We have located links that may give you full text access.
Enhanced Recovery after Surgery for Gastric Cancer Patients Improves Clinical Outcomes at a US Cancer Center.
Journal of Gastric Cancer 2018 September
Purpose: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for gastric cancer patients have shown improved outcomes in Asia. However, data on gastric cancer ERAS (GC-ERAS) programs in the United States are sparse. The purpose of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes before and after implementation of an GC-ERAS protocol at a National Comprehensive Cancer Center in the United States.
Materials and Methods: We reviewed medical records of patients surgically treated for gastric cancer with curative intent from January 2012 to October 2016 and compared the GC-ERAS group (November 1, 2015-October 1, 2016) with the historical control (HC) group (January 1, 2012-October 31, 2015). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for age, sex, number of comorbidities, body mass index, stage of disease, and distal versus total gastrectomy.
Results: Of a total of 95 identified patients, matching analysis resulted in 20 and 40 patients in the GC-ERAS and HC groups, respectively. Lower rates of nasogastric tube (35% vs. 100%, P<0.001) and intraabdominal drain placement (25% vs. 85%, P<0.001), faster advancement of diet (P<0.001), and shorter length of hospital stay (5.5 vs. 7.8 days, P=0.01) were observed in the GC-ERAS group than in the HC group. The GC-ERAS group showed a trend toward increased use of minimally invasive surgery (P=0.06). There were similar complication and 30-day readmission rates between the two groups (P=0.57 and P=0.66, respectively).
Conclusions: The implementation of a GC-ERAS protocol significantly improved perioperative outcomes in a western cancer center. This finding warrants further prospective investigation.
Materials and Methods: We reviewed medical records of patients surgically treated for gastric cancer with curative intent from January 2012 to October 2016 and compared the GC-ERAS group (November 1, 2015-October 1, 2016) with the historical control (HC) group (January 1, 2012-October 31, 2015). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for age, sex, number of comorbidities, body mass index, stage of disease, and distal versus total gastrectomy.
Results: Of a total of 95 identified patients, matching analysis resulted in 20 and 40 patients in the GC-ERAS and HC groups, respectively. Lower rates of nasogastric tube (35% vs. 100%, P<0.001) and intraabdominal drain placement (25% vs. 85%, P<0.001), faster advancement of diet (P<0.001), and shorter length of hospital stay (5.5 vs. 7.8 days, P=0.01) were observed in the GC-ERAS group than in the HC group. The GC-ERAS group showed a trend toward increased use of minimally invasive surgery (P=0.06). There were similar complication and 30-day readmission rates between the two groups (P=0.57 and P=0.66, respectively).
Conclusions: The implementation of a GC-ERAS protocol significantly improved perioperative outcomes in a western cancer center. This finding warrants further prospective investigation.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app