ORIGINAL ARTICLE   

Minerva Chirurgica 2020 June;75(3):157-63

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4733.20.08275-9

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is safe, feasible and effective in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: results of a prospective single center study

Antonio CRUCITTI ^{1, 2} ✉, Andrea MAZZARI ¹, Pasquina M. TOMAIUOLO ¹, Paolo DIONISI ³, Paolo DIAMANTI ³, Giada DI FLUMERI ¹, Lorenzo M. DONINI ⁴, Maurizio BOSSOLA ⁵

¹ General and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Cristo Re Hospital, Rome, Italy; ² Institute of General Surgery, Catholic University, IRCCS A. Gemelli University Polyclinic Foundation, Rome, Italy; ³ Department of Anesthesiology, Cristo Re Hospital, Rome, Italy; ⁴ Food Science and Human Nutrition Research Unit, Department of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy; ⁵ Hemodialysis Unit, Institute of Clinical Surgery, IRCCS A. Gemelli University Polyclinic Foundation, Rome, Italy

BACKGROUND: It is still unknown whether ERAS program is safe, feasible and effective in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. In addition, the definition of the “old patient” in terms of age varies across the studies and different age cut-off, such as 65, 70, and 75 years have been used worldwide.
METHODS: All adult patients undergoing primary, elective colorectal laparoscopic surgery between January 2017 and December 2018 were considered eligible to follow the ERAS protocol according to the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society guidelines. Elderly were defined according three different cut-off values: <65 and ≥65 years, <70 and ≥70 years, <75 and ≥75 years.
RESULTS: One hundred and eight patients were included in the study. Adherence to protocol did not differ significantly between younger and older patients, for most of the items. Thirty-day mortality was absent. The frequency of postoperative complications globally considered and the frequency of the various single complications did not differ significantly between younger and older patients, independently of the cutoff considered to define the older age. Similarly, the frequency of re-intervention and readmission was similar in younger and older patients. Time to flatus and time to stool were similar in young and older patients, independently of the age cut-off used. Time to oral liquid diet was similar in patients with age <65 and ≥65 years while it was moderately longer in patients ≥70 years (1.5±1.1 days;) than in those <70 years (1.1±0.4 days; P=0.030) as well as in patients ≥75 years with respect to the younger ones (1.2±0.5 vs. 1.6±1.2 days; P=0.045). The time to oral solid feeding was similar in young and old patients, independently of the age cut-off used. Time to bladder catheter removal was significantly longer in older patients, independently of the age cut-off used, although the differences do not seem to be clinically relevant. The length of stay was significantly higher in older patients, when the cutoff of 70 years or 75 years was used, but did not differ significantly when the cut-off of 65 years was used.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that the ERAS protocol is safe, feasible, and effective in elderly patients as in the young ones, undergoing laparoscopic elective colorectal surgery. This suggests that the ERAS program can be applied usefully to elderly patients in the routine clinical practice.

KEY WORDS: Colorectal neoplasms; Aged; Enhanced Recovery After Surgery