days; p<0.001,CI 3.14-5.68). There was a significant reduction in post- operative morbidity such as superficial SSI (RR 0.35, p0.02,CI 0.08-0.8), incidence of postoperative nausea & vomiting (RR 0.28,p<0.0001,CI 0.15- 0.51) & pulmonary complications (RR 0.24, p0.04,CI 0.06-0.95) in the ERAS vs. standard care group. The leak rates were similar (1/50 vs.2/49). Conclusion: Adapted ERAS pathways are safe and feasible in select pa- tients undergoing emergency simple closure of PDU. Disclosure of interest: None declared. OR06 PROFAST: CLINCAL AND COST RELATED BENEFITS OF ERAS IN ADVANCED OVARIAN CANCER, A RANDOMIZED TRIAL Melchor Carbonell-Socias * , Jose Luis Sanchez-Iglesias, Asunci on P erez- Benavente, Berta Diaz-Feijoo, Silvia Cabrera, Silvia Franco, Javier De La Torre, Oriol Puig, Manuel García, Susana Manrique, Rosa Burgos, Monica Pamies, Teresa Balcells, Susana Serrano, Lola Rubio, Antonio Gil Moreno. on behalf of Vall d'Hebron Gynecologic Oncology Unit And ERAS implementation Group. Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain * Corresponding author. Objectives: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS), has been shown to reduce hospitalization without increasing the rate of complications or readmissions. However, information on its benefits when applied to Advanced Gynecological cancer patients is sparse. Our hypothesis is that ERAS in the management of patients with advanced Ovarian Cancer may improve the postoperative recovery, allowing for an early discharge, without increasing the number readmission or surgery related complications. Methods: We developed the PROFAST trial, (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02172638) a prospective randomized clinical trial. Patients diagnosed with an ovarian or primary peritoneal cancer in Barcelona’s Vall d’Hebron Hospital, with clinical or radiological suspicion of advanced disease (IIb,III, IV) or relapses are randomized to an specifically designed ERAS protocol or to conventional management (CM). Reduction in the median length of hospitalization is considered as primary outcome, incidence of perioper- ative complications and readmissions rates up to 28 days after surgery, and related costs differences are considered as secondary outcomes. Results: From July 2014 to August 2016, 59 patients had been included, 29 in the ERAS group, and 30 in the CM Group. Epidemiological characteristic, surgery indication (primary or Interval), stage at diagnosis and surgical procedures were similar in both groups with no statistically significant differences. In the ERAS group compliance with ERAS protocol was > 90% for all the items except for avoidance of abdominal drainage (64%). Both median length of hospitalization (9 vs 7 days, p¼ 0.0391) and readmission rates (28% vs 0%, p 0.096) were markedly reduced in the ERAS group. There were no statistically significant differences between complication rates. Overall the ERAS protocol represented a cost reduction of 680 euros per patient. Conclusion: In the PROFAST intermediate analysis, ERAS appears to be a safe and effective in reducing the median length of Hospitalization, read- mission rates and hospitalization related costs in advanced ovarian cancer surgery. Disclosure of interest: None declared. OR07 THE INFLUENCE OF AN ENHANCED RECOVERY PROGRAMME ON CLINICAL OUTCOMES AND QUALITY OF LIFE AFTER ROBOTIC ASSISTED RADICAL CYSTECTOMY Dimitrios Moschonas 1, * , Chris Jones 2, 3 , Pavlos Pavlakis 1 , Murthy Kusuma 1 , Alison Roodhouse 1 , Hugh Mostafid 1 , Simon Woodhams 1 , Michael Swinn 1 , Matthew Perry 1 , Krishnaji Patil 1 . 1 Urology, Anaesthesia & Critical Care Research e SPACeR e Group, United Kingdom; 2 Surrey Peri-operative, Anaesthesia & Critical Care Research e SPACeR e Group, United Kingdom; 3 Anaesthetics, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, United Kingdom * Corresponding author. Objectives: Quality of life is an important outcome of complex cancer surgery. Our aim was to analyse the impact of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and urinary diversion with multimodal enhanced re- covery protocol on postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at multiple prospective time points. Methods: A total of 175 consecutive patients underwent RARC after the establishment of a new tertiary cystectomy service in April 2013. HRQOL was prospectively assessed preoperatively, after 6 and 12 months, using the QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Prospectively collected demographic, opera- tive and perioperative data from institutional database were analysed. Results: The median age at treatment was 71 years old, 77.3% were males, 73% had a BMI <30 kg/m 2 , 27.4% a CPET anaerobic threshold <11 and 84.3% an ASA score 2. The median LOS was 5 days (1 st -3 rd IQR: 4-7 days). Post- operative day 4 was the most frequent day of discharge from hospital. The incidence of post-treatment complications was 40% (70 of 175) for minor (Clavien-Dindo grade II) and 8% (14 of 175) for major (grade III) com- plications. Major complications led to reduced physical functioning (PF) levels after 6 months (p ¼ 0.050) without effect on global health status (GHS) (p ¼ 0.825). HRQOL seems to improve to similar or better levels compared to baseline after 1 year. Subgroup analysis revealed greater improvement in PF in intra vs extra corporeal diversion (p ¼ 0.05) but no differences between neobladder and ileal conduit. Conclusion: Perioperative complications and complicated recovery after RARC can affect HRQOL subdomains but do not significantly influence the GHS. QOL is comparable after either continent or incontinent urinary diversion. Totally intracorporeal minimal invasive approach is ensuring better short and long term overall HRQOL outcomes. Selection of diversion should be tailored to patient’s preference since there is no demonstrable benefit of continent reconstruction. Disclosure of interest: None declared. Outcome (in days) ERAS group Standard care group Mean Difference p value CI Day of withdrawal of NG tube 1.22 ± 0.42 3.37 ± 0.97 2.15 ± 0.15 p<0.001 1.85-2.45 Time to first bowel sounds 1.46 ± 0.54 2.02 ± 0.59 0.56 ± 0.11 p<0.001 0.33-0.79 Time to first flatus 2.0 ± 0.78 3.47 ± 1.02 1.47 ± 0.18 p<0.001 1.11-1.83 Time to first stool 3.52 ± 0.79 5.78 ± 1.26 2.27 ± 0.21 p<0.001 1.84-2.67 Duration of ileus 1.4 ± 0.07 2.02 ± 0.09 0.62 ± 0.12 p<0.001 0.38-0.86 Time to first fluids 1.52 ± 0.76 4.24 ± 2.64 2.72 ± 0.39 p<0.001 1.95-3.50 Time to first solids 2.64 ± 1.08 4.24 ± 2.64 3.71 ± 0.45 p<0.001 2.82-4.60 Time to first walk 0.76 ± 0.14 2.80 ± 0.12 2.04 ± 0.18 p<0.0001 1.68-2.40 Need for extra analgesia 12% 35% RR: 0.26 p¼0.007 0.09-0.69 Need for NG tube reinsertion 4% 6% RR: 0.63 p¼0.629 0.11-3.25 Abstracts / Clinical Nutrition ESPEN 19 (2017) 73e99 75