Top

Supportive Care in Cancer

Published in:

01-02-2017 | Original Article

Impact of enhanced recovery program on patients with esophageal cancer in comparison with traditional care

Authors: Lihong Wang, Chenjing Zhu, Xuelei Ma, Kai Shen, Hongmei Li, Yuanyuan Hu, Linghong Guo, Jing Zhang, Ping Li

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 2/2017

Abstract

Purpose

Enhanced recovery program (ERP) was reported to be beneficial to patients undergoing esophageal surgery. However, evidence for ERP as a new standard perioperative pathway is insufficient. This meta-analysis aims to systematically investigate the differences between ERP and traditional care in terms of postoperative outcomes.

Methods

Studies comparing ERP with traditional care were searched in Pubmed and Ovid databases and subsequently analyzed. The primary outcome of interest was postoperative length of hospital stay (LOHS), and the secondary outcomes of interest were postoperative morbidity, mortality, and 30-day readmission rates. Statistical analysis was performed using weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR). Review Manager 5.3 was used to generate the eligible data.

Results

Thirteen studies with 2358 patients (1182 patients in the ERP group and 1176 patients in the control group) were included in this meta-analysis. The total LOHS (WMD −5.37; 95 % confidence interval (CI) −7.74 to −2.99; p < 0.00001) was significantly shorter in the ERP group than the control group. No statistically significant difference was found in morbidity (OR 0.78; 95 % confidence interval 0.58 to 1.05; p = 0.10), mortality (OR 0.76; 95 % CI 0.40 to 1.46; p = 0.41), and 30-day readmission rates (OR 1.01; 95 % CI 0.70 to 1.46; p = 0.97).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggested that the implementation of ERP led to a reduction in LOHS, while morbidity, mortality, and 30-day readmission rates did not increase compared with traditional care in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer.

Available only for authorised users

Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, et al. (2015) Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 136(5):E359–E386CrossRefPubMed

Arnold M, Soerjomataram I, Ferlay J, Forman D (2014) Global incidence of oesophageal cancer by histological subtype in 2012. Gut 64(3):381–387CrossRefPubMed

Falk GW (2009) Risk factors for esophageal cancer development. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 18(3):469–485CrossRefPubMed

Zhang Y (2013) Epidemiology of esophageal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 19(34):5598CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hayeck TJ, Kong CY, Spechler SJ, Gazelle GS, Hur C (2010) The prevalence of Barrett’s esophagus in the US: estimates from a simulation model confirmed by SEER data. Dis Esophagus 23(6):451–457CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Cooper JS, Guo MD, Herskovic A, Macdonald JS, Martenson JA Jr, Al-Sarraf M, Byhardt R, Russell AH, Beitler JJ, Spencer S, et al. (1999) Chemoradiotherapy of locally advanced esophageal cancer: long-term follow-up of a prospective randomized trial (RTOG 85-01). Radiation therapy oncology group. JAMA 281(17):1623–1627CrossRefPubMed

Higuchi K, Koizumi W, Tanabe S, Sasaki T, Katada C, Azuma M, et al. (2009) Current management of esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma in Japan and other countries. Gastrointest Cancer Res 3(4):153–161PubMedPubMedCentral

Kelsen DP, Winter KA, Gunderson LL, Mortimer J, Estes NC, Haller DG, Ajani JA, Kocha W, Minsky BD, Roth JA, et al. (2007) Long-term results of RTOG trial 8911 (USA intergroup 113): a random assignment trial comparison of chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 25(24):3719–3725CrossRef

D’Journo XB, Thomas PA (2014) Current management of esophageal cancer. J Thorac Dis 6(S2):S253–S264PubMedPubMedCentral

10.

McNamara MJ, Adelstein DJ (2012) Current developments in the management of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 14(4):342–349CrossRefPubMed

11.

Griffin SM, Shaw IH, Dresner SM (2002) Early complications after Ivor Lewis subtotal esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy: risk factors and management. J Am Coll Surg 194(3):285–297CrossRefPubMed

12.

Whooley BP, Law S, Murthy SC, Alexandrou A, Wong J (2001) Analysis of reduced death and complication rates after esophageal resection. Ann Surg 233(3):338–344CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Kinugasa S, Tachibana M, Yoshimura H, Ueda S, Fujii T, Dhar DK, Nakamoto T, Nagasue N (2004) Postoperative pulmonary complications are associated with worse short- and long-term outcomes after extended esophagectomy. J Surg Oncol 88(2):71–77CrossRefPubMed

14.

Takeuchi H, Miyata H, Gotoh M, Kitagawa Y, Baba H, Kimura W, Tomita N, Nakagoe T, Shimada M, Sugihara K, et al. (2014) A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg 260(2):259–266CrossRefPubMed

15.

Fujita H, Kakegawa T, Yamana H, Shima I, Toh Y, Tomita Y, Fujii T, Yamasaki K, Higaki K, Noake T (1995) Mortality and morbidity rates, postoperative course, quality of life, and prognosis after extended radical lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Comparison of three-field lymphadenectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg 222(5):654–662CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Khoo CK, Vickery CJ, Forsyth N, Vinall NS, Eyre-Brook IA (2007) A prospective randomized controlled trial of multimodal perioperative management protocol in patients undergoing elective colorectal resection for cancer. Ann Surg 245(6):867–872CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Wind J, Polle SW, PH Fung Kon Jin, Dejong CH, von Meyenfeldt MF, Ubbink DT, Gouma DJ, Bemelman WA, Laparoscopy and/or fast track multimodal management versus standard care study group, enhanced recovery after surgery group: systematic review of enhanced recovery programmes in colonic surgery. The British Journal of Surgery 2006; 93(7):800–809.

18.

Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CH, Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN (2010) The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 29(4):434–440CrossRefPubMed

19.

Gouvas N, Tan E, Windsor A, Xynos E, Tekkis PP (2009) Fast-track vs standard care in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis update. Int J Color Dis 24(10):1119–1131CrossRef

20.

Mastracci TM, Cohen Z, Senagore A (2008) Canadian Association of General Surgeons and American College of Surgeons evidence-based reviews in surgery. Can J Surg 51(1):70–72PubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T (2014) Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol 14:135CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Li C, Ferri LE, Mulder DS, Ncuti A, Neville A, Lee L, Kaneva P, Watson D, Vassiliou M, Carli F, et al. (2012) An enhanced recovery pathway decreases duration of stay after esophagectomy. Surgery 152(4):606–614CrossRefPubMed

24.

Ford SJ, Adams D, Dudnikov S, Peyser P, Rahamim J, Wheatley TJ, Berrisford RG, Sanders G (2014) The implementation and effectiveness of an enhanced recovery programme after oesophago-gastrectomy: a prospective cohort study. Int J Surg 12(4):320–324CrossRefPubMed

25.

Pan H, Hu X, Yu Z, Zhang R, Zhang W, Ge J (2014) Use of a fast-track surgery protocol on patients undergoing minimally invasive oesophagectomy: preliminary results. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 19(3):441–447CrossRefPubMed

26.

Munitiz V, Martinez-de-Haro LF, Ortiz A, Ruiz-de-Angulo D, Pastor P, Parrilla P (2010) Effectiveness of a written clinical pathway for enhanced recovery after transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) oesophagectomy. Br J Surg 97(5):714–718CrossRefPubMed

27.

Blom RL, van Heijl M, Bemelman WA, Hollmann MW, Klinkenbijl JH, Busch OR, van Berge Henegouwen MI (2013) Initial experiences of an enhanced recovery protocol in esophageal surgery. World J Surg 37(10):2372–2378CrossRefPubMed

28.

Cao S, Zhao G, Cui J, Dong Q, Qi S, Xin Y, Shen B, Guo Q (2013) Fast-track rehabilitation program and conventional care after esophagectomy: a retrospective controlled cohort study. Support Care Cancer 21(3):707–714CrossRefPubMed

29.

Findlay JM, Tustian E, Millo J, Klucniks A, Sgromo B, Marshall RE, Gillies RS, Middleton MR, Maynard ND (2015) The effect of formalizing enhanced recovery after esophagectomy with a protocol. Dis Esophagus 28(6):567–573CrossRefPubMed

30.

