[Perioperative nutrition - a nationwide web-based survey of German surgery departments]. / Perioperative Ernährung aus Sicht von Chirurgen - Eine deutschlandweite Online-Umfragen.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient nutrition in surgical patients increases perioperative morbidity, mortality, length of stay and therapy costs. Therefore, guidelines declare the integration of nutrition into the overall management as one of the key aspects of perioperative care. This study was conducted to evaluate the current clinical practice of clinical nutrition in surgical departments in Germany. METHODS: In 2009 German Surgical Society (DGCH) members in leading positions were surveyed with a standardised online questionnaire concerning their perioperative nutritional routines in elective surgery. RESULTS: From the addressed physicians n = 156 (6.24 %) answered. Of those, 86.9 % consider the nutritional status of their patients. Only 6 % use standardised nutritional screening tools. Short preoperative fasting for solid and liquid food is practiced by 65 % and 40 %, respectively. After the operation, 65 % allow intake of clear fluids on the day of surgery and 78 % initiate solid food on the day of surgery or the first postoperative day. Oral nutritional supplements are given only "sometimes" or "rarely" by 53.9 % of the respondents. CONCLUSION: The low response rate may imply the dilemma that the evidence-based benefit of perioperative nutrition does not meet sufficient interest. Even in case of a positive selection of "pro-nutrition respondents", standardised preoperative malnutrition screening is also rare. Aspects such as shorter perioperative fasting are already practiced more progressively. However, still greater efforts are needed to promote guideline-based clinical nutrition in surgical care in Germany.

Initial results after implementation of a multimodal treatment for peritoneal malignancies.

INTRODUCTION: Peritoneal carcinomatosis represents a clinical condition with a limited perspective concerning long term survival. The combination of surgical cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) represents a complex multimodal therapeutic management concept with promising results for prolongation of survival. For the identification of pitfalls during implementation of the HIPEC procedure into clinical practice an observational study was conducted. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2009 data from all patients treated with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC for peritoneal carcinomatosis was prospectively collected and analysed. RESULTS: During the observational interval a total of 42 patients underwent surgical treatment for peritoneal carcinomatosis. In 34 patients the complete procedure with surgical cytoreduction and HIPEC was performed. Perioperative mortality (6%) and morbidity (35%) was similar to other reported series. Twenty-five patients (76%) survived the 18 months follow-up period after complete procedure. CONCLUSION: The multimodal therapeutic treatment concept of surgical cytoreduction and following HIPEC leads to promising results for patients suffering from peritoneal carcinomatosis. However this treatment concept is afflicted with a relevant risk of postoperative complications.

[Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the German DRG system. Analysis of case cost calculations of a maximum care university]. / Hypertherme intraperitoneale Chemotherapie im G-DRG-System. Analyse der Fallkostenkalkulationen eines universitären Maximalversorgers.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) offers patients with peritoneal cancer of various origins the chance of a relevant increase in life expectancy. These cases are very complex from a medical viewpoint and very expensive from an economical aspect. An analysis of case cost calculations was performed to find out whether this procedure can on average be carried out cost-effectively by a maximum care university. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All cases from 2008 in which HIPEC was carried out were analyzed. The types of main diagnosis, secondary diagnoses, procedures, times from incision to suture and hospital stay were analyzed. On the basis of the case costs the proceeds and marginal returns were calculated from the diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) and additional remuneration when applicable. The causes of positive and negative marginal returns were explained using the InEK cost matrix. RESULTS: In 18 patients there were 9 different main diagnoses and 7 different "main procedures" (from a surgical perspective the most resource intensive procedures) and a total of 10 different DRGs were identified in the grouping algorithm. With an average of 2 operations (range 1-7) per patient the summed incision-to-suture time was 423 min (170-962 min). The patients stayed on average 6.4 days (1.3-17.6 days) in intensive care. The average case cost was 21,072€ (range 8,657-55,904€) and the proceeds 20,474€ (6,333-37,497€). Each case had on average a debit balance of 598€ (range from 11,843€ profit balance to 18,407€ debit balance) with an assumed base rate of 2,786€. The causes for positive or negative marginal profits were mostly operating times, incision-to-suture times and duration of intensive care. CONCLUSIONS: The proceeds showed on average a deficit of only 3% compared to the costs. The operating times must be decreased by optimization particularly of the preoperative approach. Interventions should be carried out in one stage only and the intraoperative connecting and waiting times should be reduced in order to reduce the incision-to-suture times.