Search

Presents the results of a survey aimed to characterize perioperative practice in colorectal cancer surgery in five northern European countries. Description of the study and how it was conducted; Assertion that perioperative routines in colonic cancer surgery differ widely in northern Europe and deviate considerably from the best available evidence.

Background & Aims: Malnutrition has been recognized as a major risk factor for adverse postoperative outcomes. The ESPEN Symposium on perioperative nutrition was held in Nottingham, UK, on 14-15 October 2018 and the aims of this document were to highlight the scientific basis for the nutritional and metabolic management of surgical patients., Methods: This paper represents the opinion of experts in this multidisciplinary field and those of a patient and caregiver, based on current evidence. It highlights the current state of the art., Results: Surgical patients may present with varying degrees of malnutrition, sarcopenia, cachexia, obesity and myosteatosis. Preoperative optimization can help improve outcomes. Perioperative fluid therapy should aim at keeping the patient in as near zero fluid and electrolyte balance as possible. Similarly, glycemic control is especially important in those patients with poorly controlled diabetes, with a stepwise increase in the risk of infectious complications and mortality per increasing HbA1c. Immobilization can induce a decline in basal energy expenditure, reduced insulin sensitivity, anabolic resistance to protein nutrition and muscle strength, all of which impair clinical outcomes. There is a role for pharmaconutrition, pre-, pro- and syn-biotics, with the evidence being stronger in those undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancer., Conclusions: Nutritional assessment of the surgical patient together with the appropriate interventions to restore the energy deficit, avoid weight loss, preserve the gut microbiome and improve functional performance are all necessary components of the nutritional, metabolic and functional conditioning of the surgical patient., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.)

Background: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society publishes guidelines on perioperative care, but these guidelines should be validated prospectively., Objective: To evaluate the association between compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guideline elements and postoperative outcomes in an international cohort., Study Design: The study comprised 2101 patients undergoing elective gynecologic/oncology surgery between January 2011 and November 2017 in 10 hospitals across Canada, the United States, and Europe. Patient demographics, surgical/anesthesia details, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol compliance elements (pre-, intra-, and postoperative phases) were entered into the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Interactive Audit System. Surgical complexity was stratified according to the Aletti scoring system (low vs medium/high). The following covariates were accounted for in the analysis: age, body mass index, smoking status, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, operating time, surgical approach (open vs minimally invasive), intraoperative blood loss, hospital, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation status. The primary end points were primary hospital length of stay and complications. Negative binomial regression was used to model length of stay, and logistic regression to model complications, as a function of compliance score and covariates., Results: Patient demographics included a median age 56 years, 35.5% obese, 15% smokers, and 26.7% American Society of Anesthesiologists Class III-IV. Final diagnosis was malignant in 49% of patients. Laparotomy was used in 75.9% of cases, and the remainder minimally invasive surgery. The majority of cases (86%) were of low complexity (Aletti score ≤3). In patients with ovarian cancer, 69.5% had a medium/high complexity surgery (Aletti score 4-11). Median length of stay was 2 days in the low- and 5 days in the medium/high-complexity group. Every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score was associated with 8% (IRR, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.95; P<.001) decrease in days in hospital among low-complexity, and 12% (IRR, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.93; P<.001) decrease among patients with medium/high-complexity scores. For every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score, the odds of total complications were estimated to be 12% lower (P<.05) among low-complexity patients., Conclusion: Audit of surgical practices demonstrates that improved compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guidelines is associated with an improvement in clinical outcomes, including length of stay, highlighting the importance of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: Guidelines for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) have recently been published for lung surgery. Although some of the recommendations are generic or focused on anesthetic and nursing care, other recommendations are more specific to a thoracic surgeon's practice. The present review concentrates on the surgical approach, optimal chest drain management, and the importance of early mobilization., Recent Findings: Most lung cancer resections are still performed via an open thoracotomy approach. If a thoracotomy is to be used, a muscle-sparing approach may result in reduced pain and better postoperative function. Sparing of the intercostal bundle also reduces pain. There is now evidence that minimally invasive surgery for early lung cancer results in superior patient outcomes. Postoperatively, single chest tubes should be used without the routine application of external suction. Digital drainage systems are more reliable and may produce superior outcomes. Conservative chest drain removal policies are unnecessary and impair patient recovery. Early mobilization protocols should be instigated to reduce postoperative complications., Summary: The use of ERAS after lung surgery has the potential to improve patient outcomes. Although specific surgical elements are in the minority, thoracic surgeons should be involved in all aspects of perioperative care as part of the wider multidisciplinary team.

Enhanced recovery after surgery is well established in specialties such as colorectal surgery. It is achieved through the introduction of multiple evidence-based perioperative measures that aim to diminish postoperative organ dysfunction while facilitating recovery. This review aims to present consensus recommendations for the optimal perioperative management of patients undergoing thoracic surgery (principally lung resection). A systematic review of meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, large non-randomized studies and reviews was conducted for each protocol element. Smaller prospective and retrospective cohort studies were considered only when higher-level evidence was unavailable. The quality of the evidence base was graded by the authors and used to form consensus recommendations for each topic. Development of these recommendations was endorsed by the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Society and the European Society for Thoracic Surgery. Recommendations were developed for a total of 45 enhanced recovery items covering topics related to preadmission, admission, intraoperative care and postoperative care. Most are based on good-quality studies. In some instances, good-quality data were not available, and subsequent recommendations are generic or based on data extrapolated from other specialties. In other cases, no recommendation can currently be made because either equipoise exists or there is a lack of available evidence. Recommendations are based not only on the quality of the evidence but also on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects. Key recommendations include preoperative counselling, nutritional screening, smoking cessation, prehabilitation for high-risk patients, avoidance of fasting, carbohydrate loading, avoidance of preoperative sedatives, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, prevention of hypothermia, short-acting anaesthetics to facilitate early emergence, regional anaesthesia, nausea and vomiting control, opioid-sparing analgesia, euvolemic fluid management, minimally invasive surgery, early chest drain removal, avoidance of urinary catheters and early mobilization after surgery. These guidelines outline recommendations for the perioperative management of patients undergoing lung surgery based on the best available evidence. As the recommendation grade for most of the elements is strong, the use of a systematic perioperative care pathway has the potential to improve outcomes after surgery.

Background & Aims: Recognition and treatment of undernutrition in hospitalized patients are not often a priority in clinical practice., Objectives: We investigated how the nutritional risk of patients is determined and whether such assessment influences daily nutritional care across Europe and in Israeli hospitals., Methods: 1217 units from 325 hospitals in 25 countries with 21,007 patients participated in a longitudinal survey "nutritionDay" 2007/2008 undertaken in Europe and Israel. Screening practice, the type of tools used and whether energy requirements and intake are assessed and monitored were surveyed using standardized questionnaires., Results: Fifty-two percent (range 21-73%) of the units in the different regions reported a screening routine which was most often performed with locally developed methods and less often with national tools, the Nutrition Risk Screening-2002, or the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool. Twenty-seven percent of the patients were subjectively classified as being "at nutritional risk", with substantial differences existing between regions. Independent factors influencing the classification of nutritional risk included age, BMI <18.5 kg/m(2), unintentional weight loss, reduced food intake in the previous week and on nutritionDay (for all parameters, p < 0.0001). The energy goal was defined as >=1500 kcal in 76% of the patients, but 43% of patients did not reach this goal., Conclusions: The process of nutrition risk assessment varied between units and countries. Additionally, energy goals were frequently not met. More effort is needed to implement current guidelines within daily clinical practice., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.)