Enhanced recovery programmes in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a systematic review

Enhanced recovery programmes in head and neck surgery: systematic review

Objective:

To review the literature on enhanced recovery programmes in head and neck surgery.

Method:

A systematic review was performed in May 2013.

Results:

Thirteen articles discussing enhanced recovery after laryngectomy, neck dissection, major ablative surgery and microvascular reconstruction were identified. Articles on general pre-operative preparation and post-operative care were also reviewed.

Conclusion:

Considerable evidence is available supporting enhanced recovery in head and neck surgery that could be of benefit to patients and which surgeons should be aware of.

Novel strategy for laparoscopic treatment of pT2 gallbladder carcinoma

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated our new strategy for treating suspected T2 gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) using a laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

We examined 19 patients with suspected T2 GBC who were treated laparoscopically (LS group) between December 2007 and December 2013; these patients were compared with 14 patients who underwent open surgery (OS group). Laparoscopic staging was initially performed to exclude factors making the patients ineligible for curative resection. Intraoperative pathological examination of the surgical margin of the cystic duct was performed prior to laparoscopic gallbladder bed resection, and pathological examination was again performed to confirm the presence of carcinoma and the depth of tumor invasion. Surgery was completed when the pathological findings indicated that the patient was cancer free. Lymph node dissection was performed according to the depth of tumor invasion.

RESULTS

None of the patients required conversion to laparotomy. For three patients with benign lesions, only gallbladder bed resection was required. Additional regional lymph node dissection was performed in 16 patients in the LS group. The mean operative time (309 vs. 324 min, p = 0.755) and mean number of dissected lymph nodes (12.6 vs. 10.2, p = 0.361) were not significantly different between the LS and OS groups. The intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower (104 vs. 584 mL, p = 0.002) and the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (9.1 vs. 21.6 days, p = 0.002) for LS patients than for those in the OS group. In the LS group, one patient developed postoperative pneumonia, but all patients survived without recurrence after a mean follow-up of 37 months.

CONCLUSION

Our strategy for suspected T2 gallbladder GBC is safe and useful, avoids unnecessary procedures, and is associated with similar oncologic outcomes as the open method.

Enhanced recovery after pancreatic surgery: a systematic review of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been shown to reduce hospital stay without compromising outcomes. Attempts to apply ERAS principles in the context of pancreatic surgery have generated encouraging results. A systematic review of the current evidence for ERAS following pancreatic surgery was conducted.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was performed for articles describing postoperative clinical pathways in pancreatic surgery during the years 2000-2013. The keywords 'clinical pathway', 'critical pathway', 'fast-track', 'pancreas' and 'surgery' and their synonyms were used as search terms. Articles were selected for inclusion based on predefined criteria and ranked for quality. Details of the ERAS protocols and relevant outcomes were extracted and analysed.

RESULTS

Ten articles describing an ERAS protocol in pancreatic surgery were identified. The level of evidence was graded as low to moderate. No articles reported an adverse effect of an ERAS protocol for pancreatic surgery on perioperative morbidity or mortality. Length of stay (LoS) was decreased and readmission rates were found to be unchanged in six of seven studies that compared these outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence indicates that ERAS protocols may be implemented in pancreatic surgery without compromising patient safety or increasing LoS. Enhanced recovery after surgery programmes in the context of pancreatic surgery should be standardized based upon the best available evidence, and trials of ERAS programmes involving multiple centres should be performed.

A systematic review of enhanced recovery care after colorectal surgery in elderly patients

AIM

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) can decrease complications and reduces hospital stay. Less certain is whether elderly patients can fully adhere to and benefit from ERAS. We aimed to determine the safety, feasibility and efficacy of enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery in patients aged ≥ 65 years old.

METHOD

A systematic search of Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane was performed to identify (i) studies comparing elderly patients managed with ERAS vs traditional care, (ii) cohort studies of ERAS with results of elderly vs younger patients and (iii) any case series of ERAS in elderly patients. End-points of interest were length of hospital stay, complications, mortality, readmission and re-operation, and ERAS protocol adherence.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included. Two randomized controlled trials demonstrated shorter hospital stay in elderly patients with ERAS compared with elderly patients with non-ERAS (9 vs 13.2 days, P < 0.001; 5.5 vs 7 days, P < 0.0001). Fewer complications occurred with ERAS in both randomized controlled trials (27.4% vs 58.6%, P < 0.0001; 5% vs 21.1%, P = 0.045). The majority of observational studies did not show differences in outcome between elderly and younger patients in terms of hospital stay, morbidity or mortality. Inconsistent findings between cohort studies may reflect the disparities in ERAS protocol definitions or differences in study populations.

CONCLUSION

ERAS can be safely applied to elderly patients to reduce complications and shorten length of hospital stay. Further studies are required to assess whether elderly patients are able to adhere to, and benefit from, ERAS protocols to the same extent as younger patients.

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

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.

Effectiveness and implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery programmes: a rapid evidence synthesis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence on the impact of enhanced recovery programmes for patients undergoing elective surgery in acute hospital settings in the UK.

DESIGN

Rapid evidence synthesis. Eight databases were searched from 1990 to March 2013 without language restrictions. Relevant reports and guidelines, websites and reference lists of retrieved articles were scanned to identify additional studies. Systematic reviews, RCTs not included in the systematic reviews, economic evaluations and UK NHS cost analysis, implementation case studies and surveys of patient experience in a UK setting were eligible for inclusion.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

We assessed the impact of enhanced recovery programmes on health or cost-related outcomes, and assessed implementation case studies and patient experience in UK settings. Studies were quality assessed where appropriate using the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects critical appraisal process.

RESULTS

17 systematic reviews and 12 additional RCTs were included. Ten relevant economic evaluations were included. No cost analysis studies were identified. Most of the evidence focused on colorectal surgery. 14 innovation case studies and 15 implementation case studies undertaken in National Health Service settings described factors critical to the success of an enhanced recovery programme. Evidence for colorectal surgery suggests that enhanced recovery programmes may reduce hospital stays by 0.5-3.5 days compared with conventional care. There were no significant differences in reported readmission rates. Other surgical specialties showed greater variation in reductions in length of stay reflecting the limited evidence identified. Findings relating to other outcomes were hampered by a lack of robust evidence and poor reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

There is consistent, albeit limited, evidence that enhanced recovery programmes can reduce length of patient hospital stay without increasing readmission rates. The extent to which managers and clinicians considering implementing enhanced recovery programmes in UK settings can realise savings will depend on length of stay achieved under their existing care pathway.

Factors associated with failure of enhanced recovery protocol in patients undergoing major hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the risk factors associated with failure of enhanced recovery protocol after major hepatobiliary and pancreatic (HBP) surgery.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort of 194 adult patients undergoing major HBP surgery at a university hospital in Hong Kong was followed up for 30 days. The patients were from a larger cohort study of 736 consecutive adults with preoperative urinary cotinine concentration to examine the association between passive smoking and risk of perioperative respiratory complications and postoperative morbidities.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was failure of enhanced recovery protocol. This was defined as a composite measure of the following events: intensive care unit (ICU) stay more than 24 h after surgery, unplanned admission to ICU within 30 days after surgery, hospital readmission, reoperation and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 25 failures of enhanced recovery after HBP surgery (12.9%, 95% CI 8.5% to 18.4%). After adjusting for elective ICU admission, smokers (relative risk (RR ) 2.21, 95% CI 1.10 to 4.46), high preoperative alanine transaminase/glutamic-pyruvic transaminase (RR 3.55,95% CI 1.68 to 7.49) and postoperative morbidities (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.30 to 5.56) were associated with failures of enhanced recovery in the generalised estimating equation risk model. Compared with those managed successfully, failures stayed longer in ICU (median 19 vs 25 h, p<0.001) and in hospital for postoperative care (median 7 vs 13 days, p=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Smokers and patients having high preoperative alanine transaminase/glutamic-pyruvic transaminase concentration or have a high risk of postoperative morbidities are likely to fail enhanced recovery protocol in HBP surgery programmes.

Initiatives to reduce length of stay in acute hospital settings: a rapid synthesis of evidence relating to enhanced recovery programmes

Background

There has been growing interest in the NHS over recent years in the use of enhanced recovery programmes for elective surgery to deliver productivity gains through reduced length of stay, fewer postoperative complications, reduced readmissions and improved patient outcomes.

Objectives

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery programmes for patients undergoing elective surgery in acute hospital settings. To identify and critically describe key factors associated with successful adoption, implementation and sustainability of enhanced recovery programmes in UK settings. To summarise existing knowledge about patient experience of enhanced recovery programmes in UK settings.

Data sources

Eight databases, including Database of Abstracts of Reviews and Effects, International Prospective of Systematic Reviews, NHS Economic Evaluation Database and MEDLINE, were searched from 1990 to March 2013 without language restrictions. Relevant reports and guidelines and reference lists of retrieved articles were scanned to identify additional studies.

Review methods

Systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), economic evaluations, and UK NHS cost analysis studies were included if they evaluated the impact of enhanced recovery programmes on any health- and cost-related outcomes. Eligible studies included patients undergoing elective surgery in an acute hospital setting. Implementation case studies and surveys of patient experience in a UK setting were also eligible for inclusion. Quality assessment of systematic reviews, RCTs and economic evaluations was based on existing Centre for Reviews and Dissemination processes. All stages of the review process were performed by one researcher and checked by a second with discrepancies resolved by consensus. The type and range of evidence precluded meta-analysis and we therefore performed a narrative synthesis, differentiating between clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, implementation case studies and evidence on patient experience.

Results

Seventeen systematic reviews of varying quality were included in this report. Twelve additional RCTs were included; all were considered at high risk of bias. Most of the evidence focused on colorectal surgery. Fourteen innovation case studies and 15 implementation case studies undertaken in NHS settings were identified and provide descriptions of factors critical to the success of an enhanced recovery programme. Ten relevant economic evaluations were identified evaluating costs and outcomes over short time horizons. Despite the plethora of studies, robust evidence was sparse. Evidence for colorectal surgery suggests that enhanced recovery programmes may reduce hospital stays by 0.5–3.5 days compared with conventional care. There were no significant differences in reported readmission rates. Other surgical specialties showed greater variation in reported reductions in length of stay reflecting the limited evidence identified.

Limitations

Findings relating to other clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, implementation and patient experience were hampered by a lack of robust evidence and poor reporting.

Conclusions

There is consistent, albeit limited, evidence that enhanced recovery programmes may reduce length of patient hospital stay without increasing readmission rates. The extent to which managers and clinicians considering implementing enhanced recovery programmes can realise reductions and cost savings will depend on length of stays achieved under their existing care pathway. RCTs comparing an enhanced recovery programme with conventional care continue to be conducted and published. Further single-centre RCTs of this kind are not a priority. Rather, what is needed is improved collection and reporting of how enhanced recovery programmes are implemented, resourced and experienced in NHS settings.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Reducing the burden of surgical harm: a systematic review of the interventions used to reduce adverse events in surgery

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of interventions used to reduce adverse events in surgery.

BACKGROUND

Many interventions, which aim to improve patient safety in surgery, have been introduced to hospitals. Little is known about which methods provide a measurable decrease in morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to Week 19, 2012, for systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cross-sectional and cohort studies, which reported an intervention aimed toward reducing the incidence of adverse events in surgical patients. The quality of observational studies was measured using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias.

RESULTS

Ninety-one studies met inclusion criteria, 26 relating to structural interventions, 66 described modifying process factors. Only 17 (of 42 medium to high quality studies) reported an intervention that produced a significant decrease in morbidity and mortality. Structural interventions were: improving nurse to patient ratios (P = 0.008) and Intensive Care Unit (ITU) physician involvement in postoperative care (P < 0.05). Subspecialization in surgery reduced technical complications (P < 0.01). Effective process interventions were submission of outcome data to national audit (P < 0.05), use of safety checklists (P < 0.05), and adherence to a care pathway (P < 0.05). Certain safety technology significantly reduced harm (P = 0.02), and team training had a positive effect on patient outcome (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small cohort of medium- to high-quality interventions effectively reduce surgical harm and are feasible to implement. It is important that future research remains focused on demonstrating a measurable reduction in adverse events from patient safety initiatives.

Enhanced recovery in the resection of colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence for the use of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients undergoing hepatectomy, and the impact of the evolution of ERAS over time has not been examined. This study sought to evaluate the effect of an evolving ERAS program in patients undergoing hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHODS

A multimodal ERAS program was introduced in 2/2008. Consecutive patients undergoing hepatectomy for CRLM between 2/2008 and 9/2012 were included in the study. Data were collected prospectively. Retrospective analysis compared an early ERAS cohort (2/2008-4/2010) with a later cohort with a matured ERAS program (5/2010-8/2012).

RESULTS

Length of stay reduced as experience of ERAS increased (Log-rank χ(2)  = 10.43, P = 0.001). Although median length of stay remained unchanged (6 days), the probability of hospitalization beyond 10 days was 25% in the early cohort compared with 7% in the later cohort. Critical care utilization reduced over time (75.5% vs. 54.7%, P < 0.0001). Complications occurred in 38.2%, with no difference in between cohorts. One postoperative death occurred in the early cohort (<0.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that as experience of ERAS evolves, there is a progressive reduction in hospitalization and critical care admission. This is without any increase in morbidity and mortality.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of enhanced recovery after pancreatic surgery with particular emphasis on pancreaticoduodenectomies

BACKGROUND

In the past decade, Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols have been implemented in several fields of surgery. With these protocols, a faster recovery and shorter hospital stay can be accomplished without an increase in morbidity or mortality. The purpose of this study was to review systematically the evidence for implementation of an ERAS protocol in pancreatic resections, with particular emphasis on pancreaticoduodenectomies (PDs).

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, and the Cochrane library for papers describing an ERAS program in adult patients undergoing elective pancreatic surgery published between January 1966 and December 2012. The primary outcome measure was postoperative length of stay. Secondary outcome measures were time to recovery of normal function, overall postoperative complication rates, readmissions, and mortality. Subsequently, a meta-analysis of outcome measures focusing on PD was conducted. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement.

RESULTS

The literature search produced 248 potentially relevant papers. Of these, eight papers met the predefined inclusion criteria: five case-control studies, two retrospective studies, and one prospective study, describing a total of 1,558 patients. Only three of the studies reported data on discharge criteria and assessed time to recovery and return to normal function. Implementation of an ERAS protocol led in four of five comparative studies to a significant decrease in length of stay (reduction of 2-6 days in different studies). Meta-analysis of four studies focusing on PDs showed that there was a significant difference in complication rates in favor of the ERAS group (absolute risk difference 8.2 %, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.0-14.4, p = 0.008). Introduction of an ERAS protocol did not result in an increase in mortality or readmissions. Delayed gastric emptying and incidence of pancreatic fistula did not differ significantly between groups. All studies reporting on hospital costs showed a decrease after implementation of ERAS.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review suggests that using an ERAS protocol in pancreatic resections may help to shorten hospital length of stay without compromising morbidity and mortality. This seemed to apply to distal pancreatectomy, total pancreatectomy, and PD. Meta-analysis was performed for those studies focusing on PD and showed that there were no differences in readmission or mortality. Morbidity rates were significantly lower for patients managed according ERAS principles.

Surgical management of colorectal liver metastases: a European perspective

The treatment of colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver is increasingly complex as a result of changes in the patient population, advances in preoperative staging, changing definitions of resectability, advances in surgical technique and the expanding chemotherapeutic armamentarium. Management of these patients within a multidisciplinary team is increasingly important and associated with better outcomes. In patients with irresectable hepatic metastases, high secondary resection rates can be achieved with multiagent chemotherapy when managed in conjunction with a liver specialist. Perioperative mortality rates are reducing but morbidity remains high, and enhanced recovery could help reduce morbidity. Despite the advancing age and comorbidity of the patient population, multimodal management is likely to lead to further improvements in perioperative and long-term outcomes.

Pancreatoduodenectomy--current status of surgical and perioperative techniques in Germany

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomy in Germany is performed by a broad range of hospitals. A diversity of operative techniques is employed as no guidelines exist for intra- and perioperative management. We carried out a national survey to determine the de facto German standards for pancreatoduodenectomy, assess quality assurance measures, and identify relevant issues for further investigation.

METHODS

A questionnaire evaluating major outcome variables, case load, preferred surgical procedures, and perioperative management during pancreatoduodenectomy was developed and sent to 211 German hospitals performing >12 pancreatoduodenectomies per year (requirement for certification as a pancreas center). Statistical analysis was carried out using the Fisher Exact, Mann-Whitney U, and Spearman tests.

RESULTS

The final response rate was 86 % (182/211). The preferred technique and de facto German standard for pancreatoduodenectomy was pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatojejunostomy carried out via duct-to-mucosa anastomosis with interrupted sutures using PDS 4.0. The minority of German pancreas centers were certified (18-48 %). The certification rate increased with higher capacity levels and case load (P < 0.05); however, significant correlations between the fistula rate and hospital case load, hospital capacity level, or hospital certification status were not seen.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed a distinct variety of management strategies for pancreatic surgery and available evidence-based data was not necessarily translated into clinical practice. The limited certification rate represented a shortcoming of quality assurance. The data emphasize the need for further trials to answer the questions whether hospital certifications and omission of drains improve outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy and for the establishment of guidelines for pancreatoduodenectomy.

Routine staging laparoscopy has no place in the management of colorectal liver metastases

AIMS

Staging laparoscopy has been recommended in the management of patients with colorectal liver metastases prior to hepatectomy in order to reduce the incidence and associated morbidity of futile laparotomies. The utility of staging laparoscopy has not been assessed in patients undergoing CT, PET-CT and MRI as standard preoperative staging.

METHODS

All patients undergoing attempted open hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases between 1/4/2008 and 31/3/2012 were identified from a prospectively maintained research database. All patients who underwent futile laparotomy were identified, with demographics and operative notes subsequently analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 274 patients underwent attempted open hepatectomy during the study period. At laparotomy 12 (4.4%) patients were found to have irresectable disease. There were no unifying demographic factors within the patients undergoing futile laparotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

With modern imaging, the potential yield of staging laparoscopy is low. Staging laparoscopy should not be used routinely, but may have a role in the case of specific clinical concerns.