Cargando…

Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND: The inability to comply with enhanced recovery protocols (ERp) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a real but understated issue. Our goal is to report our experience and a potential tool to predict ERp failure in order to better characterize this problem. METHODS: From January 1, 2014,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Capretti, Giovanni, Cereda, Marco, Gavazzi, Francesca, Uccelli, Fara, Ridolfi, Cristina, Nappo, Gennaro, Donisi, Greta, Evangelista, Andrea, Zerbi, Alessandro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7527369/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32734454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05693-x
_version_ 1783589041615142912
author Capretti, Giovanni
Cereda, Marco
Gavazzi, Francesca
Uccelli, Fara
Ridolfi, Cristina
Nappo, Gennaro
Donisi, Greta
Evangelista, Andrea
Zerbi, Alessandro
author_facet Capretti, Giovanni
Cereda, Marco
Gavazzi, Francesca
Uccelli, Fara
Ridolfi, Cristina
Nappo, Gennaro
Donisi, Greta
Evangelista, Andrea
Zerbi, Alessandro
author_sort Capretti, Giovanni
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The inability to comply with enhanced recovery protocols (ERp) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a real but understated issue. Our goal is to report our experience and a potential tool to predict ERp failure in order to better characterize this problem. METHODS: From January 1, 2014, to January 31, 2016, 205 consecutive patients underwent PD in our center and were managed according to an ERp. Failure to comply with postoperative protocol items was defined as any of: no active ambulation on postoperative day 1 (POD1); less than 4 h out of bed on POD2; removal of nasogastric tube and bladder catheter after POD1 and POD3, respectively; reintroduction of oral feeding after POD4; and continuation of intravenous infusions after POD4. Data were collected in a prospective database. RESULTS: Taking in consideration the number of failed items and the length of stay, we defined failure of the ERp as no compliance to two or more items. A total of 116 patients (56.6%) met this definition of failure. We created a predictive model consisting of age, BMI, operative time, and pancreatic stump consistency. These variables were independent predictors of failure (OR 1.03 [1.001–1.06] p = 0.01; OR 1.11 [1.01–1.22] p = 0.03; OR 1.004 [1.001–1.009] p = 0.02 and OR 2.89 [1.48–5.67] p = 0.002, respectively). Patient final score predicted the failure of the ERp with an area under the ROC curve of 0.747. CONCLUSIONS: It seems to be possible to predict ERp failure after PD. Patients at high risk of failure may benefit more from a specific ERp.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7527369
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75273692020-10-19 Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy Capretti, Giovanni Cereda, Marco Gavazzi, Francesca Uccelli, Fara Ridolfi, Cristina Nappo, Gennaro Donisi, Greta Evangelista, Andrea Zerbi, Alessandro World J Surg Original Scientific Report BACKGROUND: The inability to comply with enhanced recovery protocols (ERp) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a real but understated issue. Our goal is to report our experience and a potential tool to predict ERp failure in order to better characterize this problem. METHODS: From January 1, 2014, to January 31, 2016, 205 consecutive patients underwent PD in our center and were managed according to an ERp. Failure to comply with postoperative protocol items was defined as any of: no active ambulation on postoperative day 1 (POD1); less than 4 h out of bed on POD2; removal of nasogastric tube and bladder catheter after POD1 and POD3, respectively; reintroduction of oral feeding after POD4; and continuation of intravenous infusions after POD4. Data were collected in a prospective database. RESULTS: Taking in consideration the number of failed items and the length of stay, we defined failure of the ERp as no compliance to two or more items. A total of 116 patients (56.6%) met this definition of failure. We created a predictive model consisting of age, BMI, operative time, and pancreatic stump consistency. These variables were independent predictors of failure (OR 1.03 [1.001–1.06] p = 0.01; OR 1.11 [1.01–1.22] p = 0.03; OR 1.004 [1.001–1.009] p = 0.02 and OR 2.89 [1.48–5.67] p = 0.002, respectively). Patient final score predicted the failure of the ERp with an area under the ROC curve of 0.747. CONCLUSIONS: It seems to be possible to predict ERp failure after PD. Patients at high risk of failure may benefit more from a specific ERp. Springer International Publishing 2020-07-30 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7527369/ /pubmed/32734454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05693-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Scientific Report
Capretti, Giovanni
Cereda, Marco
Gavazzi, Francesca
Uccelli, Fara
Ridolfi, Cristina
Nappo, Gennaro
Donisi, Greta
Evangelista, Andrea
Zerbi, Alessandro
Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy
title Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy
title_full Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy
title_fullStr Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy
title_full_unstemmed Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy
title_short Enhanced Recovery After Pancreatic Surgery Does One Size Really Fit All? A Clinical Score to Predict the Failure of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol After Pancreaticoduodenectomy
title_sort enhanced recovery after pancreatic surgery does one size really fit all? a clinical score to predict the failure of an enhanced recovery protocol after pancreaticoduodenectomy
topic Original Scientific Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7527369/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32734454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05693-x
work_keys_str_mv AT caprettigiovanni enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT ceredamarco enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT gavazzifrancesca enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT uccellifara enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT ridolficristina enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT nappogennaro enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT donisigreta enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT evangelistaandrea enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy
AT zerbialessandro enhancedrecoveryafterpancreaticsurgerydoesonesizereallyfitallaclinicalscoretopredictthefailureofanenhancedrecoveryprotocolafterpancreaticoduodenectomy