Dataset Information

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Breast Reconstruction: Pooled Meta-Analysis of 10 Observational Studies Involving 1,838 Patients.

ABSTRACT: Purpose: This study aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol vs. traditional perioperative care programs for breast reconstruction. Methods: Three electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library) were searched for observational studies comparing an ERAS program with a traditional perioperative care program from database inception to 5 May 2018. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted the data, and evaluated study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. The outcomes included the length of hospital stay (LOS), complication rates, pain control, costs, emergency department visits, hospital readmission, and unplanned reoperation. Results: Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with a conventional program, ERAS was associated with significantly decreased LOS, morphine administration (including postoperative patient-controlled analgesia usage rate and duration; intravenous morphine administration on postoperative day [POD] 0, 1, 2, and 4; total intravenous morphine administration on POD 0-3; oral morphine consumption on POD 0-4; and total postoperative oral morphine consumption), and pain scores (postoperative pain score on POD 0 and total pain score on POD 0-3). The other variables did not differ significantly. Conclusion: Our results suggest that ERAS protocols can decrease LOS and morphine equivalent dosing; therefore, further larger, and better-quality studies that report on bleeding amount and patient satisfaction are needed to validate our findings.

SUBMITTER: Tan YZ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6682620 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Breast Reconstruction: Pooled Meta-Analysis of 10 Observational Studies Involving 1,838 Patients.

Tan Ya-Zhen YZ Lu Xuan X Luo Jie J Huang Zhen-Dong ZD Deng Qi-Feng QF Shen Xian-Feng XF Zhang Chao C Guo Guang-Ling GL

Frontiers in oncology 20190730

<b>Purpose:</b> This study aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol vs. traditional perioperative care programs for breast reconstruction. <b>Methods:</b> Three electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library) were searched for observational studies comparing an ERAS program with a traditional perioperative care program from database inception to 5 May 2018. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the ...[more]

PMID: 31417864

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo conduct a systematic review of qualitative studies which explore health professionals' experiences of and perspectives on the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway.DesignSystematic 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 sourcesPsycINFO, Medline, CINAHL and PubMed were searched in May 2017.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesThe 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 synthesisLiterature 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.ResultsEight 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.ConclusionsStaff 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 numberCRD42017059952.

Project description:Background and objectiveAfter a relatively late introduction to the literature in 2015, enhanced recovery protocols for breast reconstruction have flourished into a wealth of reports. Many have since described unique methodologies making improved offerings with superior outcomes attainable. This is a particularly interesting procedure for the study of enhanced recovery as it encompasses two dissident approaches. Compared to implant-based reconstruction, autologous free-flap reconstruction has demonstrated superiority in a range of long-term metrics at the expense of historically increased peri-operative morbidity. This narrative review collates reports of recovery protocols for both approaches and examines methodologies surrounding the key pieces of a comprehensive pathway.MethodsAll primary clinical reports specifically describing enhanced recovery protocols for implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction through 2022 were identified by systematic review of PubMed and Embase libraries. Twenty-five reports meeting criteria were identified, with ten additional reports included for narrative purpose. Included studies were examined for facets of innovation from the pre-hospital setting through outpatient follow-up. Notable findings were described in the context of a comprehensive framework with attention paid to clinical and basic scientific background. Considerations for implementation were additionally discussed.Key content and findingsOf 35 included studies, 29 regarded autologous reconstruction with majority focus on reduction of peri-operative opioid requirements and length of stay. Six regarded implant-based reconstruction with most discussing pathways towards ambulatory procedures. Eighty percent of included studies were published after the 2017 consensus guidelines with many described innovations to this baseline. Pathways included considerations for pre-hospital, pre-operative, intra-operative, inpatient, and outpatient settings. Implant-based studies demonstrated that safe ambulatory care is accessible. Autologous studies demonstrated a trend towards discharge before post-operative day three and peri-operative opioid requirements equivalent to those of implant-based reconstructions.ConclusionsStudy of enhanced recovery after breast reconstruction has inspired paradigm shift and pushed limits previously not thought to be attainable. These protocols should encompass a longitudinal care pathway with optimization through patient-centered approaches and multidisciplinary collaboration. This framework should represent standard of care and will serve to expand availability of all methods of breast reconstruction.

Project description:BackgroundPatients' expectations of an anticipated timeline of recovery and fear of anesthesia in aesthetic breast surgery have not been studied.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess patient anxiety, expectations, and satisfaction after Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) pathways for aesthetic breast surgery and the progress of postoperative recovery.Materials and methodsAll consecutive patients who underwent aesthetic breast surgery between April 2021 and August 2022 were included in this single-center prospective cohort study. The ERAS protocol consists of more than 20 individual measures in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative period. Epidemiological data, expectations, and recovery were systematically assessed with standardized self-assessment questionnaires, including the International Pain Outcome Questionnaire (IPO), the BREAST-Q or BODY-Q, and data collection forms.ResultsIn total, 48 patients with a median of 30 years of age were included. Patients returned to most daily activities within 5 days. Eighty-eight percent of patients were able to accomplish daily activities sooner than expected. The time of return to normal daily activities was similar across all procedure types. There was no statistically significant difference regarding postoperative satisfaction between patients who recovered slower (12%) and patients who recovered as fast or faster (88%) than anticipated (p=0.180). Patients reporting fear of anesthesia in the form of conscious sedation significantly diminished from 17 to 4% postoperatively (p<0.001).ConclusionEnhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) pathways for aesthetic breast surgery are associated with rapid recovery and high patient satisfaction. This survey study provides valuable insight into patients' concerns and perspectives that may be implemented in patient education and consultations to improve patient satisfaction following aesthetic treatments.Level of evidence ivThis journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Dataset Information

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Breast Reconstruction: Pooled Meta-Analysis of 10 Observational Studies Involving 1,838 Patients.

Publications

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Breast Reconstruction: Pooled Meta-Analysis of 10 Observational Studies Involving 1,838 Patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets