The multidisciplinary audit in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) colorectal surgery: experience in a single Italian center.

BACKGROUND: Current literature underlines the role of periodical feed-back to improve Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) path adherence during implementation program. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical impact of an audit program in an ERAS path. METHODS: All elective patients submitted to elective colorectal surgery from November 2018 to January 2020 in our Institution were considered. The sample was divided into two study groups: group 1, including patients enrolled in the first sixth months of ERAS program until the first audit; group 2, patients enrolled in a time period of a six months after the first audit. RESULTS: The final analysis included 46 patients in group 1 and 64 in group 2. Group 2 showed a higher ASA Score (P<0.03), a higher prevalence of right hemicolectomy, and a lower prevalence of left hemicolectomy and anterior rectum resection (RAR) (P<0.016). Group 2 also had a lower prevalence of anastomotic leakage (AL) (P<0.004). Intraoperative normothermia (T>36 C°) in this group was achieved in a larger number of patients in comparison with group 1 (39% vs. 19.5%) (P<0.01). Group 2 experienced a higher average body temperature at admission in recovery room (RR) when compared to Group 1 (35.8 vs. 35.1 C°, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Audit program may represent a useful tool to promote advantageous changes in clinical practice and to favor a better compliance to ERAS program.

The Role of the Recovery Room in Improving Adherence During an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Implementation Program for Colorectal Surgery: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of thisstudy was to evaluate the clinical impact of the Recovery Room (RR) in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway in colorectal surgery. DESIGN: Single-center retrospective study. METHODS: From November 2019 until September 2021, a total of 149 consecutive patients that underwent to colon-rectal surgery were enrolled. The patients were divided into two study groups: RR Group if admitted to RR after surgery, and no-Recovery Room (NRR) Group if monitored directly on the ward, bypassing the RR. The postoperative ERAS items adherence was assessed in the two study groups. FINDINGS: Final analysis included 119 patients in the RR Group and 30 patients in NRR Group. Patients that started clear liquid oral intake within two hours postoperatively were 118 in the RR group and 19 in the NRR group (99.1% vs 63.3%, P < .001). A total of 98 patients and 18 patients were mobilized on day 0 in the RR group and in NRR group, respectively (84.4% vs 15.5%, P < .05). In the RR group, postoperative adherence to the ERAS protocol components was higher in comparison with the NRR group (P < .003); adherence to the all protocol components was also higher (P < .004). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing colorectal surgery admitted to RR after surgery, the RR nurse guaranteed effective patient assistance and ensured appropriate compliance to the postoperative ERAS items.

Management and 1-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: To analyze different types of management and one-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage (AL) after elective colorectal resection. METHODS: All patients with anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery with anastomosis (76/1,546; 4.9%), with the exclusion of cases with proximal diverting stoma, were followed-up for at least one year. Primary endpoints were as follows: composite outcome of one-year mortality and/or unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission and additional morbidity rates. Secondary endpoints were as follows: length of stay (LOS), one-year persistent stoma rate, and rate of return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT). RESULTS: One-year mortality rate was 10.5% and unplanned ICU admission rate was 30.3%. Risk factors of the composite outcome included age (aOR = 1.08 per 1-year increase, p = 0.002) and anastomotic breakdown with end stoma at reoperation (aOR = 2.77, p = 0.007). Additional morbidity rate was 52.6%: risk factors included open versus laparoscopic reoperation (aOR = 4.38, p = 0.03) and ICU admission (aOR = 3.63, p = 0.05). Median (IQR) overall LOS was 20 days (14-26), higher in the subgroup of patients reoperated without stoma. At 1 year, a stoma persisted in 32.0% of patients, higher in the open (41.2%) versus laparoscopic (12.5%) reoperation group (p = 0.04). Only 4 out of 18 patients (22.2%) were able to RIOT. CONCLUSION: Mortality and/or unplanned ICU admission rates after AL are influenced by increasing age and by anastomotic breakdown at reoperation; additional morbidity rates are influenced by unplanned ICU admission and by laparoscopic approach to reoperation, the latter also reducing permanent stoma and failure to RIOT rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT03560180.