Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Short-term Outcomes of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery and Conventional Care in Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy (GISSG1901)

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the effects of ERAS and conventional programs on short-term outcomes after LDG.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Currently, the ERAS program is broadly applied in surgical areas. Although several benefits of LDG with the ERAS program have been covered, high-level evidence is still limited, specifically in advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

The present study was designed as a randomized, multicenter, unblinded trial. The enrollment criteria included histologically confirmed cT2-4aN0-3M0 gastric adenocarcinoma. Postoperative complications, mortality, readmission, medical costs, recovery, and laboratory outcomes were compared between the ERAS and conventional groups.

RESULTS

Between April 2019 and May 2020, 400 consecutive patients who met the enrollment criteria were enrolled. They were randomly allocated to either the ERAS group (n = 200) or the conventional group (n = 200). After excluding patients who did not undergo surgery or gastrectomy, 370 patients were analyzed. The patient demographic characteristics were not different between the 2 groups. The conventional group had a significantly longer allowed day of discharge and postoperative hospital stay (6.96 vs 5.83 days, P < 0.001; 8.85 vs 7.27 days, P < 0.001); a longer time to first flatus, liquid intake and ambulation (3.37 vs 2.52 days, P < 0.001; 3.09 vs 1.13 days, P < 0.001; 2.85 vs 1.38 days, P < 0.001, respectively); and higher medical costs (6826 vs 6328 $, P = 0.027) than the ERAS group. Additionally, patients in the ERAS group were more likely to initiate adjuvant chemotherapy earlier (29 vs 32 days, P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications or in the mortality or readmission rates. Regarding laboratory outcomes, the procalcitonin and C-reactive protein levels on postoperative day 3 were significantly lower and the hemoglobin levels on postoperative day 5 were significantly higher in the ERAS group than in the conventional group.

CONCLUSION

The ERAS program provides a faster recovery, a shorter postoperative hospitalization length, and lower medical costs after LDG without increasing complication and readmission rates. Moreover, enhanced recovery in the ERAS group enables early initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Myocardial Injury After Colorectal Cancer Surgery and Postoperative 90-Day Mortality and Morbidity: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery is a strong predictor of 30-day mortality and morbidity.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of myocardial injury in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery in an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol and its association with 90-day mortality and morbidity.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at Zealand University Hospital, Denmark, between June 2015 and July 2017.

PATIENTS

Adult patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery were included if troponin was measured at least twice during the first 7 days after surgery. The patients were followed for 90 days.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Myocardial injury was defined as an elevated troponin I measurement (>45 ng/L) without evidence of a nonischemic origin causing the elevation. Ninety-day mortality and complications were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 586 patients were included of which 42 were diagnosed with myocardial injury. Thirteen patients (2%) died within 90 days of surgery. There was no significant difference in 90-day mortality between patients with and without myocardial injury (5% (2/42) versus 2% (11/544); p = 0.24). We found a higher incidence of postoperative complications within 90 days of surgery in the myocardial injury group than in the nonmyocardial injury group (43% (18/42) versus 20% (107/544); p < 0.01). We found a significant difference between the myocardial injury group and nonmyocardial injury group in terms of medical complications (33% (14/42) versus 9% (50/544); p < 0.01) but not surgical complications (19% (8/42) versus 16% (85/544); p = 0.56). Myocardial injury was an independent predictor of postoperative complications within 90 days of surgery (adjusted OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.31-5.55).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Myocardial injury occurs frequently in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery in an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. Patients with myocardial injury did not have a significantly higher 90-day mortality but had higher risk of 90-day postoperative complications than patients without myocardial injury. Future research should examine the prevention and treatment of myocardial injury. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B692.

LESIN MIOCRDICA DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA DE CNCER COLORRECTAL Y MORTALIDAD Y MORBILIDAD POSOPERATORIAS A LOS DAS UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE RETROSPECTIVE

ANTECEDENTES:La lesión del miocardio después de una cirugía no cardíaca es un fuerte predictor de mortalidad y morbilidad a los 30 días.OBJETIVO:El propósito fue examinar la incidencia de lesión miocárdica en pacientes sometidos a cirugía de cáncer colorrectal en un protocolo de recuperación mejorada después de la cirugía y su asociación con la mortalidad y morbilidad a los 90 días.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Realizado en el Hospital Universitario de Zelanda, Dinamarca, entre junio de 2015 y julio de 2017.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes adultos sometidos a cirugía de cáncer colorrectal, si la troponina se midió al menos dos veces durante los primeros siete días después de la cirugía. Los pacientes fueron seguidos durante 90 días.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La lesión miocárdica se definió como una medición de troponina I elevada (> 45 ng / l) sin evidencia de una etiología no isquémica que causara la elevación. Se evaluaron la mortalidad y las complicaciones a los noventa días.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 586 pacientes, de los cuales 42 fueron diagnosticados de lesión miocárdica. Trece pacientes (2%) murieron dentro de los 90 días posteriores a la cirugía. No hubo diferencias significativas en la mortalidad a 90 días entre los pacientes con y sin lesión del miocardio, 5% [2/42] versus 2% [11/544], p = 0,24. Encontramos una mayor incidencia de complicaciones posoperatorias dentro de los 90 días de la cirugía en el grupo de lesión miocárdica en comparación con el grupo de lesión no miocárdica, 43% [18/42] versus 20% [107/544], p <0,01. Encontramos una diferencia significativa entre el grupo de lesión miocárdica y el grupo de lesión no miocárdica en términos de complicaciones médicas (33% [14/42] versus 9% [50/544]; p <0,01) pero no complicaciones quirúrgicas (19% [8/42] versus 16% [85/544]; p = 0,56). La lesión miocárdica fue un predictor independiente de complicaciones posoperatorias dentro de los 90 días posteriores a la cirugía (razón de probabilidades ajustada: 2,69; intervalo de confianza del 95%: 1,31 - 5,55).LIMITACIONES:Limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:La lesión del miocardio ocurre con frecuencia en pacientes sometidos a cirugía de cáncer colorrectal en un protocolo de recuperación mejorada después de la cirugía. Los pacientes con lesión miocárdica no tuvieron una mortalidad significativamente mayor a los 90 días, pero tuvieron un mayor riesgo de complicaciones posoperatorias a los 90 días en comparación con los pacientes sin lesión miocárdica. Las investigaciones futuras deben examinar la prevención y el tratamiento de la lesión miocárdica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B692.

Dissecting the Perioperative Care Bundle

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are comprehensive perioperative care pathways designed to mitigate the physiologic stressors associated with surgery and, in turn, improve clinical outcomes and lead to health care cost savings. Although individual components may differ, ERAS protocols are typically organized as multimodal care "bundles" that, when followed closely and in their entirety, are meant to generate amplified cumulative benefits. This manuscript examines some of the critical components, describes some areas where the science is weak (but dogma may be strong), and provides some of the evidence or lack thereof behind components of a standard ERAS protocol.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery is Feasible and Beneficial and Should Be the Standard in Major Gynecological Surgeries

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are evidence-based protocols designed to standardize medical care, improve outcomes, and lower healthcare costs.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the implementation of the ERAS protocol and the effect on recovery during the hospitalization period after gynecological laparotomy surgeries.

METHODS

We compared demographic and clinical data of consecutive patients at a single institute who underwent open gynecological surgeries before (August 2017 to December 2018) and after (January 2019 to March 2020) the implementation of the ERAS protocol. Eighty women were included in each group.

RESULTS

The clinical and demographic characteristics were similar among the women operated before and after implementation of the ERAS protocol. Following implementation of the protocol, decreases were observed in post-surgical hospitalization (from 4.89 ± 2.56 to 4.09 ± 1.65 days, P = 0.01), in patients reporting nausea symptoms (from 18 (22.5%) to 7 (8.8%), P = 0.017), and in the use of postoperative opioids (from 77 (96.3%) to 47 (58.8%), P < 0.001). No significant changes were identified between the two periods regarding vomiting, 30-day re-hospitalization, and postoperative minor and major complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the ERAS protocol is feasible and was found to result in less postoperative opioid use, a faster return to normal feeding, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay. Implementation of the protocol implementation was not associated with an increased rate of complications or with re-admissions.

