Enhanced Recovery Program Versus Traditional Care in Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Postoperative Global Period Cost Reduction Using 3 Successive Risk-Stratified Pancreatectomy Clinical Pathways

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that iterative revisions of our original 2016 risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways would be associated with decreased 90-day perioperative costs.

STUDY DESIGN

From a single-institution retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with 3 iterations: "version 1" (V1) (October 2016 to January 2019), V2 (February 2019 to October 2020), and V3 (November 2020 to February 2022), institutional data were aggregated using revenue codes and adjusted to constant 2022-dollar value. Grand total perioperative costs (primary endpoint) were the sum of pancreatectomy, inpatient care, readmission, and 90-day global outpatient care. Proprietary hospital-based costs were converted to ratios using the mean cost of all hospital operations as the denominator.

RESULTS

Of 814 patients, pathway V1 included 363, V2 229, and V3 222 patients. Accordion Grade 3+ complications decreased with each iteration (V1: 28.4%, V2: 22.7%, and V3: 15.3%). Median length of stay decreased (V1: 6 days, interquartile range [IQR] 5 to 8; V2: 5 [IQR 4 to 6]; and V3: 5 [IQR 4 to 6]) without an increase in readmissions. Ninety-day global perioperative costs decreased by 32% (V1 cost ratio 12.6, V2 10.9, and V3 8.6). Reduction of the index hospitalization cost was associated with the greatest savings (-31%: 9.4, 8.3, and 6.5). Outpatient care costs decreased consistently (1.58, 1.41, and 1.04). When combining readmission and all outpatient costs, total "postdischarge" costs decreased (3.17, 2.59, and 2.13). Component costs of the index hospitalization that were associated with the greatest savings were room or board costs (-55%: 1.74, 1.14, and 0.79) and pharmacy costs (-61%: 2.20, 1.61, and 0.87; all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Three iterative risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathway refinements were associated with a 32% global period cost savings, driven by reduced index hospitalization costs. This successful learning health system model could be externally validated at other institutions performing abdominal cancer surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery care to reduce surgical site wound infection and postoperative complications for patients undergoing liver surgery

This study comprehensively assessed the effect of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) on wound infection and postoperative complications in patients undergoing liver surgery. The PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, and Wanfang electronic databases were searched to collect published studies on the use of ERAS in liver surgery until December 2022. Literature selection was performed independently by two investigators according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and quality evaluation and data extraction were performed. RevMan 5.4 software was used in this study. Compared with the control group, the ERAS group showed a significantly lower incidence of postoperative wound infection (odds ratio [OR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-0.84, P = .004) and overall postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33-0.57, P < .001) and significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay (mean difference: -2.30, 95% CI: -2.92 to -1.68, P < .001). Therefore, ERAS was safe and feasible when applied to liver resection, reducing the incidence of wound infection and total postoperative complications, and shortening the length of hospital stay. However, further studies are required to investigate the impact of ERAS protocols on clinical outcomes.

Impact of enhanced recovery pathways on patient-reported outcomes after abdominal surgery: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Evidence supports that enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) reduce length of stay and complications; however, these measures may not reflect the perspective of patients who are the main stakeholders in the recovery process. This systematic review aimed to appraise the evidence regarding the impact of ERPs on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Five databases (Medline, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the impact of ERPs on PROs after abdominal surgery. We focused on distinct periods of recovery: early (within 7 days postoperatively) and late (beyond 7 days). Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's RoB 2.0. Results were appraised descriptively as heterogeneity hindered meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE.

RESULTS

Fifty-six RCTs were identified [colorectal (n = 18), hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) (n = 11), upper gastrointestinal (UGI) (n = 10), gynecological (n = 7), urological (n = 7), general surgery (n = 3)]. Most trials had 'some concerns' (n = 30) or 'high' (n = 25) risk of bias. In the early postoperative period, ERPs improved patient-reported general health (colorectal, HPB, UGI, urological; very low to low certainty), physical health (colorectal, gynecological; very low to low certainty), mental health (colorectal, gynecological; very low certainty), pain (all specialties; very low to moderate certainty), and fatigue (colorectal; low certainty). In the late postoperative period, ERPs improved general health (HPB, UGI, urological; very low certainty), physical health (UGI, gynecological, urological; very low to low certainty), mental health (UGI, gynecological, urological; very low certainty), social health (gynecological; very low certainty), pain (gynecological, urological; very low certainty), and fatigue (gynecological; very low certainty).

CONCLUSION

This review supports that ERPs may have a positive impact on patient-reported postoperative health status (i.e., general, physical, mental, and social health) and symptom experience (i.e., pain and fatigue) after abdominal surgery; however, data were largely derived from low-quality trials. Although these findings contribute important knowledge to inform evidence-based ERP implementation, there remains a great need to improve PRO assessment in studies focused on postoperative recovery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery in primary liver cancer patients undergoing hepatectomy: experience from a large tertiary hospital in China

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has significant effects in gastrointestinal surgery, urology, and orthopedic department, but the application of ERAS in liver cancer patients undergoing hepatectomy is less reported. This study aims to identify the effectiveness and safety of ERAS in liver cancer patients undergoing hepatectomy.

METHODS

Patients who performed ERAS and no-ERAS after hepatectomy due to liver cancer from 2019 to 2022 were prospectively and retrospectively collected, respectively. Preoperative baseline data, surgical characteristics, and postoperative outcomes of patients in ERAS and non-ERAS groups were compared and analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the risk factors of complications occurrence and prolonged hospital stay.

RESULTS

In total, 318 patients were included in the study, 150 and 168 individuals in the ERAS group and non-ERAS group, respectively. The preoperative baseline and surgical characteristics between the ERAS and non-ERAS groups were comparable and not statistically different. Postoperative visual analogue scale pain score, the median day of gastrointestinal function recovery postoperative, complications rate, and postoperative hospitalization days were lower in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group. In addition, multivariate logistic regression analysis found that the implementation of the ERAS was an independent protective factor for prolonged hospitalization stay and complications occurrence. The rate of rehospitalization after discharge (< 30 days) in the ERAS group was lower than that in the non-ERAS group, but there was no statistical difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of ERAS in hepatectomy for patients with liver cancer is safe and effective. It can accelerate gastrointestinal function recovery postoperative, shorten the length of hospital stay, and reduce postoperative pain and complications.

Preoperative steroid for enhancing patients' recovery after head and neck cancer surgery with free tissue transfer reconstruction: protocol for a phase III, placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind study (J-SUPPORT 2022, PreSte-HN Study)

INTRODUCTION

There is no established methodology for the perioperative management of head and neck cancer surgery and free tissue transfer reconstruction (HNS-FTR). A single dose of corticosteroid administered immediately before surgery has been shown to reduce postoperative pain and nausea/vomiting after some types of surgery. However, the efficacy of this strategy has not been demonstrated in HNS-FTR, and the increased risk of infectious complications associated with its use cannot be ruled out. This phase III, placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind, comparative, multicentre study seeks to determine if preoperative administration of corticosteroid hormone has an adjunctive effect in terms of reducing pain and nausea/vomiting after surgery and improving the quality of postoperative recovery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Using the minimisation method, patients undergoing HNS-FTR are currently being recruited and randomly assigned to a study arm at a 1:1 allocation rate. The study treatment arm consists of 8.0 mg of dexamethasone phosphate dissolved in 100 mL of saline administered as a single dose by intravenous infusion. These treatments will be administered in a double-blind fashion. All patients will receive perioperative care according to the common multicentre enhanced recovery after surgery programme. The primary endpoint is the quality of postoperative recovery, as determined by the area under the curve (AUC) for total score on the Japanese version of the Quality of Recovery Score (QOR-40J) on postoperative days 2 and 4. The point estimate and CI for the difference in the AUC between the groups on postoperative days 2 and 4 will be calculated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study will be performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Japan's Clinical Trials Act. The study protocol was approved by the Certified Review Board of National Cancer Center Hospital East (Reference K2021004).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCTs031210593; V.3.0, November 2021, available at https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCTs031210593).

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Liver Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations 2022

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has been widely applied in liver surgery since the publication of the first ERAS guidelines in 2016. The aim of the present article was to update the ERAS guidelines in liver surgery using a modified Delphi method based on a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A modified Delphi method including 15 international experts was used. Consensus was judged to be reached when >80% of the experts agreed on the recommended items. Recommendations were based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations system.

RESULTS

A total of 7541 manuscripts were screened, and 240 articles were finally included. Twenty-five recommendation items were elaborated. All of them obtained consensus (>80% agreement) after 3 Delphi rounds. Nine items (36%) had a high level of evidence and 16 (64%) a strong recommendation grade. Compared to the first ERAS guidelines published, 3 novel items were introduced: prehabilitation in high-risk patients, preoperative biliary drainage in cholestatic liver, and preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation at least 4 weeks before hepatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines based on the best available evidence allow standardization of the perioperative management of patients undergoing liver surgery. Specific studies on hepatectomy in cirrhotic patients following an ERAS program are still needed.

Effect of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol on Postoperative Outcomes of Women Undergoing Abdominal Hysterectomy

Background

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocol is a standardized, multidisciplinary approach for shorter hospital stay without negatively affecting patient outcomes. The aim of this research was to evaluate the effect of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol on postoperative outcomes of women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy.

Design

A quasi-experimental design was adopted to fulfil the aim of this research.

Setting

The research was conducted at Obstetric and Gynecological Department in Benha University Hospital.

Sample

A purposive sample of 148 women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy divided into two groups.

Data collection

Three tools were used: Tool (I) structured questionnaire sheet. Tool (II) post-operative pain assessment scale (numerical rating scale). Tool (III) post-operative outcomes assessment sheet.

Results

There was a highly statistically significant difference between the studied groups regarding all postoperative outcomes (p = .000). The women in the study group experienced less mean score of pain compared to those in control group on both 2nd and 3rd day after surgery. Also, there was a statistically significant difference between the studied groups regarding postoperative complication and readmission (p = .000).

Conclusion

Women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy who received enhanced recovery after surgery protocol had better postoperative outcomes than women who received routine perioperative care.

Improving safety and efficacy with pharmacist medication reconciliation in orthopedic joint surgery within an enhanced recovery after surgery program

PURPOSE

To investigate the impact of medication reconciliation (MR), through avoidance of unintentional medication discrepancies, on enhanced recovery after surgery programs designed for older patients undergoing orthopedic joint surgery.  METHOD: Our study was divided into two phases. In the first phase, MR was performed for elderly patients undergoing orthopedic joint surgery. Types of medication discrepancies and their potential risks were analyzed. In the second phase, a controlled study was conducted in a subgroup of patients diagnosed with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and who were scheduled for two-stage revision. The primary goal was to investigate the impact of MR on length of stay for the first stage. The secondary goal was to investigate the time between the first admission and the reimplantation of a new prosthesis, the number of readmissions within 30 days, hospitalization cost.

RESULTS

A total of 506 medication discrepancies were identified in the included 260 patients. Intolerance had the highest incidence (n = 131, 25.7%). The Bayliff tool showed that 71.9% were assessed as level 2 risk, and 10.3% had a life-threatening risk. For patients with PJI, MR reduced the average length of stay in the first stage (16.3 days vs. 20.7 days, P = 0.03) and shortened the time (57.3 days vs. 70.5 days, P = 0.002) between the first admission and the reimplantation of a new prosthesis. The average cost of hospital stay ($8589.6 vs. $10,422.6, P = 0.021), antibiotics ($1052.2 vs. $1484.7, P = 0.032) and other medications ($691.5 vs. $1237.6, P = 0.014) per patient at our hospital were significantly decreased. Notably, significant improvements in patient satisfaction were seen in participants in the MR group.

CONCLUSION

Through MR by clinical pharmacists, medication discrepancies within the orthopedic ERAS program could be identified. For patients with periprosthetic joint infection, better patient satisfaction and clinical and economical outcomes can be achieved with this method.

Enhanced Recovery Care vs. Traditional Care in Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Enhanced recovery care could alleviate surgical stress and accelerate the recovery rates of patients. Previous studies showed the benefits of enhanced recovery after surgery program in liver surgery, but the exact role in laparoscopic hepatectomy is still unclear.

Aim

We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after a surgery program in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Methods

The relative studies from a specific search of PUBMED, EMBASE, OVID, and Cochrane database from June 2008 to February 2022 were selected and included in this meta-analysis. The primary outcomes included length of hospital stay, duration to functional recovery, and overall postoperative complication rate. The secondary outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, cost of hospitalization, readmission rate, Grade I complication rate, and Grade II–V complication rate.

Results

A total of six studies with 643 patients [enhanced recovery care (n = 274) vs. traditional care (n = 369)] were eligible for analysis. These comprised three randomized controlled trials and three retrospective studies. Enhanced recovery care group was associated with decreased hospital stay [standard mean difference (SMD) = −0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.83~−0.28, p < 0.0001], shorter duration to functional recovery (SMD = −1.14, 95% CI = −1.92~−0.37, p = 0.004), and lower cost of hospitalization Mean Difference (MD) = −1,539.62, 95% CI = −1992.85~−1086.39, p < 0.00001). Moreover, a lower overall postoperative complication rate was observed in enhanced recovery care group [Risk ratio (RR) = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.51~0.80, p < 0.0001] as well as lower Grade II–V complication rate (RR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.38~0.80, p = 0.002), while there was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss (MD = −65.75, 95% CI = −158.47~26.97, p = 0.16), operative time (MD = −5.44, 95% CI = −43.46~32.58, p = 0.78), intraoperative blood transfusion rate [Odds ratio (OR) = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.41~1.22, p = 0.22], and Grade I complication rate (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.53~1.03, p = 0.07).

Conclusion

Enhanced recovery care in laparoscopic hepatectomy should be recommended, because it is not only safe and effective, but also can accelerate the postoperative recovery and lighten the financial burden of patients.

Understanding conditional cumulative incidence of complications following liver resection to optimize hospital stay

BACKGROUND

After liver resection, the in-hospital observation periods associated with minimal risks for complications and unplanned readmission remains unclear. This study aimed to assess changes in risks of complications over time.

METHODS

Surgical complexity of liver resection was stratified into grades I (low complexity), II (intermediate), and III (high). The cumulative incidence rate and risk factors for complication ≥ Clavien-Dindo grade II (defined as treatment-requiring complications) were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 581 patients, grade I, II, and III resections were performed in 81 (13.9%), 119 (20.5%), and 381 patients (65.6%). Complexity grades (I vs. III, hazard ratio [HR] 0.45, P = 0.007; II vs. III, HR 0.60, P = 0.011) and background liver status (HR 1.76, P = 0.004) were risk factors for treatment-requiring complications. The cumulative incidence rate of treatment-requiring complications was higher after grade III resection than grade I resection (38.1% vs. 16.1%, P < 0.001) or grade II resection (38.1% vs. 25.2%, P = 0.019). Without cirrhosis/chronic hepatitis, the cumulative incidence rate of treatment-requiring complications decreased to less than 10% on postoperative day (POD) 3 after grade I resection, POD 5 after grade II resection, and POD 10 after grade III resection.

CONCLUSION

Conditional complication risk analysis stratified by surgical complexity may be useful for optimizing in-hospital observation.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Laparoscopic Hepatectomy

Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Methods: From September 2016 to June 2019, 282 patients were enrolled, and ERAS was implemented since March 2018. All indicators related to surgery, liver function, and postoperative outcomes were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching (PSM) identified 174 patients for further comparison.

Results: After PSM, the clinicopathological baselines were well-matched. The group showed significantly less intraoperative blood loss (100.00 [100.00–200.00] vs. 200.00 [100.00–300.00] ml, P = 0.001), fewer days before abdominal drainage tube removal (4.00 [3.00–4.00] days vs. 4.00 [3.00–5.00] days, P = 0.023), shorter hospital stay after surgery (6.00 [5.00–6.00] days vs. 6.00 [6.00–7.00] days, P < 0.001), and reduced postoperative morbidity (18.39 vs. 34.48%, P = 0.026). The proportion of patients with a pain score ≥ 4 was significantly lower in the ERAS group within the first 2 days after surgery (1.15 vs. 13.79% and 8.05 vs. 26.44%, P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, respectively). Pringle maneuver was performed more frequently in the ERAS group (70.11 vs. 18.39%, P < 0.001), and a significantly higher postoperative alanine aminotransferase level was also observed (183.40 [122.85–253.70] vs. 136.20 [82.93–263.40] U/l, P = 0.026). The 2-year recurrence-free survival was similar between the two groups (72 vs. 71%, P = 0.946).

Conclusions: ERAS programs are feasible and safe and do not influence mid-term recurrence in HCC patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy.

THERE ARE NO ADVANTAGES BETWEEN LAPAROSCOPIC AND OPEN LIVER RESECTIONS WITHIN AN ENHANCED RECOVERY PROGRAM (ERAS)

BACKGROUND

The use of a successful Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in colorectal surgery favored its application in other organs, and hepatic resections were not excluded from this tendency. Some authors suggest that the laparoscopic approach is a central element to obtain better results.

AIM

To compare the laparoscopic vs. open hepatic resections within an ERAS to evaluate if there are any differences between them.

METHODS

In a descriptive study 80 hepatic resections that were divided into two groups, regarding to whether they were submitted to laparoscopy or open surgery. Demographic data, those referring to the hepatectomy and the ERAS was analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-seven resections were carried out in open surgery and the rest laparoscopically; in the first group there was only one conversion to open surgery. Of the total, 17 resections were major hepatectomies and in 18 simultaneous resections. There were no differences between procedures regarding hospital stay and number of complications. There was a greater adherence to the ERAS (p=0.046) and a faster ambulation (p=0.001) in the open surgery.

CONCLUSION

The procedure, whether open or laparoscopically done in hepatic resections, does not seem to show differences in an ERAS evaluation.

Impact of 2016 Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Recommendations on Outcomes after Hepatectomy in Cirrhotic and Non-Cirrhotic Patients

BACKGROUND

The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) society published new recommendations for hepatectomy in 2016. Few studies have assessed their clinical impact. The aim of this monocentric study was to assess the impact of those guidelines on outcomes after liver surgery with a special focus on cirrhotic patients.

METHOD

Postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing hepatectomy 30 months before and after ERAS implementation according to the 2016 ERAS guidelines were compared after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Primary endpoint was 90-day morbidity.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2020, 430 patients underwent hepatectomy including 226 procedures performed before and 204 after ERAS implementation. After IPTW, overall morbidity (42.5% vs. 64.7%, p < 0.001), Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) score (14.3 vs. 20.8, p = 0.004), length of stay (10.4 vs. 13.7 days, p = 0.001) and textbook outcome (50% vs. 40.2%, p = 0.022) were significantly improved in the ERAS group, while mortality and severe complications were similar in both groups. In the non-cirrhosis subgroup (n = 321), these results were confirmed. However, in the cirrhosis subgroup (n = 105), no difference appeared on outcomes after hepatectomy with an overall morbidity (47.5% vs. 65.2%, p = 0.069) and a length of stay (8 vs. 9 days, p = 0.310) which were not significantly different. The compliance rate to ERAS guidelines was 60% in both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative ERAS program for hepatectomy results in improved outcomes with decreased rate of non-severe morbidity. Although those guidelines are not deleterious for cirrhotic patients, they probably require revisions to be more effective in this patient population.

Effectiveness of a Clinical Pathway for Hepatic Cystic Echinococcosis Surgery in Kashi Prefecture, Northwestern China: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Introduction

Surgical treatment for hepatic cystic ehinococcosis (CE) is not standardized in Kashi Prefecture. Previous evidence identified effectiveness of a clinical pathway in the field of liver surgery. However, proof of a clinical pathway program, especially for CE patients, is lacking. This study aimed to assess the validity of a clinical pathway for hepatic CE surgery performed on patients from Kashi Prefecture.

Methods

A clinical pathway was developed and implemented by a multidisciplinary team for patients undergoing hepatic CE surgery. Two groups were formed from patients undergoing hepatic CE surgery during a defined period before and after implementing a clinical pathway. Additionally, a propensity score matching analysis was performed.

Results

In the overall analysis (n = 258) as well as the matched analysis (n = 166), after implementing the clinical pathway, hospital stay was significantly reduced from 13 to 10 days and from 14 to 10 days, respectively (P < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity did not increase. Cost analysis showed a significant decrease in median costs of medication and nursing in favor of the clinical pathway (medication: 5400 CNY vs. 6400 CNY, P = 0.038; nursing: 3200 CNY vs. 4100 CNY, P = 0.02).

Conclusion

Implementing the clinical pathway for hepatic CE surgery is feasible and safe. The clinical pathway achieved significant reduction of hospital stay without compromising postoperative morbidity. Costs of medication and nursing are significantly reduced. The clinical pathway program is valid and propagable to a certain extent, especially in remote, poor-resourced medical centers in endemic areas.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Chinese Patients Receiving Hepatectomy With or Without Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Strategy

Purposes: For the first time in China, the current study was designed to compare the clinical outcomes between Chinese patients receiving hepatectomy with or without the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) strategy. Methods: The current study enrolled 250 patients who would receive hepatectomy. Patients were randomized into two groups: ERAS group (n = 125, ERAS strategy) and control (n = 125, conventional care). Mortality, length of hospital stay, readmission, and complications were assessed over 30 days after the operation. Results: The average age of the whole cohort was 65 (63-68) years, with 152 males (60.8%). There was no difference between two groups in baseline features, such as age, sex, medical history, Child-Pugh hepatic function, American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status, operative type, hepatectomy type, and hepatic pathology (P > 0.05 for all). There was no occurrence of death in the two groups. Patients in the ERAS group had significantly less occurrence of post-operative complications and a shorter length of hospital stay (P < 0.05 for all). Deep vein thrombosis occurred in seven patients in the control group, but did not occur in the ERAS group (P < 0.05). Patients in the two groups had similar occurrence of readmission (P > 0.05). Conclusions: ERAS strategy significantly decreased the occurrence of operative complications and shortened the length of hospital stay without any increase in mortality or readmission in Chinese patients receiving hepatectomy.

Enhanced recovery after hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery: A single-center case control study

Backgrounds/Aims

The aim of this study was to find the safety and effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients who undergo hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgeries and its association with the postoperative complications and survival rate of the patients.

Methods

This study was conducted on patients who underwent HPB surgeries in Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Iran from 2018 to 2020. Patients who underwent surgery after from 2019 to February 2020 considered as the ERAS group (n=47) in which ERAS was implemented postoperatively including removing nasogastric tube and initiating surgical diet at 6 hours post operation, and removing intraabdominal drains and Foley catheter at postoperative day one. Other patients (n=43) were considered as the control group in which conventional postoperative care was implemented.

