Is recovery enhancement after gastric cancer surgery really a safe approach for elderly patients?

Abstract

BACKGROUND This study aimed to evaluate the safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in elderly patients with gastric cancer (GC). AIM To evaluate the safety of ERAS in elderly patients with GC. METHODS The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were used to search for eligible studies from inception to April 1, 2023. The mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were pooled for analysis. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores. We used Stata (V.16.0) software for data analysis. RESULTS This study consists of six studies involving 878 elderly patients. By analyzing the clinical outcomes, we found that the ERAS group had shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD = -0.51, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.72 to -0.30, P = 0.00); earlier times to first flatus (defecation; MD = -0.30, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.55 to -0.06, P = 0.02); less intestinal obstruction (OR = 3.24, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.07 to 9.78, P = 0.04); less nausea and vomiting (OR = 4.07, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.29 to 12.84, P = 0.02); and less gastric retention (OR = 5.69, I 2 = 2.46%, 95%CI = 2.00 to 16.20, P = 0.00). Our results showed that the conventional group had a greater mortality rate than the ERAS group (OR = 0.24, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.07 to 0.84, P = 0.03). However, there was no statistically significant difference in major complications between the ERAS group and the conventional group (OR = 0.67, I 2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.38 to 1.18, P = 0.16). CONCLUSION Compared to those with conventional recovery, elderly GC patients who received the ERAS protocol after surgery had a lower risk of mortality.