Túlio Pimentel, Dante L S Souza, Ivonne Zuniga, Maria Clara Faveri, Julia Canfild, Paula Motta Pauperio, Hamza Guend
{"title":"提高术后恢复(ERAS)在造口逆转手术:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Túlio Pimentel, Dante L S Souza, Ivonne Zuniga, Maria Clara Faveri, Julia Canfild, Paula Motta Pauperio, Hamza Guend","doi":"10.1007/s13304-025-02092-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Stoma reversal surgery is known for relatively high complication rates. While Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are extensively validated for colorectal surgery, their use in stoma reversal remains underexplored. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols compared to standard care (SC) practices. Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for studies that compared clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols versus SC practices. The endpoints of interest were length of stay (LOS), ileus, wound infection, anastomotic leak, time to first stool, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, and reoperation rates. Mean difference (MD) was calculated for continuous variables and Odds Ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables. Statistical analysis was performed with R version 4.4.0. We included eight studies comprising 1322 patients. Among these, 603 (45.6%) followed an ERAS protocol, while 719 (54.4%) received SC practices. ERAS was associated with a significant decrease in LOS (MD -1.83; 95% CI -2.55 to -1.12; p < 0.01), wound infection (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97; p = 0.041), and time to first stool (MD -1.02; 95% CI -1.22 to -0.81; p < 0.01). No statistically significant difference was observed regarding ileus, anastomotic leak, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, or reoperation rates. The implementation of ERAS protocols in stoma reversal procedures should be considered, as it was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay without increasing morbidity, and may even reduce complications such as wound infections.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in stoma reversal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Túlio Pimentel, Dante L S Souza, Ivonne Zuniga, Maria Clara Faveri, Julia Canfild, Paula Motta Pauperio, Hamza Guend\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13304-025-02092-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Stoma reversal surgery is known for relatively high complication rates. While Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are extensively validated for colorectal surgery, their use in stoma reversal remains underexplored. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols compared to standard care (SC) practices. Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for studies that compared clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols versus SC practices. The endpoints of interest were length of stay (LOS), ileus, wound infection, anastomotic leak, time to first stool, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, and reoperation rates. Mean difference (MD) was calculated for continuous variables and Odds Ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables. Statistical analysis was performed with R version 4.4.0. We included eight studies comprising 1322 patients. Among these, 603 (45.6%) followed an ERAS protocol, while 719 (54.4%) received SC practices. ERAS was associated with a significant decrease in LOS (MD -1.83; 95% CI -2.55 to -1.12; p < 0.01), wound infection (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97; p = 0.041), and time to first stool (MD -1.02; 95% CI -1.22 to -0.81; p < 0.01). No statistically significant difference was observed regarding ileus, anastomotic leak, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, or reoperation rates. The implementation of ERAS protocols in stoma reversal procedures should be considered, as it was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay without increasing morbidity, and may even reduce complications such as wound infections.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02092-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02092-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
众所周知,造口手术的并发症发生率相对较高。虽然增强术后恢复(ERAS)方案在结直肠手术中得到了广泛的验证,但它们在造口逆转中的应用仍未得到充分的探索。本系统综述和荟萃分析评估了ERAS方案下的造口逆转手术与标准护理(SC)实践的临床结果。我们检索了Medline、EMBASE和Cochrane Central数据库,以比较ERAS方案和SC实践下造口逆转手术的临床结果。感兴趣的终点是住院时间(LOS)、肠梗阻、伤口感染、吻合口漏、第一次大便时间、总体、轻微和主要术后并发症、再入院率和再手术率。连续变量计算平均差(MD),二分类变量计算比值比(OR)。采用R版本4.4.0进行统计分析。我们纳入了8项研究,共1322例患者。其中,603人(45.6%)遵循了ERAS协议,而719人(54.4%)接受了SC实践。ERAS与LOS显著降低相关(MD -1.83;95% CI -2.55 ~ -1.12;p
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in stoma reversal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Stoma reversal surgery is known for relatively high complication rates. While Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are extensively validated for colorectal surgery, their use in stoma reversal remains underexplored. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols compared to standard care (SC) practices. Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for studies that compared clinical outcomes of stoma reversal surgery under ERAS protocols versus SC practices. The endpoints of interest were length of stay (LOS), ileus, wound infection, anastomotic leak, time to first stool, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, and reoperation rates. Mean difference (MD) was calculated for continuous variables and Odds Ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables. Statistical analysis was performed with R version 4.4.0. We included eight studies comprising 1322 patients. Among these, 603 (45.6%) followed an ERAS protocol, while 719 (54.4%) received SC practices. ERAS was associated with a significant decrease in LOS (MD -1.83; 95% CI -2.55 to -1.12; p < 0.01), wound infection (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97; p = 0.041), and time to first stool (MD -1.02; 95% CI -1.22 to -0.81; p < 0.01). No statistically significant difference was observed regarding ileus, anastomotic leak, overall, minor, and major postoperative complications, readmission rates, or reoperation rates. The implementation of ERAS protocols in stoma reversal procedures should be considered, as it was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay without increasing morbidity, and may even reduce complications such as wound infections.
期刊介绍:
Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future.
Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts.
Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.