Reducing complication rates and hospital readmissions while revising the enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) protocol

Patient Satisfaction and Experience with Same-Day Discharge After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Mixed-Methods study

INTRODUCTION

Same-day discharge (SDD) after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a safe and effective healthcare pathway. However, there is limited understanding of the patient perspective on SDD. The aim of this study was to explore patient satisfaction and experience with SDD after RYGB.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study with a concurrent design was conducted in a Dutch teaching hospital, using questionnaires and interviews. Patients who underwent RYGB and were discharged on the day of the surgery completed four questionnaires of the BODY-Q (satisfaction with the surgeon, satisfaction with the medical team, satisfaction with the office staff, and satisfaction with information provision) ± 4 months postoperative. The results of the questionnaires were compared with pre-existing data from a cohort of patients who stayed overnight after surgery (i.e., control group). A subset of patients was individually interviewed for an in-depth understanding of the patient perspective on SDD.

RESULTS

In the questionnaires, median scores for the control group (n = 158) versus the present group of patients (n = 51) were as follows: 92/100 vs. 92/100 (p = 0.331) for the surgeon, 100/100 vs. 92/100 (p = 0.775) for the medical team, 100/100 vs. 100/100 (p = 0.616) for the office staff, and 90/100 vs. 73/100 (p = 0.015) for information provision. Interviews with 14 patients revealed seven themes, describing high satisfaction, along with several points of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient satisfaction with SDD after RYGB is high, although information provision regarding the day of surgery could be improved. However, not every medically eligible patient might be suitable for this healthcare pathway, as responsibilities are shifted.

Implementation of updated enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery guidelines: adapted protocol in a single tertiary center

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of an adapted protocol of enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) on outcomes. This is a single-center observational study comparing patients managed according to adapted ERABS protocol (March-May 2022) with a control group of old method (January 2021-February 2022). Totally, 253 bariatric patients were included in the study (n = 68) and control (n = 185) groups. Patients were mostly females (57.3% vs 70.2%; p = 0.053), of mean age 38.8 years and body mass index 41 ± 6.53 vs. 44.60 ± 7.37 kg/m2 (p = 0.007) in study and control groups, respectively. The majority (90.5%) underwent primary bariatric surgery. Adapted ERABS protocol compliance was 98.5%. The study group had shorter hospital stay (mean 2.86 ± 0.51 vs. 4.03 ± 0.28 days; p < 0.001), similar rates of total (3% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.92) and major complications (1.5% vs. 0, p = 0.10). Readmission rates were similar (1.5% vs 1.6%, p = 0.92). Applied only in the study group, early ambulation (p < 0.001), opioid restriction, and preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), resulted in satisfactory scores (mean total visual analogue score 1.93 ± 0.80, morphine milligram equivalent 34.0 ± 14.5, and mean total PONV grade 0.17 ± 0.36). In conclusion, implementing adapted ERABS guidelines improved patients' postoperative care, raising awareness to pain management. Length of stay was shortened without safety compromise. Efforts to abandon old-school routines seem worthwhile, even if ERABS is partially implemented.

Patient's Preference for Same-Day Discharge or Hospitalization After Bariatric Surgery

PURPOSE

Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery protocols have proven to be effective in reducing complication rates and length of stay. Guidelines do not include a recommendation on the length of hospital stay whereas same-day discharge is currently widely investigated on safety and feasibility. However, none of these studies takes patient preferences into account. The study aimed to reveal the patient's preference for outpatient surgery (OS) in patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center preference-based randomized trial was performed between March and December of 2021. Adult patients planned for primary bariatric surgery were able to choose their care pathway, either OS with remote heart and respiratory rate monitoring by a wearable data logger or standard care with at least one-night hospitalization.

RESULTS

Out of the 202 patients, nearly everyone (98.5%) had a preference. Of 199 patients, 99 (49.7%) chose inpatient surgery. Of the 100 with a preference for OS, 23 stayed in the hospital due to medical reasons and 12 patients changed their preference. Based on both initial preference and changed preference, there were no differences between sex, age, body mass index, and co-morbidities such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and atrial fibrillation, nor in the use of anticoagulants or type of surgery.

CONCLUSION

Patients seemed to have a strong preference for their stay after a bariatric procedure. The preference is equally divided between outpatient and inpatient surgery and is not influenced by any patient characteristics.

Three- and five-year follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial on the effects of cognitive behavioral therapy before bariatric surgery

OBJECTIVE

Up to 37% of bariatric surgery patients suffer from insufficient weight loss or weight regain and mental health symptoms in the longer term. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) may be an effective adjunct intervention to optimize patients' psychological functioning and weight loss results. To examine the value of adding preoperative CBT to bariatric surgery, three- and five-year follow-up data are presented.

METHOD

In this multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT; N = 130), a CBT group was compared to a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control group. Measurements were conducted at five time points: pretreatment (T0) and posttreatment/presurgery (T1) and at one- (T2; N = 120), three- (T3; N = 117), and five-year postsurgery (T4; N = 115). The intervention group received a 10-weeks, individual, preoperative CBT focused on self-monitoring, identifying triggers for disordered eating and goal setting for eating behavior and physical exercise, as well as postoperative lifestyle. Outcome measures included weight change, eating behavior, eating disorders, depression, quality of life (QoL), and overall psychological health.

RESULTS

Preoperative CBT was not associated with better three- and five-year results than TAU regarding weight, dysfunctional eating behaviors, eating disorders, depression, overall psychological health, and QoL.

DISCUSSION

Contrary to our hypothesis, three- and five-year postsurgery differences between groups regarding weight change and mental health were not significant.. Further exploration suggested that in both groups weight problems and depressive symptoms worsened at three and five-year follow-up. Future research should focus on long-term postoperative monitoring of weight and mood and on associated postoperative interventions and their specific timing.

PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE

After bariatric surgery, in the longer term weight problems re-occur in 30% of patients, which is probably partly related to psychopathology. We investigated whether cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) prior to bariatric surgery improved weight maintenance and mental health after surgery. Our study provided definite proof that preoperative CBT is not effective. Long-term postoperative monitoring and prompt psychological intervention after first signs of deterioration, are important to prevent further problems.

Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery: an Italian consensus statement

Background

Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) is an approach developed to improve outcomes in obese surgical patients. Unfortunately, it is not evenly implemented in Italy. The Italian Society for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Diseases and the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care joined in drafting an official statement on ERABS.

Methods

To assess the effectiveness and safety of ERABS and to develop evidence-based recommendations with regard to pre-, intra-, and post-operative care for obese patients undergoing ERABS, a 13-member expert task force of surgeons and anesthesiologists from Italian certified IFSO center of excellence in bariatric surgery was established and a review of English-language papers conducted. Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Grade Definitions were used to grade the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations, respectively. The supporting evidence and recommendations were reviewed and discussed by the entire group at meetings to achieve a final consensus.

Results

Compared to the conventional approach, ERABS reduces the length of hospital stay and does not heighten the risk of major post-operative complications, re-operations, and hospital re-admissions, nor does it increase the overall surgical costs. A total of 25 recommendations were proposed, covering pre-operative evaluation and care (7 items), intra-operative management (1 item, 11 sub-items), and post-operative care and discharge (6 items).

Conclusions

ERABS is an effective and safe approach. The recommendations allow the proper management of obese patients undergoing ERABS for a better outcome.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Evaluation and Management of Early Complications After Bariatric/Metabolic Surgery: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

Endoscopic techniques are paramount in the identification and management of complications after surgery, though collaboration with other specialties is obligatory. Unfortunately, the evaluation and treatment algorithms are not standardized and there is a paucity of high-quality prospective studies to provide clarity regarding the best approach. The purpose of this clinical practice update is to apprise the clinician with respect to the endoscopic evaluation and management of patients with early (<90 days) complications after undergoing bariatric/metabolic surgery.

