Home    中文  
 
  • Search
  • lucene Search
  • Citation
  • Fig/Tab
  • Adv Search
Just Accepted  |  Current Issue  |  Archive  |  Featured Articles  |  Most Read  |  Most Download  |  Most Cited

Chinese Journal of Injury Repair and Wound Healing(Electronic Edition) ›› 2020, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (06): 434-440. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-9450.2020.06.003

Special Issue:

• Original Article • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Applications of enhanced recovery after surgery in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Wangming Ji1, Tao Zhang1, Yu Cheng1, Dinghua Zhou1, Wei Lyu1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Rockets Army Characteristic Medical Center of PLA, Beijing 100088, China
  • Received:2020-10-25 Online:2020-12-01 Published:2020-12-01
  • Contact: Wei Lyu
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Lyu Wei, Email:

Abstract:

Objective

To investigate the clinical application and efficacy analysis of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients with gastric cancer after radical resection.

Methods

From January 2015 to June 2019, the clinical data of 50 patients who underwent radical resection of gastric cancer in Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Rocket Army Characteristic Medical Center were retrospectively analyzed. According to the different perioperative treatment schemes, they were divided into observation group and control group, with 25 cases in each group. The observation group was guided by ERAS concept during the perioperative period, and the control group was given routine perioperative treatment measures. The vital signs such as systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, cardiac output, central venous pressure, oxygen saturation and body temperature were observed at 10, 60 and 120 min after anesthesia. The occurrence of related complications in perioperative period and postoperative recovery were analyzed. The level of postoperative pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, analgesic efficiency, peri operative anal exhaust time, ambulation time and eating time were compared at 12 h after surgery between the two groups. The data were analyzed by t test, chi-square test and analysis of variance for repeated measurement.

Results

The systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, cardiac output, central venous pressure, blood oxygen saturation and body temperature of the observation group had no significant fluctuation at 10, 60 and 120 min after anesthesia, and the differences were not statistically significant (with P values above 0.05). The heart rate showed a gradual downward trend with the extension of time, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). In the control group, there were no significant changes in cardiac output and blood oxygen saturation at 10, 60, 120 min after anesthesia, and the differences were not statistically significant (with P values above 0.05). Systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, heart rate and body temperature levels continued to decline, and the central venous pressure index showed a gradual increase trend, with statistical significance (with P values below 0.05). There were no significant differences in all the above vital signs at 10 min after anesthesia between the two groups (with P values above 0.05). There were no significant differences in systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, cardiac output and oxygen saturation at 60 and 120 min after anesthesia (with P values above 0.05). The heart rate and central venous pressure of the observation group were lower than those of the control group, and the body temperature was higher than that of the control group (with P values below 0.05). Dizziness after anesthesia, postoperative nausea and vomiting occurred in both the observation group and the control group. In addition, the risk of pulmonary infection and deep venous thrombosis in the control group were higher than that in the observation group (with P values below 0.05). The postoperative recovery time of the observation group [(10.51±2.28) min] was lower than that of the control group [(16.42±4.74) min], the difference was statistically significant (t=-3.624, P<0.05), and the recovery score [(5.58±0.46) points]was significantly higher than that of the control group [(4.71±0.89) points], the difference was statistically significant (t=1.725, P=0.016). The pain VAS score of the observation group [(1.3±0.6) points] was lower than that of the control group [(4.5±2.7) points], the difference was statistically significant (t=1.658, P=0.024). Anal exhaust time [(3.60±1.05) d], average out of bed time [(4.60±0.56) d] and eating time[(7.33±1.04) d] in the observation group were lower than those in the control group [(6.13±2.16), (8.37±1.31), (11.40±0.90) d], the differences were significant (with P values below 0.05).

Conclusion

The concept of ERAS can effectively reduce the traumatic stress reaction in radical surgery of gastric cancer, reduce the risk of perioperative complications, and promote the early functional recovery of patients after surgery.

Key words: Digestive system surgical procedures, Stomch neoplasms, Enhanced recobery after surgery, Radical surgery, Perioperative period

京ICP 备07035254号-3
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Injury Repair and Wound Healing(Electronic Edition), All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 010-58517075 E-mail: zhssyxf@163.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd