COMPARISON OF THE OUTCOMES OF ENHANCED RECOVERY AFTER SURGERY (ERAS) VS CONVENTIONAL CARE IN ELECTIVE COLORECTAL SURGERY
Keywords:
Colorectal cancer, ERAS protocol, perioperative strategies, comparative study, elective colorectal surgeryAbstract
Background: Uncontrolled cell development in the colon, rectum, or appendix is the cause of colorectal cancer, sometimes referred to as colon cancer, rectal cancer, or bowel cancer. Its incidence is higher in developed countries than in developing ones. About 75–95% of cases occur in individuals without significant genetic risk. The aim of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) or fast-track surgery involves the use of several perioperative strategies to facilitate better surgical conditions to achieve faster recovery of the patients which has shown better outcomes in different surgery types. This study aims to compare the outcome of ERAS vs conventional care in elective colorectal surgery. Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 60 patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery were assessed by dividing them into two groups. Group A patients followed ERAS protocols, while Group B patients followed conventional care techniques. Time for bowel sounds and first flatus were noted. Mean hospital stay was recorded for each patient from operation to discharge. Patients were followed for 4 weeks for surgical site infection assessment. Results: The mean time to return bowel sounds in Group A was 20.63±2.66 hours while in Group B was 27.0±2.07 hours (p-value =0.0001). The mean time to passage of the first flatus in Group A was 18.67±2.38 hours while in Group B was 25.93±2.88 hours (p-value =0.0001). The mean hospital stay in Group A was 3.37±1.75 days while in Group B was 8.30±1.68 days (p-value =0.0001). Surgical site infection was found in 04 (13.33%) patients in group A while in group B, it was found in 09 (30.0%) patients with a p-value of 0.1172. Conclusion: This study concludes that the outcome of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is better than conventional care in elective colorectal surgery.References
Brajcich BC, Stulberg JJ, Palis BE, Chung JW, Huang R, Nelson H, et al. Association Between Surgical Technical Skill and Long-term Survival for Colon Cancer. JAMA Oncol 2021;7(1):127–9.
Morgan E, Arnold M, Gini A, Lorenzoni V, Cabasag CJ, Laversanne M, et al. Global burden of colorectal cancer in 2020 and 2040: Incidence and mortality estimates from GLOBOCAN. Gut 2023;72(2):338–44.
Ahmed M. Colon cancer: a clinician’s perspective in 2019. Gastroenterology Res 2020;13(1):1–10.
Xie F, You Y, Huang J, Guan C, Chen Z, Fang M, et al. Association between physical activity and digestive-system cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sport Health Sci 2021;10(1):4–13.
Greer NL, Gunnar WP, Dahm P, Lee AE, MacDonald R, Shaukat A, et al. Enhanced recovery protocols for adults undergoing colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 2018;61(9):1108–18.
Mattiuzzi C, Sanchis-Gomar F, Lippi G. Concise update on colorectal cancer epidemiology. Ann Transl Med 2019;7(21):609.
Soomro FH, Razzaq A, Qaisar R, Ansar M, Kazmi T, Ansar Jr M. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Are Benefits Demonstrated in International Studies Replicable in Pakistan? Cureus 2021;13(11):e19624.
Mattessich NT. Goals-to-discharge patient checklist: implementing a program to optimize recovery after surgery for patients with colorectal cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2020;24(3):316–9.
Kurien JS, EU S, Varghese SA. Comparison of Outcome between the Implementation of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Programme (ERAS) vs. Traditional Care, in Elective Abdominal Surgeries. J Evoluton Med Dent Sci 2020;9(19):3127–31.
Ripollés‐Melchor J, de Fuenmayor-Varela ML, Camargo SC, Fernandez PJ, Barrio ACD, Hurtado EM, et al. Aceleração da recuperação após protocolo cirúrgico versus cuidados perioperatórios convencionais em cirurgia colorretal. Um estudo de coorte em centro único. Braz J Anesthesiol 2018;68(4):358–68.
Tian Y, Cao S, Liu X, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing the short-term outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery and conventional care in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (GISSG1901). Ann Surg 2022;275(1):e15–21.
El-Kefraoui C, Do U, Miller A, Kouyoumdjian A, Cui D, Khorasani E, et al. Impact of enhanced recovery pathways on patient-reported outcomes after abdominal surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 2023;37(10):8043–56.
Gustafsson U, Scott M, Hubner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 2019;43(3):659–95.
El-Shewy AH, Abdalla WM, Baghdadi MA. Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in colorectal surgery. Egypt J Surg 2020;39(1):94–101.
Ljungqvist O, Scott M, Fearon KC. Enhanced recovery after surgery: a review. JAMA Surg 2017;152(3):292–8.
Saurabh K, Sureshkumar S, Mohsina S, Mahalakshmy T, Kundra P, Kate V. Adapted ERAS pathway versus standard care in patients undergoing emergency small bowel surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Gastrointest Surg 2020;24(9):2077–87.
Pranavi A, Sureshkumar S, Mahalakshmy T, Kundra P, Kate V. Adapted ERAS pathway versus standard care in patients undergoing emergency surgery for perforation peritonitis—a randomized controlled trial. J Gastrointest Surg 2022;26(1):39–49.
Shang Y, Guo C, Zhang D. Modified enhanced recovery after surgery protocols are beneficial for postoperative recovery for patients undergoing emergency surgery for obstructive colorectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018;97(39):e12348.
Zhang X, Yang J, Chen X, Du L, Li K, Zhou Y. Enhanced recovery after surgery on multiple clinical outcomes: Umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Medicine (Baltimore) 2020;99(29):e20983.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Muhammad Tariq Iqbal, Atta Ullah Jatt, Fawad Mueen Arbi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad is an OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL which means that all content is FREELY available without charge to all users whether registered with the journal or not. The work published by J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad is licensed and distributed under the creative commons License CC BY ND Attribution-NoDerivs. Material printed in this journal is OPEN to access, and are FREE for use in academic and research work with proper citation. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad accepts only original material for publication with the understanding that except for abstracts, no part of the data has been published or will be submitted for publication elsewhere before appearing in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. The Editorial Board of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and authenticity of material printed in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. However, conclusions and statements expressed are views of the authors and do not reflect the opinion/policy of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad or the Editorial Board.
USERS are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
AUTHORS retain the rights of free downloading/unlimited e-print of full text and sharing/disseminating the article without any restriction, by any means including twitter, scholarly collaboration networks such as ResearchGate, Academia.eu, and social media sites such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Scholar and any other professional or academic networking site.
