ABSTRACT
@#Objective To investigate the application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in da Vinci robotic McKeown surgery for esophageal cancer. Methods Clinical data of patients admitted to the First Hospital of Lanzhou University and undergoing da Vinci robotic McKeown surgery for esophageal cancer from 2017 to 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the treatment, they were divided into two groups, a conventional group and an ERAS group. Patients in the conventional group were treated with the conventional perioperative treatment mode of thoracic surgery, and patients in the ERAS group were treated with accelerated rehabilitation surgical treatment mode. Relevant hospitalization indicators and postoperative complication rates were compared between the two groups. Results Finally 128 patients were collected, including 106 males and 22 females, with an average age of 61.91 years. There were 71 patients in the conventional group and 57 patients in the ERAS group. The postoperative pain index in the ERAS group was significantly lower than that in the conventional group (P<0.05), and the duration of postoperative analgesic pump used in the ERAS group was shorter than that in the conventional group (2.39±0.49 d vs. 3.13±0.63 d, P<0.001). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of postoperative related complications (gastroesophageal reflux, anastomotic stenosis, anastomotic fistula, arrhythmia, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, chylothorax, anastomosis stomatitis or incisional infection) between the two groups (P>0.05), but the incidence of postoperative lung infection in the ERAS group was statistically lower (12.28% vs. 26.76%, P=0.043), and the volume of postoperative pleural effusion was statistically less compared with the conventional group (P<0.05). In the ERAS group, the surgery time (294.35±15.19 min vs. 322.79±59.09 min, P<0.001), postoperative exhaust time (1.44±0.39 d vs. 1.94±0.43 d, P<0.001), postoperative removal time of nasolasal tube (6.79±0.73 d vs. 8.21±0.86 d, P<0.001), hospital stay (19.88±3.36 d vs. 21.34±3.59 d, P=0.020), hospitalization costs (105 575.28±8 960.75 yuan vs. 137 894.64±19 518.60 yuan, P<0.001) were all lower or shorter than those of the conventional group. Postoperative activity was longer in the ERAS group than that in the conventional group (P<0.05), but there was no statistical difference in preoperative anesthesia time between the two groups (P=0.841). Conclusion The application of ERAS in da Vinci robotic McKeown surgery for esophageal cancer can effectively alleviate the physiological and psychological burden of patients, reduce the occurrence of postoperative related complications, effectively shorten the total hospital stay, save hospitalization costs, and reduce the economic burden of patients and society. Therefore, it can be promoted and applied in the clinic.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the effectiveness of botulinum toxin type A ( BTXA) and ethyl alcohol ( EA) in treating lower extremity spasticity after stroke. Methods This was a randomized, case-control study. A to-tal of 92 eligible stroke survivors completed the study. They were randomly divided into a BTXA group of 48 and an EA group of 44 according to a random number table. The gastrocnemius, soleus and posterior tibial muscles of the af-fected limb were chosen as injection sites. The BTXA group was injected with 50 to 200 IU of BTXA ( at 50 U/ml) at one to four sites in each muscle, with a total injection dose of less than 600 U. The EA group was injected with less than 10 ml of 50% EA (0.1 to 0.5 ml at each site). Before and 2, 4 and 12 weeks after the injection, both groups were evaluated using the modified Ashworth scale (MAS), a 3 m timed up and go test (TUG), a timed 10 meter walk ( 10m-WT) and each was asked to assess their pain level using a visual analogue scale ( VAS) . Any adverse re-actions were also observed. Results Two weeks after the injection, the average MAS score of both groups had im-proved significantly compared to that before the injection. The average improvement in the BTXA group was signifi-cantly less than in the EA group. No significant differences were found in other measurements. After four weeks the average MAS score of the BTXA group was still significantly different from that before injection or from 2 weeks previ-ously, but the EA group now showed no significant difference from before the injection. The average TUG, 10m-WT and VAS scores of both groups had improved significantly compared to those of the earlier time points. Twelve weeks after the injection, the average MAS, TUG, 10m-WT and VAS scores of the BTXA were still significantly improved compared to before the injection, but in the EA group only the average score VAS reading was significantly improved. There were then significant differences between the two groups in all of the measurements. Conclusions Both BTXA and EA can relieve muscle spasticity. Both take effect within 2 weeks, but the former has fewer side effects than the latter and a longer duration of therapeutic effect.