| Title |
Enhanced Recovery Pathway for Right and Left Colectomy: Comparison of Functional Recovery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-016-3563-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anne Kummer, Juliette Slieker, Fabian Grass, Dieter Hahnloser, Nicolas Demartines, Martin Hübner |
| Abstract |
Enhanced recovery (ERAS) guidelines do not differentiate between left- and right-sided colectomies, but differences in recovery have been reported for the two procedure types. We aimed to compare compliance with the ERAS protocol and outcomes after right versus left colectomy. Between June 2011 and September 2014, all patients undergoing elective colonic resection were treated according to a standardized ERAS protocol and entered a prospective database. This retrospective analysis compared right and left colectomy regarding application of the ERAS pathway, bowel recovery, complications, and hospital stay. Eighty-five patients with right colectomy matched well with 138 left-sided resections for baseline demographics. Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was 76 % for right versus 77 % for left colectomy patients (p = 0.492). First flatus occurred at postoperative day 2 in both groups (p = 0.057); first stool was observed after a median of 3 (right) and 2 days (left), respectively (p = 0.189). Twenty patients (24 %) needed postoperative nasogastric tube after right colectomy compared to 11 patients (8 %) after left colectomy (p = 0.002). Overall complication rates were 49 and 37 % for right and left colectomy, respectively (p = 0.071). Median postoperative length of stay was 6 days (IQR 4-9) after right and 5 days (IQR 4-7.5) after left colectomy (p = 0.020). Overall compliance with the protocol was equally high in both groups showing that ERAS protocol was applicable for right and left colectomy. Functional recovery however, tended to be slower after right colectomy, and postoperative ileus rate was significantly higher. More cautious early feeding after right colectomy should be considered. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,328,845
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#3,799
of 4,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,159
of 334,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#61
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,235 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.