Abstract
Background
An increasing body of evidence supports the application of the Enhanced Recovery Programme (ERP) to colorectal surgery. Some institutions have reported an association between ERP failure and low rectal cancer surgery. We present the results that we achieved by applying the ERP to low anterior resections for tumours within 6 cm of the anal verge, with a view to determining the validity and safety of applying the ERP to this patient group.
Methods
A multimodal ERP, based on Kehlet’s model, was introduced in January 2007 and applied to all patients undergoing elective resections. Patients having a low anterior resection for a rectal cancer less than 6 cm from the anal verge between January 2007 and August 2011 were retrospectively identified from a prospectively maintained database. Individual patient record review was performed.
Results
Twenty consecutive patients (12 males) were identified. Median total postoperative length of stay (LOS), including readmission, was 8 days (mean 10.7, range 4–47 days), with 2 readmissions and no deaths. When surgery was uncomplicated, median LOS was 5 days (mean 5.8, range 4–12 days, n = 11), whereas LOS increased when a complication occurred, with a median of 12 days (mean 16.6, range 8–47 days, n = 9) [p = 0.001].
Conclusions
The ERP can safely be applied to this high-risk patient group. When no complication occurs, LOS of 5 days can be expected. When a complication is encountered, LOS is prolonged (12 days), but this is acceptable compared with the current national median LOS in the United Kingdom of 11 days for all rectal cancer surgery (at any height) with a stoma.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Spanjersberg WR, Reurings J, Keus F, van Laarhoven CJ (2011) Fast track versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD007635
Hignett S, Parmar CD, Lewis W, Makin CA, Walsh CJ (2010) Ileostomy formation does not prolong hospital length of stay after open anterior resection when performed within an enhanced recovery programme. Colorectal Dis 13:1180–1183
Teeuwen PH, Bleichrodt RP, de Jong PJ, van Goor H, Bremers AJ (2011) Enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional perioperative care in rectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 54:833–839
Aarts MA, Okrainec A, Glicksman A, Pearsall E, Charles Victor J, McLeod RS (2012) Adoption of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) strategies for colorectal surgery at academic teaching hospitals and impact on total length of stay. Surg Endosc 26:442–450
Lovely JK, Maxson PM, Jacob AK et al (2012) Case-matched series of enhanced versus standard recovery pathway in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 99:120–126
Branagan G, Richardson L, Shetty A, Chave HS (2010) An enhanced recovery programme reduces length of stay after rectal surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 25:1359–1362
Hendry PO, Hausel J, Nygren J, The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Study Group et al (2009) Determinants of outcome after colorectal resection within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg 96:197–205
Chen CC, Huang IP, Liu MC, Jian JJ, Cheng SH (2011) Is it appropriate to apply the enhanced recovery program to patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal surgery? Surg Endosc 25:1477–1483
Low Rectal Cancer National Development Programme website, http://www.lorec.nhs.uk/. Accessed 16 Sep 2011
Rahbari NN, Weitz J, Hohenberger W et al (2010) Definition and grading of anastomotic leakage following anterior resection of the rectum: a proposal by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer. Surgery 147:339–351
Sottmeier S, Harling H, Wille-Jørgensen P, Balleby L, Kehlet H (2011) Pathogenesis of morbidity after fast-track laparoscopic colonic cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis 13:500–505
Tan WS, Tang CL, Shi L, Eu KW (2009) Meta-analysis of defunctioning stomas in low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 96:462–472
Glancy DG, Chaudhray BN, Greenslade GL, Dixon AR (2012) Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision can be performed on a non-selective basis in patients with rectal cancer with excellent medium-term results. Colorectal Dis 14:453–457
Moran BJ (2010) Predicting the risk and diminishing the consequences of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer. Acta Chir Iugosl 57:47–50
Feng C, Yao RQ, Huang FZ, Nie WP, Liu XY (2011) Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer. Nan Fant Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao 31:908–910
National Bowel Cancer Audit Report (2010) http://www.ic.nhs.uk/bowelreports. Accessed 13 Sep 2011
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Byrne, B.E., Branagan, G. & Chave, H.S. Unselected rectal cancer patients undergoing low anterior resection with defunctioning ileostomy can be safely managed within an Enhanced Recovery Programme. Tech Coloproctol 17, 73–78 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-012-0886-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-012-0886-6