EnROL: A multicentre randomised trial of conventional versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme

被引:30
|
作者
Kennedy, Robin H. [1 ]
Francis, Anne [2 ]
Dutton, Susan [3 ]
Love, Sharon [3 ]
Pearson, Sarah [2 ]
Blazeby, Jane M. [4 ,5 ]
Quirke, Philip [6 ]
Franks, Peter J. [7 ]
Kerr, David J. [8 ]
机构
[1] St Marks Hosp, Harrow, Middx, England
[2] Univ Oxford, Dept Oncol, Oncol Clin Trials Off, Oxford, England
[3] Univ Oxford, Ctr Stat Med, Dept Oncol, Oxford, England
[4] Univ Bristol, Sch Social & Community Med, Acad Unit Surg Res, Bristol, Avon, England
[5] Univ Hosp Bristol NHS Fdn Trust, Bristol, Avon, England
[6] Univ Leeds, Leeds Inst Mol Med, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
[7] Ctr Res & Implementat Clin Practice, London, England
[8] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Clin Lab Sci, Oxford, England
关键词
Laparoscopy; Colon cancer; Rectal cancer; Enhanced recovery programme; Fast track surgery; Health economics; Cosmetic assessment; Fatigue; Randomised controlled trial; EnROL; COLON-CANCER; CLINICAL-TRIAL; ASSISTED COLECTOMY; RECTAL-CANCER; BODY-IMAGE; RESECTION; ASSOCIATION; OUTCOMES; PATHWAY; CARE;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2407-12-181
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: During the last two decades the use of laparoscopic resection and a multimodal approach known as an enhanced recovery programme, have been major changes in colorectal perioperative care. Clinical outcome improves using laparoscopic surgery to resect colorectal cancer but until recently no multicentre trial evidence had been reported regarding whether the benefits of laparoscopy still exist when open surgery is optimized within an enhanced recovery programme. The EnROL trial (Enhanced Recovery Open versus Laparoscopic) examines the hypothesis that laparoscopic surgery within an enhanced recovery programme will provide superior postoperative outcomes when compared to conventional open resection of colorectal cancer within the same programme. Methods/design: EnROL is a phase III, multicentre, randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open resection of colon and rectal cancer with blinding of patients and outcome observers to the treatment allocation for the first 7 days post-operatively, or until discharge if earlier. 202 patients will be recruited at approximately 12 UK hospitals and randomised using minimization at a central computer system in a 1:1 ratio. Recruiting surgeons will previously have performed > 100 laparoscopic colorectal resections and > 50 open total mesorectal excisions to minimize conversion. Eligible patients are those suitable for elective resection using either technique. Excluded patients include: those with acute intestinal obstruction and patients in whom conversion from laparoscopic to open procedure is likely. The primary outcome is physical fatigue as measured by the physical fatigue domain of the multidimensional fatigue inventory 20 (MFI-20) with secondary outcomes including postoperative hospital stay; complications; reoperation and readmission; quality of life indicators; cosmetic assessments; standardized performance indicators; health economic analysis; the other four domains of the MFI-20. Pathological assessment of surgical quality will also be undertaken and compliance with the enhanced recovery programme will be recorded for all patients. Discussion: Should this trial demonstrate that laparoscopic surgery confers a significant clinical and/or health economic benefit this will further support the transition to this type of surgery, with implications for the training of surgeons and resource allocation.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Enhanced recovery in colorectal surgery: a multicentre study
    José M Ramírez
    Juan A Blasco
    José V Roig
    Sergio Maeso-Martínez
    José E Casal
    Fernando Esteban
    Daniel Callejo Lic
    BMC Surgery, 11
  • [22] Laparoscopic gastric surgery in an enhanced recovery programme
    Grantcharov, T. P.
    Kehlet, H.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2010, 97 (10) : 1547 - 1551
  • [23] Randomized clinical trial on Epidural versus Patient-controlled Analgesia (EvA) for laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery pathway
    Huebner, M.
    Blanc, C.
    Roulin, D.
    Winiker, M.
    Demartines, N.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2014, 101 : 7 - 7
  • [24] Enhanced Recovery Program in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: An Observational Controlled Trial
    Targa, Simone
    Portinari, Mattia
    Ascanelli, Simona
    Camerani, Stefano
    Verri, Marco
    Volta, Carlo Alberto
    Anania, Gabriele
    Feo, Carlo V.
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2021, 31 (04): : 363 - 370
  • [25] ENHANCED RECOVERY AFTER SURGERY VERSUS CONVENTIONAL PERIOPERATIVE CARE IN COLONIC AND RECTAL LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY FOR CANCER.
    Ferrari, L.
    Picchio, M.
    Cunsolo, G.
    Cinquepalmi, M.
    Burza, A.
    Stipa, F.
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2016, 59 (05) : E260 - E261
  • [26] Laparoscopic Surgery and the Enhanced Recovery Programme Improve the Quality of Care and Outcomes in Major Colorectal Surgery
    Carten, R. V.
    James, D. R. C.
    Huang, A.
    Goede, A. C.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2015, 102 : 94 - 95
  • [27] Colorectal surgery for cancer:: Conventional or laparoscopic?
    Köckerling, F
    Scheuerlein, H
    Schneider, C
    Scheidbach, H
    Hohenberger, W
    SEMINARS IN ONCOLOGY, 2000, 27 (05) : 34 - 44
  • [28] Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Versus Conventional Postoperative Care in Colorectal Surgery
    Pascal H. E. Teeuwen
    R. P. Bleichrodt
    C. Strik
    J. J. M. Groenewoud
    W. Brinkert
    C. J. H. M. van Laarhoven
    H. van Goor
    A. J. A. Bremers
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2010, 14 : 88 - 95
  • [29] Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Versus Conventional Postoperative Care in Colorectal Surgery
    Teeuwen, Pascal H. E.
    Bleichrodt, R. P.
    Strik, C.
    Groenewoud, J. J. M.
    Brinkert, W.
    van Laarhoven, C. J. H. M.
    van Goor, H.
    Bremers, A. J. A.
    JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2010, 14 (01) : 88 - 95
  • [30] An individualised versus a conventional pneumoperitoneum pressure strategy during colorectal laparoscopic surgery: rationale and study protocol for a multicentre randomised clinical study
    Diaz-Cambronero, O.
    Mazzinari, G.
    Errando, C. L.
    Schultz, M. J.
    Flor Lorente, B.
    Garcia-Gregorio, N.
    Vila Montanes, M.
    Robles-Hernandez, Daniel
    Olmedilla Arnal, L. E.
    Martin-De-Pablos, A.
    Marques Mari, A.
    Argente Navarro, M. P.
    Jose Alberola-Estelles, Maria
    Ayas-Montero, Begona
    Matoses-Jaen, Salome
    Verdeguer, Sandra
    Alonso Inigo, Jose Miguel
    Domenech, Josep Balaguer
    Echeverri Velez, Marisol
    Cuesta-Frau, David
    Pous, Salvador
    Ballester, Cristina
    Frasson, Matteo
    Garcia-Granero, Alvaro
    Cerdan-Santacruz, Carlos
    Garcia-Granero, Eduardo
    Sanchez-Guillen, Luis
    Robles-Hernandez, Daniel
    Boquera-Albert, David
    Casado-Rodrigo, David
    Cosa-Rodriguez, Rebeca
    Enrique Oimedilla-Amai, Luis
    Rodriguez-Martin, Marcos
    Zorrilla-Ortuzar, Jaime
    Maria Perez-Pena, Jose
    Martin-de-Pablos, Angel
    Valdes-Hernandez, Javier
    Carlos Gomez-Rosado, Juan
    Heredia-Perez, Pino
    Cintas-Catena, Juan
    Flor-Parra, Fernando
    Schultz, Marcus J.
    Errando Oyonarte, Carlos Luis
    TRIALS, 2019, 20 (1)