Hintergrund, Notwendigkeit und Methodik der S3-Leitlinie „Perioperatives Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT)“

Zusammenfassung

Malignome zählen insbesondere im höheren Alter zu den häufigsten Erkrankungen und sind in Deutschland für 25% aller Todesfälle verantwortlich. Insbesondere bei Karzinomen des Gastrointestinaltraktes ist eine Heilung oft nur durch eine ausgedehnte Operation mit signifikanter Morbidität erreichbar. Vor etwa 25 Jahren wurde erstmalig das multimodale, perioperative Fast-Track-Konzept (FT-Konzept) zur Reduktion von postoperativen Komplikationen vorgestellt und in den folgenden Jahren um weitere Bausteine erweitert. Mittlerweile gibt es Hinweise, dass bei einer Umsetzung bzw. Adhärenz der Schlüsselbausteine von über 70% neben einer Reduktion der Komplikationsrate und einer verkürzten Krankenhausverweildauer ein verbessertes onkologisches Outcome möglich sein könnte. Trotz des hohen Bekanntheitsgrades und der nachgewiesenen Vorteile des FT-Konzeptes ist die Implementierung und Aufrechterhaltung der Maßnahmen schwierig und resultiert in einer Adhärenz von nur 20 – 40%. Dies hat viele Gründe: Neben einer fehlenden interdisziplinären und interprofessionellen Kooperation sowie dem hohen zeitlichen und logistischen Aufwand bei der Implementierung und Aufrechterhaltung werden häufig limitierte personelle Ressourcen als ursächlich aufgeführt. Wir haben diese Aspekte zum Anlass genommen und mit der Ausarbeitung einer S3-Leitlinie für die perioperative Behandlung zur beschleunigten Genesung von Patienten mit gastrointestinalen Tumoren begonnen. Durch die Erstellung einer im formalen Prozess konsentierten und evidenzbasierten, multidisziplinären Leitlinie wird eine Möglichkeit eröffnet, die aufgeführten Probleme durch eine Optimierung und Standardisierung der interdisziplinären Versorgung zu lösen, was insbesondere in einem Setting mit vielen verschiedenen Fachdisziplinen und deren unterschiedlichen Interessen wichtig ist. Weiterhin wird angestrebt, durch die Standardisierung der perioperativen Prozesse den zeitlichen und logistischen Aufwand zu reduzieren. Die Darstellung der Evidenz ermöglicht es, den personellen Mehraufwand gegenüber Krankenhausträgern und Krankenkassen transparenter zu gestalten und so auch besser zu begründen. Zusätzlich erlauben es die im Rahmen der Leitlinie generierten evidenzbasierten Qualitätsindikatoren, perioperative Standards in die Zertifizierungssysteme einzubeziehen und so die Qualität der perioperativen Medizin zu messen und zu überprüfen.

Abstract

Malignancies are among the most common diseases, especially in old age, and are responsible for 25% of all deaths in Germany. Especially carcinomas of the gastrointestinal tract can be cured in most cases only through extensive surgery with significant morbidity. About 25 years ago, the multimodal, perioperative Fast Track (FT) concept for reducing postoperative complications was introduced and additional elements were added in the following years. Meanwhile, there is growing evidence that adherence to the key elements of more than 70% leads to reduction in postoperative adverse events as well as a shorter hospital stay and could be associated with an improved oncological outcome. Despite the high level of awareness and the proven advantages of the FT concept, the implementation and maintenance of the measures is difficult and results in an adherence of only 20 – 40%. There are many reasons for this: In addition to a lack of interdisciplinary and interprofessional cooperation and the time consuming and extended logistical efforts, limited human resources are often listed as one of the main causes. We took these aspects as an opportunity and started to develop a S3 guideline for perioperative treatment to accelerate the recovery of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. By creating a consensus- and evidence-based, multidisciplinary guideline, many of the problems listed above could probably be solved by optimising and standardising interdisciplinary care, which is particularly important in a setting with many different disciplines and their competing interests. Furthermore, the standardisation of the perioperative procedures will reduce the time and logistical effort. The presentation of the evidence allows increased transparency and justifies the additional personnel expenditure on hospital medicine and health insurance companies. In addition, the evidence-based quality indicators generated during the development of the guideline make it possible to include perioperative standards in certification systems and thus to measure and check the quality of perioperative care.

