Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The RAPID protocol enhances patient recovery after both laparoscopic and open colorectal resections

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs can accelerate recovery and shorten the hospital stay after colorectal resections. The RAPID (remove, ambulate, postoperative analgesia, introduce diet) protocol is a simplified ERAS program that consists of a simplified, user-friendly single-page pro forma schedule. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the RAPID protocol on patients undergoing both laparoscopic and open colorectal resections in two specialized colorectal units.

Methods

A prospective, two-center study assessed 117 age-matched patients undergoing open or laparoscopic colorectal resection to compare the postoperative course for patients using the RAPID protocol with those treated in a traditional manner.

Results

Of the 117 patients studied, 70 underwent laparoscopic resection (55 with the RAPID protocol) and 47 underwent open resection (25 with the RAPID protocol). Patients undergoing laparoscopic resections with the RAPID protocol had a significantly shorter hospital stay (p = 0.01) and tolerance of a full diet (p = 0.002). Similarly, patients undergoing open resections with the RAPID protocol also have a significantly shorter hospital stay (p = 0.04).

Conclusion

The RAPID protocol is a user-friendly, easy, and effective tool that facilitates earlier tolerance of diet and discharge from the hospital for patients undergoing laparoscopic or open colorectal resections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kehlet H (2006) Future perspectives and research initiatives in fast-track surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 391:495–498

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kehlet H, Wilmore DW (2002) Multimodal strategies to improve surgical outcome. Am J Surg 183:630–641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vlug MS, Wind J, van der Zaag E, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, Bemelman WA (2009) Systematic review of laparoscopic versus open colonic surgery within an enhanced recovery programme. Colorectal Dis 11:335–343

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tjandra JJ, Chan MK (2006) Systematic review on the short-term outcome of laparoscopic resection for colon and rectosigmoid cancer. Colorectal Dis 8:375–388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ (2004) Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 91:1111–1124

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Levy BF, Tilney HS, Dowson HM, Rockall TA (2009) A systematic review of postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis. Epub ahead of print February 7

  7. Kehlet H, Wilmore DW (2008) Evidence-based surgical care and the evolution of fast-track surgery. Ann Surg 248:189–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Polle SW, Wind J, Fuhring JW, Hofland J, Gouma DJ, Bemelman WA (2007) Implementation of a fast-track perioperative care program: what are the difficulties? Dig Surg 24:441–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Basse L, Jakobsen DH, Bardram L, Billesbølle P, Lund C, Mogensen T, Rosenberg J, Kehlet H (2005) Functional recovery after open versus laparoscopic colonic resection: a randomized, blinded study. Ann Surg 241:416–423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ridgway PF, Boyle E, Keane FB, Neary P (2007) Laparoscopic colectomy is cheaper than conventional open resection. Colorectal Dis 9:819–824

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Delaney CP, Fazio VW, Senagore AJ, Robinson B, Halverson AL, Remzi FH (2001) “Fast track” postoperative management protocol for patients with high comorbidity undergoing complex abdominal and pelvic colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis 44:1590–1596

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS (1991) Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:144–150

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Leung KL, Lai PB, Ho RL, Meng WC, Yiu RY, Lee JF, Lau WY (2000) Systemic cytokine response after laparoscopic-assisted resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 231:506–511

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Braga M, Vignali A, Gianotti L, Zuliani W, Radaelli G, Gruarin P, Dellabona P, Di Carlo V (2002) Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: a randomized trial on short-term outcome. Ann Surg 236:759–766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leung KL, Kwok SP, Lam SC, Lee JF, Yiu RY, Ng SS, Lai PB, Lau WY (2004) Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trial. Lancet 363:1187–1192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lacy AM, García-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, Castells A, Taurá P, Piqué JM, Visa J (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 359:2224–2229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bokey EL, Chapuis PH, Fung C, Hughes WJ, Koorey SG, Brewer D, Newland RC (1995) Postoperative morbidity and mortality following resection of the colon and rectum for cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 38:480–486

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Basse L, Hjort Jakobsen D, Billesbølle P, Werner M, Kehlet H (2000) A clinical pathway to accelerate recovery after colonic resection. Ann Surg 232:51–57

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Senagore AJ, Madbouly KM, Fazio VW, Duepree HJ, Brady KM, Delaney CP (2003) Advantages of laparoscopic colectomy in older patients. Arch Surg 138:252–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cheatham ML, Chapman WC, Key SP, Sawyers JL (1995) A meta-analysis of selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy. Ann Surg 221:469–476

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zargar-Shoshtari K, Connolly AB, Israel LH, Hill AG (2008) Fast-track surgery may reduce complications following major colonic surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1633–1640

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Soop M, Carlson GL, Hopkinson J, Clarke S, Thorell A, Nygren J, Ljungqvist O (2004) Randomized clinical trial of the effects of immediate enteral nutrition on metabolic responses to major colorectal surgery in an enhanced recovery protocol. Br J Surg 91:1138–1145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wind J, Hofland J, Preckel B, Hollmann MW, Bossuyt PM, Gouma DJ, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Fuhring JW, Dejong CH, van Dam RM, Cuesta MA, Noordhuis A, de Jong D, van Zalingen E, Engel AF, Goei TH, de Stoppelaar IE, van Tets WF, van Wagensveld BA, Swart A, van den Elsen MJ, Gerhards MF, de Wit LT, Siepel MA, van Geloven AA, Juttmann JW, Clevers W, Bemelman WA (2006) Perioperative strategy in colonic surgery; LAparoscopy and/or FAst track multimodal management versus standard care (LAFA trial). BMC Surg 6:16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tekkis PP, Poloniecki JD, Thompson MR, Stamatakis JD (2002) ACPGBI Colorectal Cancer Study 2002: part A. Unadjusted outcomes. Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, June 2002

  25. Maessen JM, Dejong CH, Kessels AG, von Meyenfeldt MF, Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Group (2008) Length of stay: an inappropriate readout of the success of enhanced recovery programs. World J Surg 32:971–975

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Maessen J, Dejong CH, Hausel J, Nygren J, Lassen K, Andersen J, Kessels AG, Revhaug A, Kehlet H, Ljungqvist O, Fearon KC, von Meyenfeldt MF (2007) A protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection. Br J Surg 94:224–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

G. Lloyd, R. Kirby, D. Hemingway, F. Keane, A. Miller, and P. Neary have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Infirmary Square, Leicester, LE1 5WW, UK

    G. M. Lloyd, D. M. Hemingway & A. S. Miller

  2. Minimally Invasive Surgery Tallaght, Division of Colorectal Surgery, Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin, Ireland

    R. Kirby, F. B. Keane & P. Neary

Authors
  1. G. M. Lloyd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Kirby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. M. Hemingway
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. F. B. Keane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. S. Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. P. Neary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. M. Lloyd.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lloyd, G.M., Kirby, R., Hemingway, D.M. et al. The RAPID protocol enhances patient recovery after both laparoscopic and open colorectal resections. Surg Endosc 24, 1434–1439 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0795-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0795-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation