Search

This manuscript provides an overview of the principles and requirements for implementing the ERAS program in thoracic surgery.The ERAS program optimises perioperative management of elective lung resection procedures and is based on the ERAS Guidelines for Thoracic Surgery of the ERAS Society. The clinical measures are described as in the current literature, with a focus on postoperative outcome. There are currently 45 enhanced recovery items covering four perioperative phases: from the prehospital admission phase (patient education, screening and treatment of potential risk factors such as anaemia, malnutrition, cessation of nicotine or alcohol abuse, prehabilitation, carbohydrate loading) to the immediate preoperative phase (shortened fasting period, non-sedating premedication, prophylaxis of PONV and thromboembolic complications), the intraoperative measures (antibiotic prophylaxis, standardised anaesthesia, normothermia, targeted fluid therapy, minimally invasive surgery, avoidance of catheters and probes) through to the postoperative measures (early mobilisation, early nutrition, removal of a urinary catheter, hyperglycaemia control). Most of these measures are based on scientific studies, with a high level of evidence and aim to reduce general postoperative complications.The ERAS program is an optimised perioperative treatment approach aiming to improve the postoperative recovery in patients after elective lung resection by reducing the overall complication rates and overall morbidity., Competing Interests: J. Neudecker hat finanzielle Unterstützung in Form von Reisekostenunterstützung und Honorare von den Firmen Medela, Medtronic und BD erhalten. Er ist Mitglied in der ERAS Society., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Thoracic trauma is a frequent injury pattern with high patient morbidity and mortality. Preclinical and clinical emergency treatment is consented in a national S3-guideline. Following emergency therapy one third of patients may develop lung lacerations, pleural fistulation and persisting pneumothorax. An interdisciplinary working group of the German Society for Thoracic Surgery and the German Society for Traumatology reviewed the published medical literature on treatment of those injuries and assessed the existing evidence according to consensus recommendations. An inconsistent classification of those subsequent lung injuries was found. Evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations is small., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Since the early 1990s, video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS) has been increasingly established for a variety of indications in the treatment of patients with thoracic trauma. During this time, one premise for the use of thoracoscopy has not changed. Its use is consistently recommended only for trauma patients with stable circulation and respiration. To define the indications of VATS for use in thoracic trauma, the Pulmonary Injury Group - as part of the Working Committee for Thoracic Trauma of the German Society for Thoracic Surgery (DGT) and the German Society for Trauma Surgery (DGU) - has developed treatment recommendations based on a current literature review (based on the PRISMA Checklist/here: MEDLINE via PubMed from 1993 to 2022). In the present study, after reviewing the available literature, the indications for VATS in the care of thoracic trauma were identified, in order to formulate clinical recommendations for the use of VATS in thoracic trauma. The analysis of 1679 references identified a total of 4 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 4 clinical trials, and 5 meta-analyses or systematic reviews and 39 reviews, which do not allow a higher level of recommendation than consensual recommendations, due to the low evidence of the available literature. Over the past 30 years, stabilisation options in the care of trauma patients have improved significantly, allowing expansion of indications for the use of VATS. Moreover, the recommendation for more than 50 years to thoracotomise trauma patients in case of an initial blood loss ≥ 1500 ml via the inserted chest drainage or in case of continuous blood loss ≥ 250 ml/h over 4 h is now only relative with today's better stabilisation measures. For unstable/non-stabilisable patients with a thoracic injury requiring emergency treatment, thoracotomy remains the method of choice, while VATS is recommended for a wide range of indications in the diagnosis and treatment of stable patients with a penetrating or blunt thoracic trauma. The indications for VATS are persistent haemothorax, treatment of injuries and haemorrhages to the lung, diaphragm, thoracic wall and other organ injuries, and in the secondary phase, treatment of thoracic sequelae of injury (empyema, persistent pulmonary fistula, infected atelectasis, etc.)., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background, Objectives: In recent years, ERAS treatment pathways have found their way into many surgical fields, as they reduce complications and accelerate postoperative recovery. For thoracic surgery, the first ERAS guidelines were published by the ERAS Society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) in 2019. We have now evaluated how ERAS-items are implemented in clinical practice by using an online survey., Material and Methods: An online survey was conducted from 12/5/2021 until 1/6/2021. The survey consisted of 22 questions focusing on the key elements of an ERAS program according to the published ERAS guidelines. Results were summarised, descriptively analysed and put into context with the current literature., Results: Of 155 thoracic surgeons, 32 responded to the survey. In 28.1% (n = 9) of the hospitals, an ERAS core unit was established, and a database to record the ERAS items existed in 15.6% (n = 5). Only 3.1% (n = 1) kept an ERAS-diary preoperatively. A so-called Carboloading was conducted at 15.6% (n = 5) of surgeons. Standard PONV prophylaxis was administered to 59.4% (n = 19) of the patients. In most cases (84.4%, n = 29), a single drain was inserted into the pleural cavity during anatomic resections. In 3% (n = 1) of the centres two drains, in 12.5% (n = 4) no drainage was placed. The most commonly