AIM: To assess the safety of enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS) program in gastrectomy and influences on nutrition state and insulin-resistance. METHODS: Our ERAS program involved shortening the fasting periods and...AIM: To assess the safety of enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS) program in gastrectomy and influences on nutrition state and insulin-resistance. METHODS: Our ERAS program involved shortening the fasting periods and preoperative carbohydrate loading. Eighty gastrectomy patients were randomly assigned to either the conventional group(CG) or ERAS group(EG). We assessed the clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes prospectively. The primary endpoint was noninferiority in timely discharge from the hospital within 12 d. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of aspiration at anesthesia induction, incidence of postoperative complications, health related quality of life(HRQOL) using the SF8 Health Survey questionnaire, nutrition state [e.g., albumin, transthyretin(TTR), retinal-binding protein(RBP), and transferrin(Tf)], the homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance(HOMA-R) index, postoperative urine volume,postoperative weight change, and postoperative oral intake.RESULTS: The ERAS program was noninferior to the conventional program in achieving discharge from the hospital within 12 d(95.0% vs 92.5% respectively; 95%CI:-10.0%-16.0%). There was no significant difference in postoperative morbidity between the two groups. Adverse events such as vomiting and aspiration associated with the induction of general anesthesia were not observed. There were no significant differences with respect to postoperative urine volume, weight change, and oral intake between the two groups. EG patients with preoperative HOMA-R scores above 2.5 experienced significant attenuation of their HOMA-R scores on postoperative day 1 compared to CG patients(P = 0.014). There were no significant differences with respect to rapid turnover proteins(TTR, RBP and Tf) or HRQOL scores using the SF8 method.CONCLUSION: Applying the ERAS program to patients who undergo gastrectomy is safe, and improves insulin resistance with no deterioration in QOL.展开更多
Background: This study aimed to determine the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) after ESD. Methods: We reviewed patients with gastric cancer who underwent distal gastrectomy af...Background: This study aimed to determine the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) after ESD. Methods: We reviewed patients with gastric cancer who underwent distal gastrectomy after non-curative ESD from May 2000 to July 2010, and classified them into LADG-ESD and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) after non-curative ESD (ODG-ESD). In addition, we analyzed the standard LADG (LADG-standard) during the same period. We retrospectively analyzed surgical outcomes and survival in these 3 groups. Pathological results after gastrectomy were compared between the LADG-ESD and ODG-ESD;Results: Sixty-one patients underwent distal gastrectomy after non-curative ESD. No differences in overall survival were found between the LADG-ESD and ODG-ESD. The average duration to surgery after ESD was 42.4 days. Although the average surgical duration and average length of hospital stay after surgery were longer in the LADG-ESD than in the ODG-ESD, number of LN dissections was statistically identical in these 2 groups. Operative complications in the LADG-ESD (16.0%) was higher than that in the LADG-standard (3.8% - 8.2%) but similar to that in the ODG-ESD (13.9%). Conclusion: The present study suggests that LADG contributes to the effectiveness of the treatment of choice for non-curative endoscopic resection.展开更多
文摘AIM: To assess the safety of enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS) program in gastrectomy and influences on nutrition state and insulin-resistance. METHODS: Our ERAS program involved shortening the fasting periods and preoperative carbohydrate loading. Eighty gastrectomy patients were randomly assigned to either the conventional group(CG) or ERAS group(EG). We assessed the clinical characteristics and postoperative outcomes prospectively. The primary endpoint was noninferiority in timely discharge from the hospital within 12 d. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of aspiration at anesthesia induction, incidence of postoperative complications, health related quality of life(HRQOL) using the SF8 Health Survey questionnaire, nutrition state [e.g., albumin, transthyretin(TTR), retinal-binding protein(RBP), and transferrin(Tf)], the homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance(HOMA-R) index, postoperative urine volume,postoperative weight change, and postoperative oral intake.RESULTS: The ERAS program was noninferior to the conventional program in achieving discharge from the hospital within 12 d(95.0% vs 92.5% respectively; 95%CI:-10.0%-16.0%). There was no significant difference in postoperative morbidity between the two groups. Adverse events such as vomiting and aspiration associated with the induction of general anesthesia were not observed. There were no significant differences with respect to postoperative urine volume, weight change, and oral intake between the two groups. EG patients with preoperative HOMA-R scores above 2.5 experienced significant attenuation of their HOMA-R scores on postoperative day 1 compared to CG patients(P = 0.014). There were no significant differences with respect to rapid turnover proteins(TTR, RBP and Tf) or HRQOL scores using the SF8 method.CONCLUSION: Applying the ERAS program to patients who undergo gastrectomy is safe, and improves insulin resistance with no deterioration in QOL.
文摘Background: This study aimed to determine the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) after ESD. Methods: We reviewed patients with gastric cancer who underwent distal gastrectomy after non-curative ESD from May 2000 to July 2010, and classified them into LADG-ESD and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) after non-curative ESD (ODG-ESD). In addition, we analyzed the standard LADG (LADG-standard) during the same period. We retrospectively analyzed surgical outcomes and survival in these 3 groups. Pathological results after gastrectomy were compared between the LADG-ESD and ODG-ESD;Results: Sixty-one patients underwent distal gastrectomy after non-curative ESD. No differences in overall survival were found between the LADG-ESD and ODG-ESD. The average duration to surgery after ESD was 42.4 days. Although the average surgical duration and average length of hospital stay after surgery were longer in the LADG-ESD than in the ODG-ESD, number of LN dissections was statistically identical in these 2 groups. Operative complications in the LADG-ESD (16.0%) was higher than that in the LADG-standard (3.8% - 8.2%) but similar to that in the ODG-ESD (13.9%). Conclusion: The present study suggests that LADG contributes to the effectiveness of the treatment of choice for non-curative endoscopic resection.