Enhanced recovery pathways in abdominal gynecologic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Enhanced recovery after surgery versus conventional postoperative care in patients undergoing hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Hysterectomy is a common gynecological surgery associated with significant postoperative discomfort and extended hospital stays. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), a multidisciplinary approach, has emerged as a strategy aimed at improving perioperative outcomes and promoting faster patient recovery and satisfaction. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of ERAS protocols on clinical outcomes, such as hospital stay length, readmission rates, and postoperative complications, in patients undergoing gynecological hysterectomy.

METHODS

Following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Databases including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library were searched for relevant studies published up to January 31, 2023. A total of seventeen studies were selected based on predefined eligibility and exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was carried out using a random-effects model with the STATA SE 14.0 software, focusing on outcomes like length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and readmission rates.

RESULTS

ERAS protocols significantly reduced the length of hospital stays and incidence of postoperative complications such as ileus, without increasing readmission rates or the level of patient-reported pain. Notable heterogeneity was observed among included studies, attributed to the variation in patient populations and the specificity of the documented study protocols.

CONCLUSION

The findings underscore the effectiveness of ERAS protocols in enhancing recovery trajectories in gynecological hysterectomy patients. This reinforces the imperative for broader, standardized adoption of ERAS pathways as an evidence-based approach, fostering a safer and more efficient perioperative care paradigm.

Enhanced recovery protocols in trauma and emergency abdominal surgery: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) have been shown to improve patient outcomes and is now regarded as standard of care in elective surgical setting. However, the literature addressing the use of ERP in trauma and emergency abdominal surgery (EAS) is limited and heterogenous. A scoping review was conducted to comprehensively assess the literature on ERP in trauma laparotomy and EAS.

METHODS

Three bibliographic databases were searched for studies addressing ERP in trauma laparotomy and EAS. We extracted the study characteristics including study design, country, year, surgical procedures, ERP components used, and outcomes. Reporting was according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews.

RESULTS

After screening of 1631 articles for eligibility, 39 studies were included in the review. There has been an increase in the number of articles in the field, with 44% of the identified studies published between 2020 and 2022. Fourteen different protocols were identified, with varying components for each operative phase (preoperative; 29, intraoperative; 20, postoperative; 27). The majority of the studies addressed the effectiveness of ERP on clinical outcomes (31/39: 79%). Only two studies (5%) included purely trauma populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies on ERP implementations in the EAS populations were published across a range of countries, with improved outcomes. However, a clear gap in ERP research on trauma laparotomy was identified. This scoping review indicates that standardization of care through ERP implementation has potential to improve the quality of care in both EAS and trauma laparotomy.

Enhanced Recovery after Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery

The objective of this study was to review on the influence of enhanced rehabilitation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery outcomes, specifically focusing on length of hospital stay, hospital costs, pain, morbidity, and patient satisfaction. Following the PRISMA model and using PubMed as a source, eight articles pertaining to prolapse surgery and two articles concerning vaginal hysterectomies were selected, all published between 2014 and 2021. These studies revealed no significant difference in terms of operating time, intra- and post-operative complications, intra-operative blood loss and post-operative pain scores before and after the introduction of the ERAS program. Only one study noted a difference in readmission rates. There was, however, a noticeable decrease in intra-operative and post-operative intravenous intakes, opioid administration, length of stay, and overall hospital costs with the adoption of ERAS. Additionally, with ERAS, patients were able to mobilize more rapidly, and overall patient satisfaction significantly improved.

Prospective evaluation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in a Norwegian cohort of patients with suspected or advanced ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

This prospective cohort study evaluated the introduction of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in a tertiary gynecologic oncology referral center. Compliance and clinical outcomes were studied in two separate surgical cohorts.

METHODS

Patients undergoing laparotomy for suspected or verified advanced ovarian cancer at Oslo University Hospital were prospectively included in a pre- and post-implementation cohort. A priori, patients were stratified into: cohort 1, patients planned for surgery of advanced disease; and cohort 2, patients undergoing surgery for suspicious pelvic tumor. Baseline characteristics, adherence to the pathway, and clinical outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 439 included patients, 235 (54%) underwent surgery for advanced ovarian cancer in cohort 1 and 204 (46%) in cohort 2. In cohort 1, 53% of the patients underwent surgery with an intermediate/high Aletti complexity score. Post-ERAS, median fasting times for solids (13.1 hours post-ERAS vs 16.0 hours pre-ERAS, p<0.001) and fluids (3.7 hours post-ERAS vs 11.0 hours pre-ERAS, p<0.001) were significantly reduced. Peri-operative fluid management varied less and was reduced from median 15.8 mL/kg/hour (IQR 10.8-22.5) to 11.5 mL/kg/hour (IQR 9.0-15.4) (p<0.001). In cohort 2 only there was a statistically significant reduction in length of stay (mean (SD) 4.3±1.5 post-ERAS vs 4.6±1.2 pre-ERAS, p=0.026). Despite stable readmission rates, there were significantly more serious complications reported in cohort 1 post-ERAS.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS increased adherence to current standards in peri-operative management with significant reduction in fasting times for both solids and fluids, and peri-operative fluid administration. Length of stay was reduced in patients with suspicious pelvic tumor. Despite serious complications being common in patients with advanced disease undergoing debulking surgery, a causal relationship with the ERAS protocol could not be established. Implementing ERAS and continuous performance auditing are crucial to advancing peri-operative care of patients with ovarian cancer.

Early mobilization after esophageal cancer surgery: a retrospective cohort study

A key component of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway for esophagectomy is early mobilization. Evidence on a specific protocol of early and structured mobilization is scarce, which explains variation in clinical practice. This study aims to describe and evaluate the early mobilization practice after esophagectomy for cancer in a tertiary referral center in the Netherlands. This retrospective cohort study included data from a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent an esophagectomy between 1 January 2015 and 1 January 2020. Early mobilization entailed increase in activity with the first target of ambulating 100 meters. Primary outcomes were the number of postoperative days (PODs) until achieving this target and reasons for not achieving this target. Secondary outcomes were the relationship between preoperative factors (e.g. sex, BMI) and achieving the target on POD1, and the relationship between achieving the target on POD1 and postoperative outcomes (i.e. length of stay, readmissions). In total, 384 patients were included. The median POD of achieving the target was 2 (IQR 1-3), with 173 (45.1%) patients achieving this on POD1. Main reason for not achieving this target was due to hemodynamic instability (22.7%). Male sex was associated with achieving the target on POD1 (OR = 1.997, 95%CI 1.172-3.403, P = 0.011); achieving this target was not associated with postoperative outcomes. Ambulation up to 100 m on POD1 is achievable in patients after esophagectomy, with higher odds for men to achieve this target. ERAS pathways for post esophagectomy care are encouraged to incorporate 100 m ambulation on POD1 in their guideline as the first postoperative target.

The impact of enhanced recovery after gynaecological surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programs have become the gold standard of care in many surgical specialities.

OBJECTIVES

This updated systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate how an ERAS program can impact outcomes across both benign and oncological gynaecological surgery to inform standard surgical practice.

