Efficacy of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Pathway in Elderly Patients Undergoing Spine and Peripheral Nerve Surgery

The safety and effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in older patients undergoing orthopedic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

To systematically review and analyze the safety and effectiveness of ERAS in older patients undergoing orthopedic surgeries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and other databases to identify all randomized controlled studies and cohorts. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool and the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale to assess the study quality. A meta-analysis was performed using the inverse variance weighting method.

RESULTS

This study included 15 studies involving a total of 2591 older patients undergoing orthopedic surgeries with 1480 in the ERAS group. The ERAS group had a lower incidence of postoperative complications than the control group (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.42-0.65). Length of stay was 3.37 days lower in the ERAS group than in the control group (P < 0.01). And the ERAS protocol reduced the patient's postoperative VAS score (P < 0.01). Meanwhile, there was a lack of evidence of significant differences between the ERAS group and the control group in total bleeding and 30-day readmission rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of the ERAS program in older patients undergoing orthopedic surgeries is safe and effective. However, there is still a lack of standardization of protocols across institutions and centers for orthopedic surgery for older patients. Identifying ERAS components that are beneficial to older patients and developing ERAS protocols that are appropriate for older adults may further improve outcomes.

Guidelines on perioperative optimization protocol for the adult patient 2023

OBJECTIVE

The French Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine [Société Française d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation (SFAR)] aimed at providing guidelines for the implementation of perioperative optimization programs.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 29 experts from the SFAR was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the outset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence.

METHODS

Four fields were defined: 1) Generalities on perioperative optimization programs; 2) Preoperative measures; 3) Intraoperative measures and; 4) Postoperative measures. For each field, the objective of the recommendations was to answer a number of questions formulated according to the PICO model (population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes). Based on these questions, an extensive bibliographic search was carried out using predefined keywords according to PRISMA guidelines and analyzed using the GRADE® methodology. The recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology and then voted on by all the experts according to the GRADE grid method. As the GRADE® methodology could have been fully applied for the vast majority of questions, the recommendations were formulated using a "formalized expert recommendations" format.

RESULTS

The experts' work on synthesis and application of the GRADE® method resulted in 30 recommendations. Among the formalized recommendations, 19 were found to have a high level of evidence (GRADE 1±) and ten a low level of evidence (GRADE 2±). For one recommendation, the GRADE methodology could not be fully applied, resulting in an expert opinion. Two questions did not find any response in the literature. After two rounds of rating and several amendments, strong agreement was reached for all the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement among the experts was obtained to provide 30 recommendations for the elaboration and/or implementation of perioperative optimization programs in the highest number of surgical fields.

Treatment of patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression using an enhanced recovery after surgery program

Purpose: The aims of this study were to introduce a new medical, pathway based on the concept of "enhanced recovery after surgery" (ERAS) for patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC), and to test whether the ERAS program could improve clinical metrics among such patients. Methods: Data from patients with MESCC (n = 98), collected between December 2016 and December 2019 (Non-ERAS cohort), and from 86 patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression collected between January 2020 and December 2022 (ERAS cohort), were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were treated by decompressive surgery combined with transpedicular screw implantation and internal fixation. Patient baseline clinical characteristics were collected and compared between the two cohorts. Surgical outcomes analyzed included operation time; intraoperative blood loss; postoperative length of hospital stay; time to ambulation, regular diet, urinary catheter removal, and radiation therapy; perioperative complications; anxiety; depression; and satisfaction with treatment. Results: No significant differences in clinical characteristics were found between the non-ERAS and enhanced recovery after surgery cohorts (all p > 0.050), indicating that the two cohorts were comparable. Regarding surgical outcomes, the enhanced recovery after surgery cohort had significantly less intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001); shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (p < 0.001); shorter time to ambulation (p < 0.001), regular diet (p < 0.001), urinary catheter removal (p < 0.001), radiation administration (p < 0.001), and systemic internal therapy (p < 0.001); lower perioperative complication rate (p = 0.024); less postoperative anxiety (p = 0.041); and higher score for satisfaction with treatment (p < 0.001); whereas operation time (p = 0.524) and postoperative depression (p = 0.415) were similar between the two cohorts. Compliance analysis demonstrated that ERAS interventions were successfully conducted in the vast majority of patients. Conclusion: The enhanced recovery after surgery intervention is beneficial to patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, according to data on intraoperative blood loss; length of hospital stay; time to ambulation, regular diet, urinary catheter removal, radiation exposure, and systemic internal therapy; perioperative complication; alleviation of anxiety; and improvement of satisfaction. However, clinical trials to investigate the effect of enhanced recovery after surgery are needed in the future.

Fast-track protocols for patients undergoing spine surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Fast-track is an evidence-based multidisciplinary strategy for pre-, intra-, and postoperative management of patients during major surgery. To date, fast-track has not been recognized or accepted in all surgical areas, particularly in orthopedic spine surgery where it still represents a relatively new paradigm.

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was provided an evidenced-based assessment of specific interventions, measurement, and associated outcomes linked to enhanced recovery pathways in spine surgery field.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in three databases from February 2012 to August 2022 to assess the pre-, intra-, and postoperative key elements and the clinical evidence of fast-track protocols as well as specific interventions and associated outcomes, in patients undergoing to spine surgery.

RESULTS

We included 57 full-text articles of which most were retrospective. Most common fast-track elements included patient's education, multimodal analgesia, thrombo- and antibiotic prophylaxis, tranexamic acid use, urinary catheter and drainage removal within 24 hours after surgery, and early mobilization and nutrition. All studies demonstrated that these interventions were able to reduce patients' length of stay (LOS) and opioid use. Comparative studies between fast-track and non-fast-track protocols also showed improved pain scores without increasing complication or readmission rates, thus improving patient's satisfaction and functional recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the review results, fast-track seems to be a successful tool to reduce LOS, accelerate return of function, minimize postoperative pain, and save costs in spine surgery. However, current studies are mainly on degenerative spine diseases and largely restricted to retrospective studies with non-randomized data, thus multicenter randomized trials comparing fast-track outcomes and implementation are mandatory to confirm its benefit in spine surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in spine surgery

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are a set of interventions which are carried out in the preoperative and perioperative period. They are aimed to decrease the harmful effects of surgery on the body and help the patient recover better post-surgery. The effectiveness of ERAS has been well established in various other surgical specialities. Earlier spine surgery was thought to be very complex for application of ERAS protocols. However, this has changed over the last decade with (ERAS) protocols gaining widespread popularity in spine surgery. Initial studies involving ERAS in spine surgery were limited to lumbar spine. However, over the years the horizon of ERAS has expanded to include anterior cervical surgeries, spine deformity, spinal tumors and spine surgery in the elderly. ERAS has been shown to reduce the length of hospital stay, overall hospital costs, opioid consumption in perioperative and postoperative period and to lower complication rates in spine surgery. In this narrative review, we discuss various aspects of ERAS in spine surgery including the benefits of ERAS in spine surgery, the various components of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative measures of ERAS protocol.

Can the Full-Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in Day Surgery Mode Achieve Better Outcomes Following Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocol? A Retrospective Comparative Study

Background

Full-percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (F-PELD) is a popular operation for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Some studies have reported that F-PELD in day surgery mode produced favorable outcomes for LDH. At the same time, minimally invasive spinal surgery following enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) presents a rising trend in recent years, but few studies reported whether F-PELD will produce better outcomes in the day surgery (DS) mode combined with ERAS.

Objective

To analyze whether F-PELD in day surgery mode following ERAS can produce better clinical outcomes than in traditional surgery mode.

Methods

The patients who underwent F-PELD between January 2019 and October 2020 were retrospectively analyzed, and the patients who met the inclusive criteria were followed up. The patients were divided into day surgery (DS) group (n = 152) that combined with ERAS and traditional surgery (TS) group (n = 123) without ERAS. The length of hospital stays (LOS), visual analogue scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of two groups were compared before surgery, immediately after surgery, one month after surgery, and one year after surgery.

Results

A total of 298 patients who underwent F-PELD were reviewed. 290 patients were included in the study and followed up, and 275 patients who had completed the follow-up were available for analysis. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, gender, preoperative VAS, and ODI. There were significant statistical differences in the VAS and ODI immediately after surgery (VAS for back pain: DS group 1.4 ± 1.1, TS group 2.0 ± 1.2, p &lt; 0.001; VAS for leg pain: DS group 0.8 ± 0.8, TS group 1.1 ± 1.1, p = 0.010; ODI: DS group 5.8 ± 4.3, TS group 7.6 ± 7.4, p = 0.010) and one month after surgery (VAS for back pain: DS group 0.8 ± 0.9, TS group 1.1 ± 1.0, p = 0.035; ODI: DS group 3.2 ± 3.5, TS group 4.5 ± 6.5, p = 0.036). At one year after surgery, the VAS (back pain: DS group 0.3 ± 0.6, TS group 0.3 ± 0.7, p = 0.798; leg pain: DS group 0.2 ± 0.4, TS group 0.1 ± 0.4, p = 0.485) and ODI (DS group 0.8 ± 1.2, TS group 0.7 ± 1.7, p = 0.729) were further improved, but no statistically significant difference was observed between two groups. LOS of DS group (1.38 ± 0.49 days) was significantly shorter than the TS group (5.83 ± 2.24 days, p &lt; 0.001), and some postoperative complications occurred in the TS group, including throat discomfort (n = 5, 4.1%), discomfort after catheterization (n = 7, 5.7%), abdominal distention (n = 3, 2.4%), and nausea (n = 5, 4.1%). None of the above complications resulted in serious consequences.

Conclusion

The F-PELD in day surgery mode following ERAS produced a better short-term clinical effect and reduced the LOS, which is worthy of promotion.

Model-Based Computational Analysis on the Effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in the Operating Room with Nursing

Objective

In order to better understand the relative surgical process, this work used a model-based computational analysis on the effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in the operating room with nursing.

Methods

A total of 360 surgical patients in the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, from the period June 2020 to March 2021, were randomly divided into two groups, namely, observation group and control group, with 180 cases in each group. Routine nursing was used in the control group, while ERAS was implemented in the observation group from the point of view of four aspects, namely, preoperative visit, intraoperative cooperation, postoperative return visit, and psychological intervention.

Results

Postoperative complications, average hospital stay, nursing satisfaction, and postoperative quality of life in the observation group were significantly better than those in the control group (all p &lt; 0.05).

Conclusion

The application of ERAS for surgical patients can enhance team awareness, optimize the process of cooperation, reduce surgical complications and improve nursing quality, and prognosis, and it is worth popularizing in the operating room.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Surgery Reduces Length of Hospital Stay and Inpatient Narcotic Use

Background

The application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has the potential to improve outcomes, hasten patient recovery, and reduce costs. ERAS has been applied to spine surgery for several years, but data are limited around the impact of ERAS on minimally invasive spine surgery, specifically. The authors report their experience implementing a multimodal ERAS protocol for patients receiving minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Methods

The ERAS protocol was implemented at The Valley Hospital Hospital in Ridgewood, New Jersey in January 2020. Following implementation, all patients receiving minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion by a single surgeon were studied. The authors analyze the impact of the protocol on length of stay (LOS), disposition post discharge, and opioid consumption postoperatively in the inpatient and outpatient settings.

Results

Sixteen patients were enrolled in the protocol and compared with 17 historical controls. LOS was significantly shorter in the ERAS cohort (1.6 vs. 2.4 days, P = 0.022). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to disposition; the majority of patients were discharged to home without need for in-home medical services. Patients in the ERAS cohort consumed significantly fewer opioid analgesics postoperatively in the inpatient setting (51 mg morphine milligram equivalents vs. 320 mg morphine milligram equivalents, P = 0.00016). On average, patients in the ERAS cohort were prescribed fewer opioids analgesics post discharge.

Conclusions

ERAS application to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion was safe and effective, significantly reducing LOS and inpatient opioid consumption. These data reflect the importance of uniformly applying a multimodal ERAS protocol to accelerate recovery and reduce narcotic use.

Foundations in Spinal Endoscopy

Spinal endoscopy has revolutionized the way spine surgeons deliver minimally invasive care for appropriately selected patients. The evolution of endoscopy has been tumultuous since its beginnings as a "blind" percutaneous procedure to access the disk until the present state, in which complex decompressions and even fusions can be accomplished through subcentimeter incisions. Engineering has played a crucial role in this evolution with advances in optics, illumination, and instrumentation that have allowed surgeons to work safely and efficiently in smaller and smaller corridors. Finally, the adaptation of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols have complemented the benefits offered by spinal endoscopy to help patients return to the quality of life they seek through surgical intervention. In this article, we explore foundational elements of spinal endoscopy and look ahead to the future of this maturing field.

The Potential Risk Factors for Prolonged Length of Stay Despite an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Elderly Patients Undergoing Short-Level Lumbar Fusion Surgery

Objective

To identify the risk factors associated with prolonged length of stay (LOS) despite an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in short-level lumbar fusion surgery.

Methods

We gathered data for all patients undergoing short-level lumbar fusion surgery from January to November 2021. Given the discharge criteria, a threshold was set according to mean LOS, and two groups were spontaneously formed: LOS shorter than the threshold for discharge (control group, n = 114) and LOS longer or equal to the threshold for discharge (delayed group, n = 72). Preoperative metrics were compared to identify risk factors associated with prolonged LOS.

