risk factors for POI were identified by multiple logistic regression and functional and surgical outcomes assessed. The study cohort consisted of 513 consecutive colorectal ERAS patients. One hundred twenty-eight patients (24.7%) needed postoperative reinsertion of nasogastric tube at the 3.9 ± 2.9 postoperative day. Multivariate analysis retained the American Society of Anesthesiologists group 3-4 (odds ratio (OR) 1.3; 95% CI 1-1.8, p = 0.043) and duration of surgery of >3 h (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1-1.7, p = 0.047) as independent risk factors for POI. Minimally invasive surgery (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.5-0.8, p ≤ 0.001) and overall compliance of >70% to the ERAS protocol (OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-1, p = 0.031) represented independent protective factors. POI was associated with respiratory (23 vs. 5%, p ≤ 0.001) and cardiovascular (16 vs. 3%, p ≤ 0.001) complications. POI was frequent in the present study. Overall compliance to the ERAS protocol and minimally invasive surgery helped to prevent POI, which was significantly correlated with medical complications.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway includes recovery goals requiring active participation of the patients; this may be perceived as "aggressive" care in older patients. The aim of the present study was to assess whether ERAS was feasible and beneficial in older patients. Since June 2011, all consecutive colorectal patients were included in an ERAS pathway and documented in a dedicated prospective database. This retrospective analysis included 513 patients, 311 younger patients (