Fast track program in liver resection: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

Implementation of an ERAS protocol on cirrhotic patients in liver resection: a cohort study

The development of laparoscopic liver surgery, the improvement in the perioperative care programs, and the surgical innovation have allowed liver resections on selected cirrhotic patients. However, the great majority of ERAS studies for liver surgery have been conducted on patients with normal liver parenchyma, while its application on cirrhotic patients is limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of an ERAS protocol in cirrhotic patients who underwent liver surgery. We present an analytical observational prospective cohort study, which included all adult patients who underwent a liver resection between December 2017 and December 2019 with an ERAS program. We compare the outcomes in patients cirrhotic (CG)/non-cirrhotic (NCG). A total of 101 patients were included. Thirty of these (29.7%) were patients ≥ 70 cirrhotic. 87% of the both groups had performed > 70% of the ERAS. Oral diet tolerance and mobilization on the first postoperative day were similar in both groups. The hospital stay was similar in both groups (2.9 days/2.99 days). Morbidity and mortality were similar; Clavien I-II (CG: 44% vs NCG: 30%) and Clavien ≥ III (CG: 3% vs NCG: 8%). Hospital re-entry was higher in the NCG. Overall mortality of the study was 1%. ERAS protocol compliance was associated with a decrease in complications (ERAS < 70%: 80% vs ERAS > 90%: 20%; p: 0.02) and decrease in severity of complications in both study groups. The application of the ERAS program in cirrhotic patients who undergo liver surgery is feasible, safe, and reproducible. It allows postoperative complications, mortality, hospital stay, and readmission rates comparable to those in standard patients.

Amino acid metabolomics and machine learning for assessment of post-hepatectomy liver regeneration

Objective

Amino acid (AA) metabolism plays a vital role in liver regeneration. However, its measuring utility for post-hepatectomy liver regeneration under different conditions remains unclear. We aimed to combine machine learning (ML) models with AA metabolomics to assess liver regeneration in health and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH).

Methods

The liver index (liver weight/body weight) was calculated following 70% hepatectomy in healthy and NASH mice. The serum levels of 39 amino acids were measured using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis. We used orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis to determine differential AAs and disturbed metabolic pathways during liver regeneration. The SHapley Additive exPlanations algorithm was performed to identify potential AA signatures, and five ML models including least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, random forest, K-nearest neighbor (KNN), support vector regression, and extreme gradient boosting were utilized to assess the liver index.

Results

Eleven and twenty-two differential AAs were identified in the healthy and NASH groups, respectively. Among these metabolites, arginine and proline metabolism were commonly disturbed metabolic pathways related to liver regeneration in both groups. Five AA signatures were identified, including hydroxylysine, L-serine, 3-methylhistidine, L-tyrosine, and homocitrulline in healthy group, and L-arginine, 2-aminobutyric acid, sarcosine, beta-alanine, and L-cysteine in NASH group. The KNN model demonstrated the best evaluation performance with mean absolute error, root mean square error, and coefficient of determination values of 0.0037, 0.0047, 0.79 and 0.0028, 0.0034, 0.71 for the healthy and NASH groups, respectively.

Conclusion

The KNN model based on five AA signatures performed best, which suggests that it may be a valuable tool for assessing post-hepatectomy liver regeneration in health and NASH.

Predictive value of C-reactive protein for postoperative liver-specific surgical site infections

BACKGROUND

C-reactive protein is a useful biological tool to predict infectious complications, but its predictive value in detecting organ-specific surgical site infection after liver resection has never been studied. We aimed to evaluate the predictive value of c-reactive protein and determine the cut-off values to detect postoperative liver resection-surgical site infection.

METHODS

A multicentric analysis of consecutive patients with liver resection between 2018 and 2021 was performed. The predictive value of postoperative day 1, postoperative day 3, and postoperative day 5 C-reactive protein levels was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Cut-off values were determined using the Youden index in a 500-fold bootstrap resampling of 500 patients treated at 3 centers, who comprised the development cohort and were tested in an external independent validation cohort of 166 patients at a fourth center.

