Katz-Summercorn AC, Arhi C, Agyemang-Yeboah D, Cirocchi N, Musendeki D, Fitt I, McGrandles R, Zalin A, Foldi I, Rashid F, Adil MT, Jain V, Mamidanna R, Jambulingam P, Munasinghe A, Whitelaw DE, Al-Taan O. Patient and operative factors influence delayed discharge following bariatric surgery in an enhanced recovery setting.
Surg Obes Relat Dis 2024;
20:446-452. [PMID:
38218689 DOI:
10.1016/j.soard.2023.11.005]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2023] [Revised: 08/29/2023] [Accepted: 11/04/2023] [Indexed: 01/15/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs have been widely adopted in bariatric surgery. However, not all patients are successfully managed in the ERAS setting and there is currently little way of predicting the patients who will deviate from the program. Early identification of these patients could allow for more tailored protocols to be implemented preoperatively to address the issues, thereby improving patient outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to elucidate the factors which preclude discharge by comparing patients who were successfully discharged by the end of the first postoperative day (POD 0/1) to those who stayed longer, including revisional surgery in this analysis.
SETTING
A tertiary, high-volume Bariatric Centre, United Kingdom.
METHODS
A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients undergoing bariatric surgery in a single centre in 1 year. Multivariate analyses compared patient and operative variables between patients who were discharged on POD 0/1 and those who stayed longer.
RESULTS
A total of 288 bariatric operations were performed: 78% of operations performed were laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; 22% laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Of these cases, 13% were revisional operations. Four patients returned to theatre on the index admission. 81% of patients were discharged by POD 0/1. A re-presentation within 30 days was seen in 6% of patients. There was no significant difference in length of stay for the type of operation performed (P = .86). Patients who had a revisional procedure were not more likely to stay longer. Length of stay was also independent of age, BMI, and comorbidities. Caucasian patients were more likely to be discharged on POD 0/1 than those of other ethnicities (90% versus 78%; P = .02). Operations performed by trainee surgeons, under consultant supervision, were significantly more likely to be discharged on POD 0/1 (P = .03). However, a logistic regression analysis was unable to predict patients who had a prolonged stay.
CONCLUSIONS
Patient length of stay is independent of BMI, operation, and comorbidities and these factors do not need special consideration in ERAS pathways. Patients undergoing revisional procedures can be managed in the same way as those having primary procedures, with a routine POD 0/1 discharge. However, the impact of individual patient factors, and their interaction, is complex and cannot predict overstay.
Collapse