Search

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the implementation of an intraoperative standardized surgical site infection (SSI) prevention bundle. Methods: The multimodal, evidence-based care bundle included nine intraoperative items (antibiotic type, timing, and re-dosing, disinfection, induction temperature control &gt, 36.5°, glove change, intra-cavity lavage, wound protection, and closure strategy). The bundle was applied to all consecutive patients undergoing colonic resections. The primary outcome, SSI, was independently assessed by the National Infection Surveillance Committee for up to 30 postoperative days. A historical, institutional pre-implementation control group (2012–2017) with an identical methodology was used for comparison. Findings: In total, 1516 patients were included, of which 1256 (82.8%) were in the control group and 260 (17.2%) were in the post-implementation group. After 2:1 propensity score matching, the groups were similar for all items (p &gt, 0.05). Overall compliance with the care bundle was 77% (IQR 77–88). The lowest compliance rates were observed for temperature control (53% overall), intra-cavity lavage (64% overall), and wound protection and closure (68% and 63% in the SSI group, respectively). Surgical site infections were reported in 58 patients (22.2%) vs. 21.4% in the control group (p = 0.79). Infection rates were comparable throughout the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) categories: superficial, 12 patients (4.5%) vs. 4.2%, p = 0.82, deep incisional, 10 patients (3.7%) vs. 5.1%, p = 0.34, organ space, 36 (14%) vs. 12.4%, p = 0.48. After propensity score matching, rates remained comparable throughout all comparisons (all p &gt, 0.05). Conclusions: The implementation of an intraoperative standardized care bundle had no impact on SSI rates. This may be explained by insufficient compliance with the individual measures.

IntroductionEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines in gynecologic surgery are a set of multiple recommendations based on the best available evidence. However, according to previous studies, maintaining high compliance is challenging in daily clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of compliance to individual ERAS items on clinical outcomes.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of 446 consecutive women undergoing gynecologic oncology surgery (both open and minimally invasive) within an ERAS program from 1 October 2013 until 31 January 2017 in a tertiary academic center in Switzerland. Demographics, adherence, and outcomes were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Uni- and multivariate logistic regression was performed, with adjustment for confounding factors. Main outcomes were overall compliance, compliance to each individual ERAS item, and impact on post-operative complications according to Clavien classification.ResultsA total of 446 patients were included, 26.2 % (n=117) had at least one complication (Clavien I–V), and 11.4 % (n=51) had a prolonged length of hospital stay. The single independent risk factor for overall complications was intra-operative blood loss > 200 mL (OR 3.32; 95% CI 1.6 to 6.89, p=0.001). Overall compliance >70% with ERAS items (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.66, p=0.12) showed a protective effect on complications. Increased compliance was also associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (OR 0.2; 95% CI 0.435 to 0.93, p=0.001).ConclusionsCompliance >70% with modifiable ERAS items was significantly associated with reduced overall complications. Best possible compliance with all ERAS items is the goal to achieve lower complication rates after gynecologic oncology surgery.

Objective Surgical site infections (SSI) are the most frequent complications after colorectal surgery. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of a standardized SSI prevention bundle. Methods The multimodal, evidence-based care bundle included 9 intraoperative items (antibiotic type, timing and re-dosing, desinfection, induction temperature control >36.5°, glove change, intracavity lavage, wound protection and closure strategy). The bundle was implemented in November 2018 and applied to all consecutive patients undergoing colonic resections. Demographics, surgical specifics and overall compliance to the care bundle were prospectively assessed until October 2020. The primary outcome SSI was defined according to the definition of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and independently assessed by the National Infection Surveillance Committee (Swissnoso) up to 30 postoperative days. A historical, institutional pre-implementation control group (2012-2017, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2018.09.011) with identical methodology was used for comparison. Results In total, 243 patients were included. The control group included 1’263 patients. Both groups were comparable regarding main demographics (age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists class) and surgical characteristics (type and duration of surgery). Overall compliance to the care bundle was 77% (IQR 77-88). Lowest compliance was observed for temperature control (48%), intracavity lavage (59%) and predefined wound closure strategy (74%). Surgical site infections were reported in 54 patients (22.2%) vs. 21.4% in the control group, p = 0.79. Infection rates were comparable throughout the CDC categories: superficial: 11 patients (4.5%) vs. 4.2%, p = 0.82, deep incisional: 9 patients (3.7%) vs. 5.1%, p = 0.34, organ space: 34 (14%) vs. 12.4%, p = 0.48. Conclusion Implementation of a standardized surgical care bundle had no impact on SSI rates according to these preliminary results. Improved compliance to individual measures may help to achieve a clinical benefit.

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 (