ERAS protocol with respiratory prehabilitation versus conventional perioperative protocol in elective gastrectomy- a randomized controlled trial

Prospective Evaluation of Multimodal Prehabilitation in Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery: Enhancing Patient Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The significance of prehabilitation in contemporary esophagogastric surgical procedures is yet to be fully understood, due to heterogeneity in the available research. This research was conducted to assess the impact of a structured home-based multimodal prehabilitation approach on the postsurgical outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for esophagogastric cancer.

METHODS

This study was a prospective, nonrandomized investigation carried out on individuals scheduled for curative esophagogastric cancer surgery. Participants underwent a home-based, multimodal prehabilitation regimen that incorporated structured physical exercises, nutritional support, psychological counseling, and assistance in quitting smoking and alcohol use. The primary outcome measured was the incidence of postoperative pneumonia, defined according to the revised Uniform Pneumonia Scoring system from day 1 to day 4 post-surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients were analyzed. A total of 50 patients underwent multimodal prehabilitation for a minimum of 2 weeks with a compliance rate of more than 60% and were included in the intervention group, whereas the rest 44 with compliance less than 60% or unwilling to undergo prehabilitation were included in the control group. A statistically significant difference was seen in the incidence of postoperative pneumonia between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Structured multimodal prehabilitation done for 2 weeks before surgery improves outcomes in patients undergoing esophagogastric cancer surgery.

An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Unimodal Prehabilitation with Exercise Intervention to Enhance Postoperative Outcomes in Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to update the body of evidence on the efficacy of prehabilitation with exercise interventions, in reducing postoperative complications and length of hospital stay after cancer surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, AMED, and PsycINFO to identify randomized controlled trials investigating the impact of prehabilitation with exercise interventions for patients undergoing cancer surgery. Primary and secondary outcomes assessed were postoperative complications and length of hospital stay, respectively. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology was used to determine the strength of evidence. Relative risk and mean difference were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In this updated review, 32 trials (n = 2304 participants) were identified, with 5 trials focused on patients undergoing surgery for genitourinary cancer (n = 422 participants), 9 for lower gastrointestinal cancer (n = 639 participants), 6 for upper gastrointestinal cancer (n = 526), and 11 for lung cancer (n = 717 participants). The majority of included trials exhibited some risk of bias. Evidence of low-to-moderate quality indicated that prehabilitation with preoperative exercise significantly reduced postoperative complication rates by approximately 50% and decreased the length of hospital stay by 2.5 days in patients undergoing lung resection. Preoperative exercise did not demonstrate effectiveness in reducing postoperative complications or length of hospital stay for other cancer populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence supports the efficacy of prehabilitation with exercise in reducing postoperative complications and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery. Further research is warranted to establish the efficacy of unimodal prehabilitation with exercise in genitourinary, lower gastrointestinal, and upper gastrointestinal cancer populations having cancer surgery.

Mapping Global Nursing Literature on Enhancing Recovery After Surgery Programs: A Bibliometric Analysis

PURPOSE

To provide a structured macroscopic overview of the characteristics and advances in research related to the Enhancing Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocol.

DESIGN

A bibliometric analysis.

METHODS

Web of Science was selected as the search engine for the bibliometric analysis study, and data up to January 25, 2024 were included in the scan. The analysis was conducted using the "biblioshiny" application available in the Bibliometrics R package.

FINDINGS

A total of 769 studies were included in the review between 1991 and 2024. China produced the most publications on the subject, while the United States received the highest number of citations. A total of 213 global collaborations were identified, with the most frequent collaboration being between the United States and Canada (8 collaborations). The author Li K. contributed the most papers and the Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing published the most nursing papers on the topic. "Enhanced recovery" was the most frequently used keyword in the articles. In addition, China led in the number of publications, while the United Kingdom, China, Canada, and Sweden had the highest number of citations of all countries.

CONCLUSIONS

This bibliometric study provided comprehensive information on global trends and hotspots in ERAS protocol care research. Developed countries were the most productive in this area of research. It was noted that publications in this study area did not meet the Lodka and Bradford laws.

Efficacy of Prehabilitation in cancer patients: an Rcts systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer (PwC) who undergo specific treatments reported greater fatigue and reduced functional capacity as predominant outcomes, compromising their QoL during and following the treatment. Prehabilitation intervention, provided after diagnosis and before treatments, is to optimize the physiological reserve and address modifiable risk factors before surgery or chemotherapy to improve post-treatment results. The primary aim of this study is to obtain a common line of efficacy compared with prehabilitation treatment; the secondary endpoint is to assess the methodological quality of the studies eligible in the review.