Results

A total consecutive 186 patients with complete medical records were enrolled (77 males and 109 females; mean age 71.08 ± 5.70 years). After dichotomization according to the threshold for discharge, there were 114 patients in control group and 72 in delayed group. Statistical analysis demonstrated that age ≥75 years ( P = .002), female sex ( P < .001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≥ 3 ( P = .035), operation time ( P < .001), anesthesia time ( P < .001), ambulation time >1 day ( P = .027), removal of urinary catheter time >1 day ( P = .019), fusion levels ( P < .001), Clavien-Dindo grade > 1 ( P <.001) and allogeneic transfusion ( P = .009) were significantly related to prolonged LOS. Binary logistic regression revealed that age (odds ratio (OR) 5.149; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.045-12.966, P = .001), sex (OR 5.185, 95% CI 2.183-12.317, P < .001) and Clavien-Dindo grade > 1(OR 15.936, 95% CI 5.220-48.652, P < .001) were independent risk factors of prolonged LOS.

Conclusions

In this retrospective study, we analyzed the potential risk factors associated with delayed LOS despite implementing ERAS, further, binary logistic regression exhibited that age ≥75 years old, female sex and Clavien-Dindo grade >1 were independently correlated with prolonged LOS.

Efficacy of perioperative pharmacological and regional pain interventions in adult spine surgery: a network meta-analysis and systematic review of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Development of a widely accepted standardised analgesic pathway for adult spine surgery has been hampered by the lack of quantitative analysis. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare, rank, and grade all pharmacological and regional interventions used in adult spine surgery.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in January 2021. We performed double study screening, selection, and data extraction. The co-primary outcomes were cumulative morphine consumption (mg) and visual analogue pain score (range 0-10) at postoperative 24 h. An NMA was performed using the Bayesian approach (random effects model). We also ranked and graded all analgesic interventions using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for NMA.

RESULTS

We screened 5908 studies and included 86 randomised controlled studies, which comprised 6284 participants. Of 20 pharmacological and 10 regional interventions, the most effective intervention was triple-drug therapy, consisting of paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and adjunct. The pooled mean reduction in morphine consumption and pain score at postoperative 24 h were -26 (95% credible interval [CrI]: -39 to -12) mg and -2.3 (95% CrI: -3.1 to -1.4), respectively. Double-drug therapy was less effective, but showed moderate morphine reduction in a range of -15 to -17 mg and pain score reduction in a range of -1 to -1.6. Single-agent interventions were largely ineffective.

CONCLUSIONS

Triple-drug therapy is the most effective pain intervention in adult spine surgery with moderate-to-high certainty of evidence. We have also identified a graded analgesic effect, in which analgesic efficacy increased with the number of multimodal drugs used.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42020171326).

The impact of adherence to a guideline for minimizing opioid use for treatment of pain in an urban emergency department

INTRODUCTION

The opioid epidemic has significantly evolved over the last three decades. The initiation and continuation of prescription opioids for pain control were one of the primary contributors, across different medical settings. The emergency department (ED) is typically the first place patients go to for management of acute pain, and often where opioid naïve patients first become exposed to opioids. In 2018, the ED of University Hospital located in Newark, NJ implemented a pain guideline to ensure that patients are not unnecessarily exposed to opioids. The goal of our study was to determine whether provider adherence was successful in reducing opioid administration.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of pharmacy records of patients treated for pain in the ED within the time frame January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019. We analyzed the change in our practice by comparing the amount of opioid and non-opioid medications administered and the number of patients administered each type, as well as the change in our utilization of specific medications. The t-test or the χ² test were used as applicable.

RESULTS

There were decreases in the mean number of opioid doses administered in 2017 (1273) compared to 2019 (498; p = 0.027). There was an increase in non-opioid analgesics administered, (mean 2017: 1817, mean 2019: 2432.5, p = 0.018). There was also an increase in the proportion of patients given non-opioid analgesics (mean 2017: 22%, mean 2019: 28%, p < 0.0001). There were increases in administrations of acetaminophen (40% to 52%) and ibuprofen (30% to 35.1%), and decreases in administrations of hydromorphone (2.5% to 0.03%), morphine (11.5% to 5.6%), oxycodone (10.6% to 5.3%), and tramadol (5.7% to 1.9%) (all p < 0.0001).

DISCUSSION

A guideline that emphasizes the use of non-opioid analgesics first line treatment for acute pain can be effective for reducing opioid administration in the ED. Through the use of our guideline, we reduced the number of patients who have received opioid analgesics and, at the same time, increased non-opioid analgesic administration. Future studies should explore readmission rates, duration of pain relief in patients managed with non-opioid versus opioid analgesics, and perception of relief through the use of satisfaction scores.