Evaluation of the Implementation of Multiple Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Pathways Across a Provincial Health Care System in Alberta, Canada

IMPORTANCE

Engaging multidisciplinary care teams in surgical practice is important for the improvement of surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of multiple Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways with ERAS guideline adherence and outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This quality improvement study compared a pre-ERAS cohort (2013-2017) with a post-ERAS cohort (2014-2018). All patients were from Alberta Health Services in Alberta, Canada, and had available ERAS and up to 1-year postsurgery administrative data. Data collected included age, sex, body mass index, tobacco and alcohol use, diabetes, comorbidity index, and surgical characteristics. Data analysis was performed from May 7, 2020, to February 1, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Implementation of 5 ERAS pathways (colorectal, liver, pancreas, gynecologic oncology, and radical cystectomy) across 9 sites.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Adherence to ERAS guidelines was measured by the percentage of patients whose care met the common ERAS pathway care element criteria. Surgical procedures were grouped by complexity; complications were classified by severity. Outcome measures for the pre-post-ERAS cohorts included length of stay (LOS), readmission, complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 7757 patients participated in the study, including 984 in the pre-ERAS cohort (median [interquartile range] age, 62 [53-71] years; 526 [53.5%] female) and 6773 in the post-ERAS cohort (median [interquartile range] age, 62 [53-71] years; 3470 [51.2%] male). In the total cohort, care-element adherence improved from 52% to 76% (P < .001), no significant differences were found in serious complications (from 6.2% to 4.9%; P = .08) or 30-day mortality (from 0.71% to 0.93%; P = .50), 1-year mortality decreased from 7.1% to 4.6% (P < .001), mean (SD) LOS decreased from 9.4 (7.0) to 7.8 (5.0) days (P < .001), and 30-day readmission rates were unchanged (from 13.4% to 11.7%; P = .12). After adjustment for patient characteristics, the LOS mean difference decreased 0.71 days (95% CI, -1.13 to -0.29 days; P < .001), with no significant differences in adjusted 30-day readmission (-3.5%; 95% CI, -22.7% to 20.4%; P = .75), serious complications (1.3%; 95% CI, -26.2% to 39.0%; P = .94), or mortality (30-day mortality: 42% [95% CI, -35.4% to 212.3%]; P = .38; 1-year mortality: 8% [95% CI, -20.5% to 46.8%]; P = .62). The adjusted 1-year readmission rate was -15.6% (95% CI, -27.7% to -1.5%; P = .03) in favor of ERAS, and readmission LOS was shorter by 1.7 days (95% CI, -3.3 to -0.1 days; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The results of this quality improvement study suggest that implementation of ERAS across multiple pathways may improve health care practitioner adherence to ERAS guidelines, LOS, and readmission rates at a system level.

Perioperative Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy: A Prime Component of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery

Perioperative goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) is a prime component of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol. Multiple studies have demonstrated a relationship between GDFT and positive patient outcomes, including shorter hospital stays, decreased ileus formation, reduced gastrointestinal-related issues, decreased nausea, and hemodynamic stability. Electrolyte disturbances following a positive fluid balance may occur, and GDFT is aimed at euvolemia to avoid a hypervolemic state. Carbohydrate loading, early discontinuation of postoperative intravenous fluids, and use of isoosmotic solutions all are components of GDFT. Lactated Ringer's solution is the fluid recommended for nonrenal patients and patients with hepatic compromise. The negative consequences associated with hypervolemia deem it pertinent to devise an individualized GDFT plan in the ERAS protocol.

Safety and feasibility of resuming bariatric surgery under the cloud of COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous bariatric surgical units globally have halted weight loss surgery. Obesity itself has been shown to be a predictor of poor outcome in people infected with the virus. The aim of this study was to report our experience as a high-volume bariatric institution resuming elective weight loss surgery safely amidst emergency admissions of COVID-19-positive patients.

METHODS

A standard operating procedure based on national guidance and altered to accommodate local considerations was initiated across the hospital. Data were collected prospectively for 50 consecutive patients undergoing bariatric surgery following recommencement of elective surgery after the first national lockdown in the UK.

RESULTS

Between 28 June and 5 August 2020, a total of 50 patients underwent bariatric surgery of whom 94% were female. Median age was 41 years and median body mass index was 43.8 (interquartile range 40.0-48.8)kg/m2. Half of the patients (n = 25/50) underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and half underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Of these 50 patients, 9 (18%) had revisional bariatric surgery. Overall median length of hospital stay was 1 day, with 96% of the study population being discharged within 24h of surgery. The overall rate of readmission was 6% and one patient (2%) returned to theatre with an obstruction proximal to jejuno-jejunal anastomosis. None of the patients exhibited symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

With appropriately implemented measures and precautions, resumption of bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic appears feasible and safe with no increased risk to patients.

ESPEN practical guideline: Clinical nutrition in surgery

Early oral feeding is the preferred mode of nutrition for surgical patients. Avoidance of any nutritional therapy bears the risk of underfeeding during the postoperative course after major surgery. Considering that malnutrition and underfeeding are risk factors for postoperative complications, early enteral feeding is especially relevant for any surgical patient at nutritional risk, especially for those undergoing upper gastrointestinal surgery. The focus of this guideline is to cover both nutritional aspects of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) concept and the special nutritional needs of patients undergoing major surgery, e.g. for cancer, and of those developing severe complications despite best perioperative care. From a metabolic and nutritional point of view, the key aspects of perioperative care include the integration of nutrition into the overall management of the patient, avoidance of long periods of preoperative fasting, re-establishment of oral feeding as early as possible after surgery, the start of nutritional therapy immediately if a nutritional risk becomes apparent, metabolic control e.g. of blood glucose, reduction of factors which exacerbate stress-related catabolism or impaired gastrointestinal function, minimized time on paralytic agents for ventilator management in the postoperative period, and early mobilization to facilitate protein synthesis and muscle function.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) for Hip and Knee Replacement-Why and How It Should Be Implemented Following the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a reduction in hip and knee replacement surgery across healthcare systems. When regular operating returns, there will be a large volume of patients and an emphasis on a short hospital stay. Patients will be keen to return home, and capacity will need to maximised. Strategies to reduce the associated risks of surgery and to accelerate recovery will be needed, and so Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) should be promoted as the model of care. ERAS protocols are proven to reduce hospital stay safely; however, ERAS pathways may require adaption to ensure both patient and staff safety. The risk of exposure to possible sources of COVID-19 should be limited, and so hospital visits should be minimised. The use of technology such as smartphone apps to provide pre-operative education, wearable activity trackers to assist with rehabilitation, and the use of telemedicine to complete outpatient appointments may be utilised. Also, units should be reminded that ERAS protocols are multi-modal, and every component is vital to minimise the surgical stress response. The focus should be on providing better and not just faster care. Units should learn from the past in order to expedite the implementation of or adaption of existing ERAS protocols. Strong leadership will be required, along with a supportive organisational culture, an inter-professional approach, and a recognised QI method should be used to contextualize improvement efforts.

Enhanced Recovery and Surgical Optimization Protocol for Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery: An AAGL White Paper

This is the first Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guideline dedicated to standardizing and optimizing perioperative care for women undergoing minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. The guideline was rigorously formulated by an American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists Task Force of US and Canadian gynecologic surgeons with special interest and experience in adapting ERAS practices for patients requiring minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. It builds on the 2016 ERAS Society recommendations for perioperative care in gynecologic/oncologic surgery by serving as a more comprehensive reference for minimally invasive endoscopic and vaginal surgery for both benign and malignant gynecologic conditions. For example, the section on preoperative optimization provides more specific recommendations derived from the ambulatory surgery and anesthesia literature for the management of anemia, hyperglycemia, and obstructive sleep apnea. Recommendations pertaining to multimodal analgesia account for the recent Food and Drug Administration warnings about respiratory depression from gabapentinoids. The guideline focuses on workflows important to high-value care in minimally invasive surgery, such as same-day discharge, and tackles controversial issues in minimally invasive surgery, such as thromboprophylaxis. In these ways, the guideline supports the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists and our collective mission to elevate the quality and safety of healthcare for women through excellence in clinical practice.

Enhanced recovery after spine surgery-a multinational survey assessing surgeons' perspectives

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is the object of numerous publications in various surgical fields. Still, its value in spine surgery is not as recognized as it is in other surgical domains. Our aim was to report neurosurgeons' opinions about ERAS in spine surgery.

METHODS

From December 2019 to January 2020, members of the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies were asked to complete an online questionnaire regarding ERAS in spine surgery.

RESULTS

N = 234 participants responded to the survey (60% spine neurosurgeons; 22.6% working in private practice). Thirty-two percent reported to have more than 20 years of experience, followed by surgeons having between 5 and 10 (27.4%), 10-15 (17.9%), 15-20 (12%), and 0-5 years (10.7%). Gender distribution (12% vs 27% female gender, p = 0.04), private practice activity (28% vs 14%, p = 0.01), familiarity with the ERAS concept (57.4% vs 27%, p < 0.0001), and its implementation in the daily clinical practice (47.5% vs 18.3%, p < 0.0001) were statistically different between spine and general neurosurgeons. 54.7% of the surgeons were unfamiliar with ERAS in spine surgery. 63.7% considered ERAS as a progress; 36% declared to implement ERAS in their daily clinical practice. 1.7% reported ERAS as a decrease in the quality of management. 6.8% considered ERAS as not having an impact on patient care; 27.8% had no opinion. There were no differences in opinion on ERAS and its implementation between surgeons working in private and public hospitals. 69.5% of the spine surgeons considered ERAS having a positive impact on patient management, versus 55% of non-spine surgeons (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts are necessary to promote minimal invasive pre-, intra-, and postoperative workflow to improve patient management and reduce complications or side effects particularly adapted to spinal surgery. Specificities of spine patients, in terms of chronic pain, pre- and postoperative pain management, and psychological issues have to be considered.

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.

Extending Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocols to the Post-Discharge Setting: A Phone Call Intervention to Support Patients after Expedited Discharge after Pancreaticoduodenectomy

The goal of this pilot study was to track patient outcomes after an expedited discharge after enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). A quantitative content analysis approach was used. All PD patients in a single academic medical center between February 2017 and June 2018 were called twice by specialized physician extenders after discharge. A semi-structured interview approach was used to identify patient's symptoms or concerns, proactively educate them, and provide outpatient management when indicated. A detailed narrative of the conversation was documented. Ninety patients (mean age 66.3; 58.1% males) were included in the study. Of all, 88.9 per cent of the patients received follow-up phone calls in accordance with our PD ERAS protocol. Among the 80 patients called, 71 (88.8%) reported at least one symptom, issue, or self-care need. The most common issues involved bowel movements and nutrition. A total of 147 interventions were performed to address patient needs including medication management, local care coordination, and outpatient referral to a healthcare provider. The intervention led to the identification of 15 patients for earlier evaluation. This identification was associated with the total number of reported symptoms (X² = 15.6, P = 0.004). Most patients require additional care after discharge after traditional ERAS pathways. ERAS transitional care protocols uncovered an unmet need for additional patient support after PD.

Neurosurgical enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme for elective craniotomies: are patients satisfied with their experiences? A quantitative and qualitative analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patient satisfaction and associated predictors at discharge, as well as patient experience at 30-day follow-up, in a neurosurgical enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme.

DESIGN

A single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled study.

SETTING

A tertiary hospital in China.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 140 neurosurgical patients aged 18-65 years old who had a single intracranial lesion and were admitted for elective craniotomy between October 2016 and July 2017 were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomised into two groups: 70 patients received care according to a novel neurosurgical ERAS protocol (ERAS group) and 70 patients received conventional perioperative care (control group).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient satisfaction at discharge was evaluated using a multimodal questionnaire. A secondary analysis of patient experience regarding participation in the ERAS programme was conducted using a semistructured qualitative interview via telephone at 30-day follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the ERAS group than in the control group at discharge (92.2±4.3 vs 86.8±7.4, p=0.0001). The most important predictors of patient satisfaction included age (OR=6.934), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score (OR=0.184), absorbable skin suture (OR=0.007) and postoperative length of stay (LOS) (OR=0.765). Analysis on patient experience revealed five themes: information transfer, professional support, shared responsibility and active participation, readiness for discharge, and follow-up, all of which are closely related and represent positive and negative aspects.

CONCLUSIONS

Measures that include decreasing PONV VAS score, incorporating absorbable skin suture and shortening LOS seem to increase patient satisfaction in a neurosurgical ERAS programme. Analysis of data on patient experience highlights several aspects to achieve patient-centred and high-quality care. Further studies are warranted to standardise the assessment of patient satisfaction and experience in planning, employing and appraising the ERAS programme.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR-INR-16009662.

Making enhanced recovery the norm not the exception

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery ("STAAR" in our system) is multimodal care focused on the reduction of physiological and psychological stress. While enhanced recovery is well established in colorectal surgery, and there is evidence for effectiveness in other surgical disciplines, to date widespread use is limited.

METHOD

We implemented a Lean process that, within 12 months, expanded STAAR to 13 surgical services lines involving >130 surgeons, and impacting the care of >6000 surgical patients/year.