METHODS

The systematic review was conducted from September to February 2024, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Databases consulted were MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of science and CINAHL, RCTs related to Prehabilitation intervention on PwC were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed through the RoB2 Cochrane tool and the PEDro scale. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate relative treatment effects among evaluated outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies were included in the systematic review, 13 were included in the quantitative analysis. The results of the studies reporting reduced postoperative hospital stay, improved endurance, muscle strength, respiratory function, quality of life, and urinary incontinence. Critical analysis of the articles using the PEDro scale revealed 28 RCTs with a good rating, 9 with a fair rating, and 5 with a poor rating; in contrast, the Cochrane RoB2 tool revealed that all articles were at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed statistically significant values for 6MWT (38.53, 95%CI 33.03 - 44.04); HADS-depression (-0.71, 95%CI -0.93 -0.49) and HADS-anxiety (-0.49, 95%CI -0.76 -0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Prehabilitation represents a specific intervention that aims to improve postoperative outcomes in fragile patients undergoing surgery, increasing their preoperative physiological reserve in anticipation of the stress they will face and facilitating the postoperative recovery of functional capacity. Prehabilitation is a good intervention to use, especially in terms of functional capacity and mental health, the latter being very impactful in terms of reduced levels of anxiety and depression. These data make it possible to justify supportive intervention by physical therapists aimed at improving and restoring health-related QoL especially in the short term.

Cost-benefit analysis and short-term outcomes after implementing an ERAS protocol for colorectal surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has become increasingly popular in the post-operative management of abdominal surgery. Published data suggest that patients on ERAS protocols have fewer minor and major complications, and highlight a reduction in medical morbidity (such as urinary and respiratory infections). Limited data is available on surgical complications. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of the ERAS protocol on post-operative complications and length of hospital stay. Furthermore, we aimed to determine the impact of this protocol on cost-effectiveness.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From January 2016 to December 2022, 532 colectomies for colorectal cancer (CRC) were performed. A prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital on the cohort of patients, aged 18 years and older, operated on for non-urgent colorectal cancer. The impact on post-operative complications, hospital stay and economic impact was analysed in two groups: patients managed under ERAS and non-ERAS protocol. A propensity score-matching analysis was performed between the two groups.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching 1:1, each cohort included 71 patients, and clinicopathological characteristics were well balanced in terms of tumour type, surgical technique and surgical approach. ERAS patients experienced fewer infectious complications and a shorter postoperative stay (p < 0.001). In particular, they had an 8.5% reduction in anastomotic dehiscence (p = 0.012) and surgical wound infections (p = 0.029). After analysis of medical complications, no statistically significant differences were identified in urinary tract infections, pneumonia, gastrointestinal bleeding or sepsis. ERAS protocol was more efficient and cost-effective than the control group, with an overall savings of 37,673.44€.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol for elective colorectal surgery in a tertiary hospital was cost-effective and associated with a reduction in post-operative complications, especially infectious complications.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Guidelines and Hospital Length of Stay, Readmission, Complications, and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance

A comprehensive review of the evidence exploring the outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines has not been completed.

Objective

To evaluate if ERAS guidelines are associated with improved hospital length of stay, hospital readmission, complications, and mortality compared with usual surgical care, and to understand differences in estimates based on study and patient factors.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception until June 2021.

Study Selection

Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened by 2 independent reviewers. Eligible studies were randomized clinical trials that examined ERAS-guided surgery compared with a control group and reported on at least 1 of the outcomes.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were abstracted in duplicate using a standardized data abstraction form. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Risk of bias was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates for each outcome, and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity within each outcome.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcomes were hospital length of stay, hospital readmission within 30 days of index discharge, 30-day postoperative complications, and 30-day postoperative mortality.

Results

Of the 12 047 references identified, 1493 full texts were screened for eligibility, 495 were included in the systematic review, and 74 RCTs with 9076 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies presented data from 21 countries and 9 ERAS-guided surgical procedures with 15 (20.3%) having a low risk of bias. The mean (SD) Reporting on ERAS Compliance, Outcomes, and Elements Research checklist score was 13.5 (2.3). Hospital length of stay decreased by 1.88 days (95% CI, 0.95-2.81 days; I2 = 86.5%; P < .001) and the risk of complications decreased (risk ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.87; I2 = 78.6%; P < .001) in the ERAS group. Risk of readmission and mortality were not significant.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this meta-analysis, ERAS guidelines were associated with decreased hospital length of stay and complications. Future studies should aim to improve implementation of ERAS and increase the reach of the guidelines.

Prehabilitation for general surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Prehabilitation seeks to optimize patient health before surgery to improve outcomes. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted on prehabilitation, however an updated synthesis of this evidence is required across General Surgery to inform potential Supplementary discipline-level protocols. Accordingly, this systematic review of RCTs aimed to evaluate the use of prehabilitation interventions across the discipline of General Surgery.

METHODS

This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023403289), and adhered to PRISMA 2020 and SWiM guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE and Ovid Embase were searched to 4 March 2023 for RCTs evaluating prehabilitation interventions within the discipline of General Surgery. After data extraction, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Quantitative and qualitative data were synthesized and analysed. However, meta-analysis was precluded due to heterogeneity across included studies.

RESULTS

From 929 records, 36 RCTs of mostly low risk of bias were included. 17 (47.2%) were from Europe, and 14 (38.9%) North America. 30 (83.3%) investigated cancer populations. 31 (86.1%) investigated physical interventions, finding no significant difference in 16 (51.6%) and significant improvement in 14 (45.2%). Nine (25%) investigated psychological interventions: six (66.7%) found significant improvement, three (33.3%) found no significant difference. Five (13.9%) investigated nutritional interventions, finding no significant difference in three (60%), and significant improvement in two (40%).

CONCLUSIONS

Prehabilitation interventions showed mixed levels of effectiveness, and there is insufficient RCT evidence to suggest system-level delivery across General Surgery within standardized protocols. However, given potential benefits and non-inferiority to standard care, they should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Impact of Prehabilitation on Postoperative Mortality and the Need for Non-Home Discharge in High-Risk Surgical Patients

BACKGROUND

The preoperative period is an important target for interventions (eg Surgical Prehabilitation and Readiness [SPAR]) that can improve postoperative outcomes for older patients with comorbidities.

STUDY DESIGN

To determine whether a preoperative multidisciplinary prehabilitation program (SPAR) reduces postoperative 30-day mortality and the need for non-home discharge in high-risk surgical patients, surgical patients enrolled in a prehabilitation program targeting physical activity, pulmonary function, nutrition, and mindfulness were compared with historical control patients from 1 institution's American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP database. SPAR patients were propensity score-matched 1:3 to pre-SPAR NSQIP patients, and their outcomes were compared. The ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator was used to compare observed-to-expected ratios for postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 246 patients were enrolled in SPAR. A 6-month compliance audit revealed that overall patient adherence to the SPAR program was 89%. At the time of analysis, 118 SPAR patients underwent surgery with 30 days of follow-up. Compared with pre-SPAR NSQIP patients (n = 4,028), SPAR patients were significantly older with worse functional status and more comorbidities. Compared with propensity score-matched pre-SPAR NSQIP patients, SPAR patients had significantly decreased 30-day mortality (0% vs 4.1%, p = 0.036) and decreased need for discharge to postacute care facilities (6.5% vs 15.9%, p = 0.014). Similarly, SPAR patients exhibited decreased observed 30-day mortality (observed-to-expected ratio 0.41) and need for discharge to a facility (observed-to-expected ratio 0.56) compared with their expected outcomes using the ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator.

CONCLUSIONS

The SPAR program is safe and feasible and may reduce postoperative mortality and the need for discharge to postacute care facilities in high-risk surgical patients.

Multimodal prehabilitation in patients with non-small cell lung cancer undergoing anatomical resection: protocol of a non-randomised feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The preoperative period can be used to enhance a patient's functional capacity with multimodal prehabilitation and consequently improve and fasten postoperative recovery. Especially, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgical patients may benefit from this intervention, since the affected and resected organ is an essential part of the cardiorespiratory fitness. Drafting a prehabilitation programme is challenging, since many disciplines are involved, and time between diagnosis of NSCLC and surgery is limited. We designed a multimodal prehabilitation programme prior to NSCLC surgery and aimed to conduct a study to assess feasibility and indicative evidence of efficacy of this programme. Publication of this protocol may help other healthcare facilities to implement such a programme.

