Enhanced recovery program in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Reducing Readmissions While Shortening Length of Stay: The Positive Impact of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol in Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Hospital readmission rates are an increasingly important quality metric since enactment of the 2012 Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program. The proliferation of enhanced recovery protocols and earlier discharge raises concerns for increased readmission rates.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the effect of enhanced recovery on readmissions and identified risk factors for readmission.

DESIGN

This study involved implementation of a multidisciplinary enhanced recovery protocol.

SETTINGS

It was conducted at a large academic medical center PATIENTS:: All patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2011 and 2015 at our center were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

This cohort study compared patients before and after enhanced recovery initiation, looking at 30-day readmission as the primary outcome. A multivariable logistic regression model identified predictors of 30-day readmission. Kaplan-Meier analysis identified differences in time to readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 707 patients underwent colorectal procedures between 2011 and 2015, including 383 patients before enhanced recovery protocol was implemented and 324 patients after enhanced protocol was implemented. Length of stay decreased from a median 5 days to a median 4 days before and after enhanced recovery implementation (p < 0.0001). Thirty-day readmission decreased from 19% (72/383) in the pre-enhanced recovery pathway to 12% (38/324) in the enhanced recovery pathway (p = 0.009). Twenty-one percent (21/99) of patients who underwent ileostomy were readmitted before enhanced recovery implementation compared with 19% (18/93) of patients who underwent ileostomy after enhanced recovery implementation (p = 0.16). Multivariable logistic regression identified ileostomy as increasing the risk of readmission (p = 0.04), whereas enhanced recovery protocol decreased the risk of readmission (p = 0.006).

LIMITATIONS

The study is limited because it was conducted at a single institution and used a before-and-after study design.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that use of a standardized enhanced recovery protocol significantly reduces length of stay and readmission rates in an elective colorectal surgery population. However, the presence of an ileostomy maintains a high association with readmission, serving as a significant burden to patients and providers alike. Ongoing efforts are needed to further improve the management of patients undergoing ileostomy in the outpatient setting after discharge to prevent readmissions.

Enhanced recovery ERAS for elderly: a safe and beneficial pathway in colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway includes recovery goals requiring active participation of the patients; this may be perceived as "aggressive" care in older patients. The aim of the present study was to assess whether ERAS was feasible and beneficial in older patients.

METHODS

Since June 2011, all consecutive colorectal patients were included in an ERAS pathway and documented in a dedicated prospective database. This retrospective analysis included 513 patients, 311 younger patients (<70 years) and 202 older patients (≥70 years). Outcomes were adherence to the ERAS pathway, functional recovery, postoperative complications, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Older patients had significantly more diabetes, malignancies, cardiac, and respiratory co-morbidities; both groups underwent similar surgical procedures. Overall adherence to the ERAS pathway was in median 78 % in younger and 74 % in older patients (P = 0.86). In older patients, urinary drains were kept longer (P = 0.001), and oral fluid intake was reduced from day 0 to day 3 (P < 0.001). There were no differences in mobilization and intake of nutritional supplements. Postoperative complications were similar for both comparative groups (51.5 vs. 46.6 %, P = 0.32). Median length of stay was 7 days (IQR 5-13) in older patients vs. 6 days (IQR 4-10) in the younger group (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the ERAS pathway was equally high in older patients. Despite more co-morbidities, older patients did not experience more complications. Recovery was similar and hospital stay was only 1 day longer than in younger patients. ERAS pathway is of value for all patients and does not need any adaptation for the elderly.

What is the role of enhanced recovery after surgery in children? A scoping review

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways are standard practice in adult specialties resulting in improved outcomes. It is unclear whether ERAS principles are applicable to Paediatric Surgery. We performed a scoping review to identify the extent to which ERAS has been used in Paediatric Surgery, the nature of interventions, and outcomes.

METHODS

Pubmed, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, and Embase were searched using the terms enhanced recovery, post-operative protocol/pathway, fast track surgery, and paediatric surgery. Studies were excluded if they did not include abdominal/thoracic/urological procedures in children.

RESULTS

Nine studies were identified (2003-2014; total 1269 patients): three case control studies, one retrospective review and five prospective implementations, no RCTs. Interventional elements identified were post-operative feeding, mobilisation protocols, morphine-sparing analgesia, reduced use of nasogastric tubes and urinary catheters. Outcomes reported included post-operative length of stay (LOS), time to oral feeding and stooling, complications, and parent satisfaction. Fast-track programmes significantly reduced LOS in 6/7 studies, time to oral feeding in 3/3 studies, and time to stooling in 2/3 studies.

CONCLUSION

The use of ERAS pathways in Paediatric surgery appears very limited but such pathways may have benefits in children. Prospective studies should evaluate interventions used in adult ERAS on appropriate outcomes in the paediatric setting.

Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Across a Provincial Healthcare System: The ERAS Alberta Colorectal Surgery Experience

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) colorectal guideline implementation has occurred primarily in standalone institutions worldwide. We implemented the guideline in a single provincial healthcare system, and our study examined the effect of the guideline on patient outcomes [length of stay (LOS), complications, and 30-day post-discharge readmissions] across a healthcare system.

METHODS

We compared pre- and post-guideline implementation in consecutive elective colorectal patients, ≥ 18 years, from six Alberta hospitals between February 2013 and December 2014. Participants were followed up to 30 days post discharge. We used summary statistics, to assess the LOS and complications, and multivariate regression methods to assess readmissions and to estimate cost impacts.

RESULTS

A total of 1333 patients (350 pre- and 983 post-ERAS) were analysed. Of this number, 55 % were males. Median overall guideline compliance was 39 % in pre- and 60 % in post-ERAS patients. Median LOS was 6 days for pre-ERAS compared to 4.5 days in post-ERAS patients with the longest implementation (p value <0.0001). Adjusted risk ratio (RR) was 1.71, 95 % CI 1.09-2.68 for 30-day readmission, comparing pre- to post-ERAS patients. The proportion of patients who developed at least one complication was significantly reduced, from pre- to post-ERAS, difference in proportions = 11.7 %, 95 % CI 2.5-21.0, p value: 0.0139. The net cost savings attributable to guideline implementation ranged between $2806 and $5898 USD per patient.

CONCLUSION

The findings in our study have shown that ERAS colorectal guideline implementation within a healthcare system resulted in patient outcome improvements, similar to those obtained in smaller standalone implementations. There was a significant beneficial impact of ERAS on scarce health system resources.

Preparing enhanced recovery after surgery for implementation in pediatric populations

Standardization in perioperative care has led to major improvements in surgical outcomes during the last two decades. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are one example of a clinical pathway impacting both surgical outcomes and efficiency of care, but these programs have not yet been widely adapted for surgery in children. In adults, ERAS pathways have been shown to reduce length of stay, reduce complication rates, and improve patient satisfaction. These pathways improve outcomes through standardization of existing evidence-based best practices. Currently, the direct evidence for adapting ERAS pathways to pediatric surgery patients is limited. Challenges for implementation of ERAS programs for children include lack of direct translatability of adult evidence as well as varying levels acceptability of ERAS principles among pediatric providers and patients' families. We describe our newly implemented ERAS program for pediatric colorectal surgery patients in an era of limited direct evidence and discuss what further issues need to be addressed for broader implementation of pediatric ERAS pathways.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 5.

An economic evaluation of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) multisite implementation program for colorectal surgery in Alberta

BACKGROUND

In February 2013, Alberta Health Services established an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) implementation program for adopting the ERAS Society colorectal guidelines into 6 sites (initial phase) that perform more than 75% of all colorectal surgeries in the province. We conducted an economic evaluation of this initiative to not only determine its cost-effectiveness, but also to inform strategy for the spread and scale of ERAS to other surgical protocols and sites.

METHODS

We assessed the impact of ERAS on patients&#8217; health services utilization (HSU; length of stay [LOS], readmissions, emergency department visits, general practitioner and specialist visits) within 30 days of discharge by comparing pre- and post-ERAS groups using multilevel negative binomial regressions. We estimated the net health care costs/savings and the return on investment (ROI) associated with those impacts for post-ERAS patients using a decision analytic modelling technique.

RESULTS

We included 331 pre- and 1295 post-ERAS patients in our analyses. ERAS was associated with a reduction in all HSU outcomes except visits to specialists. However, only the reduction in primary LOS was significant. The net health system savings were estimated at $2 290 000 (range $1 191 000&#8211;$3 391 000), or $1768 (range $920&#8211;$2619) per patient. The probability for the program to be cost-saving was 73%&#8211;83%. In terms of ROI, every $1 invested in ERAS would bring $3.8 (range $2.4&#8211;$5.1) in return.

CONCLUSION

The initial phase of ERAS implementation for colorectal surgery in Alberta is cost-saving. The total savings has the potential to be more substantial when ERAS is spread for other surgical protocols and across additional sites.

Efficiency and Safety Effects of Applying ERAS Protocols to Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Evidence

Application of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) to the bariatric surgical procedures is at its early stages with little consolidated evidence. This meta-analysis evaluates present literature and indicates pathways for development of evidence-based standardized ERAS protocols for bariatric surgery. Comparative trials between ERAS and conventional bariatric surgery published till June 2016 were searched in the medical database. Comparisons were made for length of stay (LOS), readmission, complications (major/minor), and reoperation rates. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) for the strength of meta-analysis was performed for the primary outcome LOS. Five subgroups with a total of 394 and 471 patients in ERAS and conventional group respectively were included. LOS was shorter in ERAS group by 1.56 ± 0.18 days (random-effects, p < 0.001, I 2 = 93.07 %). The sample size in ERAS was well past the "information size" variable which was calculated to be 189 as per the TSA for power 85%. MH odds ratio [1.41 (95% CI 1.13 to1.76)] was higher for minor complications in the ERAS group (fixed effects, I 2 = 0, p < 0.001). Superiority/inferiority of ERAS could not be established for major or overall complications, readmission, and anastomotic leak rates. No publication bias was found in the included trials (Egger's test, X-intercept = 6.14, p = 0.66). Evaluation based on Cochrane collaboration recommendations suggested that all the five included trials had a high risk of methodological bias. ERAS protocols for bariatric procedures allow faster return to home for patients. The present bariatric ERAS protocols have high heterogeneity and would benefit from standardization. Minor complication rates increase with implementation of ERAS, however without any significant effect on overall patient morbidity. Further randomized trials comparing ERAS with conventional care are required to consolidate these findings.

Could the Use of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol in Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy be an Incentive for Live Kidney Donation?

Introduction and Background: Gastrointestinal (GI) recovery after major abdominal surgery can be delayed from an ongoing need for narcotic analgesia thereby prolonging hospitalization. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal perioperative care pathway designed to facilitate early recovery after major surgery by maintaining preoperative body composition and physiological organ function and modifying the stress response induced by surgical exposure. Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) in colorectal surgery have decreased the duration of postoperative ileus and the hospital stay while showing equivalent morbidity, mortality, and readmission rates in comparison to the traditional standard of care. This study is a pilot trial to evaluate the benefits of ERAS protocols in living kidney donors undergoing laparoscopic nephrectomy.

Methods: This is a single-center, non-randomized, retrospective analysis comparing the outcomes of the first 40 live kidney donors subjected to laparoscopic nephrectomy under the ERAS protocol to 40 donors operated prior to ERAS with traditional standard of care. Our ERAS protocol includes reduced duration of fasting with preoperative carbohydrate loading, intraoperative fluid restriction to 3 ml/kg/hr, target urine output of 0.5 ml/kg/hr, use of subfascial Exparel injection (bupivacaine liposome suspension), and postoperative narcotic-free pain regimen with acetaminophen, ketorolac, or tramadol. Short-term patient outcomes were compared using Pearsons’s Chi-Squared test for categorical variables and the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. Additionally, a multivariate analysis was conducted to evaluate factors influencing patient length of stay and likelihood of readmission.

Results: ERAS protocol reduced the postoperative median length of stay decreased from 2.0 to 1.0 days (p=0.001). Overall pain scores were significantly lower in the ERAS group (peak pain score 6.0 vs. 8.00, p< 0.001; morning after surgery pain score 3.0 vs. 7.0, p=0.001; lowest pain score 0.0 vs. 2.0, p=0.016) despite the absence of postoperative narcotics. The average duration of surgery was shorter in the ERAS group (248 vs. 304 minutes, p<0.001). The average amount of intraoperative fluid used was significantly lower in the ERAS group (2500 ml vs. 3525 ml, p<0.001) without affecting the donor renal function. The incidence of delayed graft function was similar in the two groups (p=0.541). A trend toward lower readmission was noted with the ERAS protocol (12.8% vs. 27.5%, p=0.105). GI dysfunction was the most common reason for readmission.

Conclusion: Application of an ERAS protocol in a laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy was associated with reduced length of hospitalization and improved pain scores related likely to intraoperative use of subfascial Exparel and a shorter duration of ileus. Restricted use of intraoperative fluids prevents excessive third spacing and bowel edema, enhancing gut recovery without adversely impacting recipient graft function. This study suggests that ERAS has the potential to enhance the advantages of laparoscopic surgery for live kidney donation through optimizing donor outcomes and perioperative patient satisfaction.

Do we really need the full compliance with ERAS protocol in laparoscopic colorectal surgery? A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although the relation between adherence to the ERAS protocol and clinical outcomes was extensively studied, there is still ongoing discussion on the need and feasibility of full compliance in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. In this study, we aimed to verify whether a strict adherence to the protocol (>90%) leads to further improvement in clinical outcomes compared to high (70-90%) and low (<70%) compliance groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The analysis included consecutive prospectively registered patients operated laparoscopically for colorectal cancer between January 2012 and December 2015. Patients were divided into three groups depending on the compliance with the ERAS protocol: <70% (Group 1), 70-90% (Group 2), >90% (Group 3). The measured outcomes were: complication rate, readmission rate, recovery parameters (tolerance of early oral diet on 1st postoperative day and mobilization of a patient on the day of surgery), length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Group 1 consisted of 70, Group 2 of 65 and Group 3 of 116 patients. There were no statistical differences between the groups based on demographic parameters, stage of cancer and operative parameters (operative time, blood loss, conversion rate). The overall compliance with the protocol in the study group was 85.6 ± 11.9%. There was a significant decrease in complication rate with increasing compliance (35.7% vs. 36.4% vs. 16.4%, p = 0.0024) and severity of complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (p = 0.0198). Moreover, we observed differences in recovery parameters between the groups: tolerance of oral diet on the 1st postoperative day (52.8% vs. 79.5% vs. 87.9%, p < 0.0001), mobilization of a patient on the day of surgery (68.6% vs. 92.3% vs. 99.1%, p < 0.0001), respectively. We also observed that with compliance increase, the median LOS decreased (6 vs. 4 vs. 3 days, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Full implementation of the ERAS protocol significantly improves short term outcomes both in comparison to the high- and low-compliant groups.

Analgesia in the surgical intensive care unit

Critically ill patients are a heterogeneous group with diverse comorbidities and physiological derangements. The management of pain in the critically ill population is emerging as a standard of care in the intensive care unit (ICU). Pain control of critically ill patients in the ICU presents numerous challenges to intensivists. Inconsistencies in pain assessment, analgesic prescription and variation in monitoring sedation and analgesia result in suboptimal pain management. Inadequate pain control can have deleterious effects on several organ systems in critically ill patients. Therefore, it becomes incumbent on physicians and nurses caring for these patients to carefully evaluate their practice on pain management and adopt an optimal pain management strategy that includes a reduction in noxious stimuli, adequate analgesia and promoting education regarding sedation and analgesia to the ICU staff. Mechanistic approaches and multimodal analgesic techniques have been clearly demonstrated to be the most effective pain management strategy to improve outcomes. For example, recent evidence suggests that the use of short acting analgesics and analgesic adjuncts for sedation is superior to hypnotic based sedation in intubated patients. This review will address analgesia in the ICU, including opioid therapy, adjuncts, regional anaesthesia and non-pharmacological options that can provide a multimodal approach to treating pain.

Quality and Safety in Health Care, Part XVIII: Improving Outcomes in Colorectal Surgery

An important way to improve outcomes after colorectal surgery is to follow the recommendations of the enhanced recovery pathway after surgery (ERAS). The ERAS guidelines are recommendations that address certain aspects of what should be done before surgery, in the operating room, and following surgery. There is a substantial fall in complications and a decrease in the length of stay for the patient if the recommendations are followed. Elements of the ERAS program are now being adopted for other surgical procedures besides colorectal surgery.

Impact of weekday surgery on application of enhanced recovery pathway: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol compliance and clinical outcomes depending on the weekday of surgery.

SETTINGS

Cohort of consecutive non-selected patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery from January 2012 to March 2015. This retrospective analysis of our prospective database compared patients operated early in the week (Monday and Tuesday) with patients operated in the second half (late: Thursday, Friday).

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Compliance with the ERAS protocol, functional recovery, complications and length of stay.

RESULTS

Demographic and surgical details were similar between the early (n=352) and late groups (n=204). Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was 78% vs 76% for the early and late groups, respectively (p=0.009). Significant differences were notably prolonged urinary drainage and intravenous fluid infusion in the late group. Complication rates and length of stay, however, were not different between surgery on Monday or Tuesday and surgery on Thursday or Friday.

CONCLUSIONS

Application of the ERAS protocol showed only minor differences for patients operated on early or late during the week, and clinical outcomes were similar. A fully implemented ERAS programme appears to work also over the weekend.

Safety and efficacy of an "enhanced recovery after surgery" protocol for patients undergoing colon cancer surgery: a multi-institutional controlled study

PURPOSE

The aim of this multi-institutional study was to prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for colonic surgery.

METHODS

The subjects of this study were 320 patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade I or II physical status. Patients underwent elective open or laparoscopic colonic resection or high anterior resection between April 2011 and January 2014 at one of six institutions. Three hospitals implemented an ERAS protocol (n = 159), and three administered conventional care (n = 161). The primary outcome measure was the surgical complication rate.

RESULTS

Most operations, irrespective of group, were performed laparoscopically. The incidence of a surgical complication was 17.0 % in the ERAS group vs. 16.1 % in the conventional group (P = 0.842), in which several non-surgical complications also arose. Oral food intake was implemented earlier for the ERAS group vs. the conventional group, after a median (range) of 1 (1-31) vs. 3 (1-9) days for the ERAS vs. conventional care groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The median length of postoperative hospital stay was reduced by 5.5 days for the ERAS group, being 8.5 (5-41) vs. 14 (7-56) days for the ERAS vs. conventional care groups, respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This multi-institutional controlled study clearly demonstrated that an ERAS protocol was efficient, without increasing the complication risk.

Enhanced Recovery Pathways in Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology

IMPORTANCE

Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) are considered standard of care across a variety of surgical disciplines, but ERPs have not been widely adopted in gynecology.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe ERP principles and the role of ERPs in gynecology and gynecologic oncology.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Comprehensive literature search was performed using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Collaboration Database, and PubMed.

RESULTS

Meta-analyses of a substantial number of randomized controlled trials have shown that implementation of ERP protocols is associated with decreased length of hospital stay, a decrease in rates of postoperative complication, decreased morbidity, and cost savings while preserving patient satisfaction and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

High-quality evidence exists for improved outcomes among patients in ERPs. Enhanced recovery programs save resources and costs across the health care system. As quality metrics and bundled payments increase in health care, ERPs will have increasing prominence.

Postoperative urinary retention in colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery pathway

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines for colorectal surgery suggest routine transurethral bladder drainage with early removal to prevent urinary tract infection (UTI). The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for urinary retention (UR).

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included all colorectal patients since ERAS implementation in May 2011-November 2014. From the prospective ERAS database, over 100 items related to demographics, surgery, compliance, and outcome were analyzed. Risk factors for UR were identified by multiple logistic regressions; then, UR was correlated to functional outcomes and UTI and acute kidney injury rates.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 513 consecutive patients. Of these, 73 patients (14%) presented with UR. Multivariate analysis identified male gender (odds ratio 1.4; 95% CI, 1-1.8; P = 0.045) and postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia (EDA; odds ratio 2.6; 95% CI, 1.6-4.3; P ≤ 0.001) as independent risk factors for postoperative UR. Functional recovery was impeded in patients with UR, who were less mobile (mobilization day 1 >4 h: 57% versus 70%, P = 0.024) and gained more weight (2.8 ± 2.5 kg versus 1.6 ±3 kg on day 1, P = 0.001) due to fluid overload. Furthermore, patients with urinary catheters reported more pain (visual analog scales day 3: 3.1 ± 2.5 versus 2.2 ± 2.4, P = 0.002) and depended longer on intravenous fluid administration (termination of intravenous fluids later than day 1: 53% versus 39%, P = 0.021). Ten of 73 patients (14%) developed UTI in patients with UR and 42 of 440 (10%) in patients without UR (P = 0.276). Six of 73 patients (8%) developed acute kidney injury in patients with UR and 36 of 440 (8%) in patients without UR (P = 0.991).

CONCLUSIONS

Male gender and EDA were independent risk factors for postoperative UR which appeared to be a significant impediment for functional recovery.

Impact of adherence to care pathway interventions on recovery following bowel resection within an established enhanced recovery program

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines recommend incorporation of more than 20 perioperative interventions within an enhanced recovery program (ERP). However, the impact of overall adherence to the pathway and the relative contribution of each intervention are unclear. The aim of this study was to estimate the extent to which adherence to ERP elements is associated with outcomes and identify key ERP elements predicting successful recovery following bowel resection.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data entered in a registry specifically designed for ERPs were reviewed. Patients undergoing elective bowel resection between 2012 and 2014 were treated within an ERP comprising 23 care elements. Primary outcome was successful recovery defined as the absence of complications, discharge by postoperative day 4 and no readmission. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay (LOS), 30-day morbidity, and severity (Comprehensive complication index, CCI, 0-100). Regression analyses were adjusted for potential confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 347 patients were included in the study. Median primary LOS was 4 days (IQR 3-7). Patients were adherent to median 18 (IQR 16-20) elements. A total of 156 (45 %) patients had successful recovery. Morbidity occurred in 175 (50 %) patients with median CCI 8.6 (IQR 0-22.6). There was a positive association between adherence and successful recovery (OR 1.39 for every additional element, p < 0.001), LOS (11 % reduction for every additional element, p < 0.001), 30-day postoperative morbidity (OR 0.78, p < 0.001), and the CCI (17 % reduction, p < 0.001). Laparoscopy (OR 4.32, p < 0.001), early mobilization out of bed (OR 2.25, p = 0.021), and early termination of IV fluid infusion (OR 2.00, p = 0.013) significantly predicted successful recovery. These factors were also associated with reduced morbidity and complication severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased adherence to ERP interventions was associated with successful early recovery and a reduction in postoperative morbidity and complication severity. In an established ERP where overall adherence was high, laparoscopic approach, perioperative fluid management, and patient mobilization remain key elements associated with improved outcomes.

Successful implementation of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program shortens length of stay and improves postoperative pain, and bowel and bladder function after colorectal surgery

Background

Despite international data indicating that Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs, which combine evidence-based perioperative strategies, expedite recovery after surgery, few centers have successfully adopted this approach within the U.S. We describe the implementation and efficacy of an ERAS program for colorectal abdominal surgery in a tertiary teaching center in the U.S.

Methods

We used a multi-modal and continuously evolving approach to implement an ERAS program among all patients undergoing colorectal abdominal surgery at a single hospital at the University of California, San Francisco. 279 patients who participated in the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery program were compared to 245 previous patients who underwent surgery prior to implementation of the program. Primary end points were length of stay and readmission rates. Secondary end points included postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, postoperative nausea and vomiting, length of urinary catheterization, and time to first solid meal.

Results

ERAS decreased both median total hospital length of stay (6.4 to 4.4 days) and post-procedure length of stay (6.0 to 4.1 days). 30-day all-cause readmission rates decreased from 21 to 9.4 %. Pain scores improved on postoperative day 0 (3.2 to 2.1) and day 1 (3.2 to 2.6) despite decreased opioid. Median time to first solid meal decreased from 4.7 to 2.7 days and duration of urinary catheterization decreased from 74 to 46 h. Similar improvements were observed in all other secondary end points.

Conclusions

These results confirm that a multidisciplinary, iterative, team-based approach is associated with a reduction in hospital stay and an acceleration in recovery without increasing readmission rates.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-016-0223-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Enhanced recovery pathways in pancreatic surgery: State of the art

Pancreatic surgery is being offered to an increasing number of patients every year. Although postoperative outcomes have significantly improved in the last decades, even in high-volume centers patients still experience significant postoperative morbidity and full recovery after surgery takes longer than we think. In recent years, enhanced recovery pathways incorporating a large number of evidence-based perioperative interventions have proved to be beneficial in terms of improved postoperative outcomes, and accelerated patient recovery in the context of gastrointestinal, genitourinary and orthopedic surgery. The role of these pathways for pancreatic surgery is still unclear as high-quality randomized controlled trials are lacking. To date, non-randomized studies have shown that care pathways for pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy are safe with no difference in postoperative morbidity, leading to early discharge and no increase in hospital readmissions. Hospital costs are reduced due to better organization of care and resource utilization. However, further research is needed to clarify the effect of enhanced recovery pathways on patient recovery and post-discharge outcomes following pancreatic resection. Future studies should be prospective and follow recent recommendations for the design and reporting of enhanced recovery pathways.

Readmission Following Gastric Cancer Resection: Risk Factors and Survival

BACKGROUND

This study utilized a multi-institutional database to evaluate risk factors for readmission in patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma with the intent of describing both perioperative risk factors and the relationship of readmission to survival.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative resection of gastric adenocarcinoma from 2000 to 2012 from seven academic institutions of the US Gastric Cancer Collaborative were analyzed. In-hospital deaths and palliative surgeries were excluded, and readmission was defined as within 30 days of discharge. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed and survival analysis conducted.

RESULTS

Of the 855 patients, 121 patients (14.2 %) were readmitted. Univariate analysis identified advanced age (p < 0.0128), American Society of Anesthesiology status ≥3 (p = 0.0045), preexisting cardiac disease (p < 0.0001), hypertension (p = 0.0142), history of smoking (p = 0.0254), increased preoperative blood urea nitrogen (BUN; p = 0.0426), concomitant pancreatectomy (p = 0.0056), increased operation time (p = 0.0384), estimated blood loss (p = 0.0196), 25th percentile length of stay (<7 days, p = 0.0166), 75th percentile length of stay (>12 days, p = 0.0256), postoperative complication (p < 0.0001), and total gastrectomy (p = 0.0167) as risk factors for readmission. Multivariable analysis identified cardiac disease (odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.6-3.3, p < 0.0001), postoperative complication (OR 2.3, 95 % CI 1.6-5.4, p < 0.0001), and pancreatectomy (OR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.1-4.1, p = 0.0202) as independent risk factors for readmission. There was an association of decreased overall median survival in readmitted patients (39 months for readmitted vs. 103 months for non-readmitted). This was due to decreased survival in readmitted stage 1 (p = 0.0039), while there was no difference in survival for other stages. Stage I readmitted patients had a higher incidence of cardiac disease than stage I non-readmitted patients (58 vs. 24 %, respectively, p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

Within this multi-institutional study investigating readmission in patients undergoing curative resection for gastric cancer, cardiac disease, postoperative complication, and concomitant pancreatectomy were identified as significant risk factors for readmission. Readmission was associated with decreased overall median survival, but on further analysis, this was driven by differences in survival for stage I disease only.

Incidence, reasons, and risk factors for readmission after surgery for benign distal esophageal disease

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to ascertain the incidence of, reasons for, and risk factors associated with hospital readmission after an operation for benign distal esophageal disease.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2012-2014), patients with a primary diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease, paraesophageal hiatal hernia, or achalasia who underwent fundoplication, paraesophageal hernia repair, or Heller myotomy were identified. The primary outcome was hospital readmission. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors associated with hospital readmission.

RESULTS

Of the 14,478 patients included in this study, 801 (5.5%) were readmitted at a median of 11 days (interquartile range 6-17) postprocedure. Intolerance of oral intake (21.8%), respiratory complications (11.6%), abdominal pain (6.0%), and venous thromboembolic events (4.7%) were some of the most common reasons for readmission. Open operative approach (odds ratio 1.34, 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.71), chronic steroid use (odds ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval 1.10-2.00), emergency admission (odds ratio 1.50, 95% confidence interval 1.01-2.21), and predischarge complication (odds ratio 1.91, 95% confidence interval 1.42-2.59) were associated most strongly with hospital readmission.

CONCLUSION

Implementing standardized perioperative strategies, such as nutritional counseling, early ambulation, intensive pulmonary toilet, and deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis, may help decrease the number of preventable readmissions and enhance the overall quality of care in this patient population.

Cost impact analysis of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program implementation in Alberta colon cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (eras) colorectal guideline has been implemented widely across Alberta. Our study examined the clinical and cost impacts of eras on colon cancer patients across the province.

METHODS

We first used both summary statistics and multivariate regression methods to compare, before and after guideline implementation, clinical outcomes (length of stay, complications, readmissions) in consecutive elective colorectal patients 18 or more years of age and in colon cancer and non-cancer patients treated at the Peter Lougheed Centre and the Grey Nuns Hospital between February 2013 and December 2014. We then used the differences in clinical outcomes for colon cancer patients, together with the average cost per hospital day, to estimate cost impacts.

RESULTS

The analysis considered 790 patients (398 cancer and 392 non-cancer patients). Mean guideline compliance increased to 60% in cancer patients and 57% in non-cancer patients after eras implementation from 37% overall before eras implementation. From pre- to post-eras, mean length of stay declined to 8.4 ± 5 days from 9.5 ± 7 days in cancer patients, and to 6.4 ± 4 days from 8.8 ± 5.5 days in non-cancer patients (p = 0.0012 and p = 0.0041 respectively). Complications declined significantly in the renal, hepatic, pancreatic, and gastrointestinal groups (difference in proportions: 13% in cancer patients; p < 0.05). No significant change in the risk of readmission was observed. The net cost savings attributable to eras implementation ranged from $1,096 to $2,771 per cancer patient and from $3,388 to $7,103 per non-cancer patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of eras not only resulted in clinical outcome improvements, but also had a significant beneficial impact on scarce health system resources. The effect for cancer patients was different from that for non-cancer patients, representing an opportunity for further refinement and study.

A Novel Approach to Major Surgery: Tracking Its Pathophysiologic Footprints

BACKGROUND

To study the 'metabolic profile' of different surgical procedures and correlate it with pertinent surgical details and postoperative complications.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective pilot study of 70 patients, ten for each of the seven following groups: (1) laparoscopic cholecystectomy, (2) incisional hernia repair, (3) laparoscopic and (4) open colon surgery, (5) upper gastrointestinal, (6) hepatic, and (7) pancreatic resections. Biochemical assessment included white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), glucose, triglycerides (TG), albumin (Alb), and pre-albumin (Pre-Alb), from the day before surgery until 5 days thereafter. Biological markers were compared for major versus minor surgery groups, which were defined on a clinical basis. Univariable analysis was used to identify risk factors for postoperative complications and p < 0.05 was the significance threshold.

RESULTS

Common findings in all surgery groups were the acute inflammatory response (↑: WBC, CRP, ↓: TG, Alb, pre-Alb). Using cut-off values of 240 min operative (OR) time and 300 ml estimated blood loss (EBL), laparoscopic cholecystectomy, incisional hernia repair, and laparoscopic colectomy could be distinguished from open colectomy, upper gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreas resections. In a biochemical level, increased CRP and reduced postoperative Alb levels were highly discriminative of all types of 'major surgery.' Significant risk factors for postoperative complications were age, male gender, malignancy, longer OR time, higher blood loss, high CRP, and low Alb levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Biochemically, CRP and Alb levels can help quantify the magnitude of the surgical trauma, which is correlated with adverse outcomes.

ERAS protocol in laparoscopic surgery for colonic versus rectal carcinoma: are there differences in short-term outcomes?

Most of the studies concerning enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in colorectal surgery include heterogeneous groups of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery, both due to colonic and rectal cancer, thus creating a potential bias. The data investigating the differences between patients operated for either colonic or rectal cancer are sparse. The aim of the study was to compare short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colonic and rectal cancer with ERAS protocol. The analysis included consecutive prospectively registered patients operated for a colorectal cancer between January 2012 and September 2015. Patients were divided into two groups (colon vs. rectum). The measured outcomes were: length of stay (LOS), complication rate, readmission rate, compliance with ERAS protocol elements and recovery parameters (tolerance of early oral diet, mobilization and time to first flatus). Group 1 (colon) consisted of 150 patients and Group 2 (rectum) of 82 patients. Patients in Group 1 (150 patients) were discharged home earlier than in Group 2 (82 patients)—median LOS 4 versus 5 days, respectively. There was no statistical difference in complication rate (27.3 vs. 36.6 %) and readmissions (7.3 vs. 6.1 %). Compliance with the protocol was 86.9 and 82.6 %, respectively. However, in Group 1, the following procedures were used less frequently: bowel preparation (24 vs. 78.3 %) and postoperative drainage (23.3 vs. 71.0 %). There were no differences in recovery parameters between the groups. Univariate logistic regression showed that the type of surgery, drainage and stoma creation significantly prolonged LOS. In a multivariate logistic regression model, only a bowel preparation and drainage were shown to be significant. Although functional recovery and high compliance with ERAS protocol are possible irrespective of the type of surgery, laparoscopic rectal resections are associated with a longer LOS.

ERAS protocol in laparoscopic surgery for colonic versus rectal carcinoma: are there differences in short-term outcomes?

Most of the studies concerning enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in colorectal surgery include heterogeneous groups of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery, both due to colonic and rectal cancer, thus creating a potential bias. The data investigating the differences between patients operated for either colonic or rectal cancer are sparse. The aim of the study was to compare short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colonic and rectal cancer with ERAS protocol. The analysis included consecutive prospectively registered patients operated for a colorectal cancer between January 2012 and September 2015. Patients were divided into two groups (colon vs. rectum). The measured outcomes were: length of stay (LOS), complication rate, readmission rate, compliance with ERAS protocol elements and recovery parameters (tolerance of early oral diet, mobilization and time to first flatus). Group 1 (colon) consisted of 150 patients and Group 2 (rectum) of 82 patients. Patients in Group 1 (150 patients) were discharged home earlier than in Group 2 (82 patients)-median LOS 4 versus 5 days, respectively. There was no statistical difference in complication rate (27.3 vs. 36.6 %) and readmissions (7.3 vs. 6.1 %). Compliance with the protocol was 86.9 and 82.6 %, respectively. However, in Group 1, the following procedures were used less frequently: bowel preparation (24 vs. 78.3 %) and postoperative drainage (23.3 vs. 71.0 %). There were no differences in recovery parameters between the groups. Univariate logistic regression showed that the type of surgery, drainage and stoma creation significantly prolonged LOS. In a multivariate logistic regression model, only a bowel preparation and drainage were shown to be significant. Although functional recovery and high compliance with ERAS protocol are possible irrespective of the type of surgery, laparoscopic rectal resections are associated with a longer LOS.

Laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery combined with enhanced recovery after surgery protocol (ERAS) reduces the negative impact of sarcopenia on short-term outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Progressive skeletal muscle loss (sarcopenia) is a negative prognostic factor in patients treated for colorectal cancer. Nevertheless, the clinical impact of those changes in body composition has been analyzed only in patients undergoing open resections. The aim of the study was to assess whether laparoscopy may eliminate the deleterious prognostic impact of sarcopenia and whether the combination with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol may improve postoperative recovery also in sarcopenic patients.

METHODS

The study included 124 (73M/51F, mean age 65.9 years) patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer. In all of them 16-item ERAS protocol was applied. The L3 skeletal muscle area identified on a preoperative CT scan was used to calculate skeletal muscle index and assess for sarcopenia and myosteatosis. The entire study group was divided into groups regarding the presence of sarcopenia or myosteatosis. The outcome measures were: length of hospital stay, complication rate and functional recovery parameters.

RESULTS

The prevalence of sarcopenia and myosteatosis was 27.4% and 38.7%, respectively. There was no association between the presence of sarcopenia or myosteatosis and postoperative complications. There were also no differences in the length of stay or readmission rates. Functional recovery (time to first flatus, oral diet tolerance and mobilization) was similar regardless of the presence of muscle depletion.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrary to traditional surgical approach, laparoscopy can reduce the negative impact of sarcopenia and myosteatosis on treatment results. ERAS protocol does not affect negatively the surgical outcomes in sarcopenic patients, compared to patients without changes in body skeletal mass.

Cost minimization analysis of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol: a single-centre, case-matched study

Introduction

The goal of modern medical treatment is to provide high quality medical care in a cost-effective environment.

Aim

To assess the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic colorectal surgery combined with the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol (ERP) in Poland.

Material and methods

We designed a single-centre, case-matched study. Economic and clinical data were collected in 3 groups of patients (33 patients in each group): group 1 – patients undergoing laparoscopy with ERP; group 2 – laparoscopy without ERP; group 3 – open resection without ERP. An independent administrative officer, not involved in the treatment process, matched patients for age, sex and type of resection. Primary outcome was cost analysis. It was carried out incorporating institutional costs: hospital bed stay, anaesthesia, surgical procedure and equipment, drugs and complications. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), readmission and complication rate.

Results

Cost of laparoscopic procedure alone was significantly more expensive than open resection. However, implementation of the ERAS protocol reduced additional costs. Total cost per patient in group 1 was significantly lower than in groups 2 and 3 (EUR 1826 vs. EUR 2355.3 vs. EUR 2459.5, p < 0.0001). Median LOS was 3, 6 and 9 days in groups 1, 2 and 3 respectively (p < 0.001). Postoperative complications were noted in 5 (15.2%), 6 (18.2%) and 13 (39.4%) patients in groups 1, 2, 3 respectively (p = 0.0435).

Conclusions

In a low medical care expenditure country, minimally invasive surgery combined with ERP can be a safe and a cost-effective alternative to open surgery with traditional perioperative care.

Is ERAS in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer changing risk factors for delayed recovery?

There is evidence that implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols into colorectal surgery reduces complication rate and improves postoperative recovery. However, most published papers on ERAS outcomes and length of stay in hospital (LOS) include patients undergoing open resections. The aim of this pilot study was to determine the factors affecting recovery and LOS in patients after laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer combined with ERAS protocol. One hundred and forty-three consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic resection were prospectively evaluated. They were divided into two subgroups depending on their reaching the targeted length of stay—LOS (75 patients in group 1—≤4 days, 68 patients in group 2—>4 days). A univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess for factors (demographics, perioperative parameters, complications and compliance with the ERAS protocol) independently associated with LOS of 4 days or longer. The median LOS in the entire group was 4 days. The postoperative complication rate was higher (18.7 vs. 36.7 %), and the compliance with ERAS protocol was lower (91.2 vs. 76.7 %) in group 2. There was an association between the pre- and postoperative compliance and the subsequent complications. In uni- and multivariate analysis, the lack of balanced fluid therapy (OR 3.87), lack of early mobilization (OR 20.74), prolonged urinary catheterization (OR 4.58) and use of drainage (OR 2.86) were significantly associated with prolonged LOS. Neither traditional patient risk factors nor the stage of the cancer was predictive of the duration of hospital stay. Instead, compliance with the ERAS protocol seems to influence recovery and LOS when applied to laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.

Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Pathway After Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Patients with Low Drain Fluid Amylase

INTRODUCTION

The safety and feasibility of an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) after pancreatic surgery is largely unknown. Our aim was to prospectively evaluate a targeted ERP after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), using first postoperative day (POD) drain fluid amylase (DFA1) values to identify patients at low risk of pancreatic fistula (PF).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Non-randomized cohort study of 130 consecutive patients. Perioperative outcomes were compared before (pre-ERP; N=65) and after (post-ERP; N=65) implementation of an ERP. Patients in each group were stratified according to the risk of PF using DFA1<350 IU/l. Low-risk patients in the post-ERP group were selected for early oral intake and early drain removal.

RESULTS

81/130 patients had a DFA1<350. Incidence of PF was significantly lower in low-risk patients (9 vs. 45%, P=0.0001). In low-risk patients, morbidity (43 vs. 36%) and mortality (2.7 vs. 4.5%) were similar for both pre- and post-ERP patients. Hospital stay (median 9 vs. 7 days, P=0.03) and 30-day readmissions (17 vs. 2%, P=0.04) were lower in low-risk patients in the post-ERP group. In high-risk patients, there was no difference in outcomes between pre- and post-ERP.

CONCLUSION

Patients at low risk of PF after PD can be identified by first POD DFA1. Enhanced recovery after PD is safe and leads to improved short-term outcomes in low-risk patients.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols Are Valuable in Pancreas Surgery Patients

BACKGROUND

There is increasing interest in implementing comprehensive perioperative protocols, including preoperative optimization and education, perioperative goal-directed fluid management, and postoperative fast tracking, to enhance recovery after surgery. Data on the outcomes of these protocols in pancreatic surgery, however, are limited.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained pancreas surgery database at a single institution from August 2012 to April 2015 was undertaken. An enhanced recovery protocol was initiated in October 2014, and patients were divided into groups according to preprotocol or postprotocol implementation. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were tabulated. Statistical analysis was performed with Student's t-test and Fisher's exact tests, as well as equality of variances where appropriate, using SAS System software (SAS Institute).

RESULTS

Three hundred and seventy-eight patients (181 men, mean age 54 years, BMI 28 kg/m(2)) underwent elective pancreatic surgery during the study period, 297 patients preprotocol and 81 postprotocol. There were no significant differences in preoperative or intraoperative characteristics. Mean postoperative length of stay was significantly lower in the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group (7.4 vs 9.2 days; p < 0.0001). Hospital costs were similarly lower in the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group ($23,307.90 vs $27,387.80; p < 0.0001). Readmission (29% vs 32%) and pancreatic fistula (26% vs 28%) rates were similar between groups. Delayed gastric emptying was lower in the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery group (26% vs 13%; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after pancreatic surgery protocol significantly decreased length of stay and hospital cost without increasing readmission or morbidity. Despite patient complexity and the potential need for individualization of care, enhanced recovery protocols can be valuable and effective in high-risk patient populations, including pancreatic surgery patients.

C-reactive protein and procalcitonin predict anastomotic leaks following colorectal cancer resections - a prospective study

INTRODUCTION

Early safe discharge is paramount for the success of ERAS following colorectal cancer resections. Anastomotic leakage (AL) has high morbidity, particularly if the patient has been discharged to the community.

AIM

To evaluate whether C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) can predict AL before early discharge.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty-five consecutive patients undergoing open and robotic colorectal cancer resections were included. C-reactive protein and PCT were measured pre-operatively, 8 h after incision, and on the first and third postoperative day. Thirty-day readmissions, re-operations and mortality were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients underwent robotic and the remainder open (n = 26) resections. Five patients had AL. The mean CRP and PCT increased on postoperative day 1 (POD 1) and POD 3 in all patients. On POD 3, mean CRP was 114 mg/l in non-AL patients and 321 mg/l in AL patients (p = 0.0001). Mean PCT on POD 3 was 0.56 ng/ml in the non-AL group and 10.4 ng/ml in AL patients (p = 0.017). On analysis of ROC and AUC curves, the cut-off for CRP on POD 3 was 245.64 mg/l, with 100% sensitivity and 98% specificity for AL. The cut-off for PCT on POD 3 was 3.83 ng/ml, with 75% sensitivity and 100% specificity for AL.

CONCLUSIONS

C-reactive protein and PCT measurement on POD 3 following colorectal cancer resection can positively identify patients at low risk of anastomotic leakage.

Postoperative Albumin Drop Is a Marker for Surgical Stress and a Predictor for Clinical Outcome: A Pilot Study

Background. Surgical stress during major surgery may be related to adverse clinical outcomes and early quantification of stress response would be useful to allow prompt interventions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the acute phase protein albumin in the context of the postoperative stress response. Methods. This prospective pilot study included 70 patients undergoing frequent abdominal procedures of different magnitude. Albumin (Alb) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were measured once daily starting the day before surgery until postoperative day (POD) 5. Maximal Alb decrease (Alb Δ min) was correlated with clinical parameters of surgical stress, postoperative complications, and length of stay. Results. Albumin values dropped immediately after surgery by about 10 g/L (42.2 ± 4.5 g/L preoperatively versus 33.8 ± 5.3 g/L at day 1, P < 0.001). Alb Δ min was correlated with operation length (Pearson ρ = 0.470, P < 0.001), estimated blood loss (ρ = 0.605, P < 0.001), and maximal CRP values (ρ = 0.391, P = 0.002). Alb Δ min levels were significantly higher in patients having complications (10.0 ± 5.4 versus 6.1 ± 5.2, P = 0.005) and a longer hospital stay (ρ = 0.285, P < 0.020). Conclusion. Early postoperative albumin drop appeared to reflect the magnitude of surgical trauma and was correlated with adverse clinical outcomes. Its promising role as early marker for stress response deserves further prospective evaluation.

Newly implemented enhanced recovery pathway positively impacts hospital length of stay

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) are thought to improve surgical outcomes by standardizing perioperative patient care established in evidence-based literature. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of a colorectal surgery ERP on hospital length of stay (LOS) and other patient outcomes.

METHODS

This is a comparative effectiveness study of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery 2 years prior (pre-ERP group) and 2 years after (ERP group) implementation of an ERP program. The primary outcome was hospital LOS. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day reoperations. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to control for patient factors, general health factors, diagnosis, surgeon, colon versus rectal operations, and open versus minimally invasive operations-laparoscopic and robotic. An ERP checklist was developed to track adherence to components of the pathway.

RESULTS

The study population included 1036 patients: 523 in the pre-ERP group and 513 in the ERP group. Unadjusted LOS was significantly shorter in the ERP group than the control pre-ERP group [3 (IQR 3.5) vs 5 days (IQR 4.6); p < 0.0001]. Multivariable regression analysis confirmed the reduction in LOS, controlling for age, colon/rectum procedure, open/laparoscopic/robotic approach, primary diagnosis, and alvimopan use. Postoperative outcomes were not significantly different between groups except for 30-day readmissions, which were unexpectedly higher in the ERP group (14.6 vs 8.7 %, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

A newly implemented ERP on a dedicated colorectal surgery service in an academic non-university hospital setting resulted in shorter hospital LOS, but increased readmissions, for patients undergoing elective open and minimally invasive colon and rectal surgery. Future multi-institutional studies are needed to understand the impact of ERP on postoperative complications and readmissions.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) protocol in patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for stage IV colorectal cancer

Background

There is strong evidence for the use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol with colorectal surgery. However, in most studies on ERAS, patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) are commonly excluded. It is not certain if the ERAS protocol combined with laparoscopy improves outcomes in this group of patients as well.

The aim of the study is to assess the feasibility of the ERAS protocol implementation in patients operated laparoscopically due to stage IV CRC.

Methods

A prospective analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery was performed. Group 1 included patients with stages I–III, and group 2 included patients with stage IV CRC. Demographic, surgical factors, length of stay (LOS), complications, readmissions, ERAS implementation and early postoperative recovery were compared between the groups.

Results

Group 1 included 168 patients, and group 2 included 20 patients. There was no difference in the age, sex, BMI, ASA, cancer localisation or surgical parameters. No statistically significant difference was noted in complications (26.8 vs 20 %, p = 0.51344), LOS (4.7 vs 5.7 days, p = 0.28228) or readmissions (6 vs 10 %, p = 0.48392). The ERAS protocol compliance was 86.3 and 83.0 %, respectively (p = 0.17158).

Conclusions

Implementation of the ERAS protocol and laparoscopic surgery among patients with stage IV CRC is feasible and provides similar short-term clinical outcomes and recovery as with patients with stages I–III.