Project description:BACKGROUND:Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has made great progress in the field of surgery, the guidelines point to the lack of high-quality evidence in upper gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS:Randomized controlled trials in four electronic databases that involved ERAS protocols for upper gastrointestinal surgery were searched through December 12, 2018. The primary endpoints were lung infection, urinary tract infection, surgical site infection, postoperative anastomotic leakage and ileus. The secondary endpoints were postoperative length of stay, the time from end of surgery to first flatus and defecation, and readmission rates. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of surgery. RESULTS:A total of 17 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that there was a decrease in rates of lung infection (RR = 0.50, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.75), postoperative length of stay (MD = -2.53, 95%CI: - 3.42 to - 1.65), time until first postoperative flatus (MD = -0.64, 95%CI: - 0.84 to - 0.45) and time until first postoperative defecation (MD = -1.10, 95%CI: - 1.74 to - 0.47) in patients who received ERAS, compared to conventional care. However, other outcomes were not significant difference. There was no significant difference between ERAS and conventional care in rates of urinary tract infection (P = 0.10), surgical site infection (P = 0.42), postoperative anastomotic leakage (P = 0.45), readmissions (P = 0.31) and ileus (P = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS:ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infection and accelerating patient recovery time. Nevertheless, we should also consider further research ERAS should be performed undergoing gastrectomy and esophagectomy.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Enhanced-recovery (ER) protocols are increasingly being utilized in surgical practice. Outside of colorectal surgery, however, their feasibility, safety, and efficacy in major oncologic surgery have not been proven. This study compared patient outcomes before and after multispecialty implementation of ER protocols at a large, comprehensive cancer center. METHODS:Surgical cases performed from 2011 to 2016 and captured by an institutional NSQIP database were reviewed. Following exclusion of outpatient and emergent surgeries, 2747 cases were included in the analyses. Cases were stratified by presence or absence of ER compliance, defined by preoperative patient education and electronic medical record order set-driven opioid-sparing analgesia, goal-directed fluid therapy, and early postoperative diet advancement and ambulation. RESULTS:Approximately half of patients were treated on ER protocols (46%) and the remaining on traditional postoperative (TP) protocols (54%). Treatment on an ER protocol was associated with decreased overall complication rates (20% vs. 33%, p?<?0.0001), severe complication rates (7.4% vs. 10%, p?=?0.010), and median hospital length of stay (4 vs. 5 days, p?<?0.0001). There was no change in readmission rates (ER vs. TP, 8.6% vs. 9.0%, p?=?0.701). Subanalyses of high magnitude cases and specialty-specific outcomes consistently demonstrated improved outcomes with ER protocol adherence, including decreased opioid use. CONCLUSIONS:This assessment of a large-scale ER implementation in multispecialty major oncologic surgery indicates its feasibility, safety, and efficacy. Future efforts should be directed toward defining the long-term oncologic benefits of these protocols.
Project description:Background and objective Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are multimodal perioperative care pathways to help patients achieve early recovery after surgical procedures. However, no evidence could be found about its role in patients undergoing small bowel surgery. This study's objective was to determine the outcome of applying ERAS protocols in patients undergoing small bowel surgery. Materials and methods This study was a descriptive case series conducted in the Department of Surgery at Services Hospital in Lahore, Pakistan, from September 2017 to August 2019. One hundred forty patients who underwent small bowel resection anastomosis were subjected to ERAS protocols. Written informed consent was received from all patients. Results The mean age of the patients was 34.1 ± 7.1 years. There were 101 (72.1%) men and 39 (27.9%) women in the study sample. The mean length of postoperative hospital stay was 4.59 ± 1.69 days. Postoperative wound infection occurred in six (4.3%) patients, while anastomotic leakage was observed in 12 (8.6%) patients. Five (3.6%) patients died within 30 days of surgery. A significantly increased length of postoperative hospital stay was associated with anastomotic leakage (9.08 ± 1.975 vs. 4.16 ± 0.83 days; p=0.00). Similarly, the frequency of wound infection (41.7% vs. 0.8%; p=0.00) and 30-day patient mortality (41.7% vs. 0%; p=0.00) was also significantly higher among those patients who acquired anastomotic leakage. Conclusion ERAS protocols were associated with a significant reduction in length of hospital stay of the patients undergoing small bowel surgery without any significant increase is anastomotic leakage, wound infection or mortality. Furthermore, anastomotic leakage occurred in the patients was significantly associated with a longer hospital stay, wound infection, and 30-day mortality. Therefore, ERAS protocols can be safely applied to small bowel surgery.
Project description:PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Effective acute pain management has evolved considerably in recent years and is a primary area of focus in attempts to defend against the opioid epidemic. Persistent postsurgical pain (PPP) has an incidence of up to 30-50% and has negative outcome of quality of life and negative burden on individuals, family, and society. The 2016 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) guidelines states that enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) forms an integral part of Perioperative Surgical Home (PSH) and is now recommended to use a multimodal opioid-sparing approach for management of postoperative pain. As such, dexmedetomidine is now being used as part of ERAS protocols along with regional nerve blocks and other medications, to create a satisfactory postoperative outcome with reduced opioid consumption in the Post anesthesia care unit (PACU). RECENT FINDINGS:Dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha2 agonist, possesses analgesic effects and has a different mechanism of action when compared with opioids. When dexmedetomidine is initiated at the end of a procedure, it has a better hemodynamic stability and pain response than ropivacaine. Dexmedetomidine can be used as an adjuvant in epidurals with local anesthetic sparing effects. Its use during nerve blocks results in reduced postoperative pain. Also, local infiltration of IV dexmedetomidine is associated with earlier discharge from PACU. Perioperative use of dexmedetomidine has significantly improved postoperative outcomes when used as part of ERAS protocols. An in-depth review of the use of dexmedetomidine in ERAS protocols is presented for clinical anesthesiologists.
Project description:Postoperative ileus (POI) and postoperative gastrointestinal tract dysfunction (POGD) are well-known complications affecting patients undergoing intestinal surgery. GI symptoms include nausea, vomiting, pain, abdominal distention, bloating, and constipation. These iatrogenic disorders are associated with extended hospitalizations, increased morbidity, and health care costs into the billions and current therapeutic strategies are limited. This is a narrative review focused on recent concepts in the pathogenesis of POI and POGD, pipeline drugs or approaches to treatment. Mechanisms, cellular targets and pathways implicated in the pathogenesis include gut surgical manipulation and surgical trauma, neuroinflammation, reactive enteric glia, macrophages, mast cells, monocytes, neutrophils and ICC's. The precise interactions between immune, inflammatory, neural and glial cells are not well understood. Reactive enteric glial cells are an emerging therapeutic target that is under intense investigation for enteric neuropathies, GI dysmotility and POI. Our review emphasizes current therapeutic strategies, starting with the implementation of colorectal enhanced recovery after surgery protocols to protect against POI and POGD. However, despite colorectal enhanced recovery after surgery, it remains a significant medical problem and burden on the healthcare system. Over 100 pipeline drugs or treatments are listed in Clin.Trials.gov. These include 5HT4R agonists (Prucalopride and TAK 954), vagus nerve stimulation of the ENS-macrophage nAChR cholinergic pathway, acupuncture, herbal medications, peripheral acting opioid antagonists (Alvimopen, Methlnaltexone, Naldemedine), anti-bloating/flatulence drugs (Simethiocone), a ghreline prokinetic agonist (Ulimovelin), drinking coffee, and nicotine chewing gum. A better understanding of the pathogenic mechanisms for short and long-term outcomes is necessary before we can develop better prophylactic and treatment strategies.
Project description:The feasibility and safety of enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) have been demonstrated in a large number of surgical specialties. Several studies have shown improved post-operative outcomes and economic benefit from the use of ERPs in oesophageal cancer surgery. However, these improvements are not always translated more widely into clinical practice due to variation in protocols, poor compliance and failure to implement a robust implementation strategy. ERP implementation strategies should reflect the fact that these are complex interventions that are influenced by a wide range of social, organizational and cultural factors.
Project description:The clinical and economic impacts of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been demonstrated extensively. Whether ERAS protocols also have a biological effect remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the biological impact of an ERAS programme in patients undergoing liver surgery. A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing liver surgery (2010-2018) was undertaken. Patients operated before and after ERAS implementation in 2013 were compared. Surrogate markers of surgical stress were monitored: white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, albumin concentration, and haematocrit. Their perioperative fluctuations were defined as Δvalues, calculated on postoperative day (POD) 0 for Δalbumin and Δhaematocrit and POD 2 for ΔWBC and ΔCRP. A total of 541 patients were included, with 223 and 318 patients in non-ERAS and ERAS groups respectively. Groups were comparable, except for higher rates of laparoscopy (24.8 versus 11.2 per cent; P < 0.001) and major resection (47.5 versus 38.1 per cent; P = 0.035) in the ERAS group. Patients in the ERAS group showed attenuated ΔWBC (2.00 versus 2.75 g/l; P = 0.013), ΔCRP (60 versus 101 mg/l; P <0.001) and Δalbumin (12 versus 16 g/l; P < 0.001) compared with those in the no-ERAS group. Subgroup analysis of open resection showed similar results. Multivariable analysis identified ERAS as the only independent factor associated with high ΔWBC (odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95 per cent c.i. 0.43 to 0.98; P = 0.038), ΔCRP (OR 0.41, 0.23 to 0.73; P = 0.003) and Δalbumin (OR 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.72; P = 0.002). Compared with conventional management, implementation of ERAS was associated with an attenuated stress response in patients undergoing liver surgery.
Project description:Enhanced recovery protocols are being implemented into the standard of care in surgical practice. This study aimed to insert a steadfast set of elements into the perioperative care pathway to establish an improved recovery program for colorectal cancer patients.Seventy patients planned for elective laparoscopic colorectal resection were randomized into 2 groups: conventional recovery group (n = 35) and enhanced recovery group (n = 35). The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included the times of removal of nasogastric tubes (NGTs), successful enteral feeding, and removal of drains, postoperative complications, intra-hospital mortality, and rate of readmission.The mean postoperative hospital stay was 4.49 ± 0.85 days vs. 13.31 ± 6.9 days (P < 0.001), the mean time of removal of NGTs was 0.77 ± 1.031 days vs. 3.26 ± 2.737 days (P < 0.001), the mean time of successful enteral feeding was 1.89 ± 1.13 days vs. 5.46 ± 1.67 days (P < 0.001), and the mean time for removal of intra-abdominal drains was 2.94 ± 1.056 days vs. 9.06 ± 3.757 days (P < 0.001) for the enhanced and the conventional groups, respectively. Complications were significantly lower among patients in the enhanced group (25.7% vs. 65.7%) (P = 0.001). The rates of readmission were similar in the 2 groups.Applying definite evidence-based elements to the colorectal rehabilitation program significantly boosts the recovery pathway with favorable outcomes, including faster recovery of gastrointestinal tract functions, lower morbidities, and eventually earlier discharge from the hospital.
Project description:The present interdisciplinary consensus review proposes clinical considerations and recommendations for anaesthetic practice in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery with an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) programme.Studies were selected with particular attention being paid to meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials and large prospective cohort studies. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined and reviewed. The group reached a consensus recommendation after critical appraisal of the literature.This consensus statement demonstrates that anaesthesiologists control several preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative ERAS elements. Further research is needed to verify the strength of these recommendations.Based on the evidence available for each element of perioperative care pathways, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society presents a comprehensive consensus review, clinical considerations and recommendations for anaesthesia care in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery within an ERAS programme. This unified protocol facilitates involvement of anaesthesiologists in the implementation of the ERAS programmes and allows for comparison between centres and it eventually might facilitate the design of multi-institutional prospective and adequately powered randomized trials.