Search

Background and aim Evidence against the use of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy are increasing. Nevertheless, it is unclear whether this practice is still widespread. We conducted a survey among Italian surgeons through the Italian Gastric Cancer Study Group and the Polispecialistic Society of Young Surgeons, aiming to understand the current use of prophylactic drain. Methods A 23-item questionnaire-based survey was developed to analyze the current practice and the individual opinion about the use of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy. Groups based on age, experience and unit volume were separately analyzed. Results Response of 104 surgeons from 73 surgical units were collected. A standardized ERAS protocol for gastrectomy was applied by 42% of the interviewed surgeons. The large majority of the surgeons, regardless of age, experience or unit volume, declared to routinely place one or more drain after gastrectomy. Only 2 (1.9%) and 7 surgeons (6.7%) belonging to high volume units, do not routinely place drains after total and subtotal gastrectomy, respectively. More than 60% of the interviewed remove the drain on postoperative day 4–6 after performing an assessment of the anastomosis integrity. Interestingly, less than half of the surgeons believe that drain is the main tool for leak management, and this percentage further drops among younger surgeons. On the other hand, drain's role seems to be more defined for duodenal stump leak treatment, with almost 50% of the surgeons recognizing its importance. Conclusion Routine use of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy is still a widespread practice even if younger surgeons are more persuaded that it could not be advantageous. New and stronger evidence are needed to define the role of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The association between compliance to an enhanced recovery protocol (ERAS) and outcome after surgery for gastric cancer has been poorly investigated, particularly in Western patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the rate of adherence to the ERAS program was correlated with outcome and time of discharge., Methods: A prospective, observational, multicenter study was designed to be performed at Italian referral centers for gastric surgery. The protocol was discussed and approved by the Italian Research Group on Gastric Cancer. Twenty-three ERAS domains were applied. A multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between ERAS compliance and overall and major complication rates. The Poisson regression model (measured as mean ratios) was used to assess the association of ERAS compliance rate and length of stay (LOS)., Results: Eight centers participated and 290 subjects with a median age of 73 years were enrolled. The overall rates of adherence to pre-, intra-, and postoperative ERAS items were 69.8%, 60.3%, and 82.5%, respectively. At the multivariate model, there was an association between overall rate of morbidity and an overall ERAS compliance rate greater than 70% (OR 0.413; 95% CI 0.235-0.7240; P 0.002). A similar association was found for major complications (OR 0.328; 95% CI 0.151-0.709; P 0.005). The Poisson regression showed that in patients with ERAS compliance rate >70%, LOS was reduced of approximately 20% (mean ratio 0.812; 95% CI 0.694-0.950; P 0.009)., Conclusions: These results suggest a moderate compliance to an ERAS program and a significant association between adherence and outcomes.

The diagnostic-therapeutic pathways (DTPs) are emerging as useful instruments for clinical management of complex diseases as gastric cancer, whose treatment is challenging and requires a multidisciplinary approach. However, the DPTs of patients with gastric cancer are still not defined yet. The aim of this study was to define the optimal DPT to be applied for patients with gastric cancer in the Veneto region. Rather than defining the ideal DTPs a priori, we conducted a preliminary research by analyzing the differences in the actual DPTs for patients with gastric cancer among different hospitals (hub and spokes) in Veneto. Then, the final DPT was elaborated based on the current available best clinical evidences; however, also the areas of homogeneity among the actual DPTs of the included centers as well as the critical issues that had emerged by our preliminary analysis were taken into account for pathway design. High heterogeneity in actual DTPs of patients with gastric cancer was observed among the analyzed centres. Moreover, some of the major criticisms have been found at crucial points of the current pathways. Based on these data, a reference path that is applicable to the whole-regional health network was constructed. The reference DTP is focused on multidisciplinary team management of patients with gastric cancer. Clinical pathways are essential tools to properly manage complex diseases such as gastric cancer. As such, more efforts should be done to implement their use.