AIM:To evaluate the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS) programs in comparison with traditional care on liver surgery outcomes.METHODS:The Pub Med,EMBASE,CNKI and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Tr...AIM:To evaluate the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS) programs in comparison with traditional care on liver surgery outcomes.METHODS:The Pub Med,EMBASE,CNKI and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) comparing the ERAS program with traditional care in patients undergoing liver surgery. Studies selected for the meta-analysis met all of the following inclusion criteria:(1) evaluation of ERAS in comparison to traditional care in adult patients undergoing elective open or laparoscopic liver surgery;(2) outcome measures including complications,recovery of bowel function,and hospital length of stay; and(3) RCTs. The following exclusion criteria were applied:(1) the study was not an RCT;(2) the study did not compare ERAS with traditional care;(3) the study reported on emergency,non-elective or transplantation surgery; and(4) the study consisted of unpublished studies with only the abstract presented at a national or international meeting. The primary outcomes were complications. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay and time to first flatus.RESULTS:Five RCTs containing 723 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In 10/723 cases,patients presented with benign diseases,while the remaining 713 cases had liver cancer. Of the five studies,three were published in English and two were published in Chinese. Three hundred and fifty-four patients were in the ERAS group,while 369 patients were in the traditional care group. Compared with traditional care,ERAS programs were associated with significantly decreased overall complications(RR = 0.66; 95%CI:0.49-0.88; P = 0.005),grade?Ⅰ?complications(RR = 0.51; 95%CI:0.33-0.79; P = 0.003),and hospitallength of stay [WMD =-2.77 d,95%CI:-3.87-(-1.66); P < 0.00001]. Similarly,ERAS programs were associated with decreased time to first flatus [WMD =-19.69 h,95%CI:-34.63-(-4.74); P < 0.0001]. There was no statistically significant difference in grade Ⅱ-Ⅴ complications between the two groups.CONCLUSION:ERAS is a safe and effective program in liver surgery. Future studies should define the active elements to optimize postoperative outcomes for liver surgery.展开更多
Hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is the second most common cause of death from cancer worldwide. Standard potentially curative treatments are either resection or transplantation. The aim of this paper is to provide an ov...Hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is the second most common cause of death from cancer worldwide. Standard potentially curative treatments are either resection or transplantation. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the surgical management of HCC, as well as highlight current issues in hepatic resection and transplantation. In summary, due to the relationship between HCC and chronic liver disease, the management of HCC depends both on tumourrelated and hepatic function-related considerations. As such, HCC is currently managed largely through nonsurgical means as the criteria, in relation to the above considerations, for surgical management is still largelyrestrictive. For early stage tumours, both resection and transplantation offer fairly good survival outcomes(5 years overall survival of around 50%). Selection therefore would depend on the level of hepatic function derangement, organ availability and local expertise. Patients with intermediate stage cancers have limited options, with resection being the only potential for cure. Otherwise, locoregional therapy with transarterial chemoembolization or radiofrequency ablation are viable options. Current issues in resection and transplantation are also briefly discussed such as laparoscopic resection, ablation vs resection, anatomical vs non-anatomical resection, transplantation vs resection, living donor liver transplantation and salvage liver transplantation.展开更多
文摘AIM:To evaluate the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS) programs in comparison with traditional care on liver surgery outcomes.METHODS:The Pub Med,EMBASE,CNKI and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for randomized controlled trials(RCTs) comparing the ERAS program with traditional care in patients undergoing liver surgery. Studies selected for the meta-analysis met all of the following inclusion criteria:(1) evaluation of ERAS in comparison to traditional care in adult patients undergoing elective open or laparoscopic liver surgery;(2) outcome measures including complications,recovery of bowel function,and hospital length of stay; and(3) RCTs. The following exclusion criteria were applied:(1) the study was not an RCT;(2) the study did not compare ERAS with traditional care;(3) the study reported on emergency,non-elective or transplantation surgery; and(4) the study consisted of unpublished studies with only the abstract presented at a national or international meeting. The primary outcomes were complications. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay and time to first flatus.RESULTS:Five RCTs containing 723 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In 10/723 cases,patients presented with benign diseases,while the remaining 713 cases had liver cancer. Of the five studies,three were published in English and two were published in Chinese. Three hundred and fifty-four patients were in the ERAS group,while 369 patients were in the traditional care group. Compared with traditional care,ERAS programs were associated with significantly decreased overall complications(RR = 0.66; 95%CI:0.49-0.88; P = 0.005),grade?Ⅰ?complications(RR = 0.51; 95%CI:0.33-0.79; P = 0.003),and hospitallength of stay [WMD =-2.77 d,95%CI:-3.87-(-1.66); P < 0.00001]. Similarly,ERAS programs were associated with decreased time to first flatus [WMD =-19.69 h,95%CI:-34.63-(-4.74); P < 0.0001]. There was no statistically significant difference in grade Ⅱ-Ⅴ complications between the two groups.CONCLUSION:ERAS is a safe and effective program in liver surgery. Future studies should define the active elements to optimize postoperative outcomes for liver surgery.
文摘Hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) is the second most common cause of death from cancer worldwide. Standard potentially curative treatments are either resection or transplantation. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the surgical management of HCC, as well as highlight current issues in hepatic resection and transplantation. In summary, due to the relationship between HCC and chronic liver disease, the management of HCC depends both on tumourrelated and hepatic function-related considerations. As such, HCC is currently managed largely through nonsurgical means as the criteria, in relation to the above considerations, for surgical management is still largelyrestrictive. For early stage tumours, both resection and transplantation offer fairly good survival outcomes(5 years overall survival of around 50%). Selection therefore would depend on the level of hepatic function derangement, organ availability and local expertise. Patients with intermediate stage cancers have limited options, with resection being the only potential for cure. Otherwise, locoregional therapy with transarterial chemoembolization or radiofrequency ablation are viable options. Current issues in resection and transplantation are also briefly discussed such as laparoscopic resection, ablation vs resection, anatomical vs non-anatomical resection, transplantation vs resection, living donor liver transplantation and salvage liver transplantation.