Results

Ninety patients with the mean age of 47.3±13.3 yrs/old (range= 17-76) including 39 females were enrolled into the study. There were no significant differences between the demographic and preoperative comorbidities between the two groups. Pain severity of the patients in the ERAS group was significantly lower than the control group (visual analogue scales of 3.4±0.77 vs. 4.47±0.88, p<0.001). However, there were no significant differences between the other postoperative data between the two groups. One patient in each group died during hospitalization period due to myocardial infarction.

Conclusions

ERAS may be safe and effective in patients who undergo HPB surgery and may be associated with less severe postoperative pain.

Cost Analysis of Enhanced Recovery Programs in Colorectal, Pancreatic, and Hepatic Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have been shown to improve postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery. This study aimed to review the current literature to assess if ERPs in colorectal, pancreas, and liver surgery induce cost savings.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed including prospective and retrospective studies comparing conventional management versus ERP in terms of costs. All kinds of ERP were considered (fast-track, ERAS^®, or home-made protocols). Studies with no mention of a clear protocol and no reporting of protocol compliance were excluded.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven articles out of 144 identified records were scrutinized as full articles. Final analysis included 16 studies. In colorectal surgery, two studies were prospective (1 randomized controlled trial, RCT) and six retrospective, totaling 1277 non-ERP patients and 2078 ERP patients. Three of the eight studies showed no difference in cost savings between the two groups. The meta-analysis found a mean cost reduction of USD3010 (95% CI: 5370-650, p = 0.01) in favor of ERP. Among the five included studies in pancreas surgery (all retrospective, 552 non-ERP vs. 348 ERP patients), the mean cost reduction in favor of the ERP group was USD7020 (95% CI: 11,600-2430, p = 0.003). In liver surgery, only three studies (two retrospective and 1 RCT, 180 non-ERP vs. 197 ERP patients) were found, which precluded a sound cost analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The present systematic review suggests that ERPs in colorectal and pancreas surgery are associated with cost savings compared to conventional perioperative management. Cost data in liver surgery are scarce.

Definition and Prospective Assessment of Functional Recovery After Liver Transplantation: A New Objective Consensus-Based Metric for Safe Discharge

Standardized discharge criteria are critical to reduce premature discharge and avoid unnecessary hospital stays. No such criteria exist for patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT). To achieve a consensus-based checklist of criteria for safe patient discharge after LT, this mixed-method study included the following: a systematic literature review and expert discussion to draft a first checklist of post-LT discharge criteria, defining patient recovery and indications for hospital discharge (functional recovery); an exploratory online electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) study; a single-center pilot study to test checklist feasibility; and a final e-Delphi study with an extended interdisciplinary expert panel to validate the final checklist. The first round provided a 10-point discharge checklist with 5 patient-centered items derived from discharge criteria after liver surgery and 5 graft-centered items derived from expert discussion. The restricted panel (9 experts) e-Delphi provided 100% consensus after the second round, with slight modifications to the criteria. During the pilot study, 19 of 45 (42.2%) patients included fulfilled the complete checklist (100% of 10 items) after median (IQR) 16 (8-21) days (functional recovery) and a length of stay of 20 (9-24) days. The item with the lowest completion rate was minimum serum tacrolimus level in the target on 2 consecutive blood samples (n = 21; 47%), achieved at 13 (9-15) days. The extended panel (66 experts) e-Delphi provided 95%-98% consensus after the third round, with slight modifications of the criteria. This study provided substantial consensus on discharge criteria after LT. We anticipate that these criteria will be useful in clinical practice to guide patient discharge and increase the comparability of results between future studies.

The impact of enhanced recovery on open and laparoscopic liver resections

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs (ERP) have been implemented in many surgical specialties. Their impact in liver surgery is poorly understood and approach-specific ERPs have not yet been assessed. This retrospective study aims to analyse the effect of such programs on liver resection. All patients undergoing liver resection at a tertiary referral centre between January 2009 and April 2019 were identified. Primary outcome was the length of stay (LOS), secondary outcomes were functional recovery, complications and readmission rates. Patients in the ERP with different protocols for open, laparoscopic, major and minor resections were compared to a historical cohort. Of 1056 patients, 644 were treated within the ERP. A comparable duration of hospital stay [7 days (IQR (interquartile range) 6-12) vs 7 days (IQR 5-9) p = 0.047] and faster functional recovery with fewer complications was found in the ERP group [94 (50.5%) vs 103 (35.9%) p < 0.002]. Those advantages were smaller after open minor compared to open major resection. In patients undergoing laparoscopic resection no differences were observed except for a lower readmission rate [21 (9.3%) vs 13 (3.6%) p = 0.005]. Multivariable analysis showed that laparoscopy was associated with a shorter LOS. ERPs offer significant advantages in open liver surgery. Those advantages are less evident after laparoscopic resection.

ERAS in minimally invasive hepatectomy

Open hepatectomy is associated with significant post-operative morbidity and mortality profile. The use of minimally invasive approach for hepatectomy can reduce the post-operative complication profile and total length of hospital stay. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs involve evidence-based multimodal care pathways designed to achieve early recovery for patients undergoing major surgery. This review will discuss the published evidence, challenges and future directions for ERAS in minimally invasive hepatectomy.

Enhanced recovery after surgery program in the patients undergoing hepatectomy for benign liver lesions

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has shown effectiveness in terms of reducing the hospital stay and cost. However, the benefit of ERAS in patients undergoing hepatectomy for benign liver lesions is still unclear.

METHODS

ERAS was implemented in our center since March 1st, 2018. From September 2016 to February 2018, 109 patients were enrolled into the control group, and from March 2018 to June 2019, 124 patients were enrolled into the ERAS group. All the indicators related to operation, liver functions, and postoperative outcomes were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

The clinicopathologic baselines were similar in these two groups. A significantly higher proportion of patients underwent laparoscopic surgery in the ERAS group. On the whole, intraoperative blood loss (100.00 mL vs. 200.00 mL, P < 0.001), blood transfusion (3.23% vs. 10.09%, P = 0.033), total bilirubin (17.10 µmol/L vs. 21.00 µmol/L, P = 0.041), D-dimer (2.08 µg/mL vs. 2.57 µg/mL, P = 0.031), postoperative hospital stay (5.00 d vs. 6.00 d, P < 0.001), and postoperative morbidity (16.13% vs. 32.11%, P = 0.008) were significantly shorter or less in the ERAS group than those in the control group. After stratified by operation methods, ERAS group showed significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay in both open and laparoscopic operation (both P < 0.001). In patients underwent open surgery, ERAS group demonstrated significantly shorter operative duration (131.76 ± 8.75 min vs. 160.73 ± 7.23 min, P = 0.016), less intraoperative blood loss (200.00 mL vs. 450.00 mL, P = 0.008) and less postoperative morbidity (16.00% vs. 44.44%, P = 0.040).

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS program may be safe and effective for the patients underwent hepatectomy, especially open surgery, for benign liver lesions.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Reduces Hospital Costs and Improve Clinical Outcomes in Liver Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are evidence-based, multimodal and patient-centred approach to optimize patient care and experience during their perioperative pathway. It has been shown to be effective in reducing length of hospital stay and improving clinical outcomes. However, evidence on its effective in liver surgery remains weak. The aim of this review is to investigate clinical benefits, cost-effectiveness and compliance to ERAS protocols in liver surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane for randomized control trials (RCTs) and cohort studies published between 2008 and 2019, comparing effect of ERAS protocols and standard care on hospital cost, LOS, complications, readmission, mortality and compliance.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 6 RCTs and 21 cohort studies of 3739 patients (1777 in ERAS and 1962 in standard care group). LOS was reduced by 2.22 days in ERAS group (MD = -2.22; CI, -2.77 to -1.68; p < 0.00001) compared to the standard care group. Fewer patients in ERAS group experienced complications (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.65-0.77; p = < 0.00001). Hospital cost was significantly lower in the ERAS group (SMD = -0.98; CI, -1.37 to - 0.58; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Our review concluded that the introduction of ERAS protocols is safe and feasible in hepatectomies, without increasing mortality and readmission rates, whilst reducing LOS and risk of complications, and with a significant hospital cost savings. Laparoscopic approach may be necessary to reduce complication rates in liver surgery. However, further studies are needed to investigate overall compliance to ERAS protocols and its impact on clinical outcomes.

Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open right hepatectomy for liver tumors: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) is one of the most challenging procedures. Right liver resections have been always performed in open procedure and open right hepatectomy (ORH) was initially considered as routine way. Moreover, it is unclear how beneficial the minimally invasive technique is to patients; thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to acquire a more reliable conclusion about the feasibility and safety of LRH compared with ORH.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library using the key words. Meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager, with results expressed as odds ratio and weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. The fixed-effect model was selected initially if high heterogeneity was not present between the studies; otherwise, the randomized-effect model was used. Subgroup analysis was performed based on different surgical methods of pure laparoscopic operation or hand-assisted operation.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 467 patients were included. In the overall analysis, less intraoperative blood loss (MD = -155.17; 95% CI, -238.89, -71.45; P = .0003) and a shorter length of stay (MD = -4.45; 95% CI, -5.84, -3.07; P < .00001) were observed in the LRH group compared to the ORH group. There were fewer overall complications (OR = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10, 0.90; P = 0.03) and severe complications (OR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10, 0.58; P = .002;) in the LRH group than in the ORH group. The disadvantage of LRH was the longer operative time (MD = 49.39; 95% CI, 5.33, 93.45; P = .03). No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in portal occlusion, rate of R0 resection, transfusion rate, mild complications, and postoperative mortality. In the subgroup analysis, intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the pure LRH group and hand-assist LRH group compared with ORH group. Length of stay was shorter by use of pure LRH and hand-assisted LRH manners than ORH. The incidence rate of complications was lower in the pure LRH group than in the ORH group. In contrast, there was no significant difference between hand-assisted LRH group and ORH group.

CONCLUSION

Compared to ORH, LRH has short-term surgical advantages and leads to a shorter recovery time in selected patients. We speculate that the operative time of LRH is closer with ORH. Overall, LRH can be considered a feasible choice in routine clinical practice with experienced surgeons, although more evidence is needed to make a definitive conclusion.

ENHANCED RECOVERY (ERAS) AFTER LIVER SURGERY:COMPARATIVE STUDY IN A BRAZILIAN TERCIARY CENTER

BACKGROUND

After the publication of the first recommendations of ERAS Society regarding colonic surgery, the proposal of surgical stress reduction, maintenance of physiological functions and optimized recovery was expanded to other surgical specialties, with minimal variations.

AIM

To analyze the implementation of ERAS protocols for liver surgery in a tertiary center.

METHODS

Fifty patients that underwent elective hepatic surgery were retrospectively evaluated, using medical records data, from June 2014 to August 2016. After September 2016, 35 patients were prospectively evaluated and managed in accordance with ERAS protocol.

RESULTS

There was no difference in age, type of hepatectomy, laparoscopic surgery and postoperative complications between the groups. In ERAS group, it was observed a reduction in preoperative fasting and in the length of hospital stay by two days (p< 0.001). Carbohydrate loading, j-shaped incision, early oral feeding, postoperative prevention of nausea and vomiting and early mobilization were also significantly related to ERAS group. Oral bowel preparation, pre-anesthetic medication, sub-costal incision, prophylactic nasogastric intubation and abdominal drainage were more common in control group.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of ERAS protocol is feasible and beneficial for health institutions and patients, without increasing morbidity and mortality.

Postoperative stress and pain response applying fast-track protocol in patients undergoing hepatectomy

Aim

To assess the clinical parameters and compare the stress and pain response between fast-track recovery protocol and conventional treatment in patients undergoing major liver resection.

Methods

Eighty-eight patients suffering from malignant liver tumours were surgically treated from May 2012 to March 2015. After randomisation, they were prospectively divided into two groups: group fast-track patients (n = 46) and group conventional treatment patients (n = 42). Demographic and clinical data were collected and patients were assessed with pain scale (behavioural observation scale and visual analog scale), while depression levels were evaluated with Zung self-rating depression scale and three Numeric Analog Scale self-reported questions. Peripheral blood samples were collected at time points: T1 on the admission day, T2 on the day of surgery and T3 on the day of discharge examining serum levels of adrenocorticotropic hormone and cortisol.

Conclusion

Fast-track recovery protocols seem to be associated with improvement in several clinical parameters, without compromising, biologic or emotional stress in patients undergoing major liver resection.

Enhanced recovery care versus traditional care following laminoplasty: A retrospective case-cohort study

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been shown to shorten length of hospital stay and reduce perioperative complications in many types of surgeries. However, there has been a paucity of research examining the application of ERAS to major spinal surgery. The current study was performed to compare complications and hospital stay after laminoplasty between an ERAS group and a traditional care group.The ERAS group included 114 patients who underwent laminoplasty managed with an ERAS protocol between January 2016 and June 2017. The traditional care group included 110 patients, who received traditional perioperative care between November 2014 and December 2015. Postoperative hospital stay (POPH), physiological function, postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score, and postoperative complications were compared between the 2 groups.The mean POPH was significantly shorter in the ERAS group than traditional care group (5.75 ± 2.46 vs. 7.67 ± 3.45 d, P < .001). ERAS protocol significantly promoted postoperative early food-taking (8.45 ± 2.94 h vs 21.64 ± 2.66 h, P < .001), reduced the first time of assisted walking (30.79 ± 14.45 vs. 65.24 ± 25.34 h, P < .001), postoperative time of indwelling urinary catheters (24.76 ± 12.34 vs. 53.61 ± 18.16 h, P < .001), and wound drainage catheters (43.92 ± 7.14 vs. 48.85 ± 10.10 h, P < .001), as compared with the traditional care group. Pain control was better in the ERAS group than traditional care group in terms of mean VAS score (2.72 ± 0.46 vs. 3.35 ± 0.46, P < .001) and mean maximum VAS score (3.76 ± 1.12 vs. 4.35 ± 1.15, P < .001) in 3 days after surgery. The morbidity rate was 21.05% (24 of 114 patients) in the ERAS group and 20.90% (23 of 110 patients) in the control group (P = .75).The ERAS protocol is both safe and feasible for patients undergoing laminoplasty, and can decrease the length of postoperative hospitalization without increasing the risk of complications.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Programs for Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols or laparoscopic technique has been applied in various surgical procedures. However, the clinical efficacy of combination of the two methods still remains unclear. Thus, our aim was to assess the role of ERAS protocols in laparoscopic abdominal surgery.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in various databases from January 1990 to October 2017. The results were analyzed according to predefined criteria.

RESULTS

In the present meta-analysis, the outcomes of 34 comparative studies (15 randomized controlled studies and 19 non-randomized controlled studies) enrolling 3615 patients (1749 in the ERAS group and 1866 in the control group) were pooled. ERAS group was associated with shorter hospital stay (WMD - 2.37 days; 95% CI - 3.00 to - 1.73; P 0.000) and earlier time to first flatus (WMD - 0.63 days; 95% CI - 0.90 to - 0.36; P 0.000). Meanwhile, lower overall postoperative complication rate (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.51-0.76; P 0.000) and less hospital cost (WMD 801.52 US dollar; 95% CI - 918.15 to - 684.89; P 0.000) were observed in ERAS group. Similar readmission rate (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52-1.03, P 0.070) and perioperative mortality (OR 1.33; 95% CI 0.53-3.34; P 0.549) were found between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocol for laparoscopic abdominal surgery is safe and effective. ERAS combined with laparoscopic technique is associated with faster postoperative recovery without increasing readmission rate and perioperative mortality.