applied initial suction was -10 cmH 2 O (75%, n = 24). Suction ≤ 2 cmH 2 O was used by only two of those interviewed. Drainage removal took place in 50% (n = 16) of cases between the 1st or 2nd POD, in 34.4% of cases (n = 11) between the 3rd and 4th POD and in 9.4% (n = 3) the drain remained longer than the 4th POD. The first postoperative mobilisation took place in 71.9% (n = 23) of the centres on the day of the operation., Conclusions: The implementation of ERAS guidelines varies in Germany between centres. Certain perioperative processes are covered sufficiently, but the implementation of key features of ERAS is yet to be fully established in clinical practice. The first steps in this direction have already been taken and lay the foundation for cooperation across centres., Competing Interests: Marco Nicolas Andreas, Tomasz Dziodzio und Jens Neudecker sind als Referenten für Medela Medizintechnik GmbH & Co. Handels KG tätig und erhalten finanzielle Unterstützung diesbezüglich. Jens Neudecker erhält finanzielle Unterstützung von Medtronic GmbH sowie von Becton Dickinson GmbH. Sonstige Interessenkonflikte bestehen nicht. Für diesen Artikel wurden weder Studien an Menschen noch an Tieren durchgeführt. Für die angeführten Studien gelten die jeweiligen Ethik-Richtlinien., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Background: The new COVID-19 pandemic has an impact on routine thoracic surgery. Various concepts and recommendations are being pursued to protect patients and hospital staff. However, the implementation of these recommendations may depend on the existing infrastructure, local conditions and in-house procedural instructions., Material and Method: Between 11th May and 26th May 2020, an anonymous online survey on the topic of COVID-19 was conducted among thoracic surgeons in Germany. The survey consisted of 16 questions on the local COVID-19 case numbers, protective measures, procedural instructions and treatment concepts. The results were summarised, descriptively analysed and discussed., Results: The response rate of 42.6% (n = 66), included replies from 23 (34.8%) specialised hospitals, 18 (27.3%) maximum care hospitals and 14 (21.2%) university clinics. COVID-19-positive patients were treated in 65 (99%) clinics and 37.9% of the clinics also performed surgery on COVID-19-positive patients. Nasopharyngeal swabs were the main instrument for COVID-19 patient testing (in 95.4% of the clinics). Test results influenced decisions on treatment in 71.2% of the clinics. In 59.1% of clinics, safety equipment was supplemented with FFP2 masks and eye protection during thoracic surgeries due to the COVID-19 pandemic., Discussion: Almost all thoracic surgeons reported that they had treated patients with COVID-19 and half of them also had performed surgery on COVID-19-positive patients. The applied procedural instructions as well as the effects of COVID-19 on treatment decisions and patient-doctor contact differed between the reporting clinics., Competing Interests: Alle Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Laparoscopic (LAP) versus open (CON) colonic resection with traditional perioperative care has some short term benefits postoperatively regarding functional recovery. Whether these benefits may also occur when all patients are treated with multimodal "fast-track"-rehabilitation programs is questionable., Methods: Patients undergoing elective left sided colonic surgery were prospectively non randomised observed. The "fast-track" program included patient information, thoracic peridural analgesia, forced mobilisation and oral intake, and stress reduction. Endpoints were duration of postoperative ileus and hospital stay, general- and local complication, and pulmonary function., Results: 147 consecutive patients were operated on, 47 open and 100 laparoscopically. The time until oral intake was completed seemed to be shorter in the LAP-group (p=0.07) followed by a shorter hospital stay (p<0.01). The pulmonary function was postoperatively improved in the LAP-group compared to the CON-group (p<0,01). General complications (LAP 9% vs. CON 17%) were non significantly increased in the CON-group. Local complications increased in the CON-group (LAP 13% vs. CON 28%, p<0,05)., Conclusion: Even with perioperative "fast-track"-rehabilitation programs short term advantages were found in laparoscopic compared with open colonic surgery in a non randomised population. The clinical relevance should be examined in controlled randomised trials.

Objective: A multimodal perioperative concept ("fast-track"-surgery) may decrease the incidence of general complications following elective colonic resections, accelerate rehabilitation and shorten postoperative hospital stay. During the introduction of this new "clinical pathway" several obstacles have to be overcome. This manuscript describes a practical way to establish "fast-track"-colonic surgery in the clinical routine., Material and Methods: After discussion of the many aspects of perioperative pathophysiology following abdominal surgery a "fast-track"-concept for colonic surgery was defined. Since 11.10.2001 the "fast-track" concept was applied to all patients treated by one attending surgeon. Experience with establishing this concept in the clinical routine was analysed., Results: "Fast-track"-colonic surgery was established in close cooperation between surgeons, anesthesiologists and nurses. A written-down concept, the use of checklists and letters of information for patients, their relatives and general practicioners will simplify the introduction of the new perioperative treatment. Traditional practice (i. e. types of incisions, use of drainage, postoperative oral feeding) have to be modified. In 74 "fast-track"-colonic resections postoperative hospital stay was reduced to a median of 4 days, regardless of the way of access to the abominal cavity (laparoscopic or conventional). Postoperative morbidity was acceptable (local complications: 7 %; general complications: 7 %, but only 1 % without local complication)., Conclusion: Establishing "fast-track"-colonic surgery requires close cooperation between surgery, anestehsiology and nursing personal. Most important is a surgeon prepared to overcome traditional concepts of perioperative care.