RESULTS

Among the 500 patients who underwent liver resection of the development cohort, liver resection-surgical site infection occurred in 66 patients (13.2%), and the median time to diagnosis was 6.0 days (interquartile range, 4.0-9.0) days. Median C-reactive protein levels were significantly higher on postoperative day 1, postoperative day 3, and postoperative day 5 in the liver resection-surgical site infection group compared with the non-surgical site infection group (50.5 vs 34.5 ng/mL, 148.0 vs 72.5 ng/mL, and 128.4 vs 35.2 ng/mL, respectively; P < .001). Postoperative day 3 and postoperative day 5 C-reactive protein-level area under the curve values were 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.88, P < .001) and 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.92, P < .001), respectively. Postoperative day 3 and postoperative day 5 optimal cut-off values of 100 mg/L and 87.0 mg/L could be used to rule out liver resection-surgical site infection, with a negative predictive value of 87.0% (interquartile range, 70.2-93.8) and 76.0% (interquartile range, 65.0-88.0), respectively, in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative day 3 and postoperative day 5 C-reactive protein levels may be valuable predictive tools for liver resection-surgical site infection and aid in hospital discharge decision-making in the absence of other liver-related complications.

Robotic colorectal resection in combination with a multimodal enhanced recovery program - results of the first 100 cases

PURPOSE

In Germany, colorectal robot-assisted surgery (RAS) has found its way and is currently used as primary technique in colorectal resections at our clinic. We investigated whether RAS can be extensively combined with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) in a large prospective patient group.

METHODS

Using the DaVinci Xi surgical robot, all colorectal RAS from 09/2020 to 01/2022 were incorporated into our ERAS® program. Perioperative data were prospectively recorded using a data documentation system. The extent of resection, duration of the operation, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate, and postoperative short-term results were analyzed. We documented the postoperative duration of Intermediate Care Unit (IMC) stay and major and minor complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, anastomotic leak rate, reoperation rate, hospital-stay length, and ERAS® guideline adherence.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (65 colon and 35 rectal resections) were included (median age: 69 years). The median durations of surgery were 167 min (colon resection) and 246 min (rectal resection). Postoperatively, four patients were IMC-treated (median stay: 1 day). In 92.5% of the colon and 88.6% of the rectum resections, no or minor complications occurred postoperatively. The anastomotic leak rate was 3.1% in colon and 5.7% in rectal resection. The reoperation rate was 7.7% (colon resection) and 11.4% (rectal resection). The hospital stay length was 5 days (colon resection) and 6.5 days (rectal resection). The ERAS® guideline adherence rate was 88% (colon resection) and 82.6% (rectal resection).

CONCLUSION

Patient perioperative therapy per the multimodal ERAS® concept is possible without any problems in colorectal RAS, leading to low morbidity and short hospital stays.

Short-Term Outcomes After Robotic Versus Open Liver Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic liver surgery is a novel technique expanding the field of minimally invasive approaches. An increasing number of studies assess the outcomes of robotic liver resections (RLR). The aim of our meta-analysis is to provide an up-to-date comparison of RLR versus open liver resections (OLR), evaluating its safety and efficacy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov for articles published from January 2000 until January 2022 was undertaken.

RESULTS

Thirteen non-randomized retrospective and one prospective clinical study enlisting 1801 patients met our inclusion criteria, with 640 patients undergoing RLR and 1161 undergoing OLR. RLR resulted in significantly lower overall morbidity (p < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (p = 0.002), and less intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001). Operative time was found to be significantly higher in the RLR group (p < 0.001). Blood transfusion requirements, R0 resection, and mortality rates presented no difference among the two groups. The cumulative rate of conversion was 5% in the RLR group.

CONCLUSION

The increasing experience in the implementation of the robot will undoubtedly generate more prospective randomized studies, necessary to assess its potential superiority over the traditional open approach, in a variety of hepatic lesions.

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.

Implementation science approaches to enhance uptake of complex interventions in surgical settings

Achieving practice change in the complex healthcare environment is difficult. Effective surgical care requires coordination of services across the continuum of care, involving interdisciplinary collaboration across multiple units, with systems and processes that may not connect effectively. Principles of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are increasingly being incorporated into facility policies and practice, but the literature reports challenges with both initial adherence and mid- to long-term sustainability. Greatest adherence is typically observed for the intraoperative elements, which are within the control of a single discipline, with poorest adherence reported for postoperative processes occurring in the complex ward environment. Using ERAS as an example, this perspective piece describes the challenges associated with implementation of complex interventions in the surgical setting, highlighting the value that implementation science approaches can bring to practice change initiatives and providing recommendations as to suggested course of action for effective implementation.

[Enhanced recovery after surgery-Does the ERAS concept keep its promises]

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concepts or fast-track are supposed to accelerate recovery after surgery, reduce postoperative complications and shorten the hospital stay when compared to traditional perioperative treatment.