Schlüsselwörter

Fast Track - perioperative Medizin - Leitlinie - gastrointestinale Tumoren - AWMF - evidenzbasiert

Key words

Fast Track Surgery - perioperative care - guideline - gastrointestinal tumours - AWMF - evidence-based

Publication History

Article published online:
21 June 2021

• Literatur

• 1 Nordlinger B, Van Cutsem E, Gruenberger T. et al. Combination of surgery and chemotherapy and the role of targeted agents in the treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases: recommendations from an expert panel. Ann Oncol 2009; 20: 985-992
• 2 Basse L, Hjort Jakobsen D, Billesbølle P. et al. A clinical pathway to accelerate recovery after colonic resection. Ann Surg 2000; 232: 51-57
• 3 Kehlet H, Mogensen T. Hospital stay of 2 days after open sigmoidectomy with a multimodal rehabilitation programme. Br J Surg 1999; 86: 227-230
• 4 Kehlet H, Wilmore DW. Multimodal strategies to improve surgical outcome. Am J Surg 2002; 183: 630-641
• 5 Bardram L, Funch-Jensen P, Jensen P. et al. Recovery after laparoscopic colonic surgery with epidural analgesia, and early oral nutrition and mobilisation. Lancet 1995; 345: 763-764
• 6 Basse L, Madsen JL, Kehlet H. Normal gastrointestinal transit after colonic resection using epidural analgesia, enforced oral nutrition and laxative. Br J Surg 2001; 88: 1498-1500
• 7 Kehlet H. Fast-track surgery-an update on physiological care principles to enhance recovery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2011; 396: 585-590
• 8 Schwenk W. Fast-Track-Rehabilitation in der Viszeralchirurgie. Chirurg 2009; 80: 690-701
• 9 Cheng P-L, Loh E-W, Chen J-T. et al. Effects of preoperative oral carbohydrate on postoperative discomfort in patients undergoing elective surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2021;
• 10 Schmid D, Leitzmann MF. Association between physical activity and mortality among breast cancer and colorectal cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Oncol 2014; 25: 1293-1311
• 11 Weimann A, Braga M, Carli F. et al. ESPEN guideline: Clinical nutrition in surgery. Clin Nutr 2017; 36: 623-650
• 12 Piraux E, Caty G, Reychler G. Effects of preoperative combined aerobic and resistance exercise training in cancer patients undergoing tumour resection surgery: A systematic review of randomised trials. Surg Oncol 2018; 27: 584-594
• 13 Trépanier M, Minnella EM, Paradis T. et al. Improved Disease-free Survival After Prehabilitation for Colorectal Cancer Surgery. Ann Surg 2019; 270: 493-501
• 14 Vlug MS, Wind J, Hollmann MW. et al. Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: a randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study). Ann Surg 2011; 254: 868-875
• 15 Whelan RL, Franklin M, Holubar SD. et al. Postoperative cell mediated immune response is better preserved after laparoscopic vs. open colorectal resection in humans. Surg Endosc 2003; 17: 972-978
• 16 van Bree SHW, van Bree S, Vlug MS. et al. Faster recovery of gastrointestinal transit after laparoscopy and fast-track care in patients undergoing colonic surgery. Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 872-880.e1–e4
• 17 Veenhof AAFA, Vlug MS, van der Pas MHGM. et al. Surgical stress response and postoperative immune function after laparoscopy or open surgery with fast track or standard perioperative care: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 2012; 255: 216-221
• 18 Wang G, Jiang Z, Zhao K. et al. Immunologic response after laparoscopic colon cancer operation within an enhanced recovery program. J Gastrointest Surg 2012; 16: 1379-1388
• 19 Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M. et al. Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS^®) Society Recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 2019; 43: 659-695
• 20 Siekmann W, Eintrei C, Magnuson A. et al. Surgical and not analgesic technique affects postoperative inflammation following colorectal cancer surgery: a prospective, randomized study. Colorectal Dis 2017; 19: O186-O195
• 21 Sprenger T, Beißbarth T, Sauer R. et al. Long-term prognostic impact of surgical complications in the German Rectal Cancer Trial CAO/ARO/AIO-94. Br J Surg 2018; 105: 1510-1518
• 22 Okamura A, Takeuchi H, Matsuda S. et al. Factors affecting cytokine change after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22: 3130-3135
• 23 Gustafsson UO, Hausel J, Thorell A. et al. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Arch Surg 2011; 146: 571-577
• 24 Asklid D, Segelman J, Gedda C. et al. The impact of perioperative fluid therapy on short-term outcomes and 5-year survival among patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery – A prospective cohort study within an ERAS protocol. Eur J Surg Oncol 2017; 43: 1433-1439
• 25 Pisarska M, Małczak P, Major P. et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in oesophageal cancer surgery: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0174382
• 26 Nachiappan S, Askari A, Mamidanna R. et al. Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy within 8 weeks of elective colorectal resection improves overall survival regardless of reoperation. Colorectal Dis 2016; 18: 1041-1049
