Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2020
Enhanced recovery after surgery strategy for cirrhosis patients undergoing hepatectomy: experience in a single research center.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zheng Yiling, Wang Liming, Wu Fan, Rong Weiqi, Liu Yunhe, Zhang Kai, Wu Jianxiong
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme after curative liver resection in cirrhotic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients.
METHODS: One hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled in the study; 80 patients whose data were collected prospectively were assigned to the ERAS group, and 82 patients whose data were collected retrospectively were assigned to the control group. Preoperative clinicopathologic factors, surgical factors, and postoperative outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. Logistic regression was applied to explore potential predictors of hospital stay and morbidity.
RESULTS: The postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complication rate, and recovery of liver function on postoperative day 5 seemed to be better in the ERAS group. The composition of complications was different in the 2 groups; pleural effusion and postoperative ascites were more common in the control group, and indocyanine green retention at 15 minutes, operation time, preoperative alanine aminotransferase, and number of liver segmentectomies were associated with postoperative complications rather than ERAS intervention.
CONCLUSION: The ERAS programme is safe and effective for HCC patients with chronic liver disease undergoing hepatectomy, but it seems that surgical factors, such as operation type, have a greater impact on morbidity than other factors. Operative characteristics such as the method of blood loss control and the volume of liver resection should be augmented into ERAS protocol of hepatectomy.
METHODS: One hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled in the study; 80 patients whose data were collected prospectively were assigned to the ERAS group, and 82 patients whose data were collected retrospectively were assigned to the control group. Preoperative clinicopathologic factors, surgical factors, and postoperative outcomes of the 2 groups were compared. Logistic regression was applied to explore potential predictors of hospital stay and morbidity.
RESULTS: The postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complication rate, and recovery of liver function on postoperative day 5 seemed to be better in the ERAS group. The composition of complications was different in the 2 groups; pleural effusion and postoperative ascites were more common in the control group, and indocyanine green retention at 15 minutes, operation time, preoperative alanine aminotransferase, and number of liver segmentectomies were associated with postoperative complications rather than ERAS intervention.
CONCLUSION: The ERAS programme is safe and effective for HCC patients with chronic liver disease undergoing hepatectomy, but it seems that surgical factors, such as operation type, have a greater impact on morbidity than other factors. Operative characteristics such as the method of blood loss control and the volume of liver resection should be augmented into ERAS protocol of hepatectomy.