SEARCH STRATEGY

An electronic search of the SCOPUS, Embase and PubMed Medline databases was performed for relevant studies assessing the use of ERAS in patients undergoing gynaecological surgery compared with those without ERAS.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The studies included were all trials using ERAS programs in gynaecological surgery with a clearly outlined protocol which included at least four items from the most recent guidelines and recorded one primary outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Meta-analysis was performed on two primary endpoints; post-operative length of stay and readmission rate and one secondary endpoint; rates of ileus. Further subgroup analyses was performed to compare benign and oncological surgeries.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty studies (7885 patients) were included in the meta-analysis; 15 randomised controlled trials and 25 cohort studies. 21 studies (4333 patients) were included in meta-analyses of length of stay. Patients in the ERAS group (2351 patients) had a shortened length of stay by 1.22 days (95% CI: -1.59 - -0.86, P < 0.00001) compared to those in the control group (1982 patients). Evaluation of 27 studies (6051 patients) in meta-analysis of readmission rate demonstrated a 20% reduction in readmission rate (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.97). Analysis of our secondary outcome, demonstrated a 47% reduction in rate of ileus compared to the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS pathways significantly reduce length of stay without increasing readmission rates or rates of ileus across benign and oncological gynaecological surgery.

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.

A Retrospective Comparison of Three Patient-Controlled Analgesic Strategies: Intravenous Opioid Analgesia Plus Abdominal Wall Nerve Blocks versus Epidural Analgesia versus Intravenous Opioid Analgesia Alone in Open Liver Surgery

Background: Adequate pain control is of crucial importance to patient recovery and satisfaction following abdominal surgeries. The optimal analgesia regimen remains controversial in liver resections. Methods: Three groups of patients undergoing open hepatectomies were retrospectively analyzed, reviewing intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) versus IV-PCA in addition to bilateral rectus sheath and subcostal transversus abdominis plane nerve blocks (IV-PCA + NBs) versus patient-controlled thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA). Patient-reported pain scores and clinical data were extracted and correlated with the method of analgesia. Outcomes included total morphine consumption and numerical rating scale (NRS) at rest and on movement over the first three postoperative days, time to remove the nasogastric tube and urinary catheter, time to commence on fluid and soft diet, and length of hospital stay. Results: The TEA group required less morphine over the first three postoperative days than IV-PCA and IV-PCA + NBs groups (9.21 ± 4.91 mg, 83.53 ± 49.51 mg, and 64.17 ± 31.96 mg, respectively, p < 0.001). Even though no statistical difference was demonstrated in NRS scores on the first three postoperative days at rest and on movement, the IV-PCA group showed delayed removal of urinary catheter (removal on postoperative day 4.93 ± 5.08, 3.87 ± 1.31, and 3.70 ± 1.30, respectively) and prolonged length of hospital stay (discharged on postoperative day 12.71 ± 7.26, 11.79 ± 5.71, and 10.02 ± 4.52, respectively) as compared to IV-PCA + NBs and TEA groups. Conclusions: For postoperative pain management, it is expected that the TEA group required the least amount of opioid; however, IV-PCA + NBs and TEA demonstrated comparable postoperative outcomes, namely, the time to remove nasogastric tube/urinary catheter, to start the diet, and the length of hospital stay. IV-PCA with NBs could thus be a reliable analgesic modality for patients undergoing open liver resections.

Impact of enhanced recovery implementation in women undergoing abdominal sacrocolpopexy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) with and without liposomal bupivacaine (LB) on opioid use, hospital length of stay (LOS), costs, and morbidity of women undergoing sacrocolpopexy.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort of women who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy between April 1, 2009 and November 30, 2017. Costs for relevant healthcare services were determined by assigning 2017 charges multiplied by 2017 Medicare Cost Report's cost to charge ratios. Outcomes were compared among periods with multivariable regression models adjusted for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and concurrent hysterectomy and posterior repair.

RESULTS

Patients were subdivided into pre-ERAS (G1, n = 128), post-ERAS (G2, n = 83), and post-ERAS plus LB (G3, n = 91). The proportion of patients needing opioids during postoperative days 0-2 was significantly less for G3 (75.8%) compared with G1 (97.7%) and G2 (92.8%); P < 0.001). The median morphine equivalent units (MEU) with interquartile ranges, mean LOS, and adjusted mean standardized costs were significantly lower in G3 compared with the other two groups (35 [20-75] vs. 67 [31-109], and 60 [30-122] MEUs; 1.8 vs. 2.3 vs. 2.9 days; and $2391, $2975, and $3844, for G3, G2, and G1, respectively; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an ERAS pathway led to significant decreases in opioid use, LOS, and costs. Supplementation with LB further improved these measures.

Perioperative enhanced recovery programmes for women with gynaecological cancers

BACKGROUND

Gynaecological cancers account for 15% of newly diagnosed cancer cases in women worldwide. In recent years, increasing evidence demonstrates that traditional approaches in perioperative care practice may be unnecessary or even harmful. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme has therefore been gradually introduced to replace traditional approaches in perioperative care. There is an emerging body of evidence outside of gynaecological cancer which has identified that perioperative ERAS programmes decrease length of postoperative hospital stay and reduce medical expenditure without increasing complication rates, mortality, and readmission rates. However, evidence-based decisions on perioperative care practice for major surgery in gynaecological cancer are limited. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 3, 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes in gynaecological cancer care on length of postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, mortality, readmission, bowel functions, quality of life, participant satisfaction, and economic outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases for the literature published from inception until October 2020: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Scopus, and four Chinese databases including the China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), WanFang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Weipu Database. We also searched four trial registration platforms and grey literature databases for ongoing and unpublished trials, and handsearched the reference lists of included trials and accessible reviews for relevant references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ERAS programmes for perioperative care in women with gynaecological cancer to traditional care strategies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted the data and assessed methodological quality for each included study using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 (RoB 2) for RCTs. Using Review Manager 5.4, we pooled the data and calculated the measures of treatment effect with the mean difference (MD), standardised mean difference (SMD), and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) to reflect the summary estimates and uncertainty.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs with 747 participants. All studies compared ERAS programmes with traditional care strategies for women with gynaecological cancer. We had substantial concerns regarding the methodological quality of the included studies since the included RCTs had moderate to high risk of bias in domains including randomisation process, deviations from intended interventions, and measurement of outcomes. ERAS programmes may reduce length of postoperative hospital stay (MD -1.71 days, 95% CI -2.59 to -0.84; I2 = 86%; 6 studies, 638 participants; low-certainty evidence). ERAS programmes may result in no difference in overall complication rates (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.05; I2 = 42%; 5 studies, 537 participants; low-certainty evidence). The certainty of evidence was very low regarding the effect of ERAS programmes on all-cause mortality within 30 days of discharge (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.14 to 6.68; 1 study, 99 participants). ERAS programmes may reduce readmission rates within 30 days of operation (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.90; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 385 participants; low-certainty evidence). ERAS programmes may reduce the time to first flatus (MD -0.82 days, 95% CI -1.00 to -0.63; I2 = 35%; 4 studies, 432 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the time to first defaecation (MD -0.96 days, 95% CI -1.47 to -0.44; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 228 participants; low-certainty evidence). The studies did not report the effects of ERAS programmes on quality of life. The evidence on the effects of ERAS programmes on participant satisfaction was very uncertain due to the limited number of studies. The adoption of ERAS strategies may not increase medical expenditure, though the evidence was of very low certainty (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.25; I2 = 54%; 2 studies, 167 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests that ERAS programmes may shorten length of postoperative hospital stay, reduce readmissions, and facilitate postoperative bowel function recovery without compromising participant safety. Further well-conducted studies are required in order to validate the certainty of these findings.

