Dataset Information

Enhanced recovery following liver surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes aim to improve postoperative outcomes. They are being utilized increasingly in hepatic surgery. This review aims to evaluate the impact of ERAS programmes on outcomes following liver surgery.

Methods

EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane Database were searched for trials comparing outcomes in patients undergoing liver surgery utilizing ERAS principles with those in patients receiving conventional care. The primary outcome was occurrence of postoperative complications within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LoS), functional recovery and adherence to ERAS protocols.

Results

Nine articles were included in the review, of which two were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Overall complication rates were 25.0% (range: 11.5-46.4%) in ERAS patients, and 31.0% (range: 11.8-46.2%) in conventional care patients. Significantly reduced overall complication rates following ERAS care were demonstrated by a meta-analysis of the data reported in the two RCTs (odds ratio: 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.84; P = 0.01) The median LoS reported by the studies was 5.0 days (range: 2.5-7.0 days) in ERAS patients, and 7.5 days (range: 3.0-11.0 days) in non-ERAS patients. Recovery milestones, when reported, were improved following ERAS care.

Conclusions

The adoption of ERAS protocols improves morbidity and LoS following liver surgery. Future ERAS programmes should accommodate the unique requirements of liver surgery in order to optimize postoperative outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Hughes MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4113251 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Enhanced recovery following liver surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hughes Michael J MJ McNally Stephen S Wigmore Stephen J SJ

HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association 20140324 8

<h4>Background</h4>Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes aim to improve postoperative outcomes. They are being utilized increasingly in hepatic surgery. This review aims to evaluate the impact of ERAS programmes on outcomes following liver surgery.<h4>Methods</h4>EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane Database were searched for trials comparing outcomes in patients undergoing liver surgery utilizing ERAS principles with those in patients receiving conventional care. The primary out ...[more]

PMID: 24661306

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWith obesity prevalence projected to increase, the demand for bariatric surgery will consequently rise. Enhanced recovery programmes aim for improved recovery, earlier discharge, and more efficient use of resources following surgery. This systematic literature review aimed to evaluate the evidence available on the effects of enhanced recovery programmes after three common bariatric procedures: laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database were searched for studies published in 2012-2019 comparing outcomes with enhanced recovery programmes versus conventional care after bariatric surgery in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Data were extracted and meta-analyses or descriptive analyses performed when appropriate using R.ResultsOf 1152 screened articles, seven relevant studies including 3592 patients were identified. Six reported outcomes for 1434 patients undergoing LRYGB; however, as only individual studies reported on LSG and OAGB these could not be included in the analyses. The meta-analysis revealed a significantly shorter mean duration of hospital-stay for LRYGB enhanced recovery programmes than conventional care (mean difference [95% CI]: -1.34 days [-2.01, -0.67]; p<0.0001), supported by sensitivity analysis excluding retrospective studies. Meta-analysis found no significant difference in 30-day readmission rate (risk ratio [95% CI]: 1.39 [0.84, 2.28]; p = 0.2010). Complication rates were inconsistently reported by Clavien-Dindo grade, but descriptive analysis showed generally higher low-grade rates for enhanced recovery programmes; the trend reversed for high-grade complications. Reoperation rates were rarely reported; no significant differences were seen.ConclusionThese results support enhanced recovery programmes allowing shorter inpatient stay without significant differences in readmission rate following LRYGB, although complication and reoperation rate comparisons were inconclusive. Further research is needed to fill current data gaps including the lack of studies on LSG and OAGB.

Project description:Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways are multimodal, evidence-based approaches to optimize patient outcome after surgery. However, the use of ERAS protocols to improve morbidity and recovery time without compromising safety following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains to be elucidated.We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of ERAS protocols compared with conventional perioperative care (CPC) in patients following PD.PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library were searched between January 2000 and June 2015.The patients who underwent PD with ERAS protocols or CPC were eligible. The studies that compared postoperative length of hospital stay (PLOS), postoperative complications, or in-hospital costs in the 2 groups were included.A meta-analysis, meta-regression, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis were performed to estimate the postoperative outcomes between the 2 groups and identified the potential confounders. We used the methodological index for nonrandomized studies checklist to assess methodological qualities. Weighted mean differences (WMD) or odds ratios (OR) were calculated with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The publication bias tests were also performed through the funnel plots.In total, 14 nonrandomized comparative studies with 1409 ERAS cases and 1310 controls were analyzed. Implementation of an ERAS protocol significantly reduced PLOS (WMD: -4.17 days; 95%CI: -5.72 to -2.61), delayed gastric emptying (OR: 0.56; 95%CI: 0.44-0.71), overall morbidity (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.54-0.74), and in-hospital costs compared to CPC (all P?<?0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in other postoperative outcomes. Age, gender, and ERAS component implementation did not significantly contribute to heterogeneity for PLOS as shown by meta-regression analysis.Our study suggested that ERAS was as safe as CPC and improved recovery of patients undergoing PD, thus reducing in-hospital costs. General adoption of ERAS protocols during PD should be recommended.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of total joint arthroplasties (TJAs) being performed is increasing worldwide. To match this increasing demand, there has been focus on hastening patients' recovery of function. This effort has culminated in the formulation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) strategies. However, with evolving ERAS programs and new recommendations, a review of current evidence is required to provide clinicians with up-to-date information about its effect on outcomes for TJA.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to assess the utility of ERAS programs on patient, health service, and economic outcomes for primary, elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsA systematic search will be conducted in Medline (Ovid), EMCARE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database, and the Cochrane Library. Analytical, observational, and experimental designs will be included in this systematic review. Only studies including patients undergoing primary TKA and THA comparing ERAS programs with conventional surgery and postoperative care will be included. Data related to patient outcomes, health service outcomes, safety, and economic evaluation will be extracted.ResultsThe search terms and primary database searches have been finalized. Findings will be reported in narrative and tabular form. Where appropriate, random effects meta-analyses will be conducted for each outcome, and heterogeneity quantified with Cochran Q test and I2 statistic. Measures of effect or mean differences will be reported with 95% confidence intervals. The results of this systematic review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.ConclusionsThis protocol will guide a systematic review assessing outcomes associated with ERAS surgery in primary THA and TKA.Trial registrationOpen Science Framework osf.io/y4bhs; https://osf.io/y4bhs.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/25581.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To conduct a systematic review of qualitative studies which explore health professionals' experiences of and perspectives on the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway. DESIGN:Systematic review of qualitative literature using a qualitative content analysis. Literature includes the experiences and views of a wide range of multidisciplinary team and allied health professional staff, to incorporate a diverse range of clinical and professional perspectives. DATA SOURCES:PsycINFO, Medline, CINAHL and PubMed were searched in May 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:The searches included relevant qualitative studies across a range of healthcare contexts. We included studies published from 2000 to 2017, as an appropriate time frame to capture evidence about ERAS after implementation in the late 1990s. Only studies published in the English language were included, and we included studies that explicitly stated that they used qualitative approaches. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Literature searches were conducted by the first author and checked by the second author: both contributed to the extraction and analysis of data. Studies identified as relevant were assessed for eligibility using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme guidance. RESULTS:Eight studies were included in the review, including studies in six countries and in four surgical specialties. Included studies focus on health professionals' experiences of ERAS before, during and after implementation in colorectal surgery, gastrointestinal surgery, abdominal hysterectomy and orthopaedics. Five main themes emerged in the analysis: communication and collaboration, resistance to change, role and significance of protocol-based care, and knowledge and expectations. Professionals described the importance of effective multidisciplinary team collaboration and communication, providing thorough education to staff and patients, and appointing a dedicated champion as means to implement and integrate ERAS pathways successfully. Evidence-based guidelines were thought to be useful for improvements to patient care by standardising practices and reducing treatment variations, but were thought to be too open to interpretation at local levels. Setting and managing 'realistic' expectations of staff was seen as a priority. Staff attitudes towards ERAS tend to become more favourable over time, as practices become successfully 'normalised'. Strengths of the review are that it includes a wide range of different studies, a variety of clinical populations, diversity of methodological approaches and local contexts. Its limitation is the inclusion of a small number of studies, although these represent six countries and four surgical specialties, and so our findings are likely to be transferable. CONCLUSIONS:Staff feel positive about the implementation of ERAS, but find the process is complex and challenging. Challenges can be addressed by ensuring that multidisciplinary teams understand ERAS principles and guidelines, and communicate well with one another and with patients. Provision of comprehensive, coherent and locally relevant information to health professionals is helpful. Identifying and recruiting local ERAS champions is likely to improve the implementation and delivery of ERAS pathways. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017059952.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence for the efficacy and safety of electroacupuncture (EA) on gastrointestinal function recovery after gynecological surgery is unclear.ObjectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of EA on recovery of postoperative gastrointestinal function for patients receiving gynecological surgery. Data sources: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CINAHL), Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Weipu (CQVIP), and Wanfang databases were systematically searched from the inception dates to May 30, 2020, for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Study selection: RCTs that evaluated EA for postoperative gastrointestinal function directly related to gynecological surgery in adults aged 18 years or over. Data extraction and synthesis: paired reviewer independently extracted the data and assessed study quality. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated as the effect measure from a random effects model. Main outcomes and measures: time to first flatus (TFF), time to bowel sounds recovery (TBS), and time to first defecation (TFD) were recorded as primary outcomes; postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), motilin (MTL), gastrin (GAS), pH value of gastric mucosa (pHi), gastric mucosal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PgCO2), vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP), and adverse event were reported as secondary outcomes.ResultsWe included eighteen RCTs (1117 participants). Our findings suggested that compared to the control group (CG), electroacupuncture group (EG) showed significant effects on TFF (SMD = -0.98, 95% CI: [-1.28, -0.68], P < 0.00001, I 2 = 69%), TBS (SMD = -0.98, 95% CI: [-1.84, -0.12], P=0.03, I 2 = 92%), and TFD (SMD = -1.23, 95% CI: [-1.59, -0.88], P < 0.0001, I 2 = 0%). Moreover, the incidence of PONV at postoperative 6 h (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: [0.27, 0.64], P < 0.0001, I 2 = 0%) and 24 h (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: [0.32, 0.68], P < 0.0001, I 2 = 0%) was lower in the EG than that in the CG, whereas no significant difference in ratio of PONV at postoperative 48 h (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: [0.20, 1.51], P=0.25, I 2 = 0%) was detected between the two groups. Meanwhile, there was a significant effect in favor of EA on the level of MTL at postoperative 6 h (SMD = -0.93, 95% CI: [-1.36, -0.61], P < 0.0001, I 2 = 21%), while no significant effect was observed at postoperative 24 h (SMD = -0.43, 95% CI: [-0.89, 0.02], P=0.06, I 2 = 69%) in the EG when compared to the CG. Additionally, a large significant effect on decreasing PgCO2 was found in the EG in comparison to the CG, but no significant effect in favor of EA on GAS, VIP, or pHi was observed. It was reported that there was one participant with pain at the needling sites and bruising, and three participants withdrew because they were not intolerant to EA.ConclusionsEA could be a promising strategy for the prevention and treatment of gastrointestinal dysfunction after gynecological surgery, including shortening TFF and TFD, TBS, regulating MTL, and decreasing the ratio of PONV within postoperative 24h. The effects on MTL and PONV varied with different intervention points, and EA used at 30 min prior to surgery might be recommended. However, the evidence quality ranged from low to very low, and large-scale and high-quality RCTs were warranted.

Dataset Information

Enhanced recovery following liver surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Enhanced recovery following liver surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets