Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Success and Failure in Colorectal Enhanced Recovery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Manual of Fast Track Recovery for Colorectal Surgery

Part of the book series: Enhanced Recovery ((ER))

Abstract

Enhanced recovery (ER) after surgery programmes should succeed in improving the quality of care and reducing the length of stay for the majority of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. A minority of patients however are perceived to fail by these measures and it is in these patients that we see some of the challenges and limitations faced by ER programmes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Wind J, Polle SW, Fung Kon Jin PH, Dejong CH, von Meyenfeldt MF, Ubbink DT, et al. Syste­matic review of enhanced recovery programmes in colonic surgery. Br J Surg. 2006; 93(7):800–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Eskicioglu C, Forbes SS, Aarts MA, Okrainec A, McLeod RS. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for patients having colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13(12):2321–9. Epub 2009 May 21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Walter CJ, Collin J, Dumville JC, Drew PJ, Monson JR. Enhanced recovery in colorectal resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2009;11(4):344–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CH, Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr. 2010;29(4):434–40. Epub 2010 Jan 29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Basse L, Hjort Jakobsen D, Billesbølle P, Werner M, Kehlet H. A clinical pathway to accelerate recovery after colonic resection. Ann Surg. 2000;232(1):51–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Maessen J, Dejong CH, Hausel J, Nygren J, Lassen K, Andersen J, et al. A protocol is not enough to implement an enhanced recovery programme for colorectal resection. Br J Surg. 2007;94(2):224–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Teeuwen PH, Bleichrodt RP, Strik C, Groenewoud JJ, Brinkert W, van Laarhoven CJ, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) versus conventional postoperative care in colorectal surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14(1):88–95. Epub 2009 Sep 25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Khoo CK, Vickery CJ, Forsyth N, Vinall NS, Eyre-Brook IA. A prospective randomized controlled trial of multimodal perioperative management protocol in patients undergoing elective colorectal resection for cancer. Ann Surg. 2007;245(6):867–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Marret E, Remy C, Bonnet F, Postoperative Pain Forum Group. Meta-analysis of epidural analgesia versus parenteral opioid analgesia after colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2007;94(6):665–73. Review.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Jørgensen H, Wetterslev J, Møiniche S, Dahl JB. Epidural local anaesthetics versus opioid-based analgesic regimens on postoperative gastrointestinal paralysis. PONV and pain after abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;4:CD001893. Review.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lobo DN, Bostock KA, Neal KR, Perkins AC, Rowlands BJ, Allison SP. Effect of salt and water balance on recovery of gastrointestinal function after elective colonic resection: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;359(9320):1812–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schwenk W, Haase O, Neudecker J, Muller J. Short term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;3:CD003145.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schwenk W, Böhm B, Haase O, Junghans T, Müller JM. Laparoscopic versus conventional colorectal resection: a prospective randomised study of postoperative ileus and early postoperative feeding. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 1998;383(1):49–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Raue W, Haase O, Junghans T, Scharfenberg M, Müller JM, Schwenk W. ‘Fast-track’ multimodal rehabilitation program improves outcome after laparoscopic sigmoidectomy: a controlled prospective evaluation. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(10):1463–8. Epub 2004 Aug 26.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. MacKay G, Ihedioha U, McConnachie A, Serpell M, Molloy RG, O’Dwyer PJ. Laparoscopic colonic resection in fast-track patients does not enhance short-term recovery after elective surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9(4):368–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Basse L, Jakobsen DH, Bardram L, Billesbølle P, Lund C, Mogensen T, et al. Functional recovery after open versus laparoscopic colonic resection: a randomized, blinded study. Ann Surg. 2005;241(3):416–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Khan S, Wilson T, Ahmed J, Owais A, MacFie J. Quality of life and patient satisfaction with enhanced recovery protocols. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12(12):1175–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A, Ljungqvist O, Soop M, Nygren J, et al. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg. 2011;146(5):571–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Smart NJ, Brigic A, Ockrim J, Allison AS, Kennedy RH, Francis NK. Factors influencing deviation and failure from enhanced recovery protocol following laparoscopic colorectal resections: what lessons can we learn? Association of coloproctology meeting, Birmingham, 20–23 June 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Brigic A, Smart NJ, Ockrim J, Kennedy RH, Francis NK. Deviations from enhanced recovery protocols following laparoscopic colorectal resections’. International surgical congress of association of surgeons of GB&I 2011, Bournemouth, 11–13 May 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Boulind C, Smart N, Brigic A, Pring T, Ockrim J, Kennedy RH, Francis N. Operative factors that predict outcome in enhanced recovery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. 19th international congress of the European association of endoscopic surgeons, Torino, 15–18 June 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Burkill C, Boulind C, Noble H, Allison A, Ockrim J, Kennedy RH, Francis NK. Factors predict outcome in enhanced recovery programme following laparoscopic colorectal resection: multi-variant analysis. The association of surgeons of GB & I, Glasgow, May 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Laparoscopic surgery: failure to recognise post-operative deterioration. National patient safety agency –NHS. National reporting and learning service. Central Alert System (CAS) reference: NPSA/2010/RRR016 23 September 2010 www.nrls.npsa.nhs.uk/resources.

  24. Noble EJ, Harris R, Hosie KB, Thomas S, Lewis SJ. Gum chewing reduces postoperative ileus? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2009;7(2):100–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Traut U, Brügger L, Kunz R, Pauli-Magnus C, Haug K, Bucher H and Koller, MT. “Cochrane database of systematic reviews.” Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23;(1):CD004930.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Boulind C, Yeo M, Burkill C, Witt A, James E, Ewings P, Kennedy RH, Francis N. Factors predicting deviation from an enhanced recovery programme and delayed discharge after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Colorectal disease 2011 in press.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Yeovil District Hospital, Yeovil, Somerset, UK

    Nader Francis & Andrew Allison

  2. Department of Surgery, Yeovil District Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, Yeovil, Somerset, UK

    Jonathan Ockrim

Authors
  1. Nader Francis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew Allison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jonathan Ockrim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation, Yeovil, BA21 4AT, United Kingdom

    Nader Francis

  2. St Mark's Hospital, Watford Road, Harrow, HA1 3UJ, United Kingdom

    Robin H. Kennedy

  3. Department of Surgery, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, 701 85, Sweden

    Olle Ljungqvist

  4. University College of London, Centre for Anaesthesia, WC1E 6, United Kingdom

    Monty G. Mythen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Francis, N., Allison, A., Ockrim, J. (2012). Success and Failure in Colorectal Enhanced Recovery. In: Francis, N., Kennedy, R., Ljungqvist, O., Mythen, M. (eds) Manual of Fast Track Recovery for Colorectal Surgery. Enhanced Recovery. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-953-6_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-953-6_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-85729-952-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-953-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation