74
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS)/Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) consensus statement on intraoperative and postoperative interventions to reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Pulmonary complications are the most common morbidity after oesophagectomy, contributing to mortality and prolonged postoperative recovery, and have a negative impact on health-related quality of life. A variety of single or bundled interventions in the perioperative setting have been developed to reduce the incidence of pulmonary complications. Significant variation in practice exists across the UK. The aim of this modified Delphi consensus was to deliver clear evidence-based consensus recommendations regarding intraoperative and postoperative care that may reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy.

          Methods

          With input from a multidisciplinary group of 23 experts in the perioperative management of patients undergoing surgery for oesophageal cancer, a modified Delphi method was employed. Following an initial systematic review of relevant literature, a range of anaesthetic, surgical, and postoperative care interventions were identified. These were then discussed during a two-part virtual conference. Recommendation statements were drafted, refined, and agreed by all attendees. The level of evidence supporting each statement was considered.

          Results

          Consensus was reached on 12 statements on topics including operative approach, pyloric drainage strategies, intraoperative fluid and ventilation strategies, perioperative analgesia, postoperative feeding plans, and physiotherapy interventions. Seven additional questions concerning the perioperative management of patients undergoing oesophagectomy were highlighted to guide future research.

          Conclusion

          Clear consensus recommendations regarding intraoperative and postoperative interventions that may reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy are presented.

          Abstract

          Pulmonary complications are the most common morbidity after oesophagectomy, contributing to mortality and prolonged postoperative recovery, and have a negative impact on short- and long-term health-related quality of life. Although numerous perioperative interventions to reduce the risk of pulmonary complications have been presented, significant variation in practice exists. Through a modified Delphi process, this Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland/Perioperative Quality Initiative, involving a multidisciplinary group of over 20 experts, has delivered clear evidence-based recommendations regarding intraoperative and postoperative care that can reduce pulmonary complications.

          Related collections

          Most cited references83

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations: 2018

          This is the fourth updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery and providing graded recommendations for each ERAS item within the ERAS® protocol.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Postoperative pulmonary complications.

            Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are common, costly, and increase patient mortality. Changes to the respiratory system occur immediately on induction of general anaesthesia: respiratory drive and muscle function are altered, lung volumes reduced, and atelectasis develops in > 75% of patients receiving a neuromuscular blocking drug. The respiratory system may take 6 weeks to return to its preoperative state after general anaesthesia for major surgery. Risk factors for PPC development are numerous, and clinicians should be aware of non-modifiable and modifiable factors in order to recognize those at risk and optimize their care. Many validated risk prediction models are described. These have been useful for improving our understanding of PPC development, but there remains inadequate consensus for them to be useful clinically. Preventative measures include preoperative optimization of co-morbidities, smoking cessation, and correction of anaemia, in addition to intraoperative protective ventilation strategies and appropriate management of neuromuscular blocking drugs. Protective ventilation includes low tidal volumes, which must be calculated according to the patient's ideal body weight. Further evidence for the most beneficial level of PEEP is required, and on-going randomized trials will hopefully provide more information. When PEEP is used, it may be useful to precede this with a recruitment manoeuvre if atelectasis is suspected. For high-risk patients, surgical time should be minimized. After surgery, nasogastric tubes should be avoided and analgesia optimized. A postoperative mobilization, chest physiotherapy, and oral hygiene bundle reduces PPCs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

              Postoperative complications, especially pulmonary complications, affect more than half the patients who undergo open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Whether hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy results in lower morbidity than open esophagectomy is unclear.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Br J Surg
                Br J Surg
                bjs
                The British Journal of Surgery
                Oxford University Press (US )
                0007-1323
                1365-2168
                November 2022
                24 August 2022
                24 August 2022
                : 109
                : 11
                : 1096-1106
                Affiliations
                Department of General Surgery, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust , Surrey, UK
                Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospitals NHS Trust , London, UK
                Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , Oxford, UK
                Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute , Solna, Sweden
                Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust , Portsmouth, UK
                Department of Anaesthesia, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust , London, UK
                Department of Physiotherapy, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham , Birmingham, UK
                Department of General Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust , London, UK
                Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospitals NHS Trust , London, UK
                School of Cancer Sciences, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine , Southampton, UK
                Centre for Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Management, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , London, UK
                Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , Oxford, UK
                NIHR Southampton Respiratory Biomedical Research Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust , Southampton, UK
                School of Cancer Sciences, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine , Southampton, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Tim Underwood, School of Cancer Sciences, Somers Building, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK (e-mail: tju@ 123456soton.ac.uk )

                Members of the AUGIS/POQI Pulmonary Consensus Group are co-authors of this study and are listed under the heading Collaborators.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8650-2017
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0788-8431
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4009-3243
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4100-385X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9484-7581
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9455-2188
                Article
                znac193
                10.1093/bjs/znac193
                10364741
                36001582
                fe3ec8ac-a68a-4a6e-89de-5639891bad35
                © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 27 April 2022
                : 09 May 2022
                Page count
                Pages: 11
                Categories
                Guideline
                AcademicSubjects/MED00910
                Bjs/5
                Bjs/2

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content140

                Most referenced authors1,765