Safety and feasibility of an enhanced recovery pathway after a liver resection: prospective cohort study

Utilizing risk-stratified pathways to personalize post-hepatectomy discharge planning: A contemporary analysis of 1,354 patients

BACKGROUND

While risk-stratified post-hepatectomy pathways (RSPHPs) reduce length-of-stay, can they stratify hepatectomy patients by risk of early postoperative events.

METHODS

90-day outcomes from consecutive hepatectomies were analyzed (1/1/2017-12/31/2021). Pre/post-pathway analysis was performed for pathways: minimally invasive surgery ("MIS"); non-anatomic resection/left hepatectomy ("low-intermediate risk"); right/extended hepatectomy ("high-risk"); "Combination" operations. Time-to-event (TTE) analyses for readmission and interventional radiology procedures (IRPs) was performed.

RESULTS

1354 patients were included: MIS/n= ​119 (9 ​%); low-intermediate risk/n= ​443 (33 ​%); high-risk/n= ​328 (24 ​%); Combination/n= ​464 (34 ​%). There was no difference in readmission (pre: 13 ​% vs. post:11.5 ​%, p ​= ​0.398). There were fewer readmissions in post-pathway patients amongst MIS, low-intermediate risk, and Combination patients (all p ​> ​0.1). 114 (8.4 ​%) patients required IRPs. Time-to-readmission and time-to-IR-procedure plots demonstrated lower plateaus and flatter slopes for MIS/low-intermediate-risk pathways post-pathway implementation (p ​< ​0.001).

CONCLUSION

RSPHPs can reliably stratify patients by risks of readmission or need for an IR procedure by predicting the most frequent period for these events.

Risk factors for failure to rescue after hepatectomy in a high-volume UK tertiary referral center

BACKGROUND

Mortality after severe complications after hepatectomy (failure to rescue) is strongly linked to center volume. The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for failure to rescue after hepatectomy in a high-volume center.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 1,826 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy from 2011 to 2018. The primary outcome was a 90-day failure to rescue, defined as death within 90 days posthepatectomy after a severe (Clavien-Dindo grade 3+) complication. Risk factors for 90-day failure to rescue were evaluated using a multivariable binary logistic regression model.

RESULTS

The cohort had a median age of 65.3 years, and 56.6% of patients were male. The commonest indication for hepatectomy was colorectal metastasis (58.9%), and 46.9% of patients underwent major or extra-major hepatectomy. Severe complications developed in 209 patients (11.4%), for whom the 30- and 90-day failure to rescue rates were 17.0% and 35.4%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, increasing age (P = .006) and modified Frailty Index (P = .044), complication type (medical or combined medical/surgical versus surgical; P < .001), and body mass index (P = .018) were found to be significant independent predictors of 90-day failure to rescue.

CONCLUSION

Older and frail patients who experience medical complications are particularly at risk of failure to rescue after hepatectomy. These results may inform preoperative counseling and may help to identify candidates for prehabilitation. Further study is needed to assess whether failure to rescue rates could be reduced by perioperative interventions.

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.

Individual components of post-hepatectomy care pathways have differential impacts on length of stay

BACKGROUND

The value of individual variable contributions to post-hepatectomy length of stay (LOS) are difficult to quantify within bundled care pathways.

METHODS

Poisson regression and marginal effects models for prolonged post-hepatectomy LOS (>25% median) included Kawaguchi-Gayet (KG) complexity, perioperative variables, and pathways (minimally-invasive = MIS; low-intermediate-risk = KGI/II; high-risk = KGIII; combination).

RESULTS

Median LOS was 2, 4, 5, and 5 days for MIS, KGI/II, KGIII and combination pathways (N = 978). Poisson regression identified age, intraoperative fluids, delayed diet tolerance, and combination cases as associated with increased LOS (p < 0.01). Marginal effects analysis demonstrated the following added probability of longer LOS: each year of age 0.03x, 250 mL intraoperative fluids 0.06x, each operative hour 0.2x, additional day before diet tolerance 0.4x, combination cases 0.7x. MIS was associated with 1.2x increased probability of shorter LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimizing intraoperative fluids, operative time, and postoperative diet, while favoring MIS approach when feasible, may maximize effects of post-hepatectomy care pathways to reduce LOS.

Current evidence on posthepatectomy liver failure: comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Despite important advances in many areas of hepatobiliary surgical practice during the past decades, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) still represents an important clinical challenge for the hepatobiliary surgeon. The aim of this review is to present the current body of evidence regarding different aspects of PHLF.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted to identify relevant articles for each topic of PHLF covered in this review. The literature search was performed using Medical Subject Heading terms on PubMed for articles on PHLF in English until May 2022.

RESULTS

Uniform reporting on PHLF is lacking due to the use of various definitions in the literature. There is no consensus on optimal preoperative assessment before major hepatectomy to avoid PHLF, although many try to estimate future liver remnant function. Once PHLF occurs, there is still no effective treatment, except liver transplantation, where the reported experience is limited.

DISCUSSION

Strict adherence to one definition is advised when reporting data on PHLF. The use of the International Study Group of Liver Surgery criteria of PHLF is recommended. There is still no widespread established method for future liver remnant function assessment. Liver transplantation is currently the only effective way to treat severe, intractable PHLF, but for many indications, this treatment is not available in most countries.

Effect of enteral ecoimmunonutrition support for patients undergoing hepatectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Whether to conduct enteral ecoimmunonutrition (EEIN) in patients undergoing hepatectomy remains controversial. This study aimed to systematically explore the efficacy and safety of EEIN in patients undergoing hepatectomy.

SUBJECT

We performed searches in the Embase, PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang databases.

RESULTS

A total of 9 randomized controlled trials (705 patients) were included. The meta-analysis revealed a significantly shorter time to first postoperative flatus (h) (MD, -14.60; 95% CI, -16.06~-13.15; P < 0.00001); lower levels of alanine aminotransferase (µmol/L) (MD, -22.26; 95% CI, -28.42~-16.10; P < 0.00001), aspartate transaminase (µmol/L) (MD, -53.79; 95% CI, -57.37~-50.21; P < 0.00001), total bilirubin (µmol/L) (MD, -16.28; 95% CI, -17.77~-14.79; P < 0.00001), direct bilirubin (µmol/L) (MD, -8.77; 95% CI, -9.65~-7.88; P < 0.00001), endotoxin (ng/L) (MD, