Search

Introduction The evidence currently available from enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes concerns their benefits in the immediate postoperative period, but there is still very little evidence as to whether their correct implementation benefits patients in the long term. The working hypothesis here is that, due to the lower response to surgical aggression and lower rates of postoperative complications, ERAS protocols can reduce colorectal cancer-related mortality. The main objective of this study is to analyse the impact of an ERAS programme for colorectal cancer on 5-year survival. As secondary objectives, we propose to analyse the weight of each of the predefined items in the oncological results as well as the quality of life.Methods and analysis A multicentre prospective cohort study was conducted in patients older than 18 years of age who are scheduled to undergo surgery for colorectal cancer. The study involved 12 hospitals with an implemented enhanced recovery protocol according to the guidelines published by the Spanish National Health Service. The intervention group includes patients with a minimum implementation level of 70%, and the control group includes those who fail to reach this level. Compliance will be studied using 18 key performance indicators, and the results will be analysed using cancer survival indicators, including overall survival, cancer-specific survival and relapse-free survival. The time to recurrence, perioperative morbidity and mortality, hospital stay and quality of life will also be studied, the latter using the validated EuroQol Five questionnaire. The propensity index method will be used to create comparable treatment and control groups, and a multivariate regression will be used to study each variable. The Kaplan-Meier estimator will be used to estimate survival and the log-rank test to make comparisons. A p value of less than 0.05 (two-tailed) will be considered to be significant.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Aragon Ethical Committee (C.P.-C.I. PI20/086) on 4 March 2020. The findings of this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals (BMJ Open, JAMA Surgery, Annals of Surgery, British Journal of Surgery). Abstracts will be submitted to relevant national and international meetings.Trial registration number NCT04305314.

A survey study based on a 21-item questionnaire was conducted to assess knowledge and practices of digestive surgeons focused on nutritional support in gastrointestinal cancer patients. At least 5 staff digestive surgeons from 25 tertiary care hospitals throughout Spain were invited to participate and 116 accepted. Malnutrition was correctly defined by 81.9% of participants. In patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, 55.2% considered that preoperative nutritional support is indicated in all patients with malnutrition for a period of 7–14 days. For the diagnosis of malnutrition, only 18.1% of participants selected unintentional weight loss together with a fasting or semi-fasting period of more than one week. Regarding the advantages of enteral infusion, 93.7% of participants considered preservation of the integrity of the intestinal mucosa and barrier function, and in relation to peripheral parenteral nutrition, 86.2% selected the definition of nutrient infusion through a peripheral vein and 81.9% its indication for less than 7 days. Digestive surgeons had a limited knowledge of basic aspects of clinical nutrition in cancer patients, but there was some variability regarding clinical practice in individual cases. These findings indicate the need to develop standardized clinical protocols as well as a national consensus on nutrition support in cancer patients.

There are no studies that have specifically assessed the role of intravenous lipid emulsions (ILE) enriched with fish oil in people with diabetes receiving total parenteral nutrition (TPN). The objective of this study was to assess the metabolic control (glycemic and lipid) and in-hospital complications that occurred in non-critically ill inpatients with TPN and type 2 diabetes with regard to the use of fish oil emulsions compared with other ILEs. We performed a post-hoc analysis of the Insulin in Parenteral Nutrition (INSUPAR) trial that included patients who started with TPN for any cause and that would predictably continue with TPN for at least five days. The study included 161 patients who started with TPN for any cause. There were 80 patients (49.7%) on fish oil enriched ILEs and 81 patients (50.3%) on other ILEs. We found significant decreases in triglyceride levels in the fish oil group compared to the other patients. We did not find any differences in glucose metabolic control: mean capillary glucose, glycemic variability, and insulin dose, except in the number of mild hypoglycemic events that was significantly higher in the fish oil group. We did not observe any differences in other metabolic, liver or infectious complications, in-hospital length of stay or mortality.