RESULTS

Implementation involved educational and administrative meetings (279 in the first 6 months) and rounding. Use of STAAR was defined as >60% compliance. LOS was reduced up to 40%, mortality index and transfusion decreased 67% and 23% respectively. Case mix index increased 17%. Readmission rates, infections, ER visits were not increased.

CONCLUSION

Using a Lean process focused on value, STAAR protocols became the standard rather than the exception. Time investment by senior surgical leadership was extensive.

Guidelines for postoperative care in cesarean delivery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations (part 3)

BACKGROUND

This Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Guideline for postoperative care in cesarean delivery will provide best practice, evidenced-based recommendations for postoperative care with primarily a maternal focus.

OBJECTIVE

The pathway process for scheduled and unscheduled cesarean delivery for this Enhanced Recovery After Surgery cesarean delivery guideline will consider time from completion of cesarean delivery until maternal hospital discharge.

STUDY DESIGN

The literature search (1966-2017) used Embase and PubMed to search medical subject headings that included "Cesarean Section," "Cesarean Delivery," "Cesarean Section Delivery," and all postoperative Enhanced Recovery After Surgery items. Study selection allowed titles and abstracts to be screened by individual reviewers to identify potentially relevant articles. Metaanalyses, systematic reviews, randomized controlled studies, nonrandomized controlled studies, reviews, and case series were considered for each individual topic. Quality assessment and data analyses evaluated the quality of evidence, and recommendations were evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system as used and described in previous Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Guidelines.

RESULTS

The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery cesarean delivery guideline/pathway has created a pathway for postoperative care. Specifics include sham feeding, nausea and vomiting prevention, postoperative analgesia, nutritional care, glucose control, thromboembolism prophylaxis, early mobilization, urinary drainage, and discharge counseling. A number of elements of postoperative care of women who undergo cesarean delivery are recommended, based on the evidence.

CONCLUSION

As the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery cesarean delivery pathway (elements/processes) are studied, implemented, audited, evaluated, and optimized by the maternity care teams, there will be an opportunity for focused and optimized areas of care and recommendations to be further enhanced.

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.

Identifying Components Necessary for an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Pathway for Elective Intracranial Surgery: An Improvement Project Using the Quality of Recovery-15 Score

OBJECTIVE

To identify the domains of recovery, as determined by the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score, that needed improvement to develop initial interventions for an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for patients undergoing elective intracranial surgery under general anesthesia.

METHODS

A paired-availability design was used to assess 2 groups of 41 patients undergoing elective intracranial surgery. The baseline QoR-15 score and scores 0, 6, 12, and 24 hours after arrival in the intensive care unit characterized the postoperative recovery trajectory. The lowest scoring domains of the QoR-15 score were identified in the preimplementation group, and pharmacologic interventions were initiated in the postimplementation group.

RESULTS

Postoperative analgesia and postoperative nausea and vomiting were identified as the lowest scoring domains. The pharmacologic interventions implemented were chosen because they produced minimal sedation and were easy to administer-1 40-mg oral preoperative dose of aprepitant to target postoperative nausea and vomiting and 2 perioperative 1-g doses of intravenous acetaminophen to improve analgesia. We observed a clinically significant as well as statistically significant improvement in analgesia on arrival in the intensive care unit and at the 6-hour postoperative time point. The total QoR-15 score was improved through the 12-hour time point.

CONCLUSIONS

In this quality improvement project, the QoR-15 score allowed us to identify domains that slowed the recovery course in this patient population. Two 1-g doses of intravenous acetaminophen improved patients' well-being and analgesia after elective intracranial surgery.

Enhanced recovery pathways in colorectal surgery: a consensus paper by the Associazione Chirurghi Ospedalieri Italiani (ACOI) and the PeriOperative Italian Society (POIS)

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway is a multi-disciplinary, patient-centered protocol relying on the implementation of the best evidence-based perioperative practice. In the field of colorectal surgery, the application of ERAS programs is associated with up to 50% reduction of morbidity rates and up to 2.5 days reduction of postoperative hospital stay. However, widespread adoption of ERAS pathways is still yet to come, mainly because of the lack of proper information and communication. Purpose of this paper is to support the diffusion of ERAS pathways through a critical review of the existing evidence by members of the two national societies dealing with ERAS pathways in Italy, the PeriOperative Italian Society (POIS) and the Associazione Italiana Chirurghi Ospedalieri (ACOI), showing the results of a consensus development conference held at Matera, Italy, during the national ACOI Congress on June 10, 2019.