ERAS, length of stay and private insurance: a retrospective study

Same-day discharge (SDD) vs standard enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for major colorectal surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are well-established, resulting in improved outcomes and shorter length of hospital stay (LOS). Same-day discharge (SDD), or "hyper-ERAS", is a natural progression of ERAS. This systematic review aims to compare the safety and efficacy of SDD against conventional ERAS in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (394793). A systematic search was performed in major databases to identify relevant articles, and a narrative systematic review was performed. Primary outcomes were readmission rates and length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were operative time and blood loss, postoperative pain, morbidity, nausea or vomiting, and patient satisfaction. Risks of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included, with five single-arm and eight comparative studies, of which one was a randomised controlled trial. This comprised a total of 38,854 patients (SDD: 1622; ERAS: 37,232). Of the 1622 patients on the SDD pathway, 1590 patients (98%) were successfully discharged within 24 h of surgery. While most studies had an overall low risk of bias, there was considerable variability in inclusion criteria, types of surgery or anaesthesia, and discharge criteria. SDD resulted in a significantly reduced postoperative LOS, without increasing risk of 30-day readmission. Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity rates were comparable between both groups. Operative duration was shorter in the SDD group. Patient-reported satisfaction was high in the SDD cohort.

CONCLUSION

SDD protocols appear to be safe and feasible in selected patients undergoing major colorectal operations. Randomised controlled trials are necessary to further substantiate these findings.

Benchmarking postoperative outcomes after open liver surgery for cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in a national cohort

BACKGROUND

Benchmark analysis for open liver surgery for cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still undefined.

METHODS

Patients were identified from the Italian national registry HE.RC.O.LE.S. The Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC) method was employed to identify the benchmarks. The outcomes assessed were the rate of complications, major comorbidities, post-operative ascites (POA), post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), 90-day mortality. Benchmarking was stratified for surgical complexity (CP1, CP2 and CP3).

RESULTS

A total of 978 of 2698 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 431 (44.1%) patients were treated with CP1 procedures, 239 (24.4%) with CP2 and 308 (31.5%) with CP3 procedures. Patients submitted to CP1 had a worse underlying liver function, while the tumor burden was more severe in CP3 cases. The ABC for complications (13.1%, 19.2% and 28.1% for CP1, CP2 and CP3 respectively), major complications (7.6%, 11.1%, 12.5%) and 90-day mortality (0%, 3.3%, 3.6%) increased with the surgical difficulty, but not POA (4.4%, 3.3% and 2.6% respectively) and PHLF (0% for all groups).

CONCLUSION

We propose benchmarks for open liver resections in HCC cirrhotic patients, stratified for surgical complexity. The difference between the benchmark values and the results obtained during everyday practice reflects the room for potential growth, with the aim to encourage constant improvement among liver surgeons.

Bowel recovery after intra- vs extra-corporeal anastomosis for oncologic laparoscopic right hemicolectomy within an ERAS protocol: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Restoring bowel continuity after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with an intra-corporeal (IC) rather than an extra-corporeal (EC) ileocolic anastomosis may offer advantages in post-operative recovery. The aim of this study was to compare bowel function recovery between these two techniques, in a context of complete mesocolic excision within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent oncologic laparoscopic right hemicolectomy from January 2012 to February 2021 in our institution were included in the study. Data were gathered from the prospectively maintained official ERAS (EIAS) database and completed through our institution's electronic health records. The primary endpoint was prolonged post-operative ileus (PPOI), defined as the need to insert a nasogastric tube, or refractory nausea VAS > 4, on or after the third post-operative day. Secondary endpoints were post-operative pain, morbidity and length of hospital stay (LoS). Groups were compared before and after propensity score matching based on age, gender, ASA score, use of epidural analgesia and post-operative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 108 patients met the inclusion criteria, 36 (30%) had IC and 72 (70%) EC anastomosis. In the unmatched population, baseline characteristics were similar except for more frequent use of epidural analgesia in the EC group (62 (72.9%) vs. 17 (47.2), p = 0.007). PSM analysis was carried out. Operative time was longer in the IC group (197 min (176-223) vs. 160 (140-189), p < 0.001). The rate of PPOI was similar (2 (5.6%) patients in the IC group vs. 10 (11.6%) in the EC group (p = 0.306)), but time to frist passage of flatus and stool was shorter in the IC group. There was no difference in morbidity but patients after IC anastomosis had lower pain VAS scores at 24 h (p = 0.004) and a trend for a shorter LoS (6 (5-8) days vs 7 (5-10) in the EC group, p = 0.054). After PSM, there were 36 patients in each group. PPOI, time to first flatus and stool, morbidity and LoS were not significantly different although there was a trend for better recovery outcomes in the IC group. Patients in the IC group had significantly longer operative times but less pain at 24 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Although IC anastomosis was not significantly associated to lower rates of PPOI, it showed trends of faster recovery and significantly less post-operative pain at the expense of longer operating times.

Optimizing discharge decision-making in colorectal surgery: a prospective cohort study of discharge practices in a recently implemented enhanced recovery pathway

AIM

The objectives of this project were (1) to compare time to readiness for discharge by set criteria and actual length of stay (LOS) in a newly implemented colorectal enhanced recovery pathway and (2) to identify reasons for delayed hospital discharge.

METHOD

We conducted a prospective cohort study of 73 adult patients (age 67 ± 14 years, 56% men, 51% laparoscopic, 13% stoma creation) undergoing elective colorectal surgery in a university hospital with a recently implemented recovery pathway (<2 years). Time to readiness for discharge (oral intake, flatus, pain control, ability to walk, and no complications) was compared to actual LOS using a correlation-adjusted log-rank test. The treating team was interviewed, and thematic analysis was used to identify reasons for patients remaining in hospital after discharge criteria (DC) were achieved.

RESULTS

Median LOS was 6 (4-8) days and median time to readiness for discharge was 5 (3-8) days (P < 0.001). Twenty-eight patients (37%) remained in hospital after DC were achieved. Although some delayed discharges were medically justified (e.g., workup [13%] or treatment of complications not captured by DC [2.6%]), unnecessary hospital stays were common (e.g., perceived need for observation [16%], or patients not willing to be discharged [11%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Unnecessary hospital stays were common within a recently implemented enhanced recovery pathway and represent a target for quality improvement. Efforts should be directed at optimizing patient education regarding discharge expectations, early consultation of the discharge planning team and improving discharge decision-making using standardized DC.

Bowel function recovery after laparoscopic transverse colectomy within an ERAS program: a comparison to right and left colectomy

BACKGROUND

It is known that functional recovery of the bowel is slower after right colectomy (RC) compared to left colectomy (LC), but very little has been reported on transverse colectomy (TC).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and early functional outcomes of TC, a more infrequent operation, to RC, and LC for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Between December 2011 and December 2017, all patients undergoing elective colon resection in our institution were treated according to a standardized ERAS protocol and entered in a prospective database. We included in the study patients undergoing laparoscopic TC, RC, or LC for cancer with curative intent. The primary endpoint was prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), defined as need to insert a nasogastric tube, or refractory nausea VAS > 4 on or after the third postoperative day. Secondary endpoints were postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay (LoS).

RESULTS

Out of 286 patients, 126 met the inclusion criteria: 20 underwent TC, 65 RC, and 41 LC. Patients in LC group were younger than in TC and RC groups; other baseline demographics were similar. PPOI was observed in 5 (25%), 26 (40%), and 10 (24%) patients in TC, RC, and LC groups, respectively (p = 0.417). In single group comparisons, the incidence of PPOI in the TC group was significantly lower in comparison to the RC group (OR for RC: 4.255, 95% CI 1.092-16.667, p = 0.037) and similar to the LC group. No significant differences in terms of postoperative complications or LoS stay were observed.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of PPOI after segmental laparoscopic colectomy for cancer within an ERAS program appears as infrequent in TC as in LC and lower than after RC. It may be reasonable to consider a slower oral intake after RC, as it represents an independent predictor of PPOI.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Robotic vs Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair With Intraperitoneal Mesh: The PROVE-IT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Despite rapid adoption of the robotic platform for ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh in the United States, there is no level I evidence comparing it with the traditional laparoscopic approach. This randomized clinical trial sought to demonstrate a clinical benefit to the robotic approach.

Objective

To determine whether robotic approach to ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh would result in less postoperative pain.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A registry-based, single-blinded, prospective randomized clinical trial at the Cleveland Clinic Center for Abdominal Core Health, Cleveland, Ohio, completed between September 2017 and January 2020, with a minimum follow-up duration of 30 days. Two surgeons at 1 academic tertiary care hospital. Patients with primary or incisional midline ventral hernias of an anticipated width of 7 cm or less presenting in the elective setting and able to tolerate a minimally invasive repair.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to a standardized laparoscopic or robotic ventral hernia repair with fascial closure and intraperitoneal mesh.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The trial was powered to detect a 30% difference in the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11) on the first postoperative day. Secondary end points included the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Intensity short form (3a), hernia-specific quality of life, operative time, wound morbidity, recurrence, length of stay, and cost.

Results

Seventy-five patients completed their minimally invasive hernia repair: 36 laparoscopic and 39 robotic. Baseline demographics and hernia characteristics were comparable. Robotic operations had a longer median operative time (146 vs 94 minutes; P < .001). There were 2 visceral injuries in each cohort but no full-thickness enterotomies or unplanned reoperations. There were no significant differences in NRS-11 scores preoperatively or on postoperative days 0, 1, 7, or 30. Specifically, median NRS-11 scores on the first postoperative day were the same (5 vs 5; P = .61). Likewise, postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 3a and hernia-specific quality-of-life scores, as well as length of stay and complication rates, were similar. The robotic platform adds cost (total cost ratio, 1.13 vs 0.97; P = .03), driven by the cost of additional operating room time (1.25 vs 0.85; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Laparoscopic and robotic ventral hernia repair with intraperitoneal mesh have comparable outcomes. The increased operative time and proportional cost of the robotic approach are not offset by a measurable clinical benefit.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03283982.