Patient-reported nausea after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for gynae-oncology patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to analyze the adherence to strategies to prevent post-operative nausea and vomiting after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for gynae-oncology patients. Patient-reported nausea before and after ERAS was also studied. METHODS: This prospective observational study included all patients undergoing laparotomy for a suspicious pelvic mass or confirmed advanced ovarian cancer before (pre-ERAS) and after the implementation of ERAS (post-ERAS) at Oslo University Hospital, Norway. Patients were a priori stratified according to the planned extent of surgery into two cohorts (Cohort 1: Surgery of advanced disease; Cohort 2: Surgery for a suspicious pelvic tumor). Clinical data including baseline characteristics and outcome data were prospectively collected. RESULTS: A total of 439 patients were included, 243 pre-ERAS and 196 post-ERAS. At baseline, 27% of the patients reported any grade of nausea. In the post-ERAS cohort, statistically significantly more patients received double post-operative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis (64% pre-ERAS vs 84% post-ERAS, p<0.0001). There was no difference in the need for rescue medication (82% pre-ERAS vs 79% post-ERAS; p=0.17) and no statistically significant difference between pre- and post-ERAS or between the surgical cohorts in patient-reported nausea of any grade on day 2. Patients who reported none/mild nausea on day 2 had significantly less peri-operative fluid administered during surgery than those who reported moderate or severe nausea (median 12.5 mL/kg/hour vs 16.5 mL/kg/hour, p=0.045) but, in multivariable analysis, fluid management did not remain significantly associated with nausea. CONCLUSION: Implementation of an ERAS protocol increased the adherence to post-operative nausea and vomiting prevention guidelines. Nausea, both before and after laparotomy, remains an unmet clinical need of gynae-oncology patients also in an ERAS program. Patient-reported outcome measures warrant further investigation in the evaluation of ERAS.

Prospective evaluation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in a Norwegian cohort of patients with suspected or advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective cohort study evaluated the introduction of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in a tertiary gynecologic oncology referral center. Compliance and clinical outcomes were studied in two separate surgical cohorts. METHODS: Patients undergoing laparotomy for suspected or verified advanced ovarian cancer at Oslo University Hospital were prospectively included in a pre- and post-implementation cohort. A priori, patients were stratified into: cohort 1, patients planned for surgery of advanced disease; and cohort 2, patients undergoing surgery for suspicious pelvic tumor. Baseline characteristics, adherence to the pathway, and clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 439 included patients, 235 (54%) underwent surgery for advanced ovarian cancer in cohort 1 and 204 (46%) in cohort 2. In cohort 1, 53% of the patients underwent surgery with an intermediate/high Aletti complexity score. Post-ERAS, median fasting times for solids (13.1 hours post-ERAS vs 16.0 hours pre-ERAS, p<0.001) and fluids (3.7 hours post-ERAS vs 11.0 hours pre-ERAS, p<0.001) were significantly reduced. Peri-operative fluid management varied less and was reduced from median 15.8 mL/kg/hour (IQR 10.8-22.5) to 11.5 mL/kg/hour (IQR 9.0-15.4) (p<0.001). In cohort 2 only there was a statistically significant reduction in length of stay (mean (SD) 4.3±1.5 post-ERAS vs 4.6±1.2 pre-ERAS, p=0.026). Despite stable readmission rates, there were significantly more serious complications reported in cohort 1 post-ERAS. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS increased adherence to current standards in peri-operative management with significant reduction in fasting times for both solids and fluids, and peri-operative fluid administration. Length of stay was reduced in patients with suspicious pelvic tumor. Despite serious complications being common in patients with advanced disease undergoing debulking surgery, a causal relationship with the ERAS protocol could not be established. Implementing ERAS and continuous performance auditing are crucial to advancing peri-operative care of patients with ovarian cancer.