Outcomes of open radical hysterectomy following implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program

OBJECTIVE

Open surgery has become the standard approach for radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 IA1 with lymphovascular space invasion-IIA1). Our primary objective was to compare the length of stay in patients undergoing open radical hysterectomy before and after implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program.

METHODS

This was a single center, retrospective, before-and-after intervention study including patients who underwent open radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer from January 2009 to December 2020. Two groups were identified based on the time of ERAS implementation: pre-ERAS group included patients who were operated on between January 2009 and October 2014; post-ERAS group included patients who underwent surgery between November 2014 and December 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients were included, of whom 29 patients were in the pre-ERAS group and 52 patients in the post-ERAS group. Both groups had similar clinical characteristics with no differences in terms of median age (42 years (interquartile range (IQR) 35-53) in pre-ERAS group vs 41 years (IQR 35-49) in post-ERAS group; p=0.47) and body mass index (26.1 kg/m² (IQR 24.6-29.7) in pre-ERAS group vs 27.1 kg/m² (IQR 23.5-33.5) in post-ERAS group; p=0.44). Patients in the post-ERAS group were discharged from the hospital earlier compared with those in the pre-ERAS group (median 3 days (IQR 2-3) vs 4 (IQR 3-4), p<0.01). The proportion of patients discharged within 48 hours was significantly higher in the post-ERAS group (47.3% vs 17.3%, p=0.013). There were no differences regarding either overall complications (44.8% pre-ERAS vs 38.5% post-ERAS; p=0.57) or readmission rates within 30 days (20.7% pre-ERAS group vs 17.3% ERAS group; p=0.40). Adherence to the ERAS pathway since its implementation in 2014 has remained stable with a median of 70% (IQR 65%-75%).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing open radical hysterectomy on an ERAS pathway have a shorter length of hospital stay without increasing overall complications or readmissions rates.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program in the treatment of uterine fibroids with focused ultrasound ablation surgery

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) can reduce the length of hospital stay, incidence of surgery-related complications, and postoperative pain. We aimed to demonstrate the implementation of an ERAS pathway in the treatment of uterine fibroids with focused ultrasound ablation surgery (FUAS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective data analysis was performed on clinical outcomes encompassing the following three phases: before ERAS (pre-ERAS), during adjustment of ERAS (interim-ERAS), and after the introduction of an ERAS program (post-ERAS). The purpose of describing the interim-ERAS was to provide references for the formulation of the program during the course of FUAS by describing the adjustment processes. Data from patients admitted to the hospital from September 2019 to December 2019 and April 2020 to November 2020 and who met the criteria for FUAS in the treatment of their uterine fibroids were examined. Length of stay, cost of surgery, postoperative pain score, utilization of postoperative analgesics, and incidence of postoperative adverse events were compared across the abovementioned three phases.

RESULTS

Compared with the pre-phase, the cost of treatment and length of stay were reduced after the implementation of ERAS. The use of analgesics before leaving the operating room, as well as the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, were also reduced.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of an ERAS protocol might benefit patients with uterine fibroids treated with FUAS in terms of requiring a shorter hospitalization period, lower costs, and reduced opioid use.

Enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery and its impact on outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are a series of perioperative interventions well-established in improving the care and outcomes of patients. With recent emergence of studies on its implementation in cardiac surgery, this paper represents the first systematic review on current evidence of ERAS efficacy in this field.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched through Pubmed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Embase and Scopus. Comparative studies with controls that described the implementation of ERAS in all types of cardiac operations from 2001 to 2020 were included. Data extracted included patient demographics, components of ERAS protocol described, types of cardiac surgery, and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

In the final analysis, nine studies were included, of which there were one randomized controlled trial (RCT), one quasi-experiment and seven retrospective/prospective studies. Significant improvement in hospital and ICU length of stay, as well as reduction in postoperative opioid consumption were demonstrated. No increase in postoperative complications were reported.

CONCLUSION

ERAS in cardiac surgery has shown to be potentially safe and effective in improving certain postoperative outcomes. However, the evidence is limited by the lack of high-quality RCTs. We also found the lack of practice of class 1 recommended interventions set forth by the ERAS Cardiac Society. Furthermore, majority of studies only evaluated the immediate postoperative outcomes of patients, and not the long-term outcomes. RCTs that fully implement measures recommended by the ERAS Cardiac Society, with assessments on both immediate and long-term outcomes, are warranted.

Updates in Enhanced Recovery Pathways for Gynecologic Surgery

Gynecologic surgery encompasses over a quarter of inpatient surgical procedures for US women, and current projections estimate an increase of the US female population by nearly 50% in 2050. Over the last decade, US hospitals have embraced enhanced recovery pathways in many specialties. They have increasingly been used in multiple institutions worldwide, becoming the standard of care for patient optimization. According to the last updated enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guideline published in 2019, there are several new considerations behind each practice in ERAS protocols. This article discusses the most updated evidence regarding ERAS programs for gynecologic surgery.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Enhanced recovery after posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis surgery: a national study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of the implementation of a national enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program for posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) surgery on the length of hospital stay, the rate of postoperative complications, and readmission within 30 days.

DESIGN

Comparative exposed/nonexposed observational study.

SETTING

Study based on the French national medicoeconomic database of the Program of Medicalization of Information System.

PATIENTS

Seven hundred and sixty-four women who underwent DIE surgery were involved and matched (1:3 ratio) into two groups: ERAS group for the year 2019 and non-ERAS group for the year 2015.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical management for posterior DIE.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The length of hospital stay, the rate of postoperative complications during the initial hospital stay, and readmission within 30 days.

RESULTS

The ERAS group included 191 women, and the non-ERAS group included 573 women. The mean length of hospital stay was shorter in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group (4.28 ± 3.80 days vs. 5.42 ± 4.04 days, respectively). The rate of postoperative abdominal or pelvic pain syndromes was lower in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group (5/191 (2.62%) vs. 48/573 (8.38%), respectively; relative risk, 0.31 [0.125-0.7969]). The rate of postoperative complication and the rate of readmission within 30 days were not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of ERAS has a significant positive impact on patient outcomes after DIE surgery. The length of hospital stay and abdominal or pelvic pain syndromes were reduced without increasing complications or readmission within 30 days.

New surgical realities: implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for gynecological laparoscopy-a prospective study

Background

Multimodal rehabilitation allows optimization of functional recovery in surgery patients by reducing the postoperative stress and hospital stay duration, without increasing the morbidity and mortality. It is reportedly successful in other surgical disciplines, and guidelines for its application to gynecological surgery are available; however, most evidence for these guidelines is derived from observational and/or retrospective studies. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the applicability of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in laparoscopic gynecological surgery and its influence on the postoperative stay, morbidity, mortality, and readmission, through a prospective approach.

Methods

This prospective cohort study was performed on 90 patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign causes from October 2017 to October 2019. Patients in whom the ERAS (ERAS group, n = 30) and traditional (control group, n = 60) protocols were implemented were compared. All patients were followed for 6 months.

Results

The groups were homogeneous and did not differ significantly with respect to the demographic characteristics (age, ASA score, body mass index), surgical indications, and surgery types. Adherence to the ERAS protocol was over 99%. The postoperative hospital-stay durations were 1.73 days (r = 1–3) and 2.97 days (r = 2–6) in the ERAS and control groups, respectively (p = 0.000). No significant intergroup differences were observed in the rates of complications and readmissions.

Conclusions

The ERAS protocol is applicable in laparoscopic gynecological surgery and can be implemented with good adherence. This can allow optimization of patient recovery by reducing the hospital stay duration, without increasing the rates of morbidity, mortality, or readmission.

Systematic Review of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in Patients Undergoing Cranial Surgery

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) pathways are increasingly being integrated in neurosurgical patient management. The full extent of ERAS in cranial surgery is not well studied. We performed a systematic review examining ERAS in cranial surgery patients to 1) identify the extent to which ERAS is integrated in cranial neurosurgical procedures and 2) assess effectiveness of ERAS interventions for patients undergoing these procedures.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, PsychInfo, and Google Scholar was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines (CRD42020197187). Studies eligible for inclusion assessed patients undergoing any cranial surgical procedure using an ERAS or ERAS-like pathway, defined by ≥2 ERAS protocol elements per the ERAS Society's RECOvER Checklist and the recommendations of Hagan et al. 2016 (not including patient education, criteria for discharge, or tracking of postdischarge outcomes).

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in qualitative synthesis, 2 of which were randomized controlled trials. All studies showed a moderate risk of bias. The most common ERAS elements used were screening and/or optimization and formal discharge criteria. The least common ERAS elements used were fasting/carbohydrate loading and antithrombotic prophylaxis. Complication rates were similar in studies comparing ERAS with non-ERAS groups. ERAS interventions were associated with reduced length of stay, with comparable and/or improved patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS is a safe and potentially favorable perioperative pathway for select patients undergoing cranial surgery. Future studies of ERAS in cranial surgery patients should emphasize postoperative optimizations and patient-reported outcome measures as key features.

Systematic review of the effect of implementing enhanced recovery after surgery on selected attributes of surgical recovery in gynecology

This study aimed to systematically review the available literature on enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) following gynecologic procedures performed either as an open surgery or as a minimally invasive gynecological surgery (MIGS) in terms of outcomes. This review revealed the results of published literature and assessed the benefits and diverse outcomes of ERAS implementation in patients undergoing MIGS or other gynecologic surgeries. In this review, we sought to examine the efficacy of entire ERAS protocols, faithfully performed, to determine whether they were successful in improving individual attributes of surgical recovery. Electronic databases of PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched in January 2021 for relevant studies. Data were extracted from eligible studies including LOS, change in the quality-of-life and recovery over time, postoperative complications including nausea and vomiting, opioid or anesthesia use, hospital cost, patient satisfaction, postoperative pain, and readmission rate as outcomes. Many of the included studies reported a significant reduction in the LOS as well as in readmission rates, hospital cost, and occurrence of nausea and vomiting postoperatively. Moreover, a clinically significant increase was noted in patient satisfaction in studies that have used tools that measure patient satisfaction. No studies have reported a significant increase in the overall quality of recovery using appropriately validated tools. Following ERAS implementation, patients’ postoperative rehabilitation, including postoperative discomfort, readmission rates, and satisfaction, showed a clinically significant improvement.

Neurosurgery perception of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are widespread in several fields, particularly general surgery, and attempt to deliver surgical care at a lower cost while also improving patient outcomes. However, few institutions have implemented ERAS protocols in neurosurgery. As such, a survey of neurosurgeons on the current state of ERAS in neurosurgery was conducted to provide insight on scaling the practice nationally. A 15-question survey was designed to assess the implementation of andsatisfaction with ERAS protocols at individual institutions. A total of 39 responses were collected from 38 unique institutions. 58.9%(N = 23) reported implementation of neurosurgical ERAS protocols. 52.1% (N = 12) of the responses were neurosurgeons at academic institutions withneurosurgical residency programs. Most neurosurgeons used ERAS protocolsfor spine cases (N = 23), with only 17.3% (N = 4) employing ERAS protocolsfor cranial cases. 69.5% (N = 16) of survey participants reported that thedesign and implementation of ERAS was a multidisciplinary effort acrossmany departments, including neurosurgery, anesthesia, and pharmacy.Decreased costs and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were reported tobe unanticipated benefits of ERAS implementation. Unanticipated challenges to implementation of new protocols included difficulties withelectronic medical record (EMR) integration, agreement of protocoldetails amongst stakeholders, uniform implementation of protocols by allneurosurgeons, and lack of adaptability by multidisciplinary staff. Meandepartment satisfaction with ERAS protocol implementation was 4.00 +/- 0.81 (N = 22) on a 5-point Likert scale.

Clinical efficacy of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy

Objective

To evaluate the application of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 136 patients who underwent RALP between August 2017 and June 2018 as the control group and a prospective analysis of 106 patients who underwent RALP between January 2019 and January 2020 as the ERAS group. ERAS focused on preoperative education, nutritional intervention, electrolyte solution intake, restrictive fluid infusion, body warming, no indwelling central venous catheter, use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), early mobilization, and eating recovery.

Results

The times from RALP to the first intake of clear liquid; first ambulation; first defecation; first fluid, semi-liquid, and general diet; drain removal; and length of hospital stay (LOS) were significantly shorter, and operative time, fluid infusion within 24 hours, postoperative day (POD) 1 albumin, POD 1 hemoglobin, and POD 2 drainage were significantly higher in the ERAS group. Five patients (3.8%) in the ERAS group developed postoperative complications (urine leakage, n = 4; intestinal obstruction, n = 1), while 1 patient (0.7%) in the control group developed intestinal obstruction.

Conclusions

ERAS effectively accelerated patient rehabilitation and reduced the LOS for patients undergoing RALP.

Recent advances in benign gynecological laparoscopic surgery

Minimally invasive surgery continues to transform the field of gynecological surgery and is now the standard of care for the surgical treatment of many diseases in gynecology. Owing to minimally invasive surgery's clear advantages, new advances in technology are being employed rapidly and enabling even the most complicated procedures to be performed less invasively. We examine recent literature on minimally invasive surgical innovations, advances, and common practices in benign gynecology that, from our point of view, made an impact on the way laparoscopic surgery is performed and managed in the last decade.

Multimodal Analgesia Decreases Postoperative Opioid Consumption in Living Liver Donation

Objective

To evaluate the effects of multimodal analgesia on postoperative opioid consumption and perioperative pain management in patients undergoing living liver donation.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted of 129 patients who underwent living liver donation between 2006 and 2015. Patients were separated into 2 cohorts, pre–multimodal analgesia and multimodal analgesia, to allow intergroup analysis. All patients received an intrathecal opioid injection and underwent donor hepatectomy. Primary outcome data compared opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents for postoperative days (PODs) 0 to 4 between the cohorts. Secondary outcomes compared yearly averaged cumulative opioid consumption on PODs 0 to 4 in oral morphine equivalents; yearly averaged numeric rating scale pain scores; hospital length of stay; and percentage of patients receiving intravenous ketorolac, ketamine, or transversus abdominis plane blocks.

Results

For PODs 0 to 4, a 50% reduction in overall opioids administered postoperatively (359 mg vs 179 mg; P<.01) was observed in the multimodal analgesia cohort, whereas no significant difference was found in year-to-year average postoperative pain scores (4.5 vs 3.6). The proportion of patients receiving ketorolac increased to more than 90% by 2013. More than 40% of all patients in the multimodal analgesia group received a perioperative regimen of acetaminophen, gabapentin, ketamine, and transverse abdominal plane blocks (0% in pre–multimodal analgesia). Mean hospital length of stay was reduced from 7.7 to 6.6 days (P<.01).

Conclusion

Implementation of multimodal analgesia to manage perioperative pain in living liver donation resulted in a 50% reduction of postoperative opioid consumption. Clinically satisfactory average pain scores were maintained for PODs 0 to 4.

[Enhanced recovery after surgery-Does the ERAS concept keep its promises]

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concepts or fast-track are supposed to accelerate recovery after surgery, reduce postoperative complications and shorten the hospital stay when compared to traditional perioperative treatment.

METHODS

Electronic search of the PubMed database to identify systematic reviews with meta-analysis (SR) comparing ERAS and traditional treatment.

RESULTS

The presented SR investigated 70 randomized controlled studies (RCT) with 12,986 patients and 93 non-RCT (24,335 patients) concerning abdominal, thoracic and vascular as well as orthopedic surgery. The complication rates were decreased under ERAS following colorectal esophageal, liver and pulmonary resections as well as after implantation of hip endoprostheses. Pulmonary complications were reduced after ERAS esophageal, gastric and pulmonary resections. The first bowel movements occurred earlier after ERAS colorectal resections and delayed gastric emptying was less often observed after ERAS pancreatic resection. Following ERAS fast-track esophageal resection, anastomotic leakage was diagnosed less often as well as surgical complications after ERAS pulmonary resection. The ERAS in all studies concerning orthopedic surgery and trials investigating implantation of a hip endoprosthesis or knee endoprosthesis reduced the risk for postoperative blood transfusions. Regardless of the type of surgery, ERAS shortened hospital stay without increasing readmissions.

CONCLUSION

Numerous clinical trials have confirmed that ERAS reduces postoperative morbidity, shortens hospital stay and accelerates recovery without increasing readmission rates following most surgical operations.

Validation of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in gynecologic surgery: an Italian randomized study

BACKGROUND

The enhanced recovery after surgery concept, which was introduced 20 years ago, is based on a multimodal approach to improve the functional rehabilitation of patients after surgery.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to validate an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in gynecologic surgery for both benign and malignant diseases (endometrial cancer and advanced ovarian cancer) and to measure the adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol items in a randomized trial setting.

STUDY DESIGN

In this trial (NCT03347409), we randomly assigned patients to undergo standard perioperative care or enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. The primary outcome is a shorter length of stay in favor of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. Secondary outcomes include measurement of adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol items: comparison of postoperative pain, vomiting, and nausea; anesthesiologic and surgical complications up to 30 days after surgery; rate of readmissions; the time to event in hours for bowel movements, flatus, drinking, hunger, eating, and walking; and the quality of recovery using a validated questionnaire (QoR-15). Finally, we explored the length of stay in the prespecified subgroups at randomization, based on the type of surgical access and gynecologic disease.

RESULTS

A total of 168 women were available for analysis: 85 women (50.6%) were assigned to the standard perioperative care group, and 83 women (49.4%) were assigned to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol group. The 2 groups were similar for age, body mass index, comorbidities, anesthesiological risk, smoking habits, surgical access, and complexity of surgical procedures. Seventy-two patients (42.9%) underwent surgery for benign disease, 48 (28.6%) for endometrial cancer, and 48 (28.6%) for ovarian cancer. Women in the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol group had a shorter length of stay (median: 2 [interquartile range, 2-3] vs 4 [interquartile range, 4-7] days; P<.001). A decreased rate of postoperative complications was noted for the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol group, as well as an earlier time to occur for all the events. Mean adherence to protocol items was 84.8% (95% confidence interval, 79.7-89.8), and we registered a better satisfaction in the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol group. The shortening of the length of stay was confirmed also in the prespecified subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

Application of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in gynecologic surgery translated to a shorter length of stay regardless of surgical access and type of gynecologic disease. Adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol items in the setting of a randomized trial was high.

Use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC) Combined with Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration (LCBDE): A Cohort Study

Background

The have been few reports on use of ERAS in LC combined with LCBDE to promote postoperative recovery of patients. Therefore, the purpose of this cohort study was to explore the use of ERAS in patients who underwent LC combined with LCBDE.

Material/Methods

We collected clinical data of 445 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration from January 2015 to February 2019 in our hospital and divided the patients into an E-LC group and an LC group. The stress response index, postoperative complication rate, and postoperative rehabilitation effect of the 2 groups were compared and analyzed.

Results

The WBC count and CRP levels in the E-LC group were significantly lower than those of the LC group 1 day after surgery (p<0.05). In terms of the postoperative complications, the incidence of nausea, incisional pain, and vomiting in the E-LC group were lower than in the LC group, and the differences were statistically significant (p<0.05). In terms of the postoperative rehabilitation efficacy, flatus time and length of hospital stay after surgery in the E-LC group were significantly shorter than those in the LC group (p<0.05).

Conclusions

Use of ERAS in the perioperative period in patients who underwent LC combined with LCBDE reduces the stress response and postoperative complications and accelerates postoperative rehabilitation.

Clinical trial registration number

ChiCTR1900024292, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=40785

A Single Centre Randomised Control Study to Assess the Impact of Pre-Operative Carbohydrate Loading on Women Undergoing Major Surgery for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Objective

Historically, patients have fasted before elective surgery to ensure an empty stomach to avoid aspiration. A fasting-induced catabolic state however may adversely influence recovery after surgery. Our study was designed to test the effect of oral carbohydrate loading on clinical parameters in patients undergoing major surgery for advanced-stage ovarian cancer.

Methods

A double-blinded single-centre randomised trial was designed to recruit 110 patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing either primary surgery, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to debulking surgery. Following written informed consent, the patients were randomised into two groups. Group 1 received the carbohydrate drink (intervention) and group 2 received flavoured water (placebo). The quantity of fluid in both groups was 800ml the night before the surgery and 400ml two hours before the induction of anaesthesia. The primary endpoint of the study was the Length of Hospital Stay (LoHS); the secondary parameters assessed were pain scores, nausea and vomiting scores, bowel function, and postoperative complication rate.

Results

Between March 2009 and December 2011, 80 patients were randomised and 75 completed the study. A decision was made to close the trial early as a change in routine clinical practice meant that patients were admitted on the day of surgery rather than a day before. Analysis of the data revealed that there were no significant differences between the study groups in terms of LoHS and other clinical parameters.

Conclusion

In this single-center study, which failed to recruit the planned number of patients, we were unable to demonstrate that oral carbohydrate intake pre-operatively has significant impact on the recovery process or the length of hospitalisation postoperatively. Future studies should examine all aspects of an Enhanced Recovery Program after Surgery as a package as compared to a single element to enhance patient outcome.

Enhanced recovery after surgery on multiple clinical outcomes: Umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Previously, many meta-analyses have reported the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs on many surgical specialties.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess the effects of ERAS pathways on multiple clinical outcomes in surgery.

DESIGN

An umbrella review of meta-analyses.

DATE SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library.

RESULTS

The umbrella review identified 23 meta-analyses of interventional study and observational study. Consistent and robust evidence shown that the ERAS programs can significantly reduce the length of hospital stay (MD: -2.349 days; 95%CI: -2.740 to -1.958) and costs (MD: -$639.064; 95%CI:: -933.850 to -344.278) in all the surgery patients included in the review compared with traditional perioperative care. The ERAS programs would not increase mortality in all surgeries and can even reduce 30-days mortality rate (OR: 0.40; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.67) in orthopedic surgery. Meanwhile, it also would not increase morbidity except laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery (RR: 1.49; 95%CI: 1.04 to 2.13). Moreover, readmission rate was increased in open gastric cancer surgery (RR: 1.92; 95%CI: 1.00 to 3.67).

CONCLUSION

The ERAS programs are considered to be safe and efficient in surgery patients. However, precaution is necessary for gastric cancer surgery.

Postoperative Bladder Filling After Outpatient Laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Time to Discharge: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether backfilling the bladder postoperatively will reduce time to discharge in patients undergoing outpatient laparoscopic hysterectomy.

METHODS

In a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial among women undergoing outpatient laparoscopic hysterectomy, patients were randomly assigned to a backfill-assisted void trial or a trial of spontaneous voiding. The primary outcome was time to discharge assessed by length of time spent in the postanesthesia care unit. Secondary outcomes included time to first spontaneous void, urinary retention rates, and postoperative complications within 8 weeks. We estimated that 152 patients (76/group) would provide greater than 80% power to identify a 30-minute difference in the primary outcome with a SD of 56 minutes and a two-sided α of 0.05.

RESULTS

Between June 2017 to May 2018, 202 women were screened, 162 women were randomized, and results were analyzed for 153 women. Seventy-five patients (group A) who had a backfill-assisted voiding trial and 78 patients (group B) who had a spontaneous voiding trial were included in the analysis. The mean time to discharge was 273.4 minutes for group A vs 283.2 minutes for group B, which was not found to be significant (P=.45). The mean time to first spontaneous void was 181.1 minutes in group A vs 206.0 minutes in group B. There was a statistically significant reduction of 24.9 minutes in time to first spontaneous void with patients randomized to the backfill group (P=.04). Five of 75 patients (6.7%) in group A and 10 of 78 patients (12.8%) in group B developed urinary retention postoperatively and required recatheterization before discharge, which was also not significant (P=.20).

CONCLUSION

Bladder filling before removing the Foley catheter is a simple procedure shown to reduce time to first spontaneous void, but not time to discharge in patients undergoing outpatient laparoscopic hysterectomy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03126162.

Robotic Surgery in Gynecology

The robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical approach has improved complex gynecologic surgeries. It has the advantages of excellent visualization through the high-resolution 3-dimensional view, a wrist-like motion of the robotic arms and improved ergonomics. Similar to conventional laparoscopic surgeries, it is associated with a decrease in long-term surgical morbidity, early recovery and return to work, and improved esthetics. We discuss preoperative planning, surgical techniques, and some of the latest clinical results of robotic-assisted laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

Recommendations from the ERAS® Society for standards for the development of enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines

BACKGROUND

ERAS® Society guidelines are holistic, multidisciplinary tools designed to improve outcomes after surgery. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) approach was initially developed for colorectal surgery and has been implemented successfully across a large number of settings, resulting in improved patient outcomes. As the ERAS approach is increasingly being adopted worldwide and new guidelines are being generated for new populations, there is a need to define an ERAS® Society guideline and the methodology that should be followed in its development.

METHODS

The ERAS® Society recommended approach for developing new guidelines is based on the creation of multidisciplinary guideline development groups responsible for defining topics, planning the literature search, and assessing the quality of the evidence.

RESULTS

Clear definitions for the elements of an ERAS guideline involve multimodal and multidisciplinary approaches impacting on multiple patient outcomes. Recommended methodology for guideline development follows a rigorous approach with systematic identification and evaluation of evidence, and consensus-based development of recommendations. Guidelines should then be evaluated and reviewed regularly to ensure that the best and most up-to-date evidence is used consistently to support surgical patients.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for a standardized, evidence-informed approach to both the development of new ERAS® Society guidelines, and the adaptation and revision of existing guidelines.

Impact of implementation of an enhanced recovery program in gynecologic surgery on healthcare costs

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery programs have been associated with improved outcomes after gynecologic surgery. There are limited data on the effect of enhanced recovery programs on healthcare costs or healthcare service use.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in hospital charges for women who undergo surgery for a suspected gynecologic cancer that is managed in an enhanced recovery program as compared with conventional perioperative care.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective cohort study of women who underwent open abdominal surgery for a suspected gynecologic cancer before and after the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program. Consecutive patients from May to October 2014 and from November 2014 to November 2015 comprised the conventional perioperative care (before enhanced recovery after surgery) and enhanced recovery after surgery cohorts, respectively. Patients were excluded if they underwent surgery with a multidisciplinary surgical team or minimally invasive surgery. All technical and professional charges were ascertained for all healthcare services from the day of surgery until postoperative day 30. Charges for adjuvant treatment were excluded. Charges were classified according to the type of clinical service provided. The primary outcome was the difference in total hospital charges between the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery and the enhanced recovery after surgery groups. Secondary outcomes were between group differences in hospital charges within clinical service categories.

RESULTS

A total of 271 patients were included in the analysis (58 patients in the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery and 213 patients in the enhanced recovery after surgery cohort). A total of 70,177 technical charges and 6775 professional charges were identified and classified. The median hospital charge for a patient decreased 15.6% in the enhanced recovery after surgery group compared with the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery group (95% confidence interval, 5-24.5%; P=.008). Patients in the enhanced recovery after surgery group also had lower charges for laboratory services (20% lower; 95% confidence interval, 0--39%; P=.04), pharmacy services (30% lower; 95% confidence interval, 14--41%; P<.001), room and board (25% lower; 95% confidence interval, 20--47%; P=.005), and material goods (64% lower; 95% confidence interval, 44--81%; P<.001). No differences in charges were observed for perioperative services, diagnostic procedures, emergency department care, transfusion-related services, interventional radiology procedures, physical/occupational therapy, outpatient care, or other services.

CONCLUSION

Hospital charges and healthcare service use were lower for enhanced recovery patients compared with patients who received conventional perioperative care after open surgery for a suspected gynecologic cancer. Enhanced recovery programs may be considered to be high value in healthcare because they provide improved outcomes while lowering resource use.

Is routine nasogastric decompression after hepatic surgery necessary? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Currently the nasogastric tube (NGT) is routinely inserted in clinical after abdominal surgery for decompression in China, yet the practice varies between regions, the role of NGT for the patients after hepatic surgery remains unclear. Therefore, this present meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of NGT placement after hepatic surgery.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis DATA SOURCES: PUBMED, EMBASE, Science Direct, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Database (until Mar 30, 2019) were systematically searched.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of NGT and no NGT treatment after hepatic surgery were included. Data were synthesized using a random-effects or fixed effect model according to the heterogeneity. Outcomes were presented as Mantel-Haenszel style odd ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

Seven studies with 1306 patients were eligible for inclusion. Compared with NGT treatment, the no NGT decompression could shorten the time to first defecation (MD -0.59; -0.79, -0.39), reduce the time to start diet (MD -0.46; -0.90, -0.03), and decrease the length of hospital stay (MD 0.48; -0.93, -0.03), but it could also increase the risk of NGT re-intubation (OR 6.8; 1.77, 26.72), no significant differences were detected on the first passage of flatus (MD -0.34; -0.86, 0.18), the incidence of nausea (OR 0.81; 0.40, 1.67), vomiting (OR 1.06; 0.19, 5.93), abdominal distention (OR 0.87; 0.60, 1.25).

CONCLUSION

Given that very limited information for some endpoints in this present meta-analysis, the routinely insertion of NGT after hepatic surgery is not justified, the no NGT decompression seems to be more beneficial to the prognosis of patients after hepatic surgery, more related studies on this issue are needed.

International validation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society guidelines on enhanced recovery for gynecologic surgery

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society publishes guidelines on perioperative care, but these guidelines should be validated prospectively.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guideline elements and postoperative outcomes in an international cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

The study comprised 2101 patients undergoing elective gynecologic/oncology surgery between January 2011 and November 2017 in 10 hospitals across Canada, the United States, and Europe. Patient demographics, surgical/anesthesia details, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol compliance elements (pre-, intra-, and postoperative phases) were entered into the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Interactive Audit System. Surgical complexity was stratified according to the Aletti scoring system (low vs medium/high). The following covariates were accounted for in the analysis: age, body mass index, smoking status, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy, operating time, surgical approach (open vs minimally invasive), intraoperative blood loss, hospital, and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation status. The primary end points were primary hospital length of stay and complications. Negative binomial regression was used to model length of stay, and logistic regression to model complications, as a function of compliance score and covariates.

RESULTS

Patient demographics included a median age 56 years, 35.5% obese, 15% smokers, and 26.7% American Society of Anesthesiologists Class III-IV. Final diagnosis was malignant in 49% of patients. Laparotomy was used in 75.9% of cases, and the remainder minimally invasive surgery. The majority of cases (86%) were of low complexity (Aletti score ≤3). In patients with ovarian cancer, 69.5% had a medium/high complexity surgery (Aletti score 4-11). Median length of stay was 2 days in the low- and 5 days in the medium/high-complexity group. Every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score was associated with 8% (IRR, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-0.95; P<.001) decrease in days in hospital among low-complexity, and 12% (IRR, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.93; P<.001) decrease among patients with medium/high-complexity scores. For every unit increase in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline score, the odds of total complications were estimated to be 12% lower (P<.05) among low-complexity patients.

CONCLUSION

Audit of surgical practices demonstrates that improved compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Gynecologic/Oncology guidelines is associated with an improvement in clinical outcomes, including length of stay, highlighting the importance of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery implementation.

Opioid Use in the Postoperative Arena: Global Reduction in Opioids After Surgery Through Enhanced Recovery and Gynecologic Surgery

Enhanced recovery programs aim to reduce surgical stress to improve the patient perioperative experience. Through a combination of multimodal analgesia and maintaining a physiological state, postoperative recovery is improved. Many analgesic adjuncts are available that improve postoperative pain control and limit opioid analgesia requirements. Adjuncts are often used in combination, but different interventions may be incorporated for patient-specific and procedure-specific needs. Postoperative pain control can be optimized by continuing nonopioid adjuncts, and prescribing opioid analgesia to address breakthrough pain. Prescribing practices should balance optimizing pain relief, minimizing the risk of chronic pain, while limiting the potential for opioid misuse.

Fast-track pathway for elective caesarean section: a quality improvement initiative to promote day 1 discharge

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) aims to improve perioperative care, hasten recovery to the normal physiological state and shorten length of stay (LoS). There is evidence that ERAS programmes following elective caesarean section (ELCS) confer benefit through faster return to physiological state and reduced LoS for mother and baby. Baseline audit of ELCS in 2013 revealed a mean LoS of 3 days. We piloted an ERAS discharge pathway promoting day 2 discharge, which rose from 5.0% to 40.2%. 19.2% of women went home on day 1. Many women fed back that they would prefer day 1 discharge. We hypothesised that a day 1 discharge pathway for low-risk women could benefit both women and services at our maternity unit. From October 2015, we developed a 'fast-track pathway' (FTP) using a Plan-Do-Study-Act approach. Between October 2015 and April 2016, we prospectively audited clinical outcomes, LoS and maternal satisfaction from all women placed on the FTP. We held regular multidisciplinary team meetings to allow contemporaneous analysis. Satisfaction was analysed by Likert scale at postoperative surveys. Women were identified in antenatal clinic after meeting predefined low-risk criteria. 27.3% of women (n=131/479) delivering by ELCS entered the FTP. 76.2% of women on the FTP were discharged on day 1. Mean LoS fell to 1.31 days. 94.2% of women who established breast feeding at day 1 were still breast feeding at 7 days. Overall satisfaction at day 7 was 4.71 on a 5-point Likert scale. 73.1% of women reported good pain control. Additional financial savings are estimated at £99 886 annually. There were no related cases of readmission. Day 1 discharge after ELCS is safe and acceptable in carefully selected, low-risk women and has high satisfaction. There may be resultant financial savings and improved flow through a maternity unit with no detected adverse effect on breast feeding, maternal morbidity or postnatal readmissions.

Reduction in opioid use and postoperative pain scores after elective laparotomy with implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol on a gynecologic oncology service

Objective

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are designed to mitigate the physiologic stress response created by surgery, to decrease the time to resumption of daily activities, and to improve overall recovery. This study aims to investigate postoperative recovery outcomes following gynecologic surgery before and after implementation of an ERAS protocol.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed of patients undergoing elective laparotomy at a major academic center following implementation of an ERAS protocol (11/4/2014–7/27/2016) with comparison to a historical cohort (6/23/2013–9/30/2014). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included surgical variables, time to recovery of baseline function, opioid usage, pain scores, and complication rates. Statistical analyses were performed using Wilcoxon rank sum, Fisher’s exact, and chi squared tests.

Results

One hundred and thirty-three women on the ERAS protocol who underwent elective laparotomy were compared with 121 historical controls. There was no difference in length of stay between cohorts (median 4 days; P = 0.71). ERAS participants had lower intraoperative (45 vs 75 oral morphine equivalents; P < 0.0001) and postoperative (45 vs 154 oral morphine equivalents; P < 0.0001) opioid use. ERAS patients reported lower maximum pain scores in the post-anesthesia care unit (three vs six; P < 0.0001) and on postoperative day 1 (four vs six; P = 0.002). There was no statistically significant difference in complication or readmission rates.

Conclusions

ERAS protocol implementation was associated with decreased intraoperative and postoperative opioid use and improved pain scores without significant changes in length of stay or complication rates.

Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery programs on long-term survival among patients undergoing digestive tract tumor surgery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs refer to a series of optimization measures based on evidence-based medical evidence to reduce perioperative stress response and speed up the recovery of organ function after surgery through a multi-disciplinary collaboration model. ERAS has been popularized in many disciplines and proved to improve the short-term prognosis of patients, while the study of long-term prognosis of patients is limited.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of ERAS programs on the long-term survival among patients undergoing digestive tract tumor surgery.

METHODS

Computer searches were performed in databases including Wanfang, CNKI, VIP, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials or case-control studies describing ERAS programs in patients undergoing digestive tract tumor surgery published between January 1995 and November 2018. Two researchers independently evaluated the quality of studies that met the inclusion criteria and performed a meta-analysis using RevMan5.3.5 software.

RESULTS

A total of ten studies including 2477 patients were selected for the meta-analysis, including the ERAS group (n = 751) and the control group (n = 1726, undergoing traditional perioperative management). Compared with the control group, the ERAS group had improved 3-year survival (OR = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.30-0.78, P < 0.05) and 5-year survival (OR = 0.51, 95%CI: 0.40-0.65, P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed in 1-year survival (OR = 1.13, 95%CI: 0.63-2.02, P > 0.05) or 2-year survival (OR = 1.19, 95%CI: 0.38-3.73, P > 0.05) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative implementation of ERAS programs can improve outcomes and 3- and 5-year survival among patients undergoing digestive tract tumor surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for esophagectomy

A perioperative treatment protocol, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) focuses on accelerating patient recovery. Previous studies confirmed that ERAS decreases surgical trauma and the stress response, which improved outcomes including reduced length of hospital stay (LOS) and decreased postoperative morbidity. While ERAS protocols have been successfully implemented in a variety of surgical disciplines (colorectal, bariatric, orthopedic, and gynecologic surgery), its use in esophageal surgery is still limited. This paper analyzes the feasibility and value of the ERAS protocol for esophageal surgery. Reviewing the literature found that implementation of ERAS resulted in decreased costs, length of stay and pulmonary specific complication reduction, but not overall morbidity. The evidence lacks randomized control trials. Further, the ERAS Society published recommendations for esophageal resection. This opportunity for unification of the protocol would make the studies more comparable and leads to stronger conclusions. Surgery specific items also require further confirmation. Nonetheless, the successful introduction of the ERAS protocol into a wide variety of surgical disciplines provides optimism for ERAS's effectiveness in esophageal surgery.

Optimize patient outcomes among females undergoing gynecological surgery: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Optimizing early education in gynecological procedures utilizing an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) program and a bundle concept may optimize patient outcomes after surgery.

PURPOSE

Evaluate whether an ERAS bundle compared to standard education can affect length of stay, 30 day readmission, and patient satisfaction among patients undergoing gynecologic surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective, comparative, randomized design SETTING: 28 bed Medical Surgical Unit SAMPLE/INTERVENTION: 50 patients undergoing hysterectomy, 25 who received post-operative evidence based bundle/standard education, and 25 who received standard education packet. Bundle components included 1) early mobilization, 2) early transition to oral pain medication, 3) early feeding, and 4) chewing gum. A follow-up phone call was made in two to three days following discharge for both groups utilizing teach-back.

RESULTS

84% (n = 21) patients in the bundle group were discharged in one day. There were no 30 day readmissions for both groups. Twenty two (88%) participants met the bundle components 100% of the time. For the indicator "walking helped with recovery" 100% (n = 25) responded "very good to excellent" for bundle group and 96% (n = 24) responded "very good to excellent" for standard group. Twenty three (92%) of the bundle group felt that that overall nursing care received was very good to excellent and 24 (96%) of the general group felt that overall nursing care received was very good to excellent.

CONCLUSION

Optimizing peri-operative education using a bundle approach to provide evidence based interventions can minimize risk and enhance early recovery for females undergoing gynecological surgery.

Quality improvement strategies for organizational change: a multiphase observational study to increase insight into nonparticipating organizations

Background

The scope of implementation research is often restricted to the analysis of organizations that participate voluntarily in implementation interventions. The recruitment of participants for a quality improvement collaborative increases awareness of the specific innovation. The objective of this multiphase observational study was to identify differences between organizations that participated in a large-scale implementation project aiming to improve perioperative care, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay after gynecologic surgery and organizations that did not participate. A secondary objective was to explore how perioperative practice changed among nonparticipants.

Methods

Of the seven gynecology departments of nonparticipating Dutch hospitals, five agreed to participate in a retrospective analysis. Baseline data of participating hospitals’ (N = 19) characteristics, time to functional recovery, and length of hospital stay were compared. Outcome measures for the subsequent pre-post awareness study in the five nonparticipating hospitals were: (1) overall adherence to predefined evidence-based perioperative elements; and (2) change in functional recovery and length of hospital stay. Multivariable regression models, adjusted for baseline characteristics, were used for analysis.

Results

In retrospect, nonparticipating and participating hospitals did not differ in baseline characteristics, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay. In three of the five nonparticipating hospitals, adherence to the selected evidence-based perioperative elements increased significantly after awareness of the trial (overall mean difference 9.7%, 95% CI 6.9 to 12.5%, p <  0.001). Linear regression models revealed no statistically significant or clinically relevant differences in time to functional recovery (mean difference − 0.2 days, 95% CI -0.7 to 0.2, p = 0.319) or length of hospital stay (mean difference − 0.4 days, 95% CI -1.3 to 0.5, p = 0.419) in the nonparticipating hospitals. None of these hospitals managed to reduce time to functional recovery or length of hospital stay significantly.

Conclusions

No differences in perioperative outcomes between the nonparticipating and participating hospitals were identified at baseline. Despite the statistically significant improvement in overall evidence-based perioperative care, the awareness raised by recruitment activities alone was not enough to reduce time to functional recovery and length of hospital stay in nonparticipating hospitals. Insight into the trends of nonparticipants is valuable to existing implementation effectiveness research.