Is recovery enhancement after gastric cancer surgery really a safe approach for elderly patients?

Zi-Wei Li; Xiao-Juan Luo; Fei Liu; Xu-Rui Liu; Xin-Peng Shu; Yue Tong; Quan Lv; Xiao-Yu Liu; Wei Zhang; Dong Peng

doi:10.4251/wjgo.v16.i4.1334

Is recovery enhancement after gastric cancer surgery really a safe approach for elderly patients?

World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2024 Apr 15;16(4):1334-1343. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v16.i4.1334.

Authors

Zi-Wei Li¹, Xiao-Juan Luo², Fei Liu¹, Xu-Rui Liu¹, Xin-Peng Shu¹, Yue Tong¹, Quan Lv¹, Xiao-Yu Liu¹, Wei Zhang¹, Dong Peng³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400016, China.
² Department of Endoscopy Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400012, China.
³ Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400016, China. carry_dong@126.com.

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in elderly patients with gastric cancer (GC).

Aim: To evaluate the safety of ERAS in elderly patients with GC.

Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were used to search for eligible studies from inception to April 1, 2023. The mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were pooled for analysis. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores. We used Stata (V.16.0) software for data analysis.

Results: This study consists of six studies involving 878 elderly patients. By analyzing the clinical outcomes, we found that the ERAS group had shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD = -0.51, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.72 to -0.30, P = 0.00); earlier times to first flatus (defecation; MD = -0.30, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.55 to -0.06, P = 0.02); less intestinal obstruction (OR = 3.24, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.07 to 9.78, P = 0.04); less nausea and vomiting (OR = 4.07, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.29 to 12.84, P = 0.02); and less gastric retention (OR = 5.69, I² = 2.46%, 95%CI = 2.00 to 16.20, P = 0.00). Our results showed that the conventional group had a greater mortality rate than the ERAS group (OR = 0.24, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.07 to 0.84, P = 0.03). However, there was no statistically significant difference in major complications between the ERAS group and the conventional group (OR = 0.67, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.38 to 1.18, P = 0.16).

Conclusion: Compared to those with conventional recovery, elderly GC patients who received the ERAS protocol after surgery had a lower risk of mortality.

Keywords: Elderly; Enhanced recovery after surgery; Gastric cancer; Mortality.