Piotr Małczak

Early implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) protocol – Compliance improves outcomes: A prospective cohort study

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol in colorectal surgery allows shortening length of hospital stay and reducing complication rate. Despite the clear guidelines and conclusive evidence their full implementation and putting them into daily practice meets certain difficulties, especially in the early stage. The aim of the study was to analyse the course of implementation of the ERAS protocol into daily practice on the basis of adherence to the protocol. Group included 92 patients (43F/49M) with colorectal cancer submitted to laparoscopic resection during the years 2013-2014. Perioperative care in all of them based on ERAS protocol consisting of 16 items. Its principles and discharge criteria were based on the guidelines of the ERAS Society guidelines. The entire analysed group of patients was divided into 3 subgroups (30 patients) depending on the time from ERAS protocol implementation. We analysed the compliance with the protocol and its influence on length of hospital stay, postoperative complications and readmission rate in different subgroups. The average compliance with the protocol differed significantly between groups and was 65% in group 1, 83.9% in group 2 and 89.6% in group 3. The compliance with subsequent protocol elements was different. The length of stay and complication rate was statistically different in analysed subgroups. The whole group demonstrated an inverse correlation between compliance and length of stay. This analysis leads to the conclusion that the introduction of the ERAS protocol is a gradual process, and its compliance at the level of 80% or more requires at least 30 patients and the period of about 6 months. The initial derogation from the assumed proceedings is inevitable and should not discourage further action. Particular emphasis in the initial stage should be put on continuous training of personnel of all specialties and continuous evaluation of the results.

One hundred seventy-nine consecutive bariatric operations after introduction of protocol inspired by the principles of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) in bariatric surgery.

Background Obese patients are a very large high-risk group for complications after surgical procedures. In this group, optimized perioperative care and a faster recovery to full activity can contribute to a decreased rate of postoperative complications. The introduction of ERAS®-based protocol is now even more important in bariatric surgery centers. The results of our study support the idea of implementation of ERAS®-based protocol in this special group of patients. Material/Methods This analysis included 170 patients (62 male/108 female, mean BMI 46.7 kg/m2) who had undergone laparoscopic bariatric surgery, and whose perioperative care was conducted according to a protocol inspired by ERAS® principles. Examined factors included oral nutrition tolerance, time until mobilization after surgery, requirements for opioids, duration of hospitalization, and readmission rate. Results During the first 24 postoperative hours, oral administration of liquid nutrition was tolerated by 162 (95.3%) patients and 163 (95.8%) were fully mobile. In 44 (25.8%) patients it was necessary to administer opioids to relieve pain. Intravenous liquid supply was discontinued within 24 hours in 145 (85.3%) patients. The complication rate was 10.5% (mainly rhabdomyolysis and impaired passage of gastric contents). The average time of hospitalization was 2.9 days and the readmission rate was 1.7%. Conclusions The introduction of an ERAS® principles-inspired protocol in our center proved technically possible and safe for our patients, and allowed for reduced hospitalization times without increased rate of complications or readmissions.

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in oesophageal cancer surgery: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol are well established in many surgical disciplines, leading to decrease in morbidity and length of hospital stay. These multi-modal protocols have been also introduced to oesophageal cancer surgery. This review aimed to evaluate current literature on ERAS in oesophageal cancer surgery and conduct a meta-analysis on primary and secondary outcomes. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. We analyzed data up to May 2016. Eligible studies had to contain four described ERAS protocol elements. The primary outcome was overall morbidity. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, specific complications, mortality and readmissions. Random effect meta-analyses were undertaken. Results Initial search yielded 1,064 articles. Thorough evaluation resulted in 13 eligible articles which were analyzed. A total of 2,042 patients were included in the analysis (1,058 ERAS group and 984 treated with traditional protocols). Analysis of overall morbidity as well as complication rate did not show any significant reduction. Non-surgical complications and pulmonary complications were significantly lower in the ERAS group, RR = 0.71 95% CI 0.62–0.80, p < 0.00001 and RR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.60–0.94, p = 0.01, respectively. Meta-analysis on length of stay presented significant reduction Mean difference = -3.55, 95% CI -4.41 to -2.69, p for effect<0.00001. Conclusions This systematic review with a meta-analysis on ERAS in oesophageal surgery indicates a reduction of non-surgical complications and no negative influence on overall morbidity. Moreover, a reduction in the length of hospital stay was presented.

