scholarly journals OC-122 Enhanced recovery after upper gastrointestinal surgery (ERAUGIS) improves outcomes in upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer: Abstract OC-122 Table 1

Gut ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. A53.1-A53 ◽  
Author(s):  
A J Beamish ◽  
D S Y Chan ◽  
T D Reid ◽  
R Barlow ◽  
I Howell ◽  
...  
BMC Surgery ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen-Dong Huang ◽  
Hui-Yun Gu ◽  
Jie Zhu ◽  
Jie Luo ◽  
Xian-Feng Shen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has made great progress in the field of surgery, the guidelines point to the lack of high-quality evidence in upper gastrointestinal surgery. Methods Randomized controlled trials in four electronic databases that involved ERAS protocols for upper gastrointestinal surgery were searched through December 12, 2018. The primary endpoints were lung infection, urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, postoperative anastomotic leakage and ileus. The secondary endpoints were postoperative length of stay, the time from end of surgery to first flatus and defecation, and readmission rates. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of surgery. Results A total of 17 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that there was a decrease in rates of lung infection (RR = 0.50, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.75), postoperative length of stay (MD = -2.53, 95%CI: − 3.42 to − 1.65), time until first postoperative flatus (MD = -0.64, 95%CI: − 0.84 to − 0.45) and time until first postoperative defecation (MD = -1.10, 95%CI: − 1.74 to − 0.47) in patients who received ERAS, compared to conventional care. However, other outcomes were not significant difference. There was no significant difference between ERAS and conventional care in rates of urinary tract infection (P = 0.10), surgical site infection (P = 0.42), postoperative anastomotic leakage (P = 0.45), readmissions (P = 0.31) and ileus (P = 0.25). Conclusions ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infection and accelerating patient recovery time. Nevertheless, we should also consider further research ERAS should be performed undergoing gastrectomy and esophagectomy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 248
Author(s):  
Thammawat Parakonthun ◽  
Thikhamporn Tawantanakorn ◽  
Jirawat Swangsri ◽  
Tharathorn Suwatthanarak ◽  
Nicha Srisuworanan ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen-Dong Huang ◽  
Hui-Yun Gu ◽  
Jie Zhu ◽  
Jie Luo ◽  
Xian-Feng Shen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has made great progress in the field of surgery, the guidelines point to the lack of high-quality evidence in upper gastrointestinal surgery. Methods : Randomized controlled trials in four electronic databases that involved ERAS protocols for upper gastrointestinal surgery were searched through December 12, 2018. The primary endpoints were lung infection, urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, postoperative anastomotic leakage and ileus. The secondary endpoints were postoperative length of stay, the time from end of surgery to first flatus and defecation, and readmission rates. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of surgery. Results : A total of 17 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that there was a decrease in rates of lung infection ( RR =0.50, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.75 ), postoperative length of stay ( MD =-2.53, 95%CI: -3.42 to -1.65 ) , time until first postoperative flatus ( MD =-0.64, 95%CI: -0.84 to -0.45 ) and time until first postoperative defecation ( MD =-1.10, 95%CI: -1.74 to -0.47 ) in patients who received ERAS, compared to conventional care . However, other outcomes were not significant difference. There was no significant difference between ERAS and conventional care in rates of urinary tract infection (P=0.10), surgical site infection (P=0.42), postoperative anastomotic leakage (P=0.45), readmissions (P=0.31) and ileus (P =0.25). Conclusions : ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infection and accelerating patient recovery time. Nevertheless, we should also consider further research ERAS should be performed undergoing gastrectomy and esophagectomy.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen-Dong Huang ◽  
Hui-Yun Gu ◽  
Jie Zhu ◽  
Jie Luo ◽  
Xian-Feng Shen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has made great progress in the field of surgery, the guidelines point to the lack of high-quality evidence in upper gastrointestinal surgery. Methods : Randomized controlled trials in four electronic databases that involved ERAS protocols for upper gastrointestinal surgery were searched through December 12, 2018. The primary endpoints were lung infection, urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, postoperative anastomotic leakage and ileus. The secondary endpoints were postoperative length of stay, the time from end of surgery to first flatus and defecation, and readmission rates. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of surgery. Results : A total of 17 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that there was a decrease in rates of lung infection ( RR =0.50, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.75 ), postoperative length of stay ( MD =-2.53, 95%CI: -3.42 to -1.65 ) , time until first postoperative flatus ( MD =-0.64, 95%CI: -0.84 to -0.45 ) and time until first postoperative defecation ( MD =-1.10, 95%CI: -1.74 to -0.47 ) in patients who received ERAS, compared to conventional care . However, other outcomes were not significant difference. There was no significant difference between ERAS and conventional care in rates of urinary tract infection (P=0.10), surgical site infection (P=0.42), postoperative anastomotic leakage (P=0.45), readmissions (P=0.31) and ileus (P =0.25). Conclusions : ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infection and accelerating patient recovery time. Nevertheless, we should also consider further research ERAS should be performed undergoing gastrectomy and esophagectomy.


Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 2655
Author(s):  
Maria Wobith ◽  
Arved Weimann

Nowadays, patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery are following perioperative treatment in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols. Although oral feeding is supposed not to be stopped perioperatively with respect to ERAS, malnourished patients and inadequate calorie intake are common. Malnutrition, even in overweight or obese patients, is often underestimated. Patients at metabolic risk have to be identified early to confirm the indication for nutritional therapy. The monitoring of nutritional status postoperatively has to be considered in the hospital and after discharge, especially after surgery in the upper gastrointestinal tract, as normal oral food intake is decreased for several months. The article gives an overview of the current concepts of perioperative enteral nutrition in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen-Dong Huang ◽  
Hui-Yun Gu ◽  
Jie Zhu ◽  
Jie Luo ◽  
Xian-Feng Shen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has made great progress in the field of surgery, the guidelines point to the lack of high-quality evidence in upper gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: Randomized controlled trials in four electronic databases that involved ERAS protocols for upper gastrointestinal surgery were searched through December 12, 2018. The primary endpoints were lung infection, urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, postoperative anastomotic leakage and ileus. The secondary endpoints were postoperative length of stay, the time from end of surgery to first flatus and defecation, and readmission rates. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of surgery. Results: A total of 17 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that there was a decrease in rates of lung infection (RR =0.50, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.75, P <0.01), PLOS (MD =-2.53, 95%CI: -3.42 to -1.65, P <0.01), time until first postoperative flatus (MD =-0.64, 95%CI: -0.84 to -0.45, P <0.01) and time until first postoperative defecation (MD =-1.10, 95%CI: -1.74 to -0.47, P <0.01) in patients who received ERAS, compared to conventional care. However, other outcomes were no significant difference. There was no significant difference between ERAS and conventional care in rates of urinary tract infection (P =0.10), surgical site infection (P =0.42), postoperative anastomotic leakage (P =0.45), readmissions (P =0.31) and ileus (P =0.25). Conclusions: ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative infection and accelerating patient recovery time. Nevertheless, we should also consider further research ERAS should be performed in elderly patients undergoing gastrectomy.


2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitri Dorcaratto ◽  
Luís Grande ◽  
Manuel Pera

Gut ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 24 (10) ◽  
pp. 965-965
Author(s):  
A G Johnson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document