By definition, ileus is an occlusion or paralysis of the bowel preventing the forward passage of the intestinal contents, causing their accumulation proximal to the site of the blockage. A key distinction is drawn between mechanical and functional...

Background: Postoperative paralytic ileus (POI) is a significant concern following gastrointestinal tumor surgery. Effective preventive and therapeutic strategies are crucial but remain elusive. Current evidence from randomized-controlled trials on pharmacological interventions for prevention or treatment of POI are systematically reviewed to guide clinical practice and future research. Materials and methods: Literature was systematically searched for prospective randomized-controlled trials testing pharmacological interventions for prevention or treatment of POI after gastrointestinal tumor surgery. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to determine risk ratios and mean differences with 95% CI. Risk of bias and evidence quality were assessed. Results: Results from 55 studies, involving 5078 patients who received experimental interventions, indicate that approaches of opioid-sparing analgesia, peripheral opioid antagonism, reduction of sympathetic hyperreactivity, and early use of laxatives effectively prevent POI. Perioperative oral Alvimopan or intravenous administration of Lidocaine or Dexmedetomidine, while safe regarding cardio-pulmonary complications, demonstrated effectiveness concerning various aspects of postoperative bowel recovery [Lidocaine: −5.97 (−7.20 to −4.74)h, P<0.0001; Dexmedetomidine: −13.00 (−24.87 to −1.14)h, P=0.03 for time to first defecation; Alvimopan: −15.33 (−21.22 to −9.44)h, P<0.0001 for time to GI-2] and length of hospitalization [Lidocaine: −0.67 (−1.24 to −0.09)d, P=0.02; Dexmedetomidine: −1.28 (−1.96 to −0.60)d, P=0.0002; Alvimopan: −0.58 (−0.84 to −0.32)d, P<0.0001] across wide ranges of evidence quality. Perioperative nonopioid analgesic use showed efficacy concerning bowel recovery as well as length of hospitalization [−1.29 (−1.95 to −0.62)d, P=0.0001]. Laxatives showed efficacy regarding bowel movements, but not food tolerance and hospitalization. Evidence supporting pharmacological treatment for clinically evident POI is limited. Results from one single study suggest that Neostigmine reduces time to flatus and accelerates bowel movements [−37.06 (−40.26 to −33.87)h, P<0.0001 and −42.97 (−47.60 to −38.35)h, P<0.0001, respectively] with low evidence quality. Conclusion: Current evidence concerning pharmacological prevention and treatment of POI following gastrointestinal tumor surgery is limited. Opioid-sparing concepts, reduction of sympathetic hyperreactivity, and laxatives should be implemented into multimodal perioperative approaches.

Colorectal surgery has undergone significant advances over the past few decades, driven by the evolution of minimally invasive techniques, particularly laparoscopy and robotics. While laparoscopy is widely recognized for its short-term benefits and oncological safety, the increasing adoption of robot-assisted surgery (RAS) has generated considerable debate regarding its clinical benefits, economic implications, and overall impact on patient outcomes. This narrative review synthesizes the existing evidence, highlighting the clinical and economic aspects of RAS in colorectal surgery, while exploring areas for future research. The findings suggest that RAS offers potential technical advantages, including increased precision, three-dimensional visualization, and improved ergonomics, particularly in anatomically complex scenarios such as low rectal resections. Still, its superiority over laparoscopy remains inconclusive and current evidence is mixed. For colon cancer, meta-analyses and analyses of large cohorts suggest lower conversion rates and faster recovery with RAS, although data are mostly retrospective and lack long-term oncological endpoints. In rectal cancer, emerging evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrates improved short-term outcomes. Additionally, the recently published three-year results of the REAL trial are the first to demonstrate enhanced oncological outcomes following RAS. However, findings remain inconsistent due to methodological heterogeneity, the absence of patient stratification, and limited data on long-term survival and cost-effectiveness. The available evidence indicates that RAS may offer advantages in selected patient populations, particularly for anatomically complex procedures. Yet, its overall utility remains uncertain. Future studies should emphasize high-quality randomized trials, stratified subgroup analyses, and standardized economic evaluations to better define the role of RAS in colorectal surgery.

Purpose The effectiveness of modern perioperative treatment concepts has been demonstrated in several studies and meta-analyses. Despite good evidence, limited implementation of the fast track (FT) concept is still a widespread concern. To assess the status quo in Austrian and German hospitals, a survey on the implementation of FT measures was conducted among members of the German Society of General and Visceralsurgery (DGAV), the German Society of Coloproctology (DGK) and the Austrian Society of Surgery (OEGCH) to analyze where there is potential for improvement. Methods Twenty questions on perioperative care of colorectal surgery patients were sent to the members of the DGAV, DGK and OEGCH using the online survey tool SurveyMonkey^®. Descriptive data analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel. Results While some of the FT measures have already been routinely adopted in clinical practice (e.g. minimally invasive surgical approach, early mobilization and diet buildup), for other components there are discrepancies between current recommendations and present implementation (e.g. the use of local nerve blocks to provide opioid-sparing analgesia or the use of abdominal drains). Conclusion The implementation of the FT concept in Austria and Germany is still in need of improvement. Particularly regarding the use of abdominal drains and postoperative analgesia, there is a tendency to stick to traditional structures. To overcome the issues with FT implementation, the development of an evidence-based S3 guideline for perioperative care, followed by the founding of a surgical working group to conduct a structured education and certification process, may lead to significant improvements in perioperative patient care.