Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol for acute complicated and uncomplicated appendicitis.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are well-documented logistic programs in elective surgery but it is still uncertain whether ERAS can benefit emergency patients, because of significant challenges facing its application to emergency surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of an ERAS protocol for patients with acute appendicitis (AA), both complicated and uncomplicated. METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed at two university hospitals in Spain, between January 2012 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were patients with diagnosis of AA, undergoing appendectomy following an ERAS protocol of perioperative care. The different items of the ERAS protocol were recorded and their implementation was separately evaluated. Analyzed variables also included postoperative complications, hospital stay and readmission rate. Levels of acute phase reactants were assessed as predictors of implementation for the ERAS protocol. RESULTS: Eight hundred fifty patients were included; 498 males (58.5%) and 302 females (41.5%), with a mean age of 34.95 ± 17 years. The implementation of all the items of the protocol was achieved in 770 patients (90.6%), 86.8% of patients with complicated AA and 93.1% of patients with uncomplicated AA (p = 0.02). Higher preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were significantly associated with the impossibility of implementing all the items of the ERAS protocol (p < 0.001), establishing a cut-off point at CRP = 13.5 mg/dl. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of ERAS protocols is safe and feasible in patients with AA. Although the implementation rate of all the items is lower in patients with complicated AA, it can be completed in 86.8% of these patients. CRP levels over 13.5 mg/dl are predictors of difficulties in the implementation of all the items of ERAS protocols.

Effects of the application of vitamin E and silicone dressings vs conventional dressings on incisional surgical site infection in elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a prospective randomized clinical trial.

AIM: To compare the effect of conventional wound dressings (CD) with vitamin E and silicone (E-Sil) dressings on incisional surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing elective colorectal laparoscopic surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized study was performed. Patients were assigned at random into two groups: an E-Sil group and a CD group. Incisional SSI, postoperative pain and acute phase reactants were investigated. RESULTS: In total, 120 patients were included in this study (60 in each group). The incisional SSI rate was 3.4% in the E-Sil group and 17.2% in the CD group (P = 0.013). Bacteroides fragilis alone grew in the cultures of infected wounds in the E-Sil group, while cultures for infected wounds in the CD group were polymicrobial. Mean postoperative pain 48 h after surgery was 27.1 [standard deviation (SD) 10.7] mm in the E-Sil group and 41.6 (SD 16.9) mm in the CD group (P < 0.001). White blood cell (WBC) count and C-reactive protein (CRP) level were lower in the E-Sil group, even after the exclusion of patients presenting with postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Use of an E-sil dressing to cover the Pfannestiel wound after elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery leads to a reduction in the incisional SSI rate, lower postoperative pain, and a decrease in CRP level and WBC count.