Benefits of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Program (ERAS) in Short-segment Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery

The Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Spine Surgery in High and Low/Middle-income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In this review article, we explore the implementation and outcomes of enhanced recovery after spine surgery (spine ERAS) across different World Bank country-income levels. A systematic literature search was conducted through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases for articles on the implementation of spine ERAS in both adult and pediatric populations. Study characteristics, ERAS elements, and outcomes were analyzed and meta-analyses were performed for length of stay (LOS) and cost outcomes. The number of spine ERAS studies from low-middle-income countries (LMICs) increased since 2017, when the first spine ERAS implementation study was published. LMICs were more likely than high-income countries (HICs) to conduct studies on patients aged ≥18 years (odds ratio [OR], 6.00; 95% CI, 1.58-42.80), with sample sizes 51 to 100 (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.21-22.90), and randomized controlled trials (OR, 7.25; 95% CI, 1.77-53.50). Preoperative optimization was more frequently implemented in LMICs than in HICs (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.06-4.41), and operation time was more often studied in LMICs (OR 3.78; 95% CI, 1.77-8.35). Implementation of spine ERAS resulted in reductions in LOS in both LMIC (-2.06; 95% CI, -2.47 to -1.64 d) and HIC (-0.99; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.70 d) hospitals. However, spine ERAS implementation did result in a significant reduction in costs. This review highlights the global landscape of ERAS implementation in spine surgery, demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing LOS across diverse settings. Further research with standardized reporting of ERAS elements and outcomes is warranted to explore the impact of spine ERAS on cost-effectiveness and other patient-centered outcomes.

Transforming Outcomes of Spine Surgery-Exploring the Power of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of 15 198 Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to optimize patient outcomes by reducing the surgical stress response, expediting recovery, and reducing care costs. We aimed to evaluate the impact of implementing ERAS protocols on the perioperative surgical outcomes and financial implications associated with spine surgeries.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed studies directly comparing outcome differences between spine surgeries performed with and without utilization of ERAS pathways was conducted along Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

Of 676 unique articles identified, 59 with 15 198 aggregate patients (7748 ERAS; 7450 non-ERAS) were included. ERAS-treated patients had shorter operative times (mean difference [MD]: 10.2 mins; P < .01), shorter hospitalizations (MD: 1.41 days, P < .01), fewer perioperative complications (relative risk [RR] = 0.64, P < .01), lower postoperative opioid use (MD of morphine equivalent dose: 164.36 mg; P < .01), and more rapid mobilization/time to first out-of-bed ambulation (MD: 0.92 days; P < .01). Spine surgeries employing ERAS were also associated with lower total costs (MD: $1140.26/patient; P < .01), especially in the United States (MD: $2869.11/patient, P < .01) and lower postoperative visual analog pain scores (MD = 0.56, P < .01), without any change in odds of 30-day readmission (RR: 0.80, P = .13) or reoperation (RR: 0.88, P = .60). Subanalyses based on the region of spine showed significantly lower length of stay in both cervical and lumbar surgeries implementing ERAS. Type of procedure showed a significantly lesser time-to-initiate mobilization in fusion surgeries using ERAS protocols compared with decompression.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis indicates that current literature supports ERAS implementation as a means of reducing care costs and safely accelerating hospital discharge for patients undergoing spine surgery.

A new nursing pattern based on ERAS concept for patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated with OLIF surgery: A retrospective study

Objective

The purpose of this study was to introduce enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concept into patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who were treated with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), and to assess whether it could increase clinical efficacy, reduce perioperative complications, shorten length of hospital stay (LHS), decrease readmission rate, and improve patient satisfaction.

Methods

The study included patients with lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs) who underwent OLIF between July 2017 and October 2018 (non-ERAS group), and between November 2018 and July 2020 (ERAS group). The two groups were compared according to the demographic and clinical characteristics.

Results

There was no significant difference in descriptive characteristics and concomitant diseases between the two groups. The preoperative Oswestry disability index (ODI) score (P = 0.191), lumbar visual analogue scale (VAS) score (P = 0.470), and leg VAS score (P = 0.657) did not significantly different. Most of the ERAS measures were also well implemented after surgery, except for early delivery (74.2%), early catheter removal (63.9%), and multimodal analgesia (80.6%). The LHS in the ERAS group was significantly shorter than that in the non-ERAS group (P = 0.004). Besides, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) score at 3 days after surgery showed a significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.019). The patient satisfaction in ERAS group was significantly higher than that in the non-ERAS group (P = 0.001).

Conclusion

The new nursing pattern combined with ERAS in patients with LDDs who underwent OLIF did not improve the short-term prognosis of surgery, while it could effectively reduce postoperative complications, shorten the LHS, and improve patient satisfaction, and did not lead to additional adverse events.

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.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes in frail patients following multilevel lumbar fusion surgery with and without the implementation of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is an evidence-based multimodal perioperative management designed to reduce the length of stay (LOS) and complications. The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the recovery of physiological function, LOS, complications, pain score, and clinical efficacy in frail elderly patients undergoing multisegment fusion surgery after the implementation of the ERAS protocol.

METHODS

Frail patients older than 75 years undergoing multilevel lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative discogenic conditions, lumbar spinal stenosis, and lumbar spondylolisthesis from January 2017 to December 2018 (non-ERAS frail group) and from January 2020 to December 2021 (ERAS frail group) were enrolled in the present study. Propensity score matching for age, sex, body mass index, and smoking status was performed to keep comparable characteristics between the two groups. Further recovery of physiological function, LOS, complications, pain score, and clinical efficacy were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

There were 64 pairs of well-balanced patients, and the clinical baseline data were comparable between the two groups. There was significant improvement in terms of recovery of physiological function (10.65 ± 3.51 days vs. 8.31 ± 3.98 days, p = 0.011) and LOS (12.18 ± 4.69 days vs. 10.44 ± 4.60 days, p = 0.035), while no statistical discrepancy was observed with regard to complications between the groups, which indicated favorable outcomes after the implementation of the ERAS protocol. Further analysis indicated that more patients were meeting a minimally clinical important difference for the visual analog score for the legs and the Oswestry Disability Index in the ERAS frail group. With regard to postoperative pain, the score was higher in the ERAS frail group than in the non-ERAS frail group on postoperative day (POD) 1 (4.88 ± 1.90 in the ERAS frail group vs. 4.27 ± 1.42 in the non-ERAS frail group, p = 0.042), while there was no significant discrepancy on POD 2 (3.77 ± 0.88 in the ERAS frail group vs. 3.64 ± 1.07 in the non-ERAS frail group, p = 0.470) and POD 3 (3.83 ± 1.89 in the ERAS frail group vs. 3.47 ± 1.75 in the non-ERAS frail group, p = 0.266).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective cohort study, we found a significant improvement in terms of LOS, recovery of physiological function, and clinical efficacy after the implementation of the ERAS protocol in elderly and frail patients undergoing multilevel lumbar fusion surgery, while there was no significant discrepancy with regard to complications, 90-day readmission, and postoperative pain.

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.