• 27 Low DE, Allum W, De Manzoni G. et al. Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Esophagectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS^®) Society Recommendations. World J Surg 2019; 43: 299-330
• 28 Blom RLGM, van Heijl M, Bemelman WA. et al. Initial experiences of an enhanced recovery protocol in esophageal surgery. World J Surg 2013; 37: 2372-2378
• 29 Wee IJY, Syn NL-X, Shabbir A. et al. Enhanced recovery versus conventional care in gastric cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials. Gastric Cancer 2019; 22: 423-434
• 30 Gianotti L, Fumagalli Romario U, De Pascale S. et al. Association Between Compliance to an Enhanced Recovery Protocol and Outcome After Elective Surgery for Gastric Cancer. Results from a Western Population-Based Prospective Multicenter Study. World J Surg 2019; 43: 2490-2498
• 31 Li Y-J, Huo T-T, Xing J. et al. Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of fast-track surgery in gastrectomy for gastric cancer. World J Surg 2014; 38: 3142-3151
• 32 Liang X, Ying H, Wang H. et al. Enhanced recovery care versus traditional care after laparoscopic liver resections: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 2018; 32: 2746-2757
• 33 Yang R, Tao W, Chen Y-Y. et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery programs versus traditional perioperative care in laparoscopic hepatectomy: A meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2016; 36: 274-282
• 34 Ji H-B, Zhu W-T, Wei Q. et al. Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery programs on pancreatic surgery: A meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2018; 24: 1666-1678
• 35 Joliat G-R, Hübner M, Roulin D. et al. Cost Analysis of Enhanced Recovery Programs in Colorectal, Pancreatic, and Hepatic Surgery: A Systematic Review. World J Surg 2020; 44: 647-655
• 36 Aarts M-A, Rotstein OD, Pearsall EA. et al. Postoperative ERAS Interventions Have the Greatest Impact on Optimal Recovery: Experience With Implementation of ERAS Across Multiple Hospitals. Ann Surg 2018; 267: 992-997
• 37 van Zelm R, Coeckelberghs E, Sermeus W. et al. Variation in care for surgical patients with colorectal cancer: protocol adherence in 12 European hospitals. Int J Colorectal Dis 2017; 32: 1471-1478
• 38 Stone AB, Yuan CT, Rosen MA. et al. Barriers to and Facilitators of Implementing Enhanced Recovery Pathways Using an Implementation Framework: A Systematic Review. JAMA Surg 2018; 153: 270-279
• 39 Martin D, Roulin D, Grass F. et al. A multicentre qualitative study assessing implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Clin Nutr 2018; 37: 2172-2177
• 40 Roulin D, Najjar P, Demartines N. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Implementation: From Planning to Success. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2017; 27: 876-879
• 41 Schwenk W. Beschleunigte Genesung nach Operationen – Hält das “ERAS”-Konzept, was es verspricht?. Chirurg 2021;
• 42 Day RW, Aloia TA. Enhanced recovery in liver surgery. J Surg Oncol 2019; 119: 660-666
• 43 Lillemoe HA, Aloia TA. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: Hepatobiliary. Surg Clin North Am 2018; 98: 1251-1264
• 44 Visioni A, Shah R, Gabriel E. et al. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Noncolorectal Surgery?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Major Abdominal Surgery. Ann Surg 2018; 267: 57-65
• 45 Parise P, Ferrari C, Cossu A. et al. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Pathway in Esophagectomy: Is a Reasonable Prediction of Hospital Stay Possible?. Ann Surg 2019; 270: 77-83
• 46 Basse L, Raskov HH, Hjort Jakobsen D. et al. Accelerated postoperative recovery programme after colonic resection improves physical performance, pulmonary function and body composition. Br J Surg 2002; 89: 446-453
• 47 Gustafsson UO, Oppelstrup H, Thorell A. et al. Adherence to the ERAS protocol is Associated with 5-Year Survival After Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study. World J Surg 2016; 40: 1741-1747
• 48 Pearsall EA, Meghji Z, Pitzul KB. et al. A qualitative study to understand the barriers and enablers in implementing an enhanced recovery after surgery program. Ann Surg 2015; 261: 92-96
• 49 van Beekum C, Stoffels B, von Websky M. et al. Implementierung eines Fast-Track-Programmes: Herausforderungen und Lösungsansätze. Chirurg 2020; 91: 143-149
• 50 Lyon A, Solomon MJ, Harrison JD. A qualitative study assessing the barriers to implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery. World J Surg 2014; 38: 1374-1380
• 51 Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ. et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 401-406
• 52 MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation. MAGICapp. A digital authoring and publication platform for the evidence ecosystem. Im Internet: https://app.magicapp.org/
• 53 Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF) – Ständige Kommission Leitlinien. AWMF-Regelwerk „Leitlinien“. 2018 Im Internet (Stand: 23.04.2021): https://www.awmf.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Leitlinien/AWMF-Regelwerk/20180608_Druckversion_AWMF-Regelwerk_2013_f_Vermerke_Links.pdf