Nicolas Demartines

Classification of Surgical Complications: A New Proposal With Evaluation in a Cohort of 6336 Patients and Results of a Survey

Objective:Although quality assessment is gaining increasing attention, there is still no consensus on how to define and grade postoperative complications. This shortcoming hampers comparison of outcome data among different centers and therapies and over time. Patients and Methods:A classification of complications published by one of the authors in 1992 was critically re-evaluated and modified to increase its accuracy and its acceptability in the surgical community. Modifications mainly focused on the manner of reporting life-threatening and permanently disabling complications. The new grading system still mostly relies on the therapy used to treat the complication. The classification was tested in a cohort of 6336 patients who underwent elective general surgery at our institution. The reproducibility and personal judgment of the classification were evaluated through an international survey with 2 questionnaires sent to 10 surgical centers worldwide. Results:The new ranking system significantly correlated with complexity of surgery (P < 0.0001) as well as with the length of the hospital stay (P < 0.0001). A total of 144 surgeons from 10 different centers around the world and at different levels of training returned the survey. Ninety percent of the case presentations were correctly graded. The classification was considered to be simple (92% of the respondents), reproducible (91%), logical (92%), useful (90%), and comprehensive (89%). The answers of both questionnaires were not dependent on the origin of the reply and the level of training of the surgeons. Conclusions:The new complication classification appears reliable and may represent a compelling tool for quality assessment in surgery in all parts of the world.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colonic Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS ® ) Society Recommendations

BackgroundThis review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colonic surgery and to provide graded recommendations for items for an evidenced-based enhanced perioperative protocol.MethodsStudies were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined, reviewed and graded. A consensus recommendation was reached after critical appraisal of the literature by the group.ResultsFor most of the protocol items, recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials (quality of evidence and recommendations according to the GRADE system).ConclusionsBased on the evidence available for each item of the multimodal perioperative care pathway, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) present a comprehensive evidence-based consensus review of perioperative care for colonic surgery.

Evidence-based Value of Prophylactic Drainage in Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses

Objective:To determine the evidence-based value of prophylactic drainage in gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. Methods:An electronic search of the Medline database from 1966 to 2004 was performed to identify articles comparing prophylactic drainage with no drainage in GI surgery. The studies were reviewed and classified according to their quality of evidence using the grading system proposed by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. Seventeen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were found for hepato-pancreatico-biliary surgery, none for upper GI tract, and 13 for lower GI tract surgery. If sufficient RCTs were identified, we performed a meta-analysis to characterize the drain effect using the random-effects model. Results:There is evidence of level 1a that drains do not reduce complications after hepatic, colonic, or rectal resection with primary anastomosis and appendectomy for any stage of appendicitis. Drains were even harmful after hepatic resection in chronic liver disease and appendectomy. In the absence of RCTs, there is a consensus (evidence level 5) about the necessity of prophylactic drainage after esophageal resection and total gastrectomy due to the potential fatal outcome in case of anastomotic and gastric leakage. Conclusion:Many GI operations can be performed safely without prophylactic drainage. Drains should be omitted after hepatic, colonic, or rectal resection with primary anastomosis and appendectomy for any stage of appendicitis (recommendation grade A), whereas prophylactic drainage remains indicated after esophageal resection and total gastrectomy (recommendation grade D). For many other GI procedures, especially involving the upper GI tract, there is a further demand for well-designed RCTs to clarify the value of prophylactic drainage.

Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colonic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations☆

BACKGROUND This review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colonic surgery and to provide graded recommendations for items for an evidenced-based enhanced perioperative protocol. METHODS Studies were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined, reviewed and graded. A consensus recommendation was reached after critical appraisal of the literature by the group. RESULTS For most of the protocol items, recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials (quality of evidence and recommendations according to the GRADE system). CONCLUSIONS Based on the evidence available for each item of the multimodal perioperative-care pathway, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) present a comprehensive evidence-based consensus review of perioperative care for colonic surgery.

A fast-track program reduces complications and length of hospital stay after open colonic surgery

BACKGROUND & AIMS A fast-track program is a multimodal approach for patients undergoing colonic surgery that combines stringent regimens of perioperative care (fluid restriction, optimized analgesia, forced mobilization, and early oral feeding) to reduce perioperative morbidity, hospital stay, and cost. We investigated the impact of a fast-track protocol on postoperative morbidity in patients after open colonic surgery. METHODS A randomized trial of patients in 4 teaching hospitals in Switzerland included 156 patients undergoing elective open colonic surgery who were assigned to either a fast-track program or standard care. The primary end point was the 30-day complication rate. Secondary end points were severity of complications, hospital stay, and compliance with the fast-track protocol. RESULTS The fast-track protocol significantly decreased the number of complications (16 of 76 in the fast-track group vs 37 of 75 in the standard care group; P = .0014), resulting in shorter hospital stays (median, 5 days; range, 2-30 vs 9 days, respectively; range, 6-30; P < .0001). There was a trend toward less severe complications in the fast-track group. A multiple logistic regression analysis revealed fluid administration greater than the restriction limits (odds ratio, 4.198; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-10.366; P = .002) and a nonfunctioning epidural analgesia (odds ratio, 3.365; 95% confidence interval, 1.367-8.283; P = .008) as independent predictors of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS The fast-track program reduces the rate of postoperative complications and length of hospital stay and should be considered as standard care. Fluid restriction and an effective epidural analgesia are the key factors that determine outcome of the fast-track program.