METHODS

The multimodal prehabilitation programme consists of an exercise programme, nutritional support, psychological support, smoking cessation, patient empowerment and respiratory optimisation. In two Dutch teaching hospitals, 40 adult patients with proven or suspected NSCLC will be included. In a non-randomised fashion, 20 patients follow the multimodal prehabilitation programme, and 20 will be assessed in the control group, according to patient preference. Assessments will take place at four time points: baseline, the week before surgery, 6 weeks postoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Feasibility and indicative evidence of efficacy of the prehabilitation programme will be assessed as primary outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Since the time between diagnosis of NSCLC and surgery is limited, it is a challenge to implement a prehabilitation programme. This study will assess whether this is feasible, and evidence of efficacy can be found. The non-randomised fashion of the study might result in a selection and confounding bias. However, the control group may help putting the results of the prehabilitation group in perspective. By publishing this protocol, we aim to facilitate others to evaluate and implement a multimodal prehabilitation programme for surgical NSCLC patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The current study is registered as NL8080 in the Netherlands Trial Register on the 10th of October 2019, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8080 . Secondary identifiers: CCMO (Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects) number NL70578.015.19, reference number of the Medical Ethical Review Committee of Máxima MC W19.045.

The Application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Gastrectomy and Colorectal Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols not only positively affect gastrointestinal surgery outcomes but may also increase the risk of some complications. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the impact of ERAS on the recovery and complications following gastrointestinal surgery. Materials and Methods: Studies published before December 2022 were retrieved from the following databases, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, without limitations of language or race. The endpoints included lung infection, surgical site infection, postoperative ileus, length of hospitalization, urinary tract infection, readmission, anastomotic leakage, and C-reactive protein serum levels. Results: A total of 23 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that there was a decrease in incidence of the lung infection (risk ratio = 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.74, P = .002) and postoperative length of hospitalization (P < .00001). However, ERAS protocol groups had higher readmission rates, nausea, and vomiting. There was no significant difference in the incidence of anastomotic leakage, ileus, surgical site infection, and urinary tract infection between the experimental and control groups. Conclusions: ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infections, shorten hospital stays, and expedite patient recovery. Furthermore, ERAS protocols are not associated with serious complications following gastrointestinal surgeries.

Enhanced recovery after gynecological surgery: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol is a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach designed to improve perioperative outcomes for patients. This meta-analysis aimed to identify and elaborate on the efficacy of this protocol in women undergoing gynecologic surgery. Four databases were searched for randomized controlled trials from inception to December 2021. A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. There was a significant reduction in the length of stay, the time to first flatus and first defecation, complications, and readmission rates in patients undergoing enhanced recovery after surgery when compared to routine care. The rate of discharge on the first postoperative day significantly increased in patients from the enhanced recovery group. There was no significant difference in the surgery time and blood loss. In conclusion, the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol might have a positive effect on patients undergoing gynecologic surgery. However, there is still heterogeneity between the included studies, and we need more research to draw reliable conclusions that enhanced recovery after surgery is favorable.

Cancer Prehabilitation in Practice: the Current Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article serves to describe recent controversies in cancer prehabilitation including efficacy, dose, cost effectiveness, stakeholder input, and international implementation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Appropriate frequency, type, and timing have yet to be determined, but high intensity exercise is recommended. Costs are favorable when modeled and information on costs of real-world application are forthcoming. Patients are interested in and willing to attend cancer prehabilitation. Cancer prehabilitation research is spreading throughout the world. Cancer prehabilitation includes assessment of a newly diagnosed cancer patient's baseline fitness and targeted interventions to improve their health before surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation. Cancer prehabilitation improves fitness as measured preoperatively and improves outcomes postoperatively.

Physiotherapy Regimens in Esophagectomy and Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Esophageal and gastric cancer surgery are associated with considerable morbidity, specifically postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), potentially accentuated by underlying challenges with malnutrition and cachexia affecting respiratory muscle mass. Physiotherapy regimens aim to increase the respiratory muscle strength and may prevent postoperative morbidity.

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of physiotherapy regimens in patients treated with esophagectomy or gastrectomy.

Methods

An electronic database search was performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Pedro databases. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of physiotherapy on the functional capacity, incidence of PPCs and postoperative morbidity, in-hospital mortality rate, length of hospital stay (LOS) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

Results

Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven cohort studies assessing prehabilitation totaling 960 patients, and five RCTs and five cohort studies assessing peri- or postoperative physiotherapy with 703 total patients, were included. Prehabilitation resulted in a lower incidence of postoperative pneumonia and morbidity (Clavien–Dindo score ≥ II). No difference was observed in functional exercise capacity and in-hospital mortality following prehabilitation. Meanwhile, peri- or postoperative rehabilitation resulted in a lower incidence of pneumonia, shorter LOS, and better HRQoL scores for dyspnea and physical functioning, while no differences were found for the QoL summary score, global health status, fatigue, and pain scores.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests that implementing an exercise intervention may be beneficial in both the preoperative and peri- or postoperative periods. Further investigation is needed to understand the mechanism through which exercise interventions improve clinical outcomes and which patient subgroup will gain the maximal benefit.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-11122-7.