Are bariatric operations performed by residents safe and efficient

BACKGROUND The growing need for surgeons who are educated and trained in bariatric surgery has raised many issues related to training in this field. OBJECTIVES This study was performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) performed by doctors-in-training during their residency in general surgery. SETTING Tertiary referral university teaching hospital, Poland. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent bariatric surgery. One group underwent surgery performed by at least third-year residents learning particular types of surgeries (trainee group), and the second group underwent surgeries performed by experienced bariatric surgeons (mentor group). The primary endpoint was the safety of the procedures. We analyzed factors related to the intraoperative and postoperative course. The secondary endpoint was long-term weight reduction. A lower body mass index (BMI), fewer co-morbidities, and preferably female sex were the selection criteria for patients in the trainee group. RESULTS We enrolled 408 patients who met all inclusion criteria. Among them, 233 underwent SG and 175 underwent LRYGB. For both SG and LRYGB, the median maximum preoperative weight was significantly lower in the trainee than mentor group. We found no statistically significant differences in the demographic factors or co-morbidities between the 2 groups. The median duration of SG and LRYGB surgery was significantly longer in the trainee than mentor group. The median number of stapler firings during SG was significantly lower in the trainee than mentor group. The number of stapler firings during LRYGB did not differ between the 2 groups. The incidence of intraoperative difficulties, which were based on the operators subjective opinion, was higher in the trainee than mentor group for both SG and LRYGB. However, intraoperative difficulties had no significant impact on the intraoperative complication rate or risk of perioperative complications. The average percentage weight loss (%WL), percentage excess weight loss (%EWL), and percentage excess BMI loss (%EBMIL) in the all study group were 31.14%±9.11%, 56.17%±17.27%, and 65.42%±19.28%, respectively. For patients who underwent SG, we found no significant difference in %WL, %EWL, or %EBMIL between the trainee and mentor groups. CONCLUSIONS The performance of bariatric surgeries by residents does not affect the risk of reoperation, intraoperative adverse events, or surgical complications. Performance of SG and LRYGB by trainees takes significantly longer but has no untoward consequences for the patient. Both SG and LRYGB performed by a doctor-in-training and experienced operator lead to comparable outcomes in terms of weight reduction.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy—systematic review and meta-analysis

PurposeThe purpose of this systematic review was to compare minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) by using meta-analytical techniques.MethodologyMedline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for eligible studies. Data from included studies were extracted for the following outcomes: operative time, overall morbidity, pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, blood loss, postoperative hemorrhage, yield of harvested lymph nodes, R1 rate, length of hospital stay, and readmissions. Random and fix effect meta-analyses were undertaken.ResultsInitial reference search yielded 747 articles. Thorough evaluation resulted in 12 papers, which were analyzed. The total number of patients was 2186 (705 in MIPD group and 1481 in OPD). Although there were no differences in overall morbidity between groups, we noticed reduced blood loss, delayed gastric emptying, and length of hospital stay in favor of MIPD. In contrary, meta-analysis of operative time revealed significant differences in favor of open procedures. Remaining parameters did not differ among groups.ConclusionOur review suggests that although MIPD takes longer, it may be associated with reduced blood loss, shortened LOS, and comparable rate of perioperative complications. Due to heterogeneity of included studies and differences in baseline characteristics between analyzed groups, the analysis of short-term oncological outcomes does not allow drawing unequivocal conclusions.

Minimally invasive pancreatic cancer surgery: What is the current evidence?

Surgery remains the only option to cure pancreatic cancer. Although the use of laparoscopy in oncology is rapidly growing worldwide, its efficacy in pancreatic surgery remains controversial. A number of studies have compared outcomes of minimally invasive and open pancreatic resections. However, they are mostly non-randomized trials including relatively small groups of patients. In addition, most of these studies were conducted in high-volume pancreatic centres. It seems that despite longer operative time, laparoscopy may be beneficial in terms of morbidity, blood loss and hospital stay. Thus far, very little is known about the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic cancer. Our aim was to review current evidence for the use of minimally invasive techniques in patients with pancreatic malignancy.

Analysis of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Learning Curve and Its Influence on Procedure Safety and Perioperative Complications

PurposeLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become an attractive bariatric procedure with promising treatment effects yet amount of data regarding institutional learning process is limited.Materials and MethodsRetrospective study included patients submitted to LSG at academic teaching hospital. Patients were divided into groups every 100 consecutive patients. LSG introduction was structured along with Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) treatment protocol. Primary endpoint was determining the LSG learning curve’s stabilization point, using operative time, intraoperative difficulties, intraoperative adverse events (IAE), and number of stapler firings. Secondary endpoints: influence on perioperative complications and reoperations. Five hundred patients were included (330 females, median age of 40 (33–49) years).ResultsOperative time in G1–G2 differed significantly from G3–G5. Stabilization point was the 200th procedure using operative time. Intraoperative difficulties of G1 differed significantly from G2–G5, with stabilization after the 100th procedure. IAE and number of stapler firings could not be used as predictor. Based on perioperative morbidity, the learning curve was stabilized at the 100th procedure. The morbidity rates in the groups were G1, 13%; G2, 4%; G3, 5%; G4, 5%; and G5, 2%. The reoperation rate in G1 was 3%; G2, 2%; G3, 2%; G4, 1%; and G5, 0%.ConclusionThe institutional learning process stabilization point for LSG in a newly established bariatric center is between the 100th and 200th operation. Initially, the morbidity rate is high, which should concern surgeons who are willing to perform bariatric surgery.