METHODS

The best practice advice outlined in this expert review are based on available published evidence, including observational studies and systematic reviews, and incorporates expert opinion where applicable. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Clinicians performing endoscopic approaches to treat early major postoperative complications should do so in a multidisciplinary manner with interventional radiology and bariatric/metabolic surgery co-managing the patient. Daily communication is advised. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Clinicians embarking on incorporating endoscopic management of bariatric/metabolic surgical complications into their clinical practice should have a comprehensive knowledge of the indications, contraindications, risks, benefits, and outcomes of each of the endoscopic treatment techniques. They should also have knowledge of the risks and benefits of alternative methods such as surgical and interventional radiological based approaches. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Clinicians incorporating endoscopic management of bariatric/metabolic surgical complications into their clinical practice should have expertise in interventional endoscopy techniques, including but not limited to: using concomitant fluoroscopy, stent deployment and retrieval, managing stenosis, and managing percutaneous drains. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Clinicians should screen all patients undergoing endoscopic management of bariatric/metabolic surgical complications and dietary intolerance for comorbid medical (nutrient deficiencies, infection, pulmonary embolism) and psychological (depression, anxiety) conditions. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Endoscopic approaches to managing complications of bariatric/metabolic surgery may be considered for patients in the immediate, early and late postoperative periods depending on hemodynamic stability. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Clinicians incorporating endoscopic management of bariatric/metabolic surgical complications into their clinical practice should have a detailed understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms initiating and perpetuating conditions such as staple-line leaks. This will allow for a prompt diagnosis and appropriate therapy to be targeted not only at the area of interest, but also any concomitant downstream stenosis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Clinicians should recognize that the goal for endoscopic management of staple-line leaks are often not necessarily initial closure of the leak site, but rather techniques to promote drainage of material from the perigastric collection into the gastric lumen such that the leak site closes by secondary intention.

Perioperative Cost Differences Between Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Single Institutional Review

Background: Minimizing bariatric surgery care costs is important since more than 250,000 patients undergo bariatric surgery annually in the United States. The study objective was to compare perioperative costs for the two most common bariatric procedures: laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). In addition, we sought to identify predictors of high-cost perioperative care. Methods: Adult patients who underwent LSG or LRYGB from 2012 to 2017 were identified using our institutional bariatric surgery database. Perioperative costs, defined as costs incurred from the time of entering the preoperative unit until exiting the postanesthesia care unit, were obtained through billing data. Median perioperative cost components of LSG and LRYGB were compared using Mann-Whitney tests. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate patient-level predictors of high-cost care, defined as the top tercile of perioperative costs. Results: We included 546 bariatric surgery patients with a mean age and body mass index (BMI) of 49.7 years and 45.9 kg/m², respectively. There were no significant differences in median perioperative costs between LSG and LRYGB ($14,942 versus $15,016; P = .80). Stapler use was the largest cost contributor for both procedures, accounting for 27.7% and 29.2% of costs for LSG and LRYGB, respectively. In multivariable analyses, preoperative patient characteristics, including BMI, were not associated with high-cost perioperative care. Conclusions: Perioperative costs for LSG and LRYGB were similar in our single institution study. Reducing costs outside of the operating room, including those related to ED visits and complications, may be more impactful than focusing on cost reduction directly related to perioperative care.

The effect of the enhanced recovery after surgery program on lung cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer-related death worldwide. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program is an effective evidence-based multidisciplinary protocol of perioperative care. However, the roles of ERAS in lung cancer surgery remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the short-term impact of the ERAS program on lung resection surgery, especially in relation to postoperative complications.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases until October 2020 was performed to identify the studies that implemented an ERAS program in lung cancer surgery. The studies were selected and subjected to data extraction by 2 reviewers independently, which was followed by quality assessment. A random effects model was used to calculate overall effect sizes. Risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) served as the summary statistics for meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were subsequently performed.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies with 6,480 patients were included. The meta-analysis indicated that patients in the ERAS group had a significantly reduced risk of postoperative complications (RR =0.64; 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.78) and shortened postoperative length of stay (SMD=-1.58; 95% CI: -2.38 to -0.79) with a significant heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis showed that the risks of pulmonary (RR =0.58; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.75), cardiovascular (RR =0.73; 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.89), urinary (RR =0.53; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.88), and surgical complications (RR =0.64; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.97) were significantly lower in the ERAS group. No significant reduction was found in the in-hospital mortality (RD =0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.00) and readmission rate (RR =1.00; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.32). In the qualitative review, most of the evidence reported significantly decreased hospitalization costs in the ERAS group.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of an ERAS program for surgery of lung cancer can effectively reduce risks of postoperative complications, length of stay, and costs of patients who have undergone lung cancer surgery without compromising their safety.