[Total parenteral nutrition for ileus in the palliative phase]. / Totale parenterale voeding bij ileus in de palliatieve fase.

Total parenteral nutrition may be considered for a carefully selected group of palliative patients with ileus. Predictive factors include a strong desire to live, low burden of disease other than the ileus and expected increase in quality of life as a result of starting with total parenteral nutrition. Therapy compliance is required and a strong social network is desirable. Close collaboration between hospital and general practitioners and frequent reviews of the palliative care plan are also required for success.

Isoperistaltic versus antiperistaltic ileocolic anastomosis. Does it really matter? Results from a randomised clinical trial (ISOVANTI).

BACKGROUND: Right hemicolectomy is a very common surgery. Many studies compare different options for laparoscopic ileocolic anastomoses: intra- or extracorporeal; handsewn or stapled; side-to-side or end-to-side. However, there are no studies about the influence that peristalsis could have on this anastomosis. The aim of this study is to compare safety and feasibility of isoperistaltic and antiperistaltic anastomosis in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality between both groups. The secondary endpoint is to compare long-term functional outcomes (chronic diarrhoea) and quality of life (GIQLI questionnaire) after a 1-year follow-up period. METHODS: A double-blind, randomised, prospective trial in patients undergoing scheduled surgery for right colon cancer with laparoscopic right hemicolectomy and isoperistaltic (ISO) or antiperistaltic (ANTI) ileocolic anastomoses. RESULTS: Hundred and eight patients were included in the study. Patients were randomised either to isoperistaltic or antiperistaltic configuration (54 ISO/ANTI). No significant differences in baseline variables were found. No differences in surgical time (130 [120-150] min ISO vs. 140 [127-160] ANTI, p = 0.481), nor in anastomotic time (19 [17-22] vs. 20 [16-25], p = 0.207) and nor in postoperative complications: 37.0% ISO versus 40.7% ANTI, (p = 0.693) were found. There were no differences in postoperative ileus (p = 0.112) nor in anastomotic leakage (3.7% vs. 5.56%, p = 1.00). Differences in "time to first flatus" and "time to first deposition" were found in favour of the antiperistaltic group (p = 0.004 and p = 0.017). Anastomotic configuration did not influence hospital stay (3 days [2-6] isoperistaltic vs. 3 [2-4] antiperistaltic, p = 0.236). During follow-up, there were no differences between the two groups at 1, 6 and 12 months (p = 0.154, p = 0.498 and p = 0.683), nor in chronic diarrhoea rates in GIQLI scores (24% ISO vs. 31.4% ANTI, p = 0.541). CONCLUSIONS: The isoperistaltic and antiperistaltic ileocolic anastomosis present similar results in terms of performance, safety and functionality. However, further studies must be carried out in order to assess relationship between postoperative ileus and anastomosis configuration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Randomised Clinical trial (Identifier: NCT02309931).

Perspectives on the importance of postoperative ileus.

Post-operative ileus (POI) is a common condition after surgery. Failure to restore adequate bowel function after surgery generates a series of complications and it is associated to patients frustration and discomfort, worsening their perioperative experience. Even mild POI can be source of anxiety and could be perceived as a drop out from the "straight-forward" pathway. Enhanced recovery programmes have emphasized the importance of early commencement of oral diet, avoiding the ancient dogmata of prolonged gastric decompression and fasting. These protocols with early oral feeding and mobilization have led to improved perioperative management and have decreased hospital length of stay, ameliorating patient's postoperative experience as well. Nonetheless, the incidence of POI is still high especially after major open abdominal surgery. In order to decrease the incidence of POI, minimally-invasive surgical approaches and minimization of surgical manipulation have been suggested. From a pharmacological perspective, a meta-analysis of pro-kinetics showed beneficial results with alvimopan, although its use has been limited by the augmented risk of myocardial infarction and the high costs. A more simple approach based on the postoperative use of chewing-gum has provided some benefits in restoring bowel function. From an anaesthesiological perspective, epidural anaesthesia/analgesia does not only reduce the postoperative consumption of systemic opioids but directly improve gastrointestinal function and should be considered where possible, at least for open surgical procedures. POI represents a common and debilitating complication that should be challenged with multi-disciplinary approach. Prospective research is warranted on this field and should focus also on patient s reported outcomes.

Early rehabilitation versus conventional care after laparoscopic rectal surgery: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although early rehabilitation programs have been reported to be effective after laparoscopic colectomy, there is no report of the efficacy of rehabilitation programs after rectal cancer surgery. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of an early rehabilitation program after laparoscopic low anterior resection for mid or low rectal cancer in a randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: Ninety-eight patients who had undergone a laparoscopic low anterior resection with defunctioning ileostomy were randomized on a 1:1 basis to an early rehabilitation program (n = 52) or conventional care (n = 46). The primary endpoint was recovery rate at 4 days postoperatively. The secondary endpoints were recovery time, postoperative hospital stay, complications, readmission rates, pain on a visual analogue scale, and quality of life (QOL) according to Short Form 36. RESULTS: The recovery rates were not different in both groups (rehabilitation, 25 % vs. conventional, 13 %, p = 0.135). Recovery time and postoperative hospital stay was similar between the groups (rehabilitation, 137 h [107-188] vs. conventional, 146.5 h [115-183], p = 0.47; 7.5 days [7-11] vs. 8.0 days [7-10], p = 0.882). The complication rates did not differ between the two groups, but more complications were noted in the rehabilitation program group (42.3 vs. 24.0 %, p = 0.054), which was related to postoperative ileus (28.8 vs. 13.0 %, p = 0.057) and acute voiding difficulty (19.6 vs. 4.7 %, p = 0.032). There was no readmission within 1 month of surgery. Pain and QOL were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial did not show that an early rehabilitation program is beneficial after laparoscopic low anterior resection. Our results confirm that postoperative ileus and acute voiding difficulty are major obstacles to fast-track surgery for mid or low rectal cancer. This study was registered (registration number NCT00606944).

[Quality of life among patients, operated on the reason of the adhesive ileus].

The long-term follow-up results of the surgical treatment of the adhesive ileus were analyzed in 128 patients after laparotomy and 49 patients after laparoscopic adhesiolisis. The quality of life was assessed with the use of the adopted SF-36 scale. The successful treatment result was registered in 92% of patients after the laparoscopic adhesiolisis and in 69% of patients who had laparotomy. The modified scale of the quality of life assessment can be used for the medico-social expertise.