Lee L, Li C, Robert N, Latimer E, Carli F, Mulder DS, Fried GM, Ferri LE, Feldman LS (2013) Economic impact of an enhanced recovery pathway for oesophagectomy. Br J Surg 100(10):1326–1334CrossRefPubMed

31.

Tang J, Humes DJ, Gemmil E, Welch NT, Parsons SL, Catton JA (2013) Reduction in length of stay for patients undergoing oesophageal and gastric resections with implementation of enhanced recovery packages. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 95(5):323–328CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Shewale JB, Correa AM, Baker CM, Villafane-Ferriol N, Hofstetter WL, Jordan VS, Kehlet H, Lewis KM, Mehran RJ, Summers BL, et al. (2015) Impact of a fast-track esophagectomy protocol on esophageal cancer patient outcomes and hospital charges. Ann Surg 261(6):1114–1123CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Zehr KJ, Dawson PB, Yang SC, Heitmiller RF (1998) Standardized clinical care pathways for major thoracic cases reduce hospital costs. Ann Thorac Surg 66(3):914–919CrossRefPubMed

34.

Zhao G, Cao S, Cui J (2014) Fast-track surgery improves postoperative clinical recovery and reduces postoperative insulin resistance after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Support Care Cancer 22(2):351–358CrossRefPubMed

35.

Tomaszek SC, Cassivi SD, Allen MS, Shen KR, Nichols FC, Deschamps C, Wigle DA (2010) An alternative postoperative pathway reduces length of hospitalisation following oesophagectomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 37(4):807–813CrossRefPubMed

36.

Bergquist H, Ruth M, Hammerlid E (2007) Psychiatric morbidity among patients with cancer of the esophagus or the gastro-esophageal junction: a prospective, longitudinal evaluation. Dis Esophagus 20(6):523–529CrossRefPubMed

37.

Zaouter C, Wuethrich P, Miccoli M, Carli F (2012) Early removal of urinary catheter leads to greater post-void residuals in patients with thoracic epidural. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica 56(8):1020–1025CrossRefPubMed

38.

Zaouter C, Kaneva P, Carli F (2009) Less urinary tract infection by earlier removal of bladder catheter in surgical patients receiving thoracic epidural analgesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 34(6):542–548CrossRefPubMed

39.

Chia YY, Wei RJ, Chang HC, Liu K (2009) Optimal duration of urinary catheterization after thoracotomy in patients under postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwanica 47(4):173–179CrossRef

40.

Findlay JM, Gillies RS, Millo J, Sgromo B, Marshall RE, Maynard ND (2014) Enhanced recovery for esophagectomy: a systematic review and evidence-based guidelines. Ann Surg 259(3):413–431CrossRefPubMed

41.

Weijs TJ, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Ruurda JP, Kouwenhoven EA, Rosman C, Sosef M, VH R, Luyer MD (2014) Study protocol for the nutritional route in oesophageal resection trial: a single-arm feasibility trial (NUTRIENT trial. BMJ Open 4(6):e004557CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Hughes MJ, Ventham NT, McNally S, Harrison E, Wigmore S (2014) Analgesia after open abdominal surgery in the setting of enhanced recovery surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 149(12):1224–1230CrossRefPubMed

Title: Impact of enhanced recovery program on patients with esophageal cancer in comparison with traditional care
Authors: Lihong Wang
Chenjing Zhu
Xuelei Ma
Kai Shen
Hongmei Li
Yuanyuan Hu
Linghong Guo
Jing Zhang
Ping Li
Publication date: 01-02-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-016-3410-0

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Discrepancy between long-term and previously published analysis for osteonecrosis of the jaw under denosumab

Dermatologic events from EGFR inhibitors: the issue of the missing patient voice

Risk factors for same-admission mortality after pathologic fracture secondary to metastatic cancer

Definition and estimation of osteonecrosis of jaw (ONJ), and optimal duration of antiresorptive treatment in bone metastatic cancer patients: supplementary data from the denosumab extension study?

Premedication with intravenous magnesium has a protective effect against cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity

Do-not-resuscitate orders in cancer patients: a review of literature

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer