Multimodal approach in colorrectal surgery without mechanical bowel cleansing

12Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the outcomes after the implementation of a multimodal protocol (ACERTO protocol) with patients undergoing colorectal operations. Methods: Fifty-three patients (37 M and 16 F; 57 [18-82] years old) submitted to various colorectal operations were prospectively studied in two different periods of time: From January 2004 through July 2005 (n=25, conventional group) and from August 2005 through June 2008 (n=28; ACERTO group). The patients received either the traditional perioperative management (including mechanical bowel cleansing) or a multidisciplinary protocol of perioperative care (without mechanical bowel cleansing) established by the ACERTO protocol. We looked at morbidity and mortality rates and length of hospital stay for comparisons between the groups. Results: Mortality was 3.8% (2 patients) without difference between groups. Preoperative fasting and postoperative feeding were shortened and intravenous fluids were diminished in patients operated under the ACERTO protocol (p<0.05). Postoperative morbidity (36% vs. 28.6%; p=0.56) and the incidence of anastomotic leak (12 vs. 10.7%; p=1.00) were similar. The number of complications per patient with any complication was lower in the ACERTO group (p=0.01). Changing protocols reduced the length of hospital stay by 4.5 days (12 [4-43] vs. 7.5 [3-47] days, p= 0.04). Conclusion: The multidisciplinary routines of the ACERTO protocol are safe and enhanced recovery in colorectal surgery by reducing both hospitalization and the severity of postoperative morbidity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

de Aguilar-Nascimento, J. E., Bicudo-Salomão, A., Caporossi, C., Silva, R. de M., Cardoso, E. A., Santos, T. P., … Hartmann, A. A. (2009). Multimodal approach in colorrectal surgery without mechanical bowel cleansing. Revista Do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, 36(3), 204–209. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-69912009000300005

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free