RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Risk profile assessment and corrective interventions using optimisation of health status and prehabilitation represent an important strategy in the management of patients with a suspected cancer diagnosis. AIM: To determine the feasibility of pre-treatment optimisation and prehabilitation commenced at index primary care consultation, to improve patients' preparation for treatment by maximising the time available. DESIGN & SETTING: Between January 2015 and May 2016, 195 patients presenting to 12 GP practices were deemed eligible to enter the study, of which 189 (96.9%, median age 60 [21-91] years and 65 months; 124 female) were recruited and consented to the prehabilitation bundle. METHOD: All patients were simultaneously referred to secondary care using urgent suspected cancer (USC) pathways. The primary outcome measures were definitive diagnosis and treatment plan. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (7.9%) were diagnosed with cancer (three breast, three colon, two lung, two skin [one melanoma, one sarcoma], one tonsil, one vocal cord, one pancreas, one prostate, one ependymoma) and 62 were diagnosed with other significant medical conditions (47 gastrointestinal, 13 sepsis, two respiratory) requiring secondary care assessment and treatment. Of the 15 patients with cancer, 11 (73.3%) underwent potentially curative treatment, and four (26.7%) palliative treatment. Of the total study cohort, 84 (44%) required a form of optimisation in primary care, and patients with cancer were more likely to require optimisation than others (n = 10 [63%] versus n = 74 [43%], χ2 9.384, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: One in 12 primary care USC patients had cancer (5.6% receiving potentially curative treatment), one in three had other systemic health issues, and overall two in five benefited from healthcare intervention. Primary care optimisation was feasible and associated with important allied health benefits.
RESUMO
This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine the influence of enhanced recovery programmes (ERPs) on outcomes after gastric cancer surgery. Medline, Embase, the Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies on outcomes of gastrectomy in enhanced recovery or fast-track programmes. The primary outcome measure was post-operative duration of hospital stay (LOHS), and secondary outcome measures were selected based inclusion in two or more studies. Statistical analysis was performed using standardized mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) as the summary statistics. Fourteen studies, totalling 1676 patients with gastric cancer were analysed, including nine randomized trials. LOHS was significantly shorter after ERP when compared with control patients (CON, SMD -1.10, 95% confidence interval -1.56 to -0.65, p < 0.001), but with significant heterogeneity between studies (I(2) = 93%, p < 0.001). ERP was also associated with reduced serum inflammatory response (CRP: SMD -0.68 (-1.16 to -0.19), p = 0.007; IL-6: SMD -0.62 (-0.94 to -0.29), p < 0.001), less weight loss (SMD -0.79 (-1.11 to -0.46), p < 0.001), and lower cost (SMD -1.02 (-1.59 to -0.45), p < 0.001), as well as a trend toward shorter duration of intravenous infusion (SMD -2.70 (-5.35 to -0.05), p = 0.05). Inclusion in an ERP was not associated with increased post-operative morbidity (OR 0.83 (0.65 to 1.06), p = 0.13) or hospital readmission (OR 1.67 (0.88 to 3.19), p = 0.12). From this review the authors concluded that multimodal, standardized perioperative gastrectomy care appears feasible, safe and cost effective.