Laparoscopic liver resection: a review of current indications and surgical techniques

Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been the most impressive development in the field of liver surgery in recent two decades. Technical innovations and experience accumulation have made LLR a safe and effective procedure with faster postoperative recovery. Despite the fast spreading of the procedure, details regarding the indications, oncological outcomes and technical essentials were still disputable. To address these issues, two international consensus conferences were hold to update the knowledge in this field. The statements of the both conferences were not conclusive and more high-quality researches are required. In this article, we reviewed the development and the current state of LLR. Indications, outcomes, surgical techniques and devices used in LLR were also discussed.

Cost-benefit analysis of enhanced recovery after hepatectomy in Chinese Han population

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been proved effective for enhancing the clinical healing rate and reducing hospitalization cost in most countries of the world. It's a multi-model approach that designed to optimize perioperative pathway, attenuate the surgical stress response, and decrease postoperative complications.

OBJECTIVE

The economic benefit from the application of ERAS to colorectal surgery has been demonstrated in China. However, such economic benefit of ERAS programs for hepatectomy hasn't been clarified yet. This study was carried out to explore the clinical efficacy and cost effectiveness of ERAS in Chinese Han population after hepatectomy.

METHODS

ERAS program was implemented in our department for hepatectomy in December 2016. In total, 79 consecutive patients after hepatectomy were chosen as ERAS group (ERAS protocol) in coming half year while 121 consecutive patients after hepatectomy were chosen as Pre-ERAS group (traditional protocol) in past half year. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), complication, readmission, and hospitalization cost of 2 groups were compared.

RESULTS

The LOS of ERAS group was 5.81 ± 1.79 days, significantly shorter than that of Pre-ERAS group (8.06 ± 3.40 d) (P = .000). The operation time was 168.03 ± 46.20 minutes for ERAS group and 175.41 ± 64.64 minutes for Pre-ERAS group respectively (P = .417). The intraoperative blood loss was 166.58 ± 194.13 mL (ERAS group) and 205.45 ± 279.63 mL (Pre-ERAS group) (P = .293). It should be noted that the hospitalization cost of ERAS group was 51556.18 ± 8926.05 Yuan (7835.05 ± 1355.45 US dollars), significantly less than that of Pre-ERAS group 60554.66 ± 15615.31 Yuan (9202.56 ± 2371.24 US dollars) (P = .000). The application of ERAS effectively saved 8998.48 Yuan (1367.51 US dollars) for each patient.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS implementation for hepatectomy surgery is safe and feasible for Chinese Han population. It eventually enhanced the clinical healing rate. The benefits from such programs include a reduction of the LOS, complication, and readmission rates. So each patient has access to better medical service. It effectively relieved the financial burden of patients. The benefits from such programs include a reduction of the hospitalization cost, especially in medication cost. So each patient can afford the diseases.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program with dexamethasone administration for major head and neck surgery with free tissue transfer reconstruction: initial institutional experience

OBJECTIVES

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols promote recovery after various invasive surgeries. Likewise, preoperative glucocorticoid administration can reduce complications after some surgeries. However, the effects of ERAS protocols and glucocorticoid administration in patients undergoing major surgery for head and neck cancer have not been well described. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of an ERAS protocol with preoperative glucocorticoid administration in major surgery for head and neck cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 28 patients who underwent major head and neck surgery with free tissue transfer reconstruction at our institution from September 2016 to May 2017, after implementation of an ERAS protocol with preoperative glucocorticoid administration. Outcomes in that group were compared with those in a control group that underwent surgery from January 2015 to September 2016, before implementation of the protocol.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed significantly less body weight fluctuation, lower C-reactive protein levels, higher albumin levels, and lower body temperature in the ERAS group than in the control group postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing major surgery for head and neck cancer who were treated with the ERAS protocol and preoperative glucocorticoid administration had evidence of better hemodynamic stability and less inflammatory response than control patients.

Enhanced Recovery via Peripheral Nerve Block for Open Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are now commonplace in many fields of surgery, but only limited data exists for their use in hepatobiliary surgery. We implemented standardized ERAS protocols for all open hepatectomies and replaced thoracic epidurals with a transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing open hepatectomy during the 14 months before and 19 months after implementation of an ERAS protocol at our institution (January 2014-September 2016). Trained abstractors reviewed charts for patient demographics, perioperative details, and healthcare utilization. All nursing-reported visual analog scale pain scores were sampled to identify patients with uncontrolled pain (daily mean score > 5). Outcomes included length of stay (LOS), costs, and 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients (mean age 54.6 ± 13.0 years, 44% female) underwent open liver resection (69 [54%] after ERAS implementation). ERAS protocols were associated with significantly lower rates of ICU admission (47 vs. 13%, p < 0.001), shorter LOS (median 5.3 vs. 4.3 days, p = 0.007), and lower median costs ($3566 less, p = 0.03). Readmission remained low throughout the study period (5% pre-ERAS, 4% during ERAS, p = 0.83). Rates of uncontrolled pain were either the same or better after ERAS implementation through post-operative day #3 (41% pre-ERAS, 23% during ERAS, p = 0.03).

DISCUSSION

The use of TAP block for hepatectomy as part of an ERAS protocol is associated with improved quality and cost of care. Surgeons performing liver resections should consider standardization of evidence-based best practices in all patients.

Enhanced recovery after hepatectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hepatectomy is a surgery with high postoperative complication rates. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) clinical pathways in liver surgery have been studied and may become a standard of care. However, few specific recommendations have been published so far.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the enhanced recovery program in liver surgery.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS group with traditional care published between 2007 and 2017 were included in this review. The outcomes were length of stay (LoS), complications, mortality and readmission rate for all liver surgeries except transplantation.

RESULTS

Five hundred and twenty-four patients randomised in 4 RCTs were analysed. Two hundred and fifty-four patients were in ERAS group and 270 patients in traditional care (TC) group. Two studies compared cares in laparoscopic surgery and 2 in open surgery. Postoperative LoS was significantly lower in the ERAS group whereas readmission and mortality rate were similar. ERAS group had also significant lower complication rate in 2 studies of the 4. The complication rate in the 2 other studies was similar.

CONCLUSION

ERAS protocols in liver surgery appeared to be safe and effective. Recent recommendations from the ERAS group in liver surgery are the only ones published so far. Other studies evaluating ERAS components in liver surgery and recommendations from scientific societies are needed to spread this clinical care pathway.

Risk-stratified clinical pathways decrease the duration of hospitalization and costs of perioperative care after pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is associated with adverse events, increased duration of stay and hospital costs. We developed perioperative care pathways stratified by postoperative pancreatic fistula risk with the aims of minimizing variations in care, improving quality, and decreasing costs.

STUDY DESIGN

Three unique risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways-low-risk pancreatoduodenectomy, high-risk pancreatoduodenectomy, and distal pancreatectomy were developed and implemented. Consecutive patients treated after implementation of the risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways were compared with patients treated immediately prior. Duration of stay, rates of perioperative adverse effects, discharge disposition, and hospital readmission, as well as the associated costs of care, were evaluated.

RESULTS

The median hospital stay after pancreatectomy decreased from 10 to 6 days after implementation of the risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways (P < .001), and the median cost of index hospitalization decreased by 22%. Decreased changes in median hospital stay and costs of hospitalization were observed in association with low-risk pancreatoduodenectomy (P < .05) and distal pancreatectomy (P < .05), but not high-risk pancreatoduodenectomy. The rates of 90-day adverse events, grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula, discharge to a facility other than home, or readmission did not change after implementation.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways decreased median stay and cost of index hospitalization after pancreatectomy without unfavorably affecting rates of perioperative adverse events or readmission, or discharge disposition. Outcomes were most favorably improved for low-risk pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy. Additional work is necessary to decrease the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, minimize variability, and improve outcomes after high-risk pancreatoduodenectomy.

Safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs in patients undergoing hepatectomy: A prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs, following a variety of perioperative treatments with evidence-based medical evidence, has indicated its validity to accelerate rehabilitation in a wide variety of surgical procedures. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) study was implemented to verify the safety and efficacy of the perioperative effects in patients undergoing hepatectomy with ERAS or with conventional surgery (CS).

METHODS

From August 2016 to November 2017, according to the inclusion criteria, 160 patients with liver diseases were suitable for participating in this experiment. Patients before liver resection were randomized into ERAS group (n = 80) and CS group (n = 80), and then the outcome measures were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Enhanced recovery after surgery group had significantly less complications than CS group (P = .009). Compared with CS group, patients in ERAS group had low peak of WBCs in postoperative day (POD1), ALT in POD1 and POD3 (P < .05), high value of ALB in POD3 and POD5 (P < .05), less pain and higher patient satisfaction (P < .001), earlier exhaust, oral feeding, ambulation and extubation time (P < .05),and also had less hospital stay and cost (P < .001). There were no significant differences in readmission rate (<30 days) between two groups (P = .772).

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs applied to patients undergoing hepatectomy can safely and effectively relieve stress response, reduce the incidence of complications, improve patient satisfaction, accelerate patient recovery, reduce financial burden, and bring economic benefits.

Perioperative Factors Predicting Prolonged Postoperative Ileus After Major Abdominal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) is among the common complications adversely affecting postoperative outcomes. Predictors of PPOI after major abdominal surgery remain unclear, although various PPOI predictors have been reported in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. This study aimed to devise a model for stratifying the probability of PPOI in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2013, 841 patients underwent major abdominal surgery after excluding patients who underwent less-invasive abdominal surgery, ileus-associated surgery, and emergency surgery. Postoperative managements were generally based on enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. The definition of PPOI was based on nausea, no oral diet, flatus absence, abdominal distension, and radiographic findings. A nomogram was devised by evaluating predictive factors for PPOI.

RESULTS

Of the 841 patients, 73 (8.8%) developed PPOI. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed smoking history (P = 0.025), colorectal surgery (P = 0.004), and an open surgical approach (P = 0.002) to all be independent predictive factors for PPOI. A nomogram was devised by employing these three significant predictive factors. The prediction model showed relatively good discrimination performance, the concordance index of which was 0.71 (95%CI 0.66-0.77). The probability of PPOI in patients with a smoking history who underwent open colorectal surgery was calculated to be 19.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal surgery, open abdominal surgery, and smoking history were found to be independent predictive factors for PPOI in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery. A nomogram based on these factors was shown to be useful for identifying patients with a high probability of developing PPOI.

Minimally invasive hepatectomy conversions: an analysis of risk factors and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Surgical approach may influence morbidity following hepatectomy. This study sought to compare outcomes in minimally invasive surgery (MIS), conversion from MIS to open, and planned open hepatectomy patients and analyze factors leading to conversion.

METHODS

The 2014 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset was queried for patients undergoing hepatectomy. Patients were divided into three cohorts: MIS, open, or conversion. Propensity matching was performed to compare MIS vs. conversion (3:1) and open vs. conversion (8:1). The logistic regression model was used to identify odds ratios for conversion.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing conversion had a higher transfusion rate (26% vs. 9%, p < 0.001), longer length of stay (5 vs. 3 days, p < 0.001), and higher morbidity (38% vs. 18%, p < 0.001) than MIS patients. Patients who underwent conversion had similar short-term outcomes to those who had planned open procedures. Independent predictors of conversion included hypertension (OR 1.91; 95% CI 1.12-3.26) and right lobectomy (OR 20.23; 95% CI 3.74-109.35).

CONCLUSION

Patients with hypertension and those undergoing right lobectomy had a higher risk of conversion to open procedure. Conversion resulted in higher morbidity and longer length of stay compared to MIS patients, but outcomes were similar to planned open procedures.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Noncolorectal Surgery?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Major Abdominal Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols across noncolorectal abdominal surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND

ERAS programs have been studied extensively in colorectal surgery and adopted at many centers. Several studies testing such protocols have shown promising results in improving postoperative outcomes across various surgical procedures. However, surgeons performing major abdominal procedures have been slower to adopt these ERAS protocols.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using "enhanced recovery after surgery" or "fast track" as search terms and excluded studies of colorectal procedures. Primary endpoints for the meta-analysis include length of stay (LOS) and complication rate. Secondary endpoints were time to first flatus, readmission rate, and costs.

RESULTS

A total of 39 studies (6511 patients) met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Among them 14 studies were randomized trials, and the remaining 25 studies were cohort studies. Meta-analysis showed a decrease in LOS of 2.5 days (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.8-3.2, P < 0.001) and a complication rate of 0.70 (95% CI: 0.56-0.86, P = 0.001) for patient treated in ERAS programs. There was also a significant reduction in time to first flatus of 0.8 days (95% CI: 0.4-1.1, P < 0.001) and cost reduction of $5109.10 (95% CI: $4365.80-$5852.40, P < 0.001). There was no significant increase in readmission rate (OR 1.03, 95% CI: 0.84-1.26, P = 0.80) in our analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocols decreased length of stay and cost by not increasing complications or readmission rates. This study adds to the evidence that ERAS protocols are safe to implement and are beneficial to surgical patients and the healthcare system across multiple abdominal procedures.

Enhanced recovery program versus traditional care after hepatectomy: A meta-analysis

To assess the safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) as compared with the traditional care in patients undergoing liver surgery and optimization of enhanced recovery programs.Literature, until August 2016, was searched to identify the comparative studies evaluating preoperative hospital stay time, complications, and C-reactive protein (CRP). Pooled odds ratios (OR) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) were calculated with either the fixed or random effect model.These studies included a total of 524 patients: 254 treated with ERAS and 270 with traditional care. The postoperative recovery time and length of hospital stay were significantly better than the control group (WMD -2.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.86 to -1.57; WMD -2.67; 95% CI -3.68 to -1.65, respectively). The overall complications, grade I, and Grand II-V complications were significantly favorable to the ERAS group (OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.30-0.67]; OR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.31-0.98]; OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.32-0.76], respectively). The concentration of CRP in the control group was significantly higher than that in the ERAS group on postoperative day 5 (WMD -21.68; 95% CI -29.30 to -14.05). Time to first flatus (WMD -0.93; 95% CI -1.41 to -0.46) was significantly shortened in the ERAS group.The evidence indicates that ERAS following liver surgery is safe, effective, and feasible. Therefore, further are essential for optimizing the ERAS protocols.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in Laparoscopic Surgery

BACKGROUND

As part of an effort to maximize value in the perioperative setting, a paradigm shift is underway in the way that patients are cared for preoperatively, on the day of surgery, and postoperatively-a setting collectively known as the perioperative care. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS^®) is an evidence-based, patient-centered team approach to delivering high-quality perioperative care to surgical patients.

METHODS

This review focuses on anesthesiologists, with their unique purview of perioperative setting, who are important drivers of change in the delivery of valuable perioperative care. ERAS care pathways begin in the preoperative setting by both preparing the patient for the psychological stress of surgery and optimizing the patient's medical and physiologic status so the body is ready for the physical demands of surgery.

