scholarly journals Feasibility of enhanced recovery protocol in minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy

Esophagus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuichiro Tanishima ◽  
Katsunori Nishikawa ◽  
Masami Yuda ◽  
Yoshitaka Ishikawa ◽  
Keita Takahashi ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Liang Cheng ◽  
Siqi Fu ◽  
Junhong Liu ◽  
Zhi Wang ◽  
Maoyong Fu

Author(s):  
Yassin Eddahchouri ◽  
◽  
Frans van Workum ◽  
Frits J. H. van den Wildenberg ◽  
Mark I. van Berge Henegouwen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex and technically demanding procedure with a long learning curve, which is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. To master MIE, training in essential steps is crucial. Yet, no consensus on essential steps of MIE is available. The aim of this study was to achieve expert consensus on essential steps in Ivor Lewis and McKeown MIE through Delphi methodology. Methods Based on expert opinion and peer-reviewed literature, essential steps were defined for Ivor Lewis (IL) and McKeown (McK) MIE. In a round table discussion, experts finalized the lists of steps and an online Delphi questionnaire was sent to an international expert panel (7 European countries) of minimally invasive upper GI surgeons. Based on replies and comments, steps were adjusted and rephrased and sent in iterative fashion until consensus was achieved. Results Two Delphi rounds were conducted and response rates were 74% (23 out of 31 experts) for the first and 81% (27 out of 33 experts) for the second round. Consensus was achieved on 106 essential steps for both the IL and McK approach. Cronbach’s alpha in the first round was 0.78 (IL) and 0.78 (McK) and in the second round 0.92 (IL) and 0.88 (McK). Conclusions Consensus among European experts was achieved on essential surgical steps for both Ivor Lewis and McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiyu Geng ◽  
Hui Bi ◽  
Dai Zhang ◽  
Changji Xiao ◽  
Han Song ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Our objective was to evaluate the impact of multimodal analgesia based enhanced recovery protocol on quality of recovery after laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Methods One hundred forty female patients scheduled for laparoscopic gynecological surgery were enrolled in this prospective, randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to receive either multimodal analgesia (Study group) or conventional opioid-based analgesia (Control group). The multimodal analgesic protocol consists of pre-operative acetaminophen and gabapentin, intra-operative flurbiprofen and ropivacaine, and post-operative acetaminophen and celecoxib. Both groups received an on-demand mode patient-controlled analgesia pump containing morphine for rescue analgesia. The primary outcome was Quality of Recovery-40 score at postoperative day (POD) 2. Secondary outcomes included numeric pain scores (NRS), opioid consumption, clinical recovery, C-reactive protein, and adverse events. Results One hundred thirty-eight patients completed the study. The global QoR-40 scores at POD 2 were not significantly different between groups, although scores in the pain dimension were higher in Study group (32.1 ± 3.0 vs. 31.0 ± 3.2, P = 0.033). In the Study group, NRS pain scores, morphine consumption, and rescue analgesics in PACU (5.8% vs. 27.5%; P = 0.0006) were lower, time to ambulation [5.0 (3.3–7.0) h vs. 6.5 (5.0–14.8) h; P = 0.003] and time to bowel function recovery [14.5 (9.5–19.5) h vs.17 (13–23.5) h; P = 0.008] were shorter, C-reactive protein values at POD 2 was lower [4(3–6) ng/ml vs. 5 (3–10.5) ng/ml; P = 0.022] and patient satisfaction was higher (9.8 ± 0.5 vs. 8.8 ± 1.2, P = 0.000). Conclusion For minimally invasive laparoscopic gynecological surgery, multimodal analgesia based enhanced recovery protocol offered better pain relief, lower opioid use, earlier ambulation, faster bowel function recovery and higher patient satisfaction, while no improvement in QoR-40 score was found. Trial registration ChiCTR1900026194; Date registered: Sep 26,2019.


2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 2914-2922 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan Stearns ◽  
Margaret A. Plymale ◽  
Daniel L. Davenport ◽  
Crystal Totten ◽  
Samuel P. Carmichael ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Evans ◽  
Maggie McCarter ◽  
Obafunbi Abimbola ◽  
Erinn M. Myers

Neurosurgery ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 65 (CN_suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 129-129
Author(s):  
G. Damian Brusko ◽  
Karthik Madhavan ◽  
Richard Epstein ◽  
John Paul G Kolcun ◽  
Jay Grossman ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document