Abstract
Purpose
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has played an important role in recovery management for radical cystectomy with ileal urinary diversion (RC-IUD). This study is to evaluate ERAS compared with the conventional recovery after surgery (CRAS) for RC-IUD.
Methods
From October 2014 and July 2016, bladder cancer patients scheduled for curative treatment from 25 centers of Chinese Bladder Cancer Consortium were randomly assigned to either ERAS or CRAS group. Primary endpoint was the 30-day complication rate. Secondary endpoints included recovery of fluid and regular diet, flatus, bowel movement, ambulation, and length of stay (LOS) postoperatively. Follow-up period was 30-day postoperatively.
Results
There were 144 ERAS and 145 CRAS patients. Postoperative complications occurred in 25.7 and 30.3% of the ERAS and CRAS patients with 55 complications in each group, respectively (p = 0.40). There was no significant difference between groups in major complications (p = 0.82), or type of complications (p = 0.99). The ERAS group had faster recovery of bowel movements (median 88 versus 100 h, p = 0.01), fluid diet tolerance (68 versus 96 h, p < 0.001), regular diet tolerance (125 versus 168 h, p = 0.004), and ambulation (64 versus 72 h, p = 0.047) than the CRAS group, but similar time to flatus and LOS.
Conclusions
ERAS did not increase 30-day complications compared with CRAS after RC. ERAS may be better than CRAS in terms of bowel movement, tolerance of fluid and regular diet, and ambulation.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- BCa:
-
Bladder cancer
- CBCC:
-
Chinese bladder cancer consortium
- CRAS:
-
Conventional recovery after surgery
- ERAS:
-
Enhanced recovery after surgery
- LOS:
-
Length of stay
- NGT:
-
Nasogastric tube
- RC:
-
Radical cystectomy
- RCT:
-
Randomized controlled trial
- RC-IUD:
-
Radical cystectomy with ileal urinary diversion
References
Stein JP, Lieskovsky G, Cote R, Groshen S, Feng AC, Boyd S, Skinner E, Bochner B, Thangathurai D, Mikhail M, Raghavan D, Skinner DG (2001) Radical cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder cancer: long-term results in 1054 patients. J Clin Oncol 19:666–675
Gakis G, Efstathiou J, Lerner SP, Cookson MS, Keegan KA, Guru KA, Shipley WU, Heidenreich A, Schoenberg MP, Sagaloswky AI, Soloway MS, Stenzl A (2013) ICUD-EAU international consultation on bladder cancer 2012: radical cystectomy and bladder preservation for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 63:45–57
Shabsigh A, Korets R, Vora KC, Brooks CM, Cronin AM, Savage C, Raj G, Bochner BH, Dalbagni G, Herr HW, Donat SM (2009) Defining early morbidity of radical cystectomy for patients with bladder cancer using a standardized reporting methodology. Eur Urol 55:164–174
Novara G, Catto JW, Wilson T, Annerstedt M, Chan K, Murphy DG, Motttrie A, Peabody JO, Skinner EC, Wiklund PN, Guru KA, Yuh B (2015) Systematic review and cumulative analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical cystectomy. Eur Urol 67:376–401
Collins JW, Tyritzis S, Nyberg T, Schumacher M, Laurin O, Khazaeli D, Adding C, Jonsson MN, Hosseini A, Wiklund NP (2013) Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: description of an evolved approach to radical cystectomy. Eur Urol 64:654–663
Li K, Lin T, Fan X, Xu K, Bi L, Duan Y, Zhou Y, Yu M, Li J, Huang J (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies reporting early outcomes after robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy. Cancer Treat Rev 39:551–560
Gregg JR, Cookson MS, Phillips S, Salem S, Chang SS, Clark PE, Davis R, Stimson CJ Jr, Aghazadeh M, Smith JA Jr, Barocas DA (2011) Effect of preoperative nutritional deficiency on mortality after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol 185:90–96
Huang J, Lin T, Liu H, Xu K, Zhang C, Jiang C, Huang H, Yao Y, Guo Z, Xie W (2010) Laparoscopic radical cystectomy with orthotopic ileal neobladder for bladder cancer: oncologic results of 171 cases with a median 3-year follow-up. Eur Urol 58:442–449
Dutton TJ, Daugherty MO, Mason RG, McGrath JS (2014) Implementation of the Exeter enhanced recovery programme for patients undergoing radical cystectomy. BJU Int 113:719–725
Nelson R, Edwards S, Tse B (2007) Prophylactic nasogastric decompression after abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD004929
Xu R, Zhao X, Zhong Z, Zhang L (2010) No advantage is gained by preoperative bowel preparation in radical cystectomy and ileal conduit: a randomized controlled trial of 86 patients. Int Urol Nephrol 42:947–950
Raynor MC, Lavien G, Nielsen M, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS (2013) Elimination of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation in patients undergoing cystectomy and urinary diversion. Urol Oncol 31:32–35
Kehlet H (1997) Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 78:606–617
Wilmore DW, Kehlet H (2001) Management of patients in fast track surgery. BMJ 322:473–476
Nicholson A, Lowe MC, Parker J, Lewis SR, Alderson P, Smith AF (2014) Systematic review and meta-analysis of enhanced recovery programmes in surgical patients. Br J Surg 101:172–188
Contant CM, Hop WC, van’t Sant HP, Oostvogel HJ, Smeets HJ, Stassen LP, Neijenhuis PA, Idenburg FJ, Dijkhuis CM, Heres P, van Tets WF, Gerritsen JJ, Weidema WF (2007) Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 370:2112–2117
Tyson MD, Chang SS (2016) Enhanced recovery pathways versus standard care after cystectomy: a meta-analysis of the effect on perioperative outcomes. Eur Urol 70:995–1003
Collins JW, Patel H, Adding C, Annerstedt M, Dasgupta P, Khan SM, Artibani W, Gaston R, Piechaud T, Catto JW, Koupparis A, Rowe E, Perry M, Issa R, McGrath J, Kelly J, Schumacher M, Wijburg C, Canda AE, Balbay MD, Decaestecker K, Schwentner C, Stenzl A, Edeling S, Pokupic S, Stockle M, Siemer S, Sanchez-Salas R, Cathelineau X, Weston R, Johnson M, D’Hondt F, Mottrie A, Hosseini A, Wiklund PN (2016) Enhanced recovery after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: EAU robotic urology section scientific working group consensus view. Eur Urol 70:649–660
Huang J (2014) Guidelines of diagnosis and treatment on bladder cancer. Guidelines of Chinese Urology Association, 2014th edn. People’s Medical Publishing House, Beijing, pp 20–60
Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG (2010) CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 23(340):c869
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213
JCO Group (2013) JCOG_Clavien-Dindo_ver2.0. http://www.jcog.jp/doctor/tool/Clavien_Dindo.html. Accessed 1 Oct 2014
Elting LS, Pettaway C, Bekele BN, Grossman HB, Cooksley C, Avritscher EB, Saldin K, Dinney CP (2005) Correlation between annual volume of cystectomy, professional staffing, and outcomes: a statewide, population-based study. Cancer 104:975–984
Khan MS, Gan C, Ahmed K, Ismail AF, Watkins J, Summers JA, Peacock JL, Rimington P, Dasgupta P (2016) A single-centre early phase randomised controlled three-arm trial of open, robotic, and laparoscopic radical cystectomy (CORAL). Eur Urol 69:613–621
Daneshmand S, Ahmadi H, Schuckman AK, Mitra AP, Cai J, Miranda G, Djaladat H (2014) Enhanced recovery protocol after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol 192:50–55
Pruthi RS, Nielsen M, Smith A, Nix J, Schultz H, Wallen EM (2010) Fast track program in patients undergoing radical cystectomy: results in 362 consecutive patients. J Am Coll Surg 210:93–99
Maffezzini M, Gerbi G, Campodonico F, Parodi D (2007) Multimodal perioperative plan for radical cystectomy and intestinal urinary diversion. I. Effect on recovery of intestinal function and occurrence of complications. Urology 69:1107–1111
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Jian Huang had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Jian Huang, Tianxin Lin, and Kaiwen Li. Acquisition of data: Hao Liu, Xueyi Xue, Ning Xu, Yong Wei, Zhiwen Chen, Xiaozhou Zhou, Lin Qi, Wei He, Shiyu Tong, Fengshuo Jin, Xudong Liu, Qiang Wei, Ping Han, Xin Gou, Weiyang He, Xu Zhang, Guoqiang Yang, Zhoujun Shen, Tianyuan Xu, Xin Xie, Wei Xue, Ming Cao, Jin Yang, Jianyun Hu, Fubao Chen, Peijun Li, Guangyong Li, Tong Xu, Ye Tian, Wenying Wang, Dongkui Song, Lei Shi, Xiaoming Yang, Yang Yang, Benkang Shi, Yaofeng Zhu, Xigao Liu, Jinchun Xing, Zhun Wu, Kaiyan Zhang, Wei Li, Chaozhao Liang, Cheng Yang, Wei Li, Jinchun Qi, Chuanliang Xu, Weidong Xu, Liqun Zhou, Lin Cai, En’ci Xu, Weizhong Cai, Minggao Weng, Yiming Su, Fangjian Zhou, Lijuan Jiang, Zhuowei Liu, Qiuhong Chen, Tiejun Pan, Bo Liu, Yu Zhou, Xin Gao, Jianguang Qiu, Jie Situ, Cheng Hu, Shan Chen, and Yupeng Zheng. Analysis and interpretation of data: Tianxin Lin and Kaiwwen Li. Drafting of the manuscript: Tianxin Lin and Kaiwwen Li. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Statistical analysis: Hao Liu. Obtaining funding: Jian Huang and Tianxin Lin. Administrative, technical, or material support: none. Supervision: all authors. Other (specify): none.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All authors certify that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (e.g., employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: None.
Funding sources
This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 81572514, U1301221, 81472384, 81402106, 81372729, 81272808, and 81172431), National Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong (Nos. 2016A030313321, 2015A030311011, 2015A030310122, S2013020012671, 07117336, 10151008901000024, 2015A030310091, and 2016A030313185), Science and Technology Program of Guangzhou (Grant Nos. 201604020156 and 201604020177),“Three Big Constructions” funds of Sun Yat-sen University (for Jian Huang and Tianxin Lin), Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education (for Tianxin Lin, 20130171110073), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (for Jian Huang), Project Supported by Guangdong Province Higher Vocational Colleges & Schools Pearl River Scholar Funded Scheme (for Tianxin Lin), Elite Young Scholars Program of Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital (for Tianxin Lin, J201401), and National Clinical Key Specialty Construction Project for Department of Urology and Department of Oncology. Grant KLB09001 from the Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Gene Regulation and Target Therapy of Guangdong Higher Education Institutes, Sun Yat-sen University. Grant [2013]163 from the Key Laboratory of Malignant Tumor Molecular Mechanism and Translational Medicine of Guangzhou Bureau of Science and Information Technology. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Ethical approval
All procedures in this study were approved by the local Medical Ethical Committee of Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University and in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lin, T., Li, K., Liu, H. et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery for radical cystectomy with ileal urinary diversion: a multi-institutional, randomized, controlled trial from the Chinese bladder cancer consortium. World J Urol 36, 41–50 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2108-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2108-3