RESULTS

Minimization of perioperative fasting is important to maintain volume status-decreasing reliance on intravenous fluid administration, and to reduce protein catabolism around the time of surgery. Intraoperative management in ERAS pathways relies on goal-directed fluid therapy and opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia. Postoperatively, early feeding and ambulation, as well as discontinuation of extraneous lines and catheters facilitate patients' functional recovery.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach to surgery, when possible, compliments ERAS techniques by reducing abdominal wall trauma and the resultant milieu of inflammatory, neurohumoral, and pain responses. Anesthesiologists driving change in the perioperative setting, in collaboration with surgeons and other disciplines, can improve value in healthcare and provide optimal outcomes that matter most to patients and healthcare providers alike.

Enhanced recovery after surgery program reduces length of hospital stay and complications in liver resection: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Many enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines have already been established in several kinds of surgeries. But due to concerns of the specific complications, it has not yet been considered the standard of care in liver surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to assess the effect of ERAS in patients undergoing liver surgery.

METHODS

EMBASE, CNKI, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERAS with conventional care in patients undergoing liver surgery. Subgroup meta-analysis between laparoscopic and open surgical approaches to liver resection was also conducted.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs were included, representing 996 patients. Length of stay (LOS) (MD -3.17, 95% CI: -3.99 to -2.35, P < .00001, I = 89%) and time to first flatus (MD -0.9, 95% CI: -1.36 to -0.45, P = .0001, I = 98%) were both reduced in the ERAS group. There were also fewer complications in the ERAS group (OR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.37-0.72, P < .0001, I = 0%).

CONCLUSION

The ERAS program can obviously enhance short-term recovery after liver resection. It is safe and worthwhile. A specific ERAS guideline for liver resection is recommended.

Assessing pre- and postoperative activity levels with an accelerometer: a proof of concept study

Background

Postoperative recovery after abdominal surgery is measured mostly based on subjective or self-reported data. In this article we aim to evaluate whether recovery of daily physical activity levels can be measured postoperatively with the use of an accelerometer.

Methods

In this multicenter, observational pilot study, 30 patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominal surgery (hysterectomy, adnexal surgery, cholecystectomy and hernia inguinal surgery) were included. Patients were instructed to wear an Actigraph wGT3X-BT accelerometer during one week before surgery (baseline) and during the first, third and fifth week after surgery. Wear time, steps taken and physical activity intensity levels (sedentary, light, moderate and vigorous) were measured. Patients were blinded for the accelerometer outcomes. Additionally, an activity diary comprising patients’ self-reported time of being recovered and a list of 18 activities, in which the dates of resumption of these 18 activities were recorded after surgery, was completed by the patient.

Results

Five patients were excluded from analyses because of technical problems with the accelerometer (n = 1) and protocol non-adherence (n = 4). Light, moderate, vigorous, combined moderate and vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA), and step counts showed a clear recovery curve after surgery. Patients who underwent minor surgery reached their baseline step count and MVPA three weeks after surgery. Patients who underwent intermediate surgery had not yet reached their baseline step count during the last measuring week (five weeks after surgery). The results of the activity diaries showed a fair agreement with the accelerometer results (Cohens Kappa range: 0.273-0.391). Wearing the accelerometer was well tolerated and not regarded as being burdensome by the patients.

Conclusions

The accelerometer appeared to be a feasible way to measure recovery of postoperative physical activity levels in this study and was well tolerated by the patients. The agreement with self-reported physical recovery times was fair.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12893-017-0223-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Development of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: results of the first 120 consecutive cases from a university hospital

The ERAS^® represents a dynamic culmination of upon perioperative care elements, successfully applied to different surgical specialties with shorter hospital stay and lower morbidity rates. The aim of this study is to describe the introduction of the ERAS protocol in colorectal surgery in our hospital analysing our first series. Between September 2014 and June 2016, 120 patients suffering from colorectal diseases were included in the study. Laparoscopic approach was used in all patients if not contraindicated. Patients were discharged when adequate mobilization, canalization, and pain control were obtained. Analysed outcomes were: length of hospital stay, readmission rate, perioperative morbidity, and mortality. Malignant lesions were the most common indication (84.2%; 101/120). Laparoscopic approach was performed in the 95.8% of cases (115/120) with a conversion rate of 4.4% (5/115). Surgical procedures performed were: 36 rectal resections (30%), 36 left colonic resections (30%), 42 right hemicolectomy (35%), and 6 Miles (5%). The median hospital stay was of 4 (3-34) days in the whole series with a morbidity rate of 10% (12/120); four patients experienced Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa complications; and only one anastomotic leak was observed. No 30-day readmission and no perioperative mortality were recorded. At the univariate analysis, the presence of complications was the only predictive factor for prolonged hospital stay (p < 0.001). In our experience, implementation of ERAS protocol for colorectal surgery allows a significant reduction of hospital stay improving perioperative management and postoperative outcomes.

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Programs for Liver Resection: a Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Due to the limited number of high-quality randomized controlled trials on enhanced recovery after surgery for hepatectomy, previous reviews have not been sufficiently comprehensive. Our objectives were to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery programs and traditional care in patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery and to assess the optimized items for hepatectomy.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases for all the relevant studies regardless of study design. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies and excluded studies of poor quality. We performed a meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

In total, 19 original studies with 2575 patients, including four randomized controlled trials and 15 non-randomized controlled trials, were analyzed. The meta-analysis demonstrated that enhanced recovery after surgery programs could reduce morbidity, hospital stays and cost, blood loss, and time to bowel function recovery for both open and laparoscopic surgery without increasing mortality, readmission rate, or transfusion rate. Twelve items were essential for liver surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs for hepatectomy are feasible and efficient. Further studies should optimize perioperative outcomes for liver surgery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs versus traditional perioperative care in laparoscopic hepatectomy: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are a series of measures being taken during the perioperation to alleviate surgical stress and accelerate the recovery rate of patients. Although several studies reported the efficacy of ERAS in liver surgery, the role of ERAS in laparoscopic hepatectomy is still unclear. This meta-analysis is aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ERAS programs versus traditional care in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wang Fang Database and VIP Database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or clinical controlled trials (CCTs) concerning using ERAS in laparoscopic hepatectomy. Data collection ended in June 1st, 2016. The main end points were intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, operative time, the cost of hospitalization, time to first flatus, the time to first diet after surgery, duration of postoperative hospital stay, total postoperative complication rate, gradeⅠcomplication rate, grade Ⅱ-Ⅴcomplication rate.

RESULTS

8 studies with 580 patients were eligible for analysis. There were 292 cases in ERAS group and 288 cases in traditional perioperative care (CTL) group. Compared with CTL group, ERAS group was associated with significantly accelerated of time to first diet after surgery (SMD = -1.79, 95%CI: -3.19 ∼ -0.38, P = 0.01), time to first flatus (MD = -0.51, 95%CI: -0.91 ∼ -0.12, P = 0.01). Meanwhile, it was associated with significantly decreased of duration of the postoperative hospital stay (MD = -3.31, 95%CI: -3.95 ∼ -2.67, P < 0.00001), cost of hospitalization (MD = -1.0, 95%CI: -1.49 ∼ -0.51, P < 0.0001), total postoperative complication rate (OR = 0.34, 95%CI: 0.15-0.75, P = 0.008), gradeⅠcomplication rate (OR = 0.37, 95%CI: 0.22-0.64, P = 0.0003) and gradeⅡ-Ⅴcomplication rate (OR = 0.49, 95%CI: 0.32-0.77, P = 0.002). Whereas there was no significantly difference in intraoperative blood loss (P > 0.05), intraoperative blood transfusion (P > 0.05), operative time (P > 0.05) between ERAS group and CTL group.

CONCLUSION

Application of ERAS in laparoscopic hepatectomy is safe and effective, and it could accelerate the postoperative recovery and lighten the financial burden of patients.