This is the Scientific Surgery Archive, which contains all randomized clinical trials in surgery that have been identified by searching the top 50 English language medical journal issues since January 1998. Compiled by Jonothan J. Earnshaw, former Editor-in-Chief, BJS
Impact of enhanced recovery on oncological outcomes following minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. BJS 2019; 106: 922-929.
Published: 12th March 2019
Authors: B. J. Quiram, J. Crippa, F. Grass, J. K. Lovely, K. T. Behm, D. T. Colibaseanu et al.
Background
Oncological outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer depend on the quality of surgical and oncological management. Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) have yet to be assessed for their oncological impact when used in combination with minimally invasive surgery. This study assessed outcomes with or without an ERP in patients with rectal cancer.
Method
This was a retrospective analysis of all consecutive adult patients who underwent elective minimally invasive surgery for primary rectal adenocarcinoma with curative intent between February 2005 and April 2018. Both laparoscopic and robotic procedures were included. Short‐term morbidity and overall survival were compared between patients treated according to the institutional ERP and those who received conventional care.
Results
A total of 600 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery, of whom 320 (53·3 per cent) were treated according to the ERP and 280 (46·7 per cent) received conventional care. ERP was associated with less overall morbidity (34·7 versus 54·3 per cent; P < 0·001). Patients in the ERP group had improved overall survival on univariable (91·4 versus 81·7 per cent at 5 years; hazard ratio (HR) 0·53, 95 per cent c.i. 0·28 to 0·99) but not multivariable (HR 0·78, 0·41 to 1·50) analysis. Multivariable analysis revealed age (HR 1·46, 1·17 to 1·82), male sex (HR 1·98, 1·05 to 3·70) and complications (HR 2·23, 1·30 to 3·83) as independent risk factors for compromised overall survival. Disease‐free survival was comparable for patients who had ERP or conventional treatment (80·5 versus 84·6 per cent at 5 years respectively; P = 0·272).
Conclusion
Treatment within an ERP was associated with a lower morbidity risk that may have had a subtle impact on overall but not disease‐specific survival.
Full textYou may also be interested in
Leading article
Authors: C. Chamberlain, J. M. Blazeby
Original article
Authors: S. J. Chapman, R. C. Grossman, M. E. B. FitzPatrick, R. R. W. Brady
Systematic review
Authors: J. H. H. Olsen, S. Öberg, K. Andresen, T. W. Klausen, J. Rosenberg
Original article
Authors: L. Heylen, J. Pirenne, U. Samuel, I. Tieken, M. Coemans, M. Naesens et al.
Systematic review
Authors: H. K. James, A. W. Chapman, G. T. R. Pattison, D. R. Griffin, J. D. Fisher
Original article
Authors: L. Cairncross, H. A. Snow, D. C. Strauss, M. J. F. Smith, O. Sjokvist, C. Messiou et al.
Original article
Authors: R. J. Dinsdale, J. Hazeldine, K. Al Tarrah, P. Hampson, A. Devi, C. Ermogenous et al.
Original article
Authors: C. A. Sewalt, E. Venema, E. J. A. Wiegers, F. E. Lecky, S. C. E. Schuit, D. den Hartog et al.
Article
Authors: A. M Lacy, R. Bravo, A. M. Otero‐Piñeiro, R. Pena, F. B. De Lacy, R. Menchaca et al.
Original article
Authors: P. Ghorbani, T. Troëng, O. Brattström, K. G. Ringdal, T. Eken, A. Ekbom et al.
Original article
Authors: E. H. Wright, M. Tyler, B. Vojnovic, J. Pleat, A. Harris, D. Furniss et al.
Original article
Authors: S. Nougaret, F. Castan, H. Forges, H. A. Vargas, B. Gallix, S. Gourgou et al.