Does the Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Guidelines Improve Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery? A Propensity Score Analysis in 464 Patients

Patient and operative factors influence delayed discharge following bariatric surgery in an enhanced recovery setting

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs have been widely adopted in bariatric surgery. However, not all patients are successfully managed in the ERAS setting and there is currently little way of predicting the patients who will deviate from the program. Early identification of these patients could allow for more tailored protocols to be implemented preoperatively to address the issues, thereby improving patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to elucidate the factors which preclude discharge by comparing patients who were successfully discharged by the end of the first postoperative day (POD 0/1) to those who stayed longer, including revisional surgery in this analysis.

SETTING

A tertiary, high-volume Bariatric Centre, United Kingdom.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients undergoing bariatric surgery in a single centre in 1 year. Multivariate analyses compared patient and operative variables between patients who were discharged on POD 0/1 and those who stayed longer.

RESULTS

A total of 288 bariatric operations were performed: 78% of operations performed were laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; 22% laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Of these cases, 13% were revisional operations. Four patients returned to theatre on the index admission. 81% of patients were discharged by POD 0/1. A re-presentation within 30 days was seen in 6% of patients. There was no significant difference in length of stay for the type of operation performed (P = .86). Patients who had a revisional procedure were not more likely to stay longer. Length of stay was also independent of age, BMI, and comorbidities. Caucasian patients were more likely to be discharged on POD 0/1 than those of other ethnicities (90% versus 78%; P = .02). Operations performed by trainee surgeons, under consultant supervision, were significantly more likely to be discharged on POD 0/1 (P = .03). However, a logistic regression analysis was unable to predict patients who had a prolonged stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient length of stay is independent of BMI, operation, and comorbidities and these factors do not need special consideration in ERAS pathways. Patients undergoing revisional procedures can be managed in the same way as those having primary procedures, with a routine POD 0/1 discharge. However, the impact of individual patient factors, and their interaction, is complex and cannot predict overstay.

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in Patients Over 60 Years Old: A Long-Term Follow-Up

Purpose: This study analyzed the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients over 60 years old, in a long-term follow-up, in a high-volume bariatric center. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all patients older than 60 years who underwent LSG in our center from January 2009 to December 2018. A prospectively collected database of 4991 consecutive LSG cases was reviewed. Results: One hundred seventy-nine sleeve gastrectomy procedures were performed in patients older than 60 years, 135 were aged 60-65 years (group A) and 44 were older than 65 years (group B). We reported five cases (2.7%) of early complications: three postoperative hemorrhages, one cardial leakage, and one perigastric abscess. No thromboembolic events or mortality rates were reported. The mean follow-up period was 5.5 years (66 months). The follow-up loss rate was about 29%. At last follow-up, the mean body-mass index/body mass/percentage of excess weight loss values were, respectively, 33.7 ± 7/86.1 ± 21/60.4 ± 28.6 in group A and 32.4 ± 6.4/82.6 ± 18/61.8 ± 33 in group B. We reported 5 (4.0%) trocar site hernias, 1 (0.8%) cardial junction stenosis, and 22 (18%) new outbreaks of gastroesophageal reflux (GERD). There were 7 reinterventions (5.7%): 5 for weight regain and 2 for GERD not responding to medical therapy. There were no statistically significant differences between the two age groups. Conclusions: LSG is a safe and effective treatment for severe obesity in people over 60 years old. There are no differences in results of patients over 65 years and between 60 and 65 years old. Scales that include associated medical problems and the patient's general condition must be considered.

Mid-term Results of an ERAS Program of Bariatric Surgery in a Tertiary Referral Center

BACKGROUND

To identify preoperative risk factors for discharge failure beyond postoperative day two (POD-2) in bariatric surgery ERAS program in a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

all consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic bariatric treated in accordance with ERAS protocol between January 2017 and December 2019 were included. Two groups were identified, failure of early discharge (> POD-2) (ERAS-F) and success of early discharge (≤ POD-2) (ERAS-S). Overall postoperative morbidity, unplanned readmission rates were analyzed at POD-30 and POD-90, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the independent risk factors for LOS > 2 days (ERAS-F).

RESULTS

A total of 697 consecutive patients were included, 148 (21.2%) in ERAS-F group and 549 (78.8%) in ERAS-S group. All postoperative complications at POD 90, whether medical or surgical were significantly more frequent in ERAS-F group than in ERAS-S group. Neither readmission nor unplanned consultations rates at POD 90 were significantly different between both groups. History of psychiatric disorder (p = 0.01), insulin-dependent diabetes (p < 0.0001), use of anticoagulants medicine (p < 0.00001), distance to the referral center > 100 km (p = 0.006), gallbladder lithiasis (p = 0.02), and planned additional procedures (p = 0.01) were independent risk factors for delayed discharge beyond POD-2.

CONCLUSIONS

One in five patients with bariatric surgery failed to discharge earlier despite the ERAS program. Knowledge of these preoperative risk factors would allow us to identify patients who need more recovery time and a tailored approach to the ERAS protocol.

Utilization of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol for pediatric metabolic and bariatric surgery

INTRODUCTION

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for pediatric metabolic and bariatric surgery are limited. In 2018, an ERAS protocol for patients undergoing robotically assisted vertical sleeve gastrectomy (r-VSG) was instituted. This study's aim was to compare outcomes before and after ERAS initiation.

METHODS

A single institution retrospective review of patients undergoing r-VSG from July 2015 to July 2021 was performed. The multimodal ERAS protocol focused on limiting post-operative nausea and narcotic utilization. Subjects were categorized into non-ERAS (July 2015-July 2018) and ERAS (August 2018-July 2021) groups. In-hospital and 30-day outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

110 subjects (94 females) with a median age of 17.6 years (range 12.5-22.0 years) were included (60 non-ERAS, 50 ERAS). Demographics were similar except for a higher proportion of females in the non-ERAS group (97% vs 72%, p < 0.001). A significant decrease in narcotic use (p < 0.001) and higher utilization of acetaminophen (p < 0.001) and ketorolac (p < 0.001) was observed in the ERAS group. Additionally, median time to oral intake, a proxy for postoperative nausea and vomiting [2:00 h (1:15, 2:30) vs. 3:22 h (2:03, 6:15), p < 0.001] and hospital length of stay (LOS) [1.25 days (1.14, 1.34) vs. 2.16 days (1.48, 2.42), p < 0.001] were shorter in the ERAS group. Eleven subjects (10%; ERAS = 5, non-ERAS = 6) experienced post-discharge dehydration, prompting readmission 8 times for 7 (6%) individuals.

CONCLUSION

Utilization of ERAS led to a significant decrease narcotic utilization, time to first oral intake, and hospital LOS with no change in adverse events following pediatric metabolic and bariatric surgery. Larger studies, including comparative analysis of health care utilization, should be carried out.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

TYPE OF STUDY

Treatment Study.

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.

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy versus Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: An Analysis of Weight Loss Using a Multilevel Mixed-Effects Linear Model

Background: Regarding weight loss outcomes, the results published after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y (LRYGB) are conflicting. At this time, no clear evidence exists that outcomes from LSG are similar to those for LRYGB. The main objective of this study was to compare the percent of total weight loss (%TWL) between LRYGB and LSG over the first 2 years using a multilevel mixed-effects linear regression. Methods: Data were collected from a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent primary laparoscopic bariatric surgery from January 2016 to December 2017 at a French accredited bariatric center. The medical records of 435 consecutive patients were analyzed. %TWL was calculated at each follow-up surgical consultation and used as a repeated outcome variable in our models to assess the long-term %TWL. Due to this hierarchical structure of the data (%TWL at each visit = level 1) within patients (level 2), a multilevel linear regression adjusted for age, sex, preoperative BMI and comorbidities was used. Results: Among the medical records of 435 consecutive patients included, 266 patients underwent LRYGB and 169 underwent LSG. The average %TWL at 2 years was 31.7% for the LRYGB group and 25.8% for the LSG group. The final multivariate model showed that, compared with LRYGB, LSG was associated with a decreased %TWL at over 2 years of follow-up (β: −4.01; CI95%: −5.47 à −2.54; p ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: This observational study suggests that compared with LRYGB, LSG was associated with a decreased %TWL at 2 years using a multilevel model. Further studies are required to confirm the results observed with this statistical model.

The impact of procedure type on 30-day readmissions following metabolic and bariatric surgery: postoperative complications of bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

Hospital readmission (HR) rates following metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS) are used as a surrogate for quality outcomes and are increasingly tied to reimbursement rates. There are limited data concerning predictors of HR rates with regard to type of bariatric procedure.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from patients who underwent MBS from January 2014 to December 2019 at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. The causes of all HRs and reoperations within 30 days of the original discharge were analyzed. Statistical significance was determined using Chi Squared test and T test.

RESULTS

2815 patients underwent MBS. 2373 patients (84.3%) had primary procedures, while 442 patients (15.7%) had secondary or revisional procedures. The overall 30-day readmission rate was 5.7%, with no significant difference for patients who underwent primary vs. secondary MBS. Among primary procedures, the readmission rate was higher for Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) than laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (10.32% vs. 4.77%). Readmissions were most often due to nontechnical causes. The overall reoperation rate was 1.14% and was higher for patients undergoing secondary vs. primary procedures (2.94% vs 0.80%).

CONCLUSIONS

Readmission rate was similar to that in existing literature. Revisional/secondary surgery did not lead to increased readmissions, although was associated with a higher reoperation rate. Most HRs were due to nontechnical causes. Optimization of postoperative care, such as fluid status, may reduce the incidence of postoperative complications.

Analysis of the Lack of Follow-Up of Bariatric Surgery Patients: Experience of a Reference Center

Few studies have evaluated the association between non-clinical and clinical determinants in terms of discontinuing follow-up after bariatric surgery. This cohort study aims to assess these associations. Data were collected from a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent laparoscopic bariatric surgery from January 2012 to December 2019. The Cox model was used to assess the influence of preoperative determinants on follow-up interruptions for more than one year. Multilevel logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between clinical factors and post-operative weight loss with the regularity of follow-up. During the study period, 9607 consultations were performed on 1549 patients. The factors associated with a follow-up interruption from more than 365 days included male gender (HR = 1.323; CI = 1.146−1.527; p = 0.001) and more recent years of intervention (HR = 1.043; CI = 1.012−1.076; p = 0.0068). Revisional bariatric surgery was associated with a lower risk of follow-up interruption (HR = 0.753; CI = 0.619−0.916; p = 0.0045). Independent risk factors of an irregular follow up were higher age (HR = 1.01; CI = 1.002−1.017; p = 0.0086); male gender (OR = 1.272; CI = 1.047−1.545; p = 0.0153); and higher %TWL (Total Weight Loss) (OR = 1.040 CI = 1.033−1.048 p < 0.0001). A higher preoperative BMI (OR = 0.985; CI = 0.972−0.998; p = 0.0263) and revisional surgery (OR = 0.707; CI = 0.543−0.922; p = 0.0106) were protective factors of irregularity. This study suggests that the male gender and most recent dates of surgery are the two independent risk factors for follow-up interruption. Older age, male gender, and higher weight loss were all independent risk factors of an irregular follow-up. Revision bariatric surgery is a protective factor against interruption and irregular follow-up with a higher preoperative BMI. Further studies are needed to obtain long-term results in these patients with discontinued follow-ups.

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.

Trends, Outcomes, and Impact of Early Discharge Following Bariatric Surgery: a Retrospective MBSAQIP Analysis of 748,955 Patients

INTRODUCTION

Decreasing the length of stay following bariatric surgery can reduce pressure on hospitals and surgical costs and increase patient satisfaction. We examine trends in length of hospital stay following bariatric surgery and in post-operative complications.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The 2015-2019 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was used to compile patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy. Patients were categorized into either early discharge (within one day of surgery) or late discharge, and patient and non-patient factors were compared between the two groups. A multivariable logistic regression was carried out to determine predictive factors for early discharge.

RESULTS

We evaluated 748,955 patients, with 399,918 (53%) being discharged early. Patients discharged early were younger and had fewer associated medical problems. The rate of early discharge increased between 2015 and 2019 (42.1% in 2015 vs 62.0% in 2019), while complication rates decreased or were unchanged. Multivariable analysis revealed lower ASA classification (OR 1.07; CI 1.06-1.09; p < 0.0001) and operative year (2019 vs. 2015 OR 2.26; CI 2.22-2.29; p < 0.0001) to be independently associated with early discharge. Several factors including undergoing RYGB (OR 0.44 CI 0.44-0.45; p < 0.0001), and dialysis dependence (OR 0.50; CI 0.45-0.55; p < 0.0001) among others, were associated with reduced early discharge likelihood.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a trend in bariatric surgery towards the practice of early discharge, which is safe for patients. Further work is needed to develop a set of criteria to determine which patients are best suited for this practice.

Safety of Bariatric Surgery in ≥ 65-Year-Old Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

Age ≥ 65 years is regarded as a relative contraindication for bariatric surgery. Advanced age is also a recognised risk factor for adverse outcomes with Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) which continues to wreak havoc on global populations. This study aimed to assess the safety of bariatric surgery (BS) in this particular age group during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison with the younger cohort.

Methods

We conducted a prospective international study of patients who underwent BS between 1/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Patients were divided into two groups — patients ≥ 65-years-old (Group I) and patients < 65-years-old (Group II). The two groups were compared for 30-day morbidity and mortality.

Results

There were 149 patients in Group 1 and 6923 patients in Group II. The mean age, preoperative weight, and BMI were 67.6 ± 2.5 years, 119.5 ± 24.5 kg, and 43 ± 7 in Group I and 39.8 ± 11.3 years, 117.7±20.4 kg, and 43.7 ± 7 in Group II, respectively. Approximately, 95% of patients in Group 1 had at least one co-morbidity compared to 68% of patients in Group 2 (p = < 0.001).

The 30-day morbidity was significantly higher in Group I (11.4%) compared to Group II (6.6%) (p = 0.022). However, the 30-day mortality and COVID-19 infection rates were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusions

Bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a higher complication rate in those ≥ 65 years of age compared to those < 65 years old. However, the mortality and postoperative COVID-19 infection rates are not significantly different between the two groups.

Graphical abstract

Are Geographical Health Accessibility and Socioeconomic Deprivation Associated with Outcomes Following Bariatric Surgery? A Retrospective Study in a High-Volume Referral Bariatric Surgical Center

PURPOSE

Few studies have evaluated the association between non-clinical determinants (socioeconomic status and geographic accessibility to healthcare) and the outcomes of bariatric surgery, with conflicting results. This study aimed to evaluate this association.

METHODS

The medical records of 1599 consecutive patients who underwent either laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy between June 2005 and December 2017 were retrieved. All relevant data, including patient characteristics, biometric values before and after surgery, related medical problems, surgical history, medications, and habitus, for each patient were prospectively collected in a database. Logistic regressions were used to assess the influence of non-clinical determinants on surgical indications and complications. Multilevel linear or logistic regression was used to evaluate the influence of non-clinical determinants on long-term %TWL and the probability to achieve adequate weight loss (defined as a %TWL > 20% at 12 months).

RESULTS

Analysis of the 1599 medical records revealed that most geographically isolated patients were more likely to have undergone laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (odds ratio: 0.97; 95% confidence interval: 0.94 to 0.99; P = 0.018) and had a greater likelihood of adequate weight loss (β: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.05; P = 0.021). Conversely, socioeconomic status (measured by the European Deprivation Index) did not affect outcomes following bariatric surgery.

CONCLUSION

Geographical health isolation is associated with a higher probability to achieve adequate weight loss after 1 year of follow-up, while neither health isolation nor socioeconomic deprivation is associated with post-operative mortality and morbidity. This results suggests that bariatric surgery is a safe and effective tool for weight loss despite socioeconomic deprivation.

Higher Adherence to ERAS Society® Recommendations is Associated with Shorter Hospital Stay Without an Increase in Postoperative Complications or Readmissions in Bariatric Surgery: the Association Between Use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocols and Postoperative Complications after Bariatric Surgery (POWER 3) Multicenter Observational Study

PURPOSE

The effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways in patients undergoing bariatric surgery remains unclear. Our objective was to determine the effect of the ERAS elements on patient outcomes following elective bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective cohort study in adult patients undergoing elective bariatric surgery. Each participating center selected a single 3-month data collection period between October 2019 and September 2020. We assessed the 24 individual components of the ERAS pathways in all patients. We used a multivariable and multilevel logistic regression model to adjust for baseline risk factors, ERAS elements, and center differences RESULTS: We included 1419 patients. One hundred and fourteen patients (8%) developed postoperative complications. There were no differences in the incidence of overall postoperative complications between the self-designated ERAS and non-ERAS groups (54 (8.7%) vs. 60 (7.6%); OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.73-1.79; P = .56), neither for moderate-to-severe complications, readmissions, re-interventions, mortality, or hospital stay (2 [IQR 2-3] vs. 3 [IQR 2-4] days, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.62-1.17; P = .33) Adherence to the ERAS elements in the highest adherence quartile (Q1) was greater than 72.2%, while in the lowest adherence quartile (Q4) it was less than 55%. Patients with the highest adherence rates had shorter hospital stay (2 [IQR 2-3] vs. 3 [IQR 2-4] days, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.09-2.17; P = .015), while there were no differences in the other outcomes CONCLUSIONS: Higher adherence to ERAS Society® recommendations was associated with a shorter hospital stay without an increase in postoperative complications or readmissions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03864861.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in Bariatric Surgery

The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program is now widely applied in bariatric surgeries and other surgical procedures. The ERAS program in bariatric surgery consists of various components similar to that in colorectal surgery or other procedures. The major concept of the ERAS protocol relies on a multidisciplinary and multimodal approach to resolve various problems after surgical treatment. The key principles of the ERAS program in bariatric surgery include patient education, opioid-sparing multimodal pain management, prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting, goal-directed fluid therapy, and minimizing insulin resistance and catabolism. Several guidelines and studies, including randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews, have advocated for the ERAS program in bariatric surgery, which has consistently shown advantages in shortening hospital stay without increasing morbidity. The systematic application of the ERAS program in bariatric patients results in less pain and early recovery and should be routinely recommended.

Development of the "OS-SEV90 Score" to Predict Severe Postoperative Complications at 90 Days Following Bariatric Surgery

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery may be associated with severe postoperative complications (SPC). Factors associated with the risk of SPC have not been fully investigated.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify preoperative risk factors of SPC within 90 days and to develop a risk prediction model based on these factors.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study based on a prospectively maintained database of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery from October 2005 to May 2019. All SPC occurring up to the 90th postoperative day were recorded according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. Associations between potential risk factors and SPC were analyzed using a logistic regression model, and the risk prediction ("OS-SEV90 score") was computed. Based on the OS-SEV90 score, the patients were grouped into 3 categories of risk: low, intermediate, and high.

RESULTS

Among 1963 consecutive patients, no patient died and 82 (4.2%) experienced SPC within 90 days. History of gastric or esophageal surgery (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.040, 95% confidence interval; CI 1.78-5.20, p< 0.0001), past of thromboembolic event aOR 2.26, 95%; CI 1.12-4.55, p = 0.0225), and surgery performed by a junior surgeon (aOR 1.99, 95%; CI 1.26-3.13, p = 0.003) were all independently associated with risk for SPC, adjusting for ASA physical status system (ASA) score ≥ 3, severe OSA, psychiatric disease, asthma, a history of abdominal surgery, alcohol, cardiac disease, and dyslipidemia. "the OS-SEV90 score" based on these factors was constructed to classify patients into 3 risk groups: low (≤2), intermediate (3-4), and high (≥5). According to "the OS-SEV90 score," SPC increased significantly from 2.9% in the low-risk group, 7.7% in the intermediate-risk group, and 23.3% in the high-risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

