Verification of clinical applicability of the non-special perioperative administration for enhanced recovery after surgery of gastric cancer patients: a Chinese single-center observational report
10.3760/cma.j.cn.441530-20190924-00357
- VernacularTitle:验证非特殊准备的胃癌根治术围手术期加速康复外科的临床适用性：中国单中心报道
- Author:
Wenting HE
1
;
Jingyu DENG
;
Han LIANG
;
Rupeng ZHANG
;
Jiangtao GUO
;
Nannan ZHANG
;
Shiwei GUO
Author Information
1. 天津医科大学肿瘤医院胃肠肿瘤科 国家肿瘤临床医学研究中心 天津市"肿瘤防治"重点实验室 天津市恶性肿瘤临床医学研究中心 300060
- Keywords:
Stomach neoplasms;
Enhanced recovery after surgery;
Retrospective Cohort study
- From:
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
2020;23(8):766-773
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To verify clinical applicability of the non-special perioperative administration for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) proposed by Japanese scholars in Chinese gastric cancer patients.Methods:The main measures of the non-special perioperative administration for ERAS are as follows: (1) discussion of multiple disciplinary team before surgery; (2) rehabilitation education for patients; (3) no routine bowel preparation before surgery; (4) placement of nasogastric tube for decompression routinely before operation and removal as early as 24 hours after surgery; (5) appropriate rehydration; (6) antibiotic prophylaxis before surgery; (7) place abdominal drainage tubes when necessary; (8) epidural patient-controlled analgesia and oral medication for postoperative pain management; (9) start low-molecular-weight heparin injection 48h after surgery and ambulation every day to prevent deep vein thrombosis; (10) postoperative dietary management and supplement with parenteral nutrition intermittently; (11) remove Foley catheter about 24 hours after surgery. A retrospective cohort study was performed, including 203 patients undergoing radical gastrectomy at Department of Gastroenterology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from January 2017 to December 2018. Inclusion criteria were patients who were ≤75 years old without distant metastasis by preoperative examination, were diagnosed as gastric adenocarcinoma by postoperative histopathology and had complete clinicopathological and follow-up data. Patients with history of other malignancies and gastrectomy, extensive implantation of the abdominal cavity or malignant ascites by intraoperative exploration, death within 1 month after surgery, and residual gastric cancer were excluded. The perioperative management methods were chosen by patients. There were 123 patients who followed non-special perioperative administration for ERAS (non-special preparation group) and 80 patients who underwent traditional perioperative management (traditional method group). The primary outcomes (postoperative hospital stay, time to the first flatus, time to the first fluid diet, time to the first ambulatory activity, morbidity of postoperative complication, mortality, and readmission rate) and secondary outcomes (operative time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pain score) were compared between the two groups.Results:Compared to the traditional method group, the non-special preparation group had shorter time to the first flatus [(3.6±1.1) days vs. (4.8±1.4) days, t=3.134, P=0.003], shorter time to the first liquid diet [(2.6±0.9) days vs. (5.5±1.6) days, t=15.105, P<0.001], shorter time to the first ambulatory activity [(1.9±0.5) days vs. (4.1±1.1) days, t=8.543, P<0.001] and shorter postoperative hospital stay [(9.6±2.3) days vs. (12.9±2.3) days, t=5.020, P<0.001]. Besides, incidences of pancreatic leakage [6.5% (8/123) vs. 16.3% (13/80), χ 2=4.964, P=0.026], lymphatic leakage [1.6% (2/123) vs. 13.8% (11/80), χ 2=11.887, P=0.001], peritoneal effusion [2.4% (3/123) vs. 10.0% (8/80), χ 2=4.032, P=0.045], and gastroparesis [0.8% (1/123) vs. 7.5% (6/80), χ 2=4.657, P=0.031] in the non-special preparation group were significantly lower. The overall morbidity of postoperative complications and incidences of pulmonary infection and intestinal adhesion were not significantly different between the two groups (all P>0.05). As for the secondary outcomes, compared to the traditional method group, the non-special preparation group had less intraoperative blood loss [(80.4±24.4) ml vs. (100.5±19.4) ml, t=3.134, P=0.003] and lower postoperative pain score [postoperative day 1: (4.4±0.3) vs. (5.3±0.8), t=2.504, P=0.037],while the difference in operative time was not significant ( P>0.05). Conclusion:The non-special perioperative administration for ERAS proposed by Japanese scholars is effective and safe, which has certain clinical applicability and value for Chinese patients with gastric cancer.