Role of Sarcopenia in Predicting the Postoperative Morbidity and Perioperative Mortality in Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery for Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE OF STUDY

This study was done to assess the effect of sarcopenia and other risk factors on the postoperative morbidity and perioperative mortality of patients undergoing elective surgery for gastric cancer.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study comprising a single group of patients undergoing elective surgery for gastric cancer carried out in a tertiary care center in India. Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer underwent contrast-enhanced computed tomography preoperatively. Patients were considered sarcopenic when their skeletal muscle index (SMI) was < 34.9 cm²/m² for women and < 40.8 cm²/m² for men. Patients were planned for surgery ranging from gastrectomy with curative intent to palliative gastrojejunostomy. Postoperative complications including mortality were noted for 30 days following surgery and graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The role of sarcopenia and other risk factors on the postoperative outcome of patients was noted.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were included in the study. There was a high prevalence of sarcopenia (62%) among patients with gastric cancer who underwent elective surgery. However, sarcopenia was not associated with any postoperative complication (p > 0.05) including 30-day mortality (p = 0.155), prolonged postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.876), or 30-day readmission rate (0.524). Among the variables considered, only esophagojejunostomy (p < 0.001) was associated with a poor postoperative outcome.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed that there was a high prevalence of sarcopenia (62%) in patients undergoing elective surgery for gastric cancer. However, it did not adversely affect the postoperative outcome. Among the variables considered, esophagojejunostomy alone was associated with a poor postoperative outcome.

Oncologic Surgical Care Using an Enhanced Recovery Approach

Enhanced recovery programs are multimodal, evidence-based perioperative programs designed to improve a patient's functional recovery after surgery. Enhanced recovery programs promote standardized, multidisciplinary care throughout the perioperative course to improve patient outcomes, rather than focusing on surgical technique. It is important for nurses working in acute and critical care to be aware of the paradigm shift created by the trend toward the enhanced recovery approach. By learning more about facets of the approach, the nurse will be better prepared to adopt whatever aspects of enhanced recovery their institution implements for the surgical oncology population. An overview is provided of the potential components of enhanced recovery.

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.

Enhanced Recovery After Major Gastrectomy for Cancer

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have gained increasing popularity over the past 10 years, and its overarching objectives are to improve perioperative morbidity and reduce postoperative length of stay. Consensus guidelines from the ERAS Society specific to major gastrectomy were published in 2014, however since that time, prospective and retrospective studies have expanded the collective evidence for both the content and efficacy of ERAS pathways for gastrectomy. This objective of this review was to summarize recent data pertinent to the preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative management of gastrectomy patients along an ERAS pathway.

Efficacy of Prehabilitation Including Exercise on Postoperative Outcomes Following Abdominal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives: This systematic review set out to identify, evaluate and synthesise the evidence examining the effect of prehabilitation including exercise on postoperative outcomes following abdominal cancer surgery. Methods: Five electronic databases (MEDLINE 1946-2020, EMBASE 1947-2020, CINAHL 1937-2020, PEDro 1999-2020, and Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials 1991-2020) were systematically searched (until August 2020) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effects of prehabilitation interventions in patients undergoing abdominal cancer surgery. This review included any form of prehabilitation either unimodal or multimodal that included whole body and/or respiratory exercises as a stand-alone intervention or in addition to other prehabilitation interventions (such as nutrition and psychology) compared to standard care. Results: Twenty-two studies were included in the systematic review and 21 studies in the meta-analysis. There was moderate quality of evidence that multimodal prehabilitation improves pre-operative functional capacity as measured by 6 min walk distance (Mean difference [MD] 33.09 metres, 95% CI 17.69-48.50; p = <0.01) but improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness such as preoperative oxygen consumption at peak exercise (VO2 peak; MD 1.74 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -0.03-3.50; p = 0.05) and anaerobic threshold (AT; MD 1.21 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -0.34-2.76; p = 0.13) were not significant. A reduction in hospital length of stay (MD 3.68 days, 95% CI 0.92-6.44; p = 0.009) was observed but no effect was observed for postoperative complications (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% CI 0.55-1.18; p = 0.27), pulmonary complications (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01; p = 0.05), hospital re-admission (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.61-1.90; p = 0.81) or postoperative mortality (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.43-2.09, p = 0.90). Conclusion: Multimodal prehabilitation improves preoperative functional capacity with reduction in hospital length of stay. This supports the need for ongoing research on innovative cost-effective prehabilitation approaches, research within large multicentre studies to verify this effect and to explore implementation strategies within clinical practise.