A predictive model of SPC within 90 days "the OS-SEV90 score" has been developed using 9 baseline risk factors. The use of the OS-SEV90 score may help the multidisciplinary team to identify the specific risk of each patient and inform them about and optimize the comorbidities before the surgery. Further studies are warranted to validate this score in a new independent cohort before using it in clinical practice.

Reduction in Opiate Use, Pain, Nausea, and Length of Stay After Implementation of a Bariatric Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol

PURPOSE

Evaluate adherence to bariatric surgery enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in pre-operative, operative, and post-operative phases, and to compare opiate use, nausea control, and length of stay (LOS) versus historical controls.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted to evaluate adherence to ERAS protocols and compare opiate and antiemetic use, pain intensity, and LOS versus those of traditional care (TC) patients preceding protocol implementation at Erie County Medical Center, a community-based hospital in Buffalo, NY, USA.

RESULTS

One hundred ERAS and TC patients were compared. Patients were similar in age (42.5 years), gender (female, ~ 80%), race (~ 80 white), and BMI (47 kg/m²). The primary procedure performed was sleeve gastrectomy (89% ERAS, 86% TC). Protocol adherence was high for ERAS phases: prior to admission (85-98%), pre-operative (96-100%), operative (93-99%), post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) (55-61%), and floor (86-98%). Opiate morphine milligram equivalent (MME) was reduced in ERAS vs. TC in hospital by 73% (43.5 ± 42.4 vs. 160 ± 116; p < 0.001), discharge prescribing by 53% (34.8 ± 38.2 vs. 74 ± 125 MME; p = 0.003), and in total by 69% (78.3 ± 67.5 vs. 252 ± 160; p < 0.001). Despite lower opiate use, ERAS had lower pain intensity entering PACU (1.1 ± 1.8 vs. 1.9 ± 2.6; p < 0.011), leaving PACU (1.7 ± 1.5 vs. 2.9 ± 1.5; p < 0.001), and floor day 0 (5.0 ± 2.1 vs. 5.9 ± 1.8; p < 0.001). Fewer ERAS required antiemetic day 0 (63% vs. 94%; p < 0.001). ERAS were discharged in fewer hours than TC (41.1 ± 15.5 vs. 52.1 ± 18.9 h; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric surgery ERAS protocols were implemented with a high rate of adherence and yielded profound reduction in operative and post-operative opiate use while improving pain control and nausea management in hospital and decreasing LOS.

The Application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in bariatric surgery. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, OVID, World Health Organization International Trial Register, and Cochrane Library identifying all eligible studies comparing ERAS protocols with standard care (SC) in bariatric surgery through May 2020. Relevant perioperative parameters were extracted from the resulting studies for meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay, and secondary outcomes included operation time, postoperative nausea, and vomiting (PONV), postoperative complications, readmission, reoperation, and subsequent emergency room visits. Postoperative complications were categorized according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Final analysis included five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and twelve observational studies which included 4964 patients in the ERAS group and 3218 patients in the SC group. The length of the hospital stay was significantly decreased (p < 0.01) after ERAS protocol management, as did the incidence of POVN (p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed between the ERAS group and SC group in terms of operation time (p = 0.37), postoperative complications (p = 0.18), readmission (p = 0.17), reoperation (p = 0.34), or emergency room visits (p = 0.65). The application of ERAS protocols in bariatric surgery is safe and feasible, effectively shortening the length of a hospital stay without compromising morbidity, and accelerating patient recovery.

Is Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery Safe and Effective in Patients over 60 Years of Age?" an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

To evaluate, mid-term outcomes between elderly patients (EP, i.e., age > 60 years old) and young patients (YP, i.e., age < = 60 years old) who underwent laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Studies comparing EP versus YP for bariatric surgery published until April 2020 were selected and submitted to a systematic review and meta-analysis. After LSG, overall morbidity and specific post-operative complication rates (i.e., leak, abscess, hemorrhage, and reoperation) were significantly more frequent in EP compared with those in YP. Surgical outcomes were similar between EP and YP after LRYGB. Both procedures achieved weight loss, but it was statistically greater in YP compared with that in EP. In summary, this meta-analysis suggests that laparoscopic bariatric surgery is a safe and effective treatment in EP compared with that in YP.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS): a Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) in Bariatric Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to conduct an up-to-date systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the benefits and harms of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme in bariatric surgery.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs on ERAS versus standard care (SC) until April 2020. The primary endpoint was the length of hospital stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Five RCTs included a total of 610 procedures. ERAS adoption is capable of significantly reducing LOS (MD of - 0.51; 95% CI - 0.92 to - 0.10; P = 0.01) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.95; P = 0.04). No significant differences in terms of adverse events and readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of ERAS in bariatric surgery produces a significant reduction in LOS and PONV.

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.

Does ERAS impact outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in adolescents?

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been successfully implemented in several surgical fields; however, the application of ERAS in the pediatric population is still limited.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to determine if implementation of an ERAS protocol can improve outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in adolescents.

SETTING

University Hospital, United States.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 112 adolescent patients who underwent LSG from February 2011 to July 2019 was conducted. An ERAS protocol was instituted in June 2016. Conventional care patients (n = 51) were compared with ERAS patients (n = 61). Comparisons were made using Χ² tests or Fisher's exact for categoric data and Wilcoxon-rank sum tests for continuous data. Multiple linear regression was used to adjust length of stay for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

The 2 cohorts were similar in age, sex, race, number of co-morbidities, and preoperative body mass index. The volume of intraoperative fluid, intraoperative and postoperative opioids were significantly reduced in the ERAS group (P < .0001). The number of ERAS elements received per patient increased from a median of 9 to 15 (P < .0001). ERAS group had more discharges on postoperative day 1 (48% versus 6 %, respectively). Length of stay was significantly lower in the ERAS group (2.34 versus 2.04 median d, respectively). Difference was still significant after adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, payor status, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, preoperative body mass index, and the duration of surgery (P < .0001). There were no differences in postoperative complications and 30-day readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

An LSG ERAS protocol is associated with significant reduction in perioperative opioid use and length of stay with no increase in complications or readmission rates.

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.

Surgeon and hospital volume outcomes in bariatric surgery: a population-level study

BACKGROUND

Outcomes after bariatric surgery are tied to surgical volume; however, this relationship is not clearly established for each procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of surgeon/hospital volumes on morbidity after bariatric surgery and identify volume cutoffs.

SETTING

Multi-centric population-level study, province of Quebec, Canada.

METHODS

We studied a population-based cohort of all morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery in Quebec, Canada during 2006 to 2012. We evaluated only the most common procedures in North America, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Multilevel, cross-classified logistic regressions were used to test the effects of annual surgeon volume (SV) and hospital volume (HV) on a composite 90-day postoperative outcome. Receiver operator curve was used to identify volume thresholds.

RESULTS

Overall, 821 patients had RYGB and 1802 underwent SG by 34 surgeons in 15 centers. For RYGB, 10-case increase in SV was associated with adjusted odds ratio of .82 (95% confidence interval: .71-.94). Similar increase in HV resulted in odds ratio of .86 (95% confidence interval: .77-.96). Annual SV threshold of 21 RYGBs and HV of 25 cases were identified (area under the curve = .60 and .61, respectively). For SV, being in the higher volume category translated into an absolute risk reduction of 12.5% for 90-day major morbidity. For SG, annual 10-case increase in SV and HV was not significantly associated with a decrease in 90-day postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSION

SV and HV are significant independent predictors of 90-day major morbidity after RYGB. This study further supports establishing minimum surgical volume requirements for more complex anastomotic procedures like RYGB. However, the role of volume targets in SG remains unclear.