THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ENHANCED RECOVERY AFTER SURGERY (ERAS) PROTOCOLS IN BREAST CANCER SURGERY AT A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL IN KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA PAKISTAN

Authors

  • Shifa Basharat Department of Histopathology, Rehman Medical Institute, Hayatabad, Peshawar-Pakistan
  • Ayesha Sajjad Department of Histopathology, Rehman Medical Institute, Hayatabad, Peshawar-Pakistan
  • Faryal Javaid Department of Histopathology, Rehman Medical Institute, Hayatabad, Peshawar-Pakistan
  • Maria Khan Department of Pathology, Pakistan Institute of Cardiology, Peshawar-Pakistan
  • Maria Tasneem Khattak Department of Histopathology, Rehman Medical Institute, Hayatabad, Peshawar-Pakistan
  • Iqbal Muhammad Khan Department of Histopathology, Rehman Medical Institute, Hayatabad, Peshawar-Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55519/JAMC-02-12584

Keywords:

Urothelial Carcinoma, EGFR, Bladder Cancer, Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor

Abstract

Background:  Breast cancer treatment outcomes have markedly improved over the years with advancements in knowledge and treatment options. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been introduced recently to enhance post-operative patient well-being, attain enhanced recovery for patients who undergo major surgery, and therefore facilitate a reduction in hospital length of stay (LOS). These may also provide an additional advantage of decreasing healthcare costs while refining the standard of care and patient contentment. Methods: This Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) was conducted in the Breast Unit of Khyber Teaching Hospital Peshawar, with a sample size of 60 (30 in each group). A consecutive non-probability sampling technique was used. Comparison was made between both groups for effectiveness, noted with regard to hospital stay, post-op pain, and complication rate. Results: The mean age of the patients in the ERAS group was 56.30±5.615 years, while the mean age in the non-ERAS group was 56.07±6.11 years. Wound infection was observed in 11 patients with ERAS (36.7%) compared to 12 (40.0%) without ERAS. Hospital stay was longer in the non-ERAS group compared to ERAS, while the post-op VAS mean difference was 1.267 with a p-value of 0.001. Conclusion: Evidence supports the effectiveness, affordability, and safety of ERAS protocols. They lead to a noticeable decrease in hospitalization duration and wound infection rates, resulting in reduced resource consumption and financial burdens. Nonetheless, achieving the mentioned benefits may necessitate strict adherence to the protocols, which could be challenging too.

References

Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The Hallmarks of Cancer. Cell 2000;100(1):57–70.

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021;71(3):209–49.

Duggan C, Dvaladze A, Rositch AF, Ginsburg O, Yip C, Horton S, et al. The Breast Health Global Initiative 2018 Global Summit on Improving Breast Healthcare Through Resource-Stratified Phased Implementation: Methods and overview. Cancer 2020;126:2339–52.

WHO. Global Health Estimates 2016: Disease Burden by Cause, Age, Sex, by Country and by Region, 2000–2016. World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland; 2018.

Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, et al. Global Cancer Obser-Vatory: Cancer Today. International Agency for Research on Cancer; Lyon, France; 2020.

DeSantis CE, Fedewa SA, Sauer AG, Kramer JL, Smith RA, Jemal A. Breast cancer statistics, 2015: Convergence of incidence rates between black and white women. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;66(1):31–42.

Sharma R. Global, regional, national burden of breast cancer in 185 countries: Evidence from GLOBOCAN 2018. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021;187:557–67.

Ginsburg O, Bray F, Coleman M, Vanderpuye V, Eniu A, Kotha SR, et al. The global burden of women’s cancers: A grand challenge in global health. Lancet 2016;389:847–60.

Vostakolaei FA, Karim-Kos HE, Janssen-Heijnen MLG, Visser O, Verbeek ALM, Kiemeney L. The validity of the mortality to incidence ratio as a proxy for site-specific cancer survival. Eur J Public Health 2010;21:573–7.

Sankaranarayanan R, Swaminathan R, Brenner H, Chen K, Chia KS, Chen JG, et al. Cancer survival in Africa, Asia, and Central America: A population-based study. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:165–73.

Porter P. Westernizing Women’s Risks? Breast Cancer in Lower-Income Countries. N Engl J Med 2008;358:213–6.

Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Travis RC, Alberg AJ, Barricarte A, et al. Sex hormones and risk of breast cancer in premenopausal women: A collaborative reanalysis of individual participant data from seven prospective studies. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:1009–19.

Folkerd E, Dowsett M. Sex hormones and breast cancer risk and prognosis. Breast 2013;22:S38–43.

Zhang X, Tworoger S, Eliassen AH, Hankinson SE. Postmenopausal plasma sex hormone levels and breast cancer risk over 20 years of follow-up. Breast Cancer Res. Treat 2013;137:883–92.

Key T, Appleby P, Barnes I, Reeves G. The Endogenous Hormones and Breast Cancer Collaborative Group Endogenous Sex Hormones and Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women: Reanalysis of Nine Prospective Studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:606–16.

Giordano SH. Breast cancer in men. N Engl J Med 2018;378:2311–20.

Benz CC. Impact of aging on the biology of breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol 2008;66:65–74.

Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:9–29.

McGuire A, Brown JAL, Malone C, McLaughlin R, Kerin MJ. Effects of Age on the Detection and Management of Breast Cancer. Cancers 2015;7:908–29.

Stat Bite: Lifetime Probability among Females of Dying of Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:1311–21.

Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Familial breast cancer: Collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease. Lancet 2001;358:1389–99.

Shiyanbola OO, Arao RF, Miglioretti DL, Sprague BL, Hampton JM, Stout NK, et al. Emerging Trends in Family History of Breast Cancer and Associated Risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017;26(12):1753–60.

Baglia ML, Tang MTC, Malone KE, Porter P, Li CI. Family History and Risk of Second Primary Breast Cancer after In Situ Breast Carcinoma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2018;27(3):315–320.

Published

2024-06-27