METHODS

Electronic search of the PubMed database to identify systematic reviews with meta-analysis (SR) comparing ERAS and traditional treatment.

RESULTS

The presented SR investigated 70 randomized controlled studies (RCT) with 12,986 patients and 93 non-RCT (24,335 patients) concerning abdominal, thoracic and vascular as well as orthopedic surgery. The complication rates were decreased under ERAS following colorectal esophageal, liver and pulmonary resections as well as after implantation of hip endoprostheses. Pulmonary complications were reduced after ERAS esophageal, gastric and pulmonary resections. The first bowel movements occurred earlier after ERAS colorectal resections and delayed gastric emptying was less often observed after ERAS pancreatic resection. Following ERAS fast-track esophageal resection, anastomotic leakage was diagnosed less often as well as surgical complications after ERAS pulmonary resection. The ERAS in all studies concerning orthopedic surgery and trials investigating implantation of a hip endoprosthesis or knee endoprosthesis reduced the risk for postoperative blood transfusions. Regardless of the type of surgery, ERAS shortened hospital stay without increasing readmissions.

CONCLUSION

Numerous clinical trials have confirmed that ERAS reduces postoperative morbidity, shortens hospital stay and accelerates recovery without increasing readmission rates following most surgical operations.

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.

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.

Analysis of the postoperative hemostatic profile of colorectal cancer patients subjected to liver metastasis resection surgery

BACKGROUND

Liver resection surgery has advanced greatly in recent years, and the adoption of fasttrack programs has yielded good results. Combination anesthesia (general anesthesia associated to epidural analgesia) is an anesthetic-analgesic strategy commonly used for the perioperative management of patients undergoing surgery of this kind, though there is controversy regarding the coagulation alterations it may cause and which can favor the development of spinal hematomas.

AIM

To study the postoperative course of liver resection surgery, an analysis was made of the outcomes of liver resection surgery due to colorectal cancer metastases in our centre in terms of morbiditymortality and hospital stay according to the anesthetic technique used (general vs combination anesthesia).

METHODS

A prospective study was made of 61 colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgery due to liver metastases under general and combination anesthesia between January 2014 and October 2015. The patient characteristics, intraoperative variables, postoperative complications, evolution of hemostatic parameters, and stay in intensive care and in hospital were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 61 patients were included in two homogeneous groups: general anesthesia (n = 30) and combination anesthesia (general anesthesia associated to epidural analgesia) (n = 31). All patients had normal coagulation values before surgery. The international normalized ratio (INR) in both the general and combination anesthesia groups reached maximum values at 2448 h (mean 1.37 and 1.45 vs 1.39 and 1.41, respectively), followed by a gradual decrease. There was less intraoperative bleeding in the combination anesthesia group (769 mL) than in the general anesthesia group (1200 mL) (P < 0.05). Of the 61 patients, 38.8% in the general anesthesia group experienced some respiratory complication vs 6.6% in the combination anesthesia group (P < 0.001). The time to gastrointestinal tolerance was significantly correlated to the type of anesthesia, though not so the stay in critical care or the time to hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION

Epidural analgesia in liver resection surgery was seen to be safe, with good results in terms of pain control and respiratory complications, and with no associated increase in complications secondary to altered hemostasis.

Enhanced Recovery in Liver Transplantation: A Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programmes after surgery are effective in reducing length of stay, functional recovery and complication rates in liver surgery (LS) with the indirect advantage of reducing hospitalisation costs. Preoperative comorbidities, challenging surgical procedures and complex post-operative management are the points that liver transplantation (LT) shares with LS. Nevertheless, there is little evidence regarding the feasibility and safety of ERAS programmes in LT.

METHODS

We designed a pilot, small-scale, feasibility study to assess the impact on hospital stay, protocol compliance and safety of an ERAS programme tailored for LT. The ERAS arm was compared with a 1:2 match paired control arm with similar characteristics. All patients with MELD <25 were included. A dedicated LT-tailored protocol was derived from publications on ERAS liver surgery.

RESULTS

Ten patients were included in the Fast-Trans arm. It was observed a 47% reduction of the total LOS, as compared to the control arm: 9.5 (9.0-10.5) days versus 18.0 (14.3-24.3) days, respectively, p <0.001. The protocol achieved 72.9% compliance. No differences were observed in terms of post-operative complications or readmission rates after discharge between the two arms. Overall, it was observed a reduction of length of stay in ICU and surgical ward in the Fast-Trans arm compared with the control arm.

CONCLUSION

Considered the main points in common between LS and LT, this small-scale study suggests that the application of an ERAS programme tailored to the LT setting is feasible. Further testing will be appropriate to generalise these findings.

Comparison between robotic and open liver resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes

Minimally invasive liver surgery has evolved significantly during the last 2 decades. A growing number of published studies report outcomes from robotic liver resections (RLR). The aim of our meta-analysis was to evaluate short-term outcomes after RLR vs. open liver resection (OLR). A systematic search of Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for articles published from January 2000 until November 2018 was performed. Ten non-randomized retrospective clinical studies comprising a total of 1248 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Four hundred and fifty-eight patients underwent RLR and 790 underwent OLR. RLRs were associated with lower overall morbidity rates (p =0.006) and shorter hospital stay (p <0.00001), whereas OLRs were associated with shorter operative time (p =0.003). No differences were shown between the two groups with regard to blood loss, blood transfusion requirements, R0 resection and mortality rates. Cumulative conversion rate was 4.6% in the RLR group. Due to limited available data, further prospective randomized studies are needed to better determine the potential beneficial role of the robotic approach in the treatment of malignant and benign hepatic tumors.

[Identical oncological results with lower perioperative morbidity after laparoscopic liver resection : Results of a matched pair analysis]

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver resection belongs to the standard repertoire in hepatobiliary surgery. The advantages and disadvantages are still the subject of controversial discussion.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open liver resections.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All patients who underwent liver resection in the Department of Surgery at the certified liver center of the  municipal hospital Karlsruhe were analyzed. From a total of 268 hepatic resections 65 laparoscopic liver resections were identified and matched 1:1 with 65 open resections, based primarily on the extent of the resection and secondarily on diagnosis, age and gender of the patients. The demographic data, comorbidities, perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Both groups had comparable demographic parameters and comorbidities. Operation time, duration of intensive care stay and percentage of negative resection margins were comparable in both groups. The 30-day mortality was 0% and 90-day mortality 1.5% in both groups. The laparoscopic group showed lower intraoperative and postoperative transfusion rates (p < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) and lower overall morbidity (p < 0.001). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall and tumor-free survival of patients with colorectal liver metastases was comparable (p = 0.984; p = 0.947). The same applied for patients with hepatocellular carcinomas (p = 0.803; p = 0.935).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic liver resections have identical long-term outcomes with lower overall morbidity. Laparoscopic liver resections offer advantages regarding transfusion rates, length of hospital stay and postoperative complications.

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.

Optimal perioperative care in peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma resection

Surgical resection remains the only proven curative treatment for peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Despite recent advances in liver surgery techniques and perioperative care, resection for peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma remains associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Considerable variation in the perioperative management of these patients exists. Optimal perioperative management has the potential to deliver improved outcomes. This article seeks to summarize the evidence underpinning best practice in the perioperative care of patients undergoing resection of peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma. The authors also seek to identify areas where research efforts and future clinical trials should be targeted.

The Effectiveness of a Clinical Pathway in Liver Surgery: a Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

In the field of liver surgery, evidence on the effectiveness of clinical pathways based on ERAS principles is limited.

METHODS

This is a single-center observational study from a prospectively maintained database. Two cohorts were formed of all patients undergoing liver surgery during a defined period before (traditional management) and after introduction of a clinical pathway. Additionally, a case-match analysis-based on approach, tumor location, and Brisbane classification of resection-was performed. A cost analysis and patient satisfaction questionnaire were carried out.

RESULTS

In both the overall analysis (n = 229) as well as the case-match analysis (n = 100), hospital stay was significantly reduced from 8 to 4 days and from 6.5 to 4 days, respectively (p < 0.05). Postoperative morbidity (traditional management 11/50 vs clinical pathway 5/50; p = 1.00) and readmission rate did not increase. Cost analysis showed a significant decrease in postoperative costs in favor of the clinical pathway (traditional management €3666.7 vs clinical pathway €1912.2; p < 0.001). Overall, 92.3% of the survey questions were answered with satisfied (86.0%) or very satisfied (6.3%).

DISCUSSION

Implementation of clinical pathway for liver surgery is feasible and safe. A clinical pathway significantly reduces hospital stay without increasing postoperative morbidity and readmission rates. Postoperative costs are significantly reduced. Patient satisfaction is high.

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.