Impact of Introducing a PACU24 Concept on the Perioperative Outcome of Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer Treated with Cytoreductive Surgery

Abstract

Introduction

Patients with ovarian cancer who undergo multivisceral surgery usually require intensive care monitoring postoperatively. In view of the ever-fewer numbers of high-care/intensive care beds and the introduction of fast-track treatment concepts, it is increasingly being suggested that these patients should be cared for postoperatively in 24-h Post Anesthesia Care Units (PACU24). No analyses have been carried out to date to investigate whether such a postoperative care concept might be associated with a potential increase in postoperative complications in this patient cohort.

Methods

A PACU24 unit was set up in our institution in 2015 and it has become the primary postoperative care pathway for patients with ovarian cancer who have undergone cytoreductive (debulking) surgery. A structured, retrospective analysis of data from patients treated before (control group) and after (PACU group) the introduction of this care concept was carried out, with a particular focus on postoperative complications and secondary admission to an intensive care unit where necessary.

Results

The data of 42 patients were analyzed for the PACU group and 45 patients for the control group. According to the analysis, the preoperative and surgical data of both groups were comparable (age, ASA, BMI, FIGO stage, duration of surgery, blood loss). The Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity (POSSUM score) as a measure for the risk of postoperative complications was higher in the PACU group (11.1% vs. 9.7%, p = 0.001). Patients in the PACU group underwent bowel resection with anastomosis significantly more often (76.3% vs. 33.3%, p < 0.001), although the extent of surgery was otherwise comparable. The total number, type and severity of postoperative complications and the duration of the overall stay in hospital did not differ between the two groups. None of the patients required secondary transfer from the PACU or normal ward to an intensive care unit (ICU).

Summary

Our data support the assumption that the care concept of transferring patients to a PACU24 represents a safe and cost-saving care pathway for the postoperative care of patients even after complex gynecological-oncological procedures.

Keywords

Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU24) - fast track - length of hospital stay (LOS) - cytoreductive surgery - ovarian cancer