More stapler firings increase the risk of perioperative morbidity after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

Introduction Staple-line bleeding and leakage are the most common serious complications of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. The relationship between multiple stapler firings and higher risk of postoperative complications is well defined in colorectal surgery but has not been addressed in bariatric procedures so far. Identification of new factors such as “the numbers of stapler firings used during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG)” as a predictor for complications can lead to optimization of the patient care at bariatric centers. Aim To determine the association between perioperative morbidity and the number of stapler firings during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Material and methods This observational study was based on retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in patients operated on for morbid obesity in a teaching hospital/tertiary referral center for general surgery. The patients who underwent LSG were analyzed in terms of the number of stapler firings used as a new potential risk predictor for postoperative complications after surgery, adjusting for other patient- and treatment-related factors. The study included 333 patients (209 women, 124 men, mean age: 40 ±11). Results During the first 30 days after surgery, complications were observed in 18 (5.41%) patients. Multivariate analysis showed that prolonging operative time increased morbidity (every minute, OR = 1.01; 95% CI: 1.00–1.02) and the complication rate increased with the number of stapler firings (every firing, OR = 1.91; 95% CI: 1.09–3.33; p = 0.023). Conclusions Additional stapler firings above the usual number and a prolonged operation should alert a surgeon and the whole team about increased risk of postoperative complications.

Comparison of circular- and linear-stapled gastrojejunostomy in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multicenter study

Introduction Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is a common, well-established procedure, but no consensus regarding selection of the gastrojejunostomy (GJ) technique has been reached, and standardization of this precise technique is far from being achieved. Aim To compare circular-stapled and linear-stapled GJ in LRYGB in terms of operative time and postoperative complications. Material and methods This retrospective case-control study compared the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of LRYGB with a circular-stapled (LRYGB-CS) versus linear-stapled (LRYGB-LS) gastrojejunostomy. All patients, operated on in two academic referral care centers for bariatric surgery, were enrolled from April 2013 to June 2016. 457 patients were included (255 and 202 respectively in the LRYGB-CS and LRYGB-LS groups). After matching the groups for age, sex, body mass index, arterial hypertension, and presence of type 2 diabetes in a 1 : 1 ratio, 99 patients were enrolled in each. Results The total operative time was longer in the LRYGB-LS group (140 vs. 85 min, p < 0.001). The postoperative hemorrhage and wound infection rates were lower in the LRYGB-LS group (2.1% vs. 10.3%, p = 0.021, and 1.0% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.011). The readmission rates were comparable (8.2% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.593). There was no significant difference in the incidence of gastrojejunostomy leakage, stricture, port-site hernia, or marginal ulcer. Conclusions Both anastomosis types for LRYGB are safe and have low and comparable risks of postoperative complications. After LRYGB-CS, postoperative bleeding and wound infections are slightly more frequent; however, the operative time is shorter.

Laparoscopic approach to splenic aneurysms

Background Splenic artery aneurysm is a rare disease with possibly mortal complications. For years, the main method of treatment was excision of aneurysm with spleen. In recent years, several methods have been developed in order to salvage the spleen such endovascular techniques and aneurysmectomy. Objective The aim of our study was to determine the feasibility of laparoscopic aneurysmectomy with spleen salvage in cases of splenic artery aneurysm. Materials Analysis of prospectively gathered data containing records of patients operated laparoscopically due to diseases of the spleen in 1998–2016 in our department. Inclusion criteria were attempted laparoscopic aneurysmectomy with intent to salvage spleen. Results Out of 11 patients, seven patients underwent aneurysmectomy with spleen preservation, one patient had partial-splenectomy, two patients had intra-operative splenectomies and one patient had a re-operation on post-op day 1 with splenectomy. Re-operation with splenectomy was the only recorded complication. Conclusions Laparoscopic aneurysmectomy of SAA may be considered as a safe treatment method, with good short- and long-term results; however, a complete evaluation requires further research on a larger study group. It allows permanent treatment of SAA with maintaining spleen function.