Optimizing ERAS protocols in robotic nephron-sparing surgery: a randomized trial.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Yiqiang Wang, Mangmang He, Lulu Lou
{"title":"Optimizing ERAS protocols in robotic nephron-sparing surgery: a randomized trial.","authors":"Yiqiang Wang, Mangmang He, Lulu Lou","doi":"10.1186/s12957-025-03927-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the clinical efficacy of evidence-based Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) nursing protocols in patients undergoing robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy using the Da Vinci system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 240 patients undergoing Da Vinci robot-assisted partial nephrectomy were randomized (1:1) to ERAS (n = 120) or conventional care (n = 120) groups using a stratified block randomization method. The sample size was calculated based on a power of 80%, α = 0.05, and anticipated clinically significant differences, though specific values for the standard deviation and effect size were not disclosed. Primary outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes assessed complication rates (Clavien-Dindo classification) and patient-reported comfort (Kolcaba GCQ questionnaire). Categorical variables were analyzed using the Chi-square test, while continuous variables were assessed with the independent samples t-test. Bonferroni correction was applied for pairwise comparisons to control for multiple testing. All analyses adhered to the modified intention-to-treat principle using the full analysis set (FAS), and no imputation was made for missing data. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ERAS group demonstrated superior recovery metrics compared to the control group: operative duration (228.6 ± 9.5 vs. 252.8 ± 10.1 min, mean difference [MD] - 24.2, 95% CI -27.3, -21.1; p < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss (200.4 ± 18.2 vs. 232.6 ± 19.3 mL, MD - 32.2, 95% CI -36.8, -27.6; p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative milestones (ambulation: 14.3 ± 1.7 vs. 18.7 ± 2.2 h, p < 0.001; catheter removal: 2.1 vs. 3.5 days, p < 0.001). Hospital stay was significantly reduced (6.2 ± 2.1 vs. 10.5 ± 3.3 days, MD - 4.3, 95% CI -5.0, -3.6; p < 0.001). Complication rates were markedly lower with ERAS (14.2% vs. 39.2%, relative risk [RR] 0.36, 95% CI 0.24-0.55; p < 0.001), particularly for urinary infections (3.3% vs. 11.7%, p = 0.027) and wound hematomas (5.0% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.025). GCQ scores improved significantly in the ERAS group post-intervention (p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ERAS nursing grounded in evidence-based medicine significantly enhances postoperative recovery, reduces complications, and improves patient comfort in robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy. These findings support its broader clinical adoption.</p>","PeriodicalId":23856,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":"23 1","pages":"271"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12243225/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-025-03927-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of evidence-based Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) nursing protocols in patients undergoing robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy using the Da Vinci system.

Methods: A total of 240 patients undergoing Da Vinci robot-assisted partial nephrectomy were randomized (1:1) to ERAS (n = 120) or conventional care (n = 120) groups using a stratified block randomization method. The sample size was calculated based on a power of 80%, α = 0.05, and anticipated clinically significant differences, though specific values for the standard deviation and effect size were not disclosed. Primary outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes assessed complication rates (Clavien-Dindo classification) and patient-reported comfort (Kolcaba GCQ questionnaire). Categorical variables were analyzed using the Chi-square test, while continuous variables were assessed with the independent samples t-test. Bonferroni correction was applied for pairwise comparisons to control for multiple testing. All analyses adhered to the modified intention-to-treat principle using the full analysis set (FAS), and no imputation was made for missing data. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: The ERAS group demonstrated superior recovery metrics compared to the control group: operative duration (228.6 ± 9.5 vs. 252.8 ± 10.1 min, mean difference [MD] - 24.2, 95% CI -27.3, -21.1; p < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss (200.4 ± 18.2 vs. 232.6 ± 19.3 mL, MD - 32.2, 95% CI -36.8, -27.6; p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative milestones (ambulation: 14.3 ± 1.7 vs. 18.7 ± 2.2 h, p < 0.001; catheter removal: 2.1 vs. 3.5 days, p < 0.001). Hospital stay was significantly reduced (6.2 ± 2.1 vs. 10.5 ± 3.3 days, MD - 4.3, 95% CI -5.0, -3.6; p < 0.001). Complication rates were markedly lower with ERAS (14.2% vs. 39.2%, relative risk [RR] 0.36, 95% CI 0.24-0.55; p < 0.001), particularly for urinary infections (3.3% vs. 11.7%, p = 0.027) and wound hematomas (5.0% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.025). GCQ scores improved significantly in the ERAS group post-intervention (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: ERAS nursing grounded in evidence-based medicine significantly enhances postoperative recovery, reduces complications, and improves patient comfort in robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy. These findings support its broader clinical adoption.

Abstract Image

优化机器人肾保留手术的ERAS方案:一项随机试验。
目的:评价循证强化术后恢复(ERAS)护理方案在机器人辅助Da Vinci系统部分肾切除术患者中的临床效果。方法:采用分层块随机化方法,将240例接受达芬奇机器人辅助部分肾切除术的患者按1:1的比例随机分为ERAS组(n = 120)和常规组(n = 120)。样本量的计算基于80%的幂,α = 0.05,并预期临床显著差异,但标准偏差和效应大小的具体值未披露。主要结局包括手术时间、估计失血量和住院时间。次要结局评估并发症发生率(Clavien-Dindo分类)和患者报告的舒适度(Kolcaba GCQ问卷)。分类变量采用卡方检验,连续变量采用独立样本t检验。两两比较采用Bonferroni校正,以对照多重检验。所有分析均使用全分析集(full analysis set, FAS)遵循改良的意向治疗原则,未对缺失数据进行补全。A p值结果:ERAS组表现出优于对照组的恢复指标:手术时间(228.6±9.5 vs 252.8±10.1 min),平均差[MD] - 24.2, 95% CI -27.3, -21.1;结论:基于循证医学的ERAS护理可显著提高机器人辅助部分肾切除术的术后恢复,减少并发症,提高患者舒适度。这些发现支持其更广泛的临床应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
15.60%
发文量
362
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: World Journal of Surgical Oncology publishes articles related to surgical oncology and its allied subjects, such as epidemiology, cancer research, biomarkers, prevention, pathology, radiology, cancer treatment, clinical trials, multimodality treatment and molecular biology. Emphasis is placed on original research articles. The journal also publishes significant clinical case reports, as well as balanced and timely reviews on selected topics. Oncology is a multidisciplinary super-speciality of which surgical oncology forms an integral component, especially with solid tumors. Surgical oncologists around the world are involved in research extending from detecting the mechanisms underlying the causation of cancer, to its treatment and prevention. The role of a surgical oncologist extends across the whole continuum of care. With continued developments in diagnosis and treatment, the role of a surgical oncologist is ever-changing. Hence, World Journal of Surgical Oncology aims to keep readers abreast with latest developments that will ultimately influence the work of surgical oncologists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信