Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Short-term quality of life in patients undergoing colonic surgery using enhanced recovery after surgery program versus conventional perioperative management

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) integrates evidence-based interventions to reduce surgical stress and accelerate rehabilitation. Our study was to compare the short-term quality of life (QOL) in patients undergoing open colonic surgery using ERAS program or conventional management.

Methods

A prospective study of 57 patients using ERAS program and 60 patients using conventional management was conducted. The clinical characteristics of all patients were recorded. QOL was evaluated longitudinally using the questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29) pre- and postoperatively. Generalized estimating equation was used to do the analysis in order to determine the effective impact of correlative factors on the postoperative QOL, including age, sex, BMI, ASA grade, tumor location, tumor size, pTNM stage, recovery program and length of time after surgery.

Results

The morbidity in ERAS and control group was 17.5 versus 26.7 % (p = 0.235). The patients in ERAS group had much faster rehabilitation and less hospital stay. In the primary statistical analysis, the scores of global QOL (on POD3, POD6, POD10, POD14, POD21), physical functioning (on POD3, POD6, POD10, POD14, POD21), role functioning (on POD6, POD10, POD14, POD21), emotional functioning (on POD3, POD6, POD10, POD14, POD21), cognitive functioning (on POD3, POD6) and social functioning (on POD3, POD6, POD10, POD14, POD21, POD28) were higher in ERAS group than in control group, which suggested that the patients in ERAS group had a better life status. However, the scores of pain (on POD10, POD14, POD21), appetite loss (on POD3, POD6), constipation (on POD3, POD6, POD10), diarrhea (on POD3, POD10), financial difficulties (on POD10, POD14, POD21), perspective of future health (on POD6, POD10, POD14), gastrointestinal tract problems (on POD3, POD6, POD10) and defecation problems (on POD6, POD10, POD14) were lower in ERAS group than in control group, which revealed that the patients in ERAS group suffered less symptoms. In the further generalized estimating equation analysis, the result showed that recovery program and length of time after surgery had independently positive impact on the patient’s postoperative QOL.

Conclusion

Short-term QOL in patients undergoing colonic cancer using ERAS program was better than that using conventional management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Basse, L., Hjort Jakobsen, D., Billesbølle, P., et al. (2000). A clinical pathway to accelerate recovery after colonic resection. Annals of Surgery, 232, 51–57.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kehlet, H., & Wilmore, D. W. (2002). Multimodal strategies to improve surgical outcome. American Journal of Surgery, 183, 630–641.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fearon, K. C., Ljungqvist, O., Von Meyenfeldt, M., et al. (2005). Enhanced recovery after surgery: A consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clinical Nutrition, 24, 466–477.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lassen, K., Soop, M., Nygren, J., et al. (2009). Consensus review of optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) GROUP recommendations. Archives of Surgery, 144, 961–969.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wind, J., Polle, S. W., Fung Kon Jin, P. H., et al. (2006). Systematic review of enhanced recovery programmes in colonic surgery. British Journal of Surgery, 93, 800–809.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Spanjersberg, W. R., Reurings, J., Keus, F., et al. (2011). Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Systematic Review, 2, CD007635.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Vlug, M. S., Wind, J., Hollmann, M. W., et al. (2011). Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: A randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study). Annals of Surgery, 254, 868–875.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhuang, C. L., Ye, X. Z., Zhang, X. D., et al. (2013). Enhanced recovery after surgery programs versus traditional care for colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 56, 667–678.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Koller, M., & Lorenz, W. (2003). Survival of the quality of life concept. British Journal of Surgery, 90, 1175–1177.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Langenhoff, B. S., Krabbe, P. F., Wobbes, T., et al. (2001). Quality of life as an outcome measure in surgical oncology. British Journal of Surgery, 88, 643–652.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Otto, S., Kroesen, A. J., Hotz, H. G., et al. (2008). Effect of anastomosis level on continence performance and quality of life after colonic J-pouch reconstruction. Digestive Diseases and Sciences, 53, 14–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sailer, M., Fuchs, K. H., Fein, M., & Thiede, A. (2002). Randomized clinical trial comparing quality of life after straight and pouch coloanal reconstruction. British Journal of Surgery, 89, 1108–1117.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kasparek, M. S., Hassan, I., Cima, R. R., et al. (2011). Quality of life after coloanal anastomosis and abdominoperineal resection for distal rectal cancers: Sphincter preservation vs quality of life. Colorectal Disease, 13, 872–877.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Khan, S., Wilson, T., Ahmed, J., et al. (2010). Quality of life and patient satisfaction with enhanced recovery protocols. Colorectal Disease, 12, 1175–1182.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ren, L., Zhu, D., Wei, Y., et al. (2012). Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program attenuates stress and accelerates recovery in patients after radical resection for colorectal cancer: A prospective randomized controlled trial. World Journal of Surgery, 36, 407–414.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fayers, P. M., Aaronson, N. K., Bjordal, K., et al. (2001). The EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual (3rd edition). Brussels: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Whistance, R. N., Conroy, T., Chie, W., et al. (2009). Clinical and psychometric validation of the EORTC QLQ-CR29 questionnaire module to Assess health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. European Journal of Cancer, 45, 3017–3026.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Osoba, D., Rodrigues, G., Myles, J., et al. (1998). Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16, 139–144.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gatt, M., Anderson, A. D., Reddy, B. S., et al. (2005). Randomized clinical trial of multimodal optimization of surgical care in patients undergoing major colonic resection. British Journal of Surgery, 92, 1354–1362.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Anderson, A. D. G., McNaught, C. E., MacFie, J., et al. (2003). Randomized clinical trial of multimodal optimization and standard perioperative surgical care. British Journal of Surgery, 90, 1497–1504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Basse, L., Raskov, H. H., Hjort Jakobsen, D., et al. (2002). Accelerated postoperative recovery programme after colonic resection improves physical performance, pulmonary function and body composition. British Journal of Surgery, 89, 446–453.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Raue, W., Haase, O., Junghans, T., et al. (2004). ‘Fast-track’ multimodal rehabilitation program improves outcome after laparoscopic sigmoidectomy: A controlled prospective evaluation. Surgical Endoscopy, 18, 1463–1468.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Jakobsen, D. H., Sonne, E., Andreasen, J., et al. (2006). Convalescence after colonic surgery with fast-track vs conventional care. Colorectal Disease, 8, 683–687.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zargar-Shoshtari, K., Paddison, J. S., Booth, R. J., et al. (2009). A prospective study on the influence of a fast-track program on postoperative fatigue and functional recovery after major colonic surgery. Journal of Surgical Research, 154, 330–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Delaney, C. P., Zutshi, M., Senagore, A. J., et al. (2003). Prospective, randomized, controlled trial between a pathway of controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet and traditional postoperative care after laparotomy and intestinal resection. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 46, 851–859.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Henriksen, M. G., Jensen, M. B., Hansen, H. V., et al. (2002). Enforced mobilization, early oral feeding, and balanced analgesia improve convalescence after colorectal surgery. Nutrition, 18, 147–152.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. King, P. M., Blazeby, J. M., Ewings, P., et al. (2006). The influence of an enhanced recovery programme on clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancer. Colorectal Disease, 8, 506–513.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Khan, S. A., Ullah, S., Ahmed, J., et al. (2013). Influence of enhanced recovery after surgery pathways and laparoscopic surgery on health-related quality of life. Colorectal Disease, 15, 900–907.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Osoba, D., Hsu, M. A., Copley-Merriman, C., et al. (2006). Stated preferences of patients with cancer for health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) domains during treatment. Quality of Life Research, 15, 273–283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cocks, K., King, M. T., Velikova, G., et al. (2012). Evidence-based guidelines for interpreting change scores for the European organisation for the research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire core 30. European Journal of Cancer, 48, 1713–1721.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Department of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, China

      Hao Wang, Dexiang Zhu, Lechi Ye, Qi Lin, Yunshi Zhong, Ye Wei, Li Ren, Jianmin Xu & Xinyu Qin

    2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China

      Hao Wang

    3. Department of Oncology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China

      Li Liang

    Authors
    1. Hao Wang
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Dexiang Zhu
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    3. Li Liang
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    4. Lechi Ye
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    5. Qi Lin
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    6. Yunshi Zhong
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    7. Ye Wei
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    8. Li Ren
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    9. Jianmin Xu
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    10. Xinyu Qin
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Jianmin Xu.

    Additional information

    Hao Wang, Dexiang Zhu and Li Liang have contributed equally to this article.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Wang, H., Zhu, D., Liang, L. et al. Short-term quality of life in patients undergoing colonic surgery using enhanced recovery after surgery program versus conventional perioperative management. Qual Life Res 24, 2663–2670 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0996-5

    Download citation

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0996-5

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation