Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for bariatric surgery

Effectiveness of Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Program in Bariatric Surgery

INTRODUCTION

While the adoption of ERAS protocols in bariatric surgery has increased, variability exists across centers, reflecting a spectrum of implementation stages. The objective of this study is to understand and increase awareness of the effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in bariatric surgery, given the specific perioperative difficulties and risks for this population. We aimed to study the association between implementation of the ERAS program in bariatric surgery and specific outcomes.

METHODS

Primary bariatric patients (≥18 y old) at a single academic institution were divided into pre-ERAS and post-ERAS groups. Poisson and quantile regressions were used to examine the association between the ERAS protocol and length of stay and cost, respectively. Logistic regression was used to assess the impact of ERAS on 30-d readmissions.

RESULTS

A total of 680 procedures were performed in the pre-ERAS cohort, compared to 1124 procedures post-ERAS. The median length of hospital stay was shorter, and median cost of surgery was lower for post-ERAS patients compared to pre-ERAS patients by 1 d (P = 0.001) and $2000, respectively. A higher proportion of patients in the pre-ERAS period had one or more unplanned readmissions compared to the post-ERAS period (P < 0.001). The ERAS protocol was associated with decreased length of stay (incidence rate ratio = 0.72, P < 0.001), decreased median cost (-$2230, P < 0.001), and lower risk of 30-d unplanned readmissions (odds ratio = 0.48, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the value of an enhanced recovery program in bariatric surgery, benefiting both patients and health systems.

Can We Predict Gastric Leaks After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy by Evaluating the Complete Blood Count on Postoperative Day 1?

INTRODUCTION

We assessed whether postoperative day-1 (POD-1) complete blood count (CBC) test parameters, including red cell distribution width (RDW), mean platelet volume (MPV), plateletcrit (PCT), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), could identify patients with gastric leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

METHODS

Patients with postoperative gastric leaks (n=36) and patients with no complications who were selected by age-sex-BMI matching (n=254) were included in the study. The levels of RDW, MPW, PCT, PLR, and NLR were compared between groups in univariate analyses. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was run for CBC parameters with a P -value<0.05 in univariate analyses. The area under the curve (AUC) was evaluated, and a cutoff value was determined. Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated.

RESULTS

The level of PCT was significantly lower, while levels of PLR and NLR were significantly higher in patients with postoperative gastric leaks as compared with those without ( P <0.05). The AUC of both PCT and PLR was <0.750, while the AUC of NLR was 0.911. NLR cutoff at 3.6 yielded 80% sensitivity, 92% specificity, and an LR of 10. In the study cohort, PPV of 59%, NPV of 97%, and an accuracy of 90% were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that NLR at POD-1, with a cutoff value of 3.6, is a useful indicator of postoperative gastric leak who underwent LSG. We recommend the use of this easily calculated parameter in clinical practice.

Predicting readmission after bariatric surgery using machine learning

BACKGROUND

While bariatric surgery is an effective method for achieving long-term weight loss, postoperative readmissions are associated with negative clinical outcomes and significant costs.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to use machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict readmissions and compare results to logistic regression.

SETTING

Hospitals participating in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program, United States.

METHODS

Patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch between 2016 and 2020 were selected from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Patient variables reported by the MBSAQIP database were analyzed by ML algorithms random forest (RF), gradient boosting (XGB), and deep neural networks (NN), and the results of the predictive models were compared to logistic regression using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).

RESULTS

Our study included 863,348 patients, of which 39,068 (4.52%) were readmitted. AUROC scores were XGB .785 (95% CI .784-.786), RF .785 (95% CI .784-.785), and NN .754 (95% CI .753-.754), compared with .62 (95% CI .62-.621) for logistic regression (LR) (P < .001). The sensitivity and specificity for XGB, the best performing model, were 73.81% and 70%, compared with 52.94% and 70% for logistic regression. The most important variables were intervention or reoperation prior to discharge, unplanned ICU admission, initial procedure, and the intraoperative transfusion.

CONCLUSIONS

ML demonstrates significant advantages over logistic regression when predicting 30-day readmission following bariatric surgery. With external validation, models could identify the best candidates for early discharge or targeted postdischarge resources.

Efficacy and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol on minimally invasive bariatric surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), a multidisciplinary and multimodal perioperative care protocol, has been widely used in several surgical fields. However, the effect of this care protocol on patients receiving minimally invasive bariatric surgery remains unclear. This meta-analysis compared the clinical outcomes of the ERAS protocol and standard care (SC) in patients who underwent minimally invasive bariatric surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were systematically searched to identify literature reporting the effects of the ERAS protocol on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive bariatric surgery. All the articles published until 01 October 2022, were searched, followed by data extraction of the included literature and independent quality assessment. Then, pooled mean difference (MD) and odds ratio with a 95% CI were calculated by either a random-effects or fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, 21 studies involving 10 764 patients were included in the final analysis. With the ERAS protocol, the length of hospitalization (MD: -1.02, 95% CI: -1.41 to -0.64, P <0.00001), hospitalization costs (MD: -678.50, 95% CI: -1196.39 to -160.60, P =0.01), and the incidence of 30-day readmission (odds ratio =0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.97, P =0.02) were significantly reduced. The incidences of overall complications, major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3), postoperative nausea and vomiting, intra-abdominal bleeding, anastomotic leak, incisional infection, reoperation, and mortality did not differ significantly between the ERAS and SC groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The current meta-analysis indicated that the ERAS protocol could be safely and feasibly implemented in the perioperative management of patients receiving minimally invasive bariatric surgery. Compared with SC, this protocol leads to significantly shorter hospitalization lengths, lower 30-day readmission rate, and hospitalization costs. However, no differences were observed in postoperative complications and mortality.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Bariatric Surgery Leads to Decreased Complications and Shorter Length of Stay

PURPOSE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown in some specialties to improve short-term outcomes following surgical procedures. There is no consensus regarding the optimal perioperative care for bariatric surgical patients. The purpose of this study was to develop a bariatric ERAS protocol and determine whether it improved outcomes following surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An IRB-approved prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed for all patients undergoing bariatric surgery from October 2018 to January 2020. Propensity matching was used to compare post-ERAS implementation patients to pre-ERAS implementation.

RESULTS

There were 319 patients (87 ERAS, 232 pre-ERAS) who underwent bariatric operations between October 2018 and January 2020. Seventy-nine patients were kept on the ERAS protocol whereas 8 deviated. Patients who deviated from the ERAS protocol had a longer length of stay when compared to patients who completed the protocol. The use of any ERAS protocol (completed or deviated) reduced the odds of complications by 54% and decreased length of stay by 15%. Furthermore, patients who completed the ERAS protocol had an 83% reduction in odds of complications and 31% decrease in length of stay. Similar trends were observed in the matched cohort with 74% reduction in odds of complications and 26% reduction in length of stay when ERAS was used.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocol decreases complications and reduces length of stay in bariatric patients.

Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery: an Italian consensus statement

Background

Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) is an approach developed to improve outcomes in obese surgical patients. Unfortunately, it is not evenly implemented in Italy. The Italian Society for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Diseases and the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care joined in drafting an official statement on ERABS.

Methods

To assess the effectiveness and safety of ERABS and to develop evidence-based recommendations with regard to pre-, intra-, and post-operative care for obese patients undergoing ERABS, a 13-member expert task force of surgeons and anesthesiologists from Italian certified IFSO center of excellence in bariatric surgery was established and a review of English-language papers conducted. Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Grade Definitions were used to grade the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations, respectively. The supporting evidence and recommendations were reviewed and discussed by the entire group at meetings to achieve a final consensus.

Results

Compared to the conventional approach, ERABS reduces the length of hospital stay and does not heighten the risk of major post-operative complications, re-operations, and hospital re-admissions, nor does it increase the overall surgical costs. A total of 25 recommendations were proposed, covering pre-operative evaluation and care (7 items), intra-operative management (1 item, 11 sub-items), and post-operative care and discharge (6 items).

Conclusions

ERABS is an effective and safe approach. The recommendations allow the proper management of obese patients undergoing ERABS for a better outcome.

Compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol recommendations for bariatric surgery in an obesity treatment center

INTRODUCTION

The higher risk of perioperative complications associated with obesity has made anesthesiologists increasingly concerned with the management of obese patients. Measures that improve bariatric surgery patient safety have become essential. The implementation of ERAS protocols in several surgical specialties has made it possible to achieve appropriate outcomes as to surgery safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient compliance with the recommendations of an ERAS protocol for Bariatric Surgery (ERABS) at a hospital specialized in obesity treatment.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study, using a medical record database, in a hospital certified as an International Center of Excellence in Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery. The definition of the variables to be assessed was based on the most recent ERABS proposed by Thorell et al. Results were analyzed using descriptive epidemiology.

RESULTS

The study evaluated all patients undergoing bariatric surgery in 2019. Mean compliance with the recommendations per participant was 42.8%, with a maximum of 55.5%, and was distributed as follows: 22.6% of compliance with preoperative recommendations, 60% to intraoperative recommendations, and 58.1% to postoperative recommendations. The anesthesiologist is the professional who provides most measures for the perioperative optimization of bariatric surgery patients. In our study we found that anesthesiologists complied with only 39.5% of ERABS recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Mean compliance with ERABS recommendations per participant was 42.8%. Considering that the study was carried out at a hospital certified as an international center of excellence, the need for introducing improvements in the care of patients to be submitted to bariatric surgery is evident.

Enhanced recovery after elective craniotomy: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been proven to improve outcomes but have not been widely used in neurosurgery. The purpose of this study was to design a multidisciplinary enhanced recovery after elective craniotomy protocol and to evaluate its clinical efficacy and safety after implementation.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

The setting is at an operating room, a post-anesthesia care unit, and a hospital ward.

PATIENTS

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) prospectively analyzed 151 patients who underwent elective craniotomy between January 2019 and June 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

The neurosurgical ERAS group was cared for with evidence-based systematic optimization approaches, while the control group received routine care.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcomes were the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs. The secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission rates, postoperative complications, postoperative pain scores, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, duration of the drainage tube, time to oral intake, time to ambulation, and postoperative functional recovery status.

MAIN RESULTS

After ERAS protocol implementation, the median postoperative LOS (4 days to 3 days, difference [95% confidence interval, CI], 2 [1 to 2], P < 0.0001) and hospitalization costs (6266 USD to 5880 USD, difference [95% CI], 427.0 [234.8 to 633.6], P < 0.0001) decreased. Compared to routine perioperative care, the ERAS protocol reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (28.0% to 9.2%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.7, P = 0.003), shortened urinary catheter removal time by 24 h (64.0% to 83.0%, adjusted OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.3-6.5, P = 0.031), improved ambulation on postoperative day 1 (POD 1) (30.7% to 75.0%, adjusted OR 7.5, 95% CI 3.6-15.8, P < 0.0001), shortened the time to oral intake (15 h to 13 h, difference [95% CI], 3 [1 to 4], P < 0.001), and improved perioperative pain management.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after elective craniotomy protocol had significant benefits over conventional perioperative management. It was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative length of stay, medical cost, and postoperative complications.

Impact of Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery (ERABS) Protocol in Reducing Length of Stay and Hospitalization Costs: the Experience of a Philanthropic Hospital in Brazil

OVERVIEW

The global prevalence of obesity and increase in bariatric surgeries are burdening the healthcare system. Enhanced recovery postoperative protocols are associated with a reduction in hospitalization costs and length of stay (LOS) and may be an alternative to reduce public health expenses.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of implementing a customized Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery (ERABS) protocol on hospitalization costs (HC), LOS, and complication rates.

SETTING

Santa Marcelina Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil.

METHODS

A retrospective electronic health record analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and who were cared for within a clinical pathway (CP) protocol (Jan. 2016-Aug. 2018) or after implementation of an ERABS protocol (Aug. 2018-Jun. 2019). The LOS, HC, and complication, readmission, and reoperation rates were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients were included in the study (CP, 56, 87.5% women; ERABS, 26, 92.3% women). Hospital LOS and total HC decreased significantly by 32.5% and 15.2%, respectively (both, p < 0.05), after implementation of ERABS. There were no significant differences in 30-day readmission, complication, or reoperation rates.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a standardized enhanced recovery program resulted in reduced LOS and HC without an increase in perioperative morbidity. The ERABS protocol is cost-effective and can help ease the healthcare burden.

Bariatric Enhanced Recovery Protocol: a Community Quality Perspective

INTRODUCTION

Bariatric enhanced recovery protocols can decrease length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs without compromising patient safety. Increased data is needed to compare patient outcomes before and after application of enhanced recovery pathways. We present a bariatric enhanced recovery protocol (BERP) at a community hospital. The objectives were to decrease hospital LOS and reduce schedule II substance use (medications with a high potential for abuse, potentially resulting in psychological or physical dependence), without compromising patient safety.

METHODS

This was a combined retrospective and prospective analysis of all patients undergoing bariatric surgery by two surgeons from September 2016 to April 2018. Mann-Whitney U, Pearson chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients were evaluated. Overall median (interquartile range) age was 43.0 (36.0-54.0) years and body mass index (BMI) was 45.0 (40.6-50.3) kg/m². Pre-protocol mean hospital LOS was 2.3 days while enhanced recovery protocol patients mean LOS was 1.4 days (p < 0.001). Sixty-five percent of BERP patients were discharged on hospital day 1, while no patients prior to the protocol were discharged before hospital day 2. Only 9% of BERP patients were discharged with schedule II medications, compared to 100% of the pre-protocol patients (p < 0.001). Intraoperative, in-hospital, and 30-day complication rates were not statistically significant between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Community hospitals can reduce length of stay and narcotic prescribing without compromising safety-related outcomes. Significant reductions in the amount of schedule II medications can be achieved when using multimodal enhanced recovery protocol approaches.

How can lean thinking improve ERAS program in bariatric surgery?

INTRODUCTION

Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocol (ERABS) decreased length of hospital stay (LOS) without influencing clinical outcomes. ERABS improved logistics aspects in operating room (OR) with OR time savings. Lean management was used to reorganize OR logistics and to improve its efficiency. This study analyzed clinical and OR logistic aspects in ERABS protocols.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database of obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery from 2017 to 2019 was performed. Since September 2018, patients were treated with ERABS protocol (ERABS group). All patients treated with a standard protocol between January 2017 and September 2018 (control group) were compared to ERABS group. Preoperative (anthropometric data, surgical and medical history) and intraoperative (type of procedure) were analyzed in two groups. LOS was the primary outcomes parameter analyzed; complications, readmissions and reoperations within 30 days were the secondary outcomes. Logistic endpoints were evaluated in time saving and efficiency: surgical time, team work time and total anesthesia time.

RESULTS

471 patients underwent bariatric surgery: 239 patients (control group) compared to 232 patients (ERABS group). ERABS presented more previous surgical history rate (p = 0.04) compared to control group with difference of type of procedure performed (p < 0.001). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was mainly procedure in both groups (61.1% in control group compared to 52.6% in ERABS groups). Mean LOS was shorter in ERABS (3.16 days) compared to control group (4.81 days) with no difference in clinical outcomes rate. All logistics endpoints showed a time savings in ERABS group compared to control group (surgical procedure, total anesthesia and team work time, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, LOS was associated to ERAS status (IRR 0.722; p < 0.0001), team work time (IRR 1.002; p = 0.002), surgical procedure time (IRR 1.002; p < 0.0001). ERAS status was not associated with complication neither readmission, but surgical procedure time was a factor associated with complication (IRR 1.011; p = 0.0008).

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed that ERABS protocol is safe and a feasible alternative with improved LOS. OR reorganization and logistic efficiency achieved using lean management helped reduce all OR times and these are likely related to the improvement in LOS and complication.

Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) protocol implementation in a laparoscopic center

INTRODUCTION

Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) protocols consist of a combination of several preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative methods for the management of the surgical patient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the ERABS protocol on length of hospital stay (LOS) and postoperative complications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective study of patients who underwent elective Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) between 2015 and 2018. From 2015 to 2017, patients received traditional management (pre-ERABS group). Those who underwent surgery during 2018 were managed with our ERABS protocol (ERABS group). The primary outcome was LOS. Secondary outcomes were readmission rate and 30-day postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients who received RYGB and SG between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed; we included 120 patients in the pre-ERABS group and 80 in the ERABS group. The median LOS was four days [2-49] in the pre-ERABS group, as compared with two days [1-26] in the ERABS group (p < .0001). No significant differences were found in postoperative complication rates, readmissions, and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the ERABS protocol is related to a better postoperative recovery and allows an early discharge without increasing postoperative complications, readmissions or mortality.