Immunonutrition in gastrointestinal surgery.

Patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery are at increased risk of developing complications. The use of immunonutrition (IN) in such patients is not widespread because the available data are heterogeneous, and some show contradictory results with regard to complications, mortality and length of hospital stay.

A multicenter randomized clinical trial of primary anastomosis or Hartmann's procedure for perforated left colonic diverticulitis with purulent or fecal peritonitis.

Objectives:To evaluate the outcome after Hartmanns procedure (HP) versus primary anastomosis (PA) with diverting ileostomy for perforated left-sided diverticulitis. Background:The surgical management of left-sided colonic perforation with purulent or fecal peritonitis remains controversial. PA with ileostomy seems to be superior to HP; however, results in the literature are affected by a significant selection bias. No randomized clinical trial has yet compared the 2 procedures. Methods:Sixty-two patients with acute left-sided colonic perforation (Hinchey III and IV) from 4 centers were randomized to HP (n = 30) and to PA (with diverting ileostomy, n = 32), with a planned stoma reversal operation after 3 months in both groups. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary end point was the overall complication rate. The study was discontinued following an interim analysis that found significant differences of relevant secondary end points as well as a decreasing accrual rate (NCT01233713). Results:Patient demographics were equally distributed in both groups (Hinchey III: 76% vs 75% and Hinchey IV: 24% vs 25%, for HP vs PA, respectively). The overall complication rate for both resection and stoma reversal operations was comparable (80% vs 84%, P = 0.813). Although the outcome after the initial colon resection did not show any significant differences (mortality 13% vs 9% and morbidity 67% vs 75% in HP vs PA), the stoma reversal rate after PA with diverting ileostomy was higher (90% vs 57%, P = 0.005) and serious complications (Grades IIIb-IV: 0% vs 20%, P = 0.046), operating time (73 minutes vs 183 minutes, P < 0.001), hospital stay (6 days vs 9 days, P = 0.016), and lower in-hospital costs (US

The Impact of Enhanced Recovery Protocol Compliance on Elective Colorectal Cancer Resection Results From an International Registry

16,717 vs US

Consensus guidelines for enhanced recovery after gastrectomy. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

24,014) were significantly reduced in the PA group. Conclusions:This is the first randomized clinical trial favoring PA with diverting ileostomy over HP in patients with perforated diverticulitis.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) Society Recommendations.

BACKGROUND The ERAS (enhanced recovery after surgery) care has been shown in randomized clinical trials to improve outcome after colorectal surgery compared to traditional care. The impact of different levels of compliance and specific elements, particularly out with a trial setting, is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the individual impact of specific patient factors and perioperative enhanced recovery protocol compliance on postoperative outcome after elective primary colorectal cancer resection. METHODS The international, multicenter ERAS registry data, collected between November 2008 and March 2013, was reviewed. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and perioperative ERAS protocol compliance were assessed. Linear regression was undertaken for primary admission duration and logistic regression for the development of any postoperative complication. FINDINGS A total of 1509 colonic and 843 rectal resections were undertaken in 13 centers from 6 countries. Median length of stay for colorectal resections was 6 days, with readmissions in 216 (9.2%), complications in 948 (40%), and reoperation in 167 (7.1%) of 2352 patients. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with reduced complications [odds ratio (OR) = 0.68; P < 0.001] and length of stay (OR = 0.83, P < 0.001). Increasing ERAS compliance was correlated with fewer complications (OR = 0.69, P < 0.001) and shorter primary hospital admission (OR = 0.88, P < 0.001). Shorter hospital stay was associated with preoperative carbohydrate and fluid loading (OR = 0.89, P = 0.001), and totally intravenous anesthesia (OR = 0.86, P < 0.001); longer stay was associated with intraoperative epidural analgesia (OR = 1.07, P = 0.019). Reduced postoperative complications were associated with restrictive perioperative intravenous fluids (OR = 0.35, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS This analysis has demonstrated that in a large, international cohort of patients, increasing compliance with an ERAS program and the use of laparoscopic surgery independently improve outcome.