Publication History

Received: 15 December 2022

Accepted after revision: 15 March 2023

Article published online:
02 June 2023

• References/Literatur

• 1 Robert Koch Institut. Krebs in Deutschland. Eierstockkrebs 2017/2018. Accessed January 01, 2022 at: https://www.krebsdaten.de/Krebs/DE/Content/Publikationen/Krebs_in_Deutschland/kid_2021/kid_2021_c56_eierstoecke.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
• 2 du Bois A, Neijt JP, Thigpen JT. First line chemotherapy with carboplatin plus paclitaxel in advanced ovarian cancer--a new standard of care?. Ann Oncol 1999; 10 (Suppl. 01) 35-41 DOI: 10.1023/a:1008355317514. (PMID: 10219451)
• 3 du Bois A, Reuss A, Pujade-Lauraine E. et al. Role of surgical outcome as prognostic factor in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a combined exploratory analysis of 3 prospectively randomized phase 3 multicenter trials: by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Studiengruppe Ovarialkarzinom (AGO-OVAR) and the Groupe d’Investigateurs Nationaux Pour les Etudes des Cancers de l’Ovaire (GINECO). Cancer 2009; 115: 1234-1244 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24149.
• 4 Harter P, Sehouli J, Lorusso D. et al. A Randomized Trial of Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Advanced Ovarian Neoplasms. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 822-832 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1808424.
• 5 Hofstetter G, Concin N, Braicu I. et al. The time interval from surgery to start of chemotherapy significantly impacts prognosis in patients with advanced serous ovarian carcinoma – analysis of patient data in the prospective OVCAD study. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 131: 15-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.07.086.
• 6 Iyer R, Gentry-Maharaj A, Nordin A. et al. Predictors of complications in gynaecological oncological surgery: a prospective multicentre study (UKGOSOC-UK gynaecological oncology surgical outcomes and complications). Br J Cancer 2015; 112: 475-484 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.630. (PMID: 25535730)
• 7 Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004; 240: 205-213 DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.
• 8 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 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(95)90643-6.
• 9 Kehlet H, Dahl JB. Anaesthesia, surgery, and challenges in postoperative recovery. Lancet 2003; 362: 1921-1928 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(03)14966-5. (PMID: 14667752)
• 10 Brady M, Kinn S, Stuart P. Preoperative fasting for adults to prevent perioperative complications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003; DOI: 10.1002/14651858.Cd004423. (PMID: 14584013)
• 11 Spies CD, Breuer JP, Gust R. et al. Preoperative fasting. An update. Anaesthesist 2003; 52: 1039-1045 DOI: 10.1007/s00101-003-0573-0. (PMID: 14992092)
• 12 Halaszynski TM, Juda R, Silverman DG. Optimizing postoperative outcomes with efficient preoperative assessment and management. Crit Care Med 2004; 32: S76-S86 DOI: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000122046.30687.5c. (PMID: 15064666)
• 13 Anderson AD, McNaught CE, MacFie J. et al. Randomized clinical trial of multimodal optimization and standard perioperative surgical care. Br J Surg 2003; 90: 1497-1504 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4371. (PMID: 14648727)
• 14 Spanjersberg WR, Reurings J, Keus F. et al. Fast track surgery versus conventional recovery strategies for colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007635.pub2. (PMID: 21328298)
• 15 Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth 1997; 78: 606-617 DOI: 10.1093/bja/78.5.606. (PMID: 9175983)
• 16 Khan S, Wilson T, Ahmed J. et al. Quality of life and patient satisfaction with enhanced recovery protocols. Colorectal Dis 2010; 12: 1175-1182 DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01997.x.
• 17 Philp S, Carter J, Pather S. et al. Patients’ satisfaction with fast-track surgery in gynaecological oncology. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2015; 24: 567-573 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12254.
• 18 Wodlin NB, Nilsson L. The development of fast-track principles in gynecological surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92: 17-27 DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01525.x. (PMID: 22880948)
• 19 Muallem MZ, Dimitrova D, Pietzner K. et al. Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Pathways in Gynecologic Oncology. A NOGGO-AGO* survey of 144 Gynecological Departments in Germany. Anticancer Res 2016; 36: 4227-4232 (PMID: 27466536)
• 20 Kastrup M, Seeling M, Barthel S. et al. Effects of intensivist coverage in a post-anaesthesia care unit on surgical Patients’ case mix and characteristics of the intensive care unit. Crit Care 2012; 16: R126 DOI: 10.1186/cc11428. (PMID: 22809294)
• 21 R Core Team. A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2020. Accessed January 01, 2022 at: http://www.r-project.org/
• 22 Doyle DJ, Goyal A, Bansal P, Garmon EH. American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL)StatPearls Publishing; 2021
• 23 Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M. POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg 1991; 78: 355-360 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800780327. (PMID: 2021856)
• 24 Meinhold-Heerlein I, Fotopoulou C, Harter P. et al. The new WHO classification of ovarian, fallopian tube, and primary peritoneal cancer and its clinical implications. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2016; 293: 695-700 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-016-4035-8. (PMID: 26894303)
• 25 Kalogera E, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Jankowski CJ. et al. Enhanced recovery in gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122: 319-328 DOI: 10.1097/aog.0b013e31829aa780. (PMID: 23969801)
• 26 Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML. et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 2009; 250: 187-196 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e3181b13ca2. (PMID: 19638912)
• 27 Kalogera E, Dowdy SC. Enhanced Recovery Pathway in Gynecologic Surgery: Improving Outcomes Through Evidence-Based Medicine. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2016; 43: 551-573 DOI: 10.1016/j.ogc.2016.04.006. (PMID: 27521884)
• 28 Sanjay P, Dodds A, Miller E. et al. Cancelled elective operations: an observational study from a district general hospital. J Health Organ Manag 2007; 21: 54-58 DOI: 10.1108/14777260710732268.
• 29 Argo JL, Vick CC, Graham LA. et al. Elective surgical case cancellation in the Veterans Health Administration system: identifying areas for improvement. Am J Surg 2009; 198: 600-606 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.07.005. (PMID: 19887185)
• 30 Ender J, Borger MA, Scholz M. et al. Cardiac surgery fast-track treatment in a postanesthetic care unit: six-month results of the Leipzig fast-track concept. Anesthesiology 2008; 109: 61-66 DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31817881b3. (PMID: 18580173)
• 31 Priestap FA, Martin CM. Impact of intensive care unit discharge time on patient outcome. Crit Care Med 2006; 34: 2946-2951 DOI: 10.1097/01.Ccm.0000247721.97008.6F. (PMID: 17075364)