ERAS programs in elderly patients: is there a limit?

Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) on surgical site infection and postoperative recovery outcomes: a retrospective study of 1276 cases

This retrospective observational study aimed to evaluate the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in the era of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and the effect of ERAS on postoperative outcomes. Totally 1,276 patients (565 in ERAS group and 711 in non-ERAS group) who underwent operations at the department of general surgery during 2017-2021 were included. Risk factors were identified via logistic regression analysis and meta-analysis of all relevant published studies was performed. Subsequently, propensity score matching was used to match different risk factors. Overall, 40 patients were diagnosed with SSI, and the pooled incidence of SSI was 3.13%. In total, 14 (2.48%) and 26 (3.66%) patients in the ERAS and non-ERAS groups, respectively, were diagnosed with SSI (P = 0.230). Among patients for whom the ERAS protocol was adopted, 7 independent risk factors of SSI were identified. After propensity score matching, in patients without SSI, the number of hospital days was significantly lower in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group (2 [2, 5] vs. 3 [2, 7], P = 0.005), whereas in patients with SSI, the number of hospital days was similar between the ERAS and non-ERAS groups. ERAS had no effect on the incidence of SSI but could significantly accelerate the discharge of uninfected patients. In the era of ERAS, SSI incidence was affected by the type of surgery; number of postoperative hospital days; type of incision; serum hemoglobin, total protein, and albumin levels; and antibiotic prophylaxis. Furthermore, these results will significantly affect the implementation of the ERAS protocol and optimal preoperative management.

Guidelines on perioperative optimization protocol for the adult patient 2023

OBJECTIVE

The French Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine [Société Française d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation (SFAR)] aimed at providing guidelines for the implementation of perioperative optimization programs.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 29 experts from the SFAR was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the outset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence.

METHODS

Four fields were defined: 1) Generalities on perioperative optimization programs; 2) Preoperative measures; 3) Intraoperative measures and; 4) Postoperative measures. For each field, the objective of the recommendations was to answer a number of questions formulated according to the PICO model (population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes). Based on these questions, an extensive bibliographic search was carried out using predefined keywords according to PRISMA guidelines and analyzed using the GRADE® methodology. The recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology and then voted on by all the experts according to the GRADE grid method. As the GRADE® methodology could have been fully applied for the vast majority of questions, the recommendations were formulated using a "formalized expert recommendations" format.

RESULTS

The experts' work on synthesis and application of the GRADE® method resulted in 30 recommendations. Among the formalized recommendations, 19 were found to have a high level of evidence (GRADE 1±) and ten a low level of evidence (GRADE 2±). For one recommendation, the GRADE methodology could not be fully applied, resulting in an expert opinion. Two questions did not find any response in the literature. After two rounds of rating and several amendments, strong agreement was reached for all the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement among the experts was obtained to provide 30 recommendations for the elaboration and/or implementation of perioperative optimization programs in the highest number of surgical fields.

[Enhanced recovery after lung resection in high-risk patients]

OBJECTIVE

To study the possibilities of the ERAS program and immediate results in high-risk patients undergoing lung resection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The prospective study included 76 high-risk patients. All patients required lobar resection for various lung diseases. The risk of postoperative complications and mortality was stratified using the Thoracoscore and Thoracic Revised Cardiac Risk Index systems, as well as the American Society of Anesthesiologists Outcome Prediction Scale. At all perioperative stages, we assessed the possibilities for accelerated recovery and postoperative complications using the Thoracic Morbidity and Mortality System.

RESULTS

Patients were characterized by multiple comorbidities requiring long-term and individual preoperative correction. This prevented adherence to a single protocol at the outpatient stage. We intraoperatively observed severe adhesive process up to complete obliteration of pleural cavity that complicated the use of minimally invasive technologies. Lung tissue was characterized by emphysematous lesions and reduced elasticity that caused prolonged air release and formation of residual cavities. These features required two pleural drains in 42 (52.3%) cases that increased hospital-stay. Multimodal analgesia and early activation with rehabilitation were optimal elements of ERAS. Various postoperative abnormalities developed in 31 (40.8%) patients, mortality rate was 7.9% (n=6). Minor and serious complications prevailed (21 (27.6%) cases). Their correction was effective and not accompanied by fatal outcomes. Critical complications occurred in 10 (13.1%) patients and caused fatal outcomes in 6 (7.9%) cases.

CONCLUSION

ERAS protocol among high-risk patients in thoracic surgery is possible in the form of separate elements included in perioperative support.

Prevention and Management of Postoperative Ileus: A Review of Current Practice

Postoperative ileus (POI) has long been a challenging clinical problem for both patients and healthcare physicians alike. Although a standardized definition does not exist, it generally includes symptoms of intolerance to diet, lack of passing stool, abdominal distension, or flatus. Not only does prolonged POI increase patient discomfort and morbidity, but it is possibly the single most important factor that results in prolongation of the length of hospital stay with a significant deleterious effect on healthcare costs in surgical patients. Determining the exact pathogenesis of POI is difficult to achieve; however, it can be conceptually divided into patient-related and operative factors, which can further be broadly classified as neurogenic, inflammatory, hormonal, and pharmacological mechanisms.

Different strategies have been introduced aimed at improving the quality of perioperative care by reducing perioperative morbidity and length of stay, which include Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, minimally invasive surgical approaches, and the use of specific pharmaceutical therapies. Recent studies have shown that the ERAS pathway and laparoscopic approach are generally effective in reducing patient morbidity with early return of gut function. Out of many studies on pharmacological agents over the recent years, alvimopan has shown the most promising results. However, due to its potential complications and cost, its clinical use is limited. Therefore, this article aimed to review the pathophysiology of POI and explore recent advances in treatment modalities and prevention of postoperative ileus.

Real-world implementation of a geriatric-specific ERAS protocol in patients undergoing colonic cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this single-center observational study was to evaluate the impact of implementing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, combined with systematic geriatric assessment and support, on surgical and oncological outcomes in patients aged 70 or older undergoing colonic cancer surgery.

METHODS

Two groups were formed from an actively maintained database from all patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic surgery for neoplasms during a defined period before (standard group) or after (ERAS group) the introduction of an ERAS program associated with systematic geriatric assessment. The primary outcome was postoperative 90-day morbidity. Secondary outcomes were total length of hospital stay, initiated and completed adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) rate, and 1-year mortality rate.

RESULTS

A total of 266 patients (135 standard and 131 ERAS) were included in the study. Overall 90-day morbidity and mean hospital stay were significantly lower in the ERAS group than in the standard group (22.1% vs. 35.6%, p = 0.02; and 6.2 vs. 9.3 days, p < 0.01, respectively). There were no differences in readmission rates and anastomotic complications. AC was recommended in 114 patients. The rate of initiated treatment was comparable between the groups (66.6% vs. 77.7%, p = 0.69). The rate of completed AC was significantly higher in the ERAS group (50% vs. 20%, p < 0.01) with a lower toxicity rate (57.1% vs. 87.5%, p = 0.002). The 1-year mortality rate was higher in the standard group (7.4% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of ERAS protocols and geriatric assessment and support reduces the overall morbidity rate and improves 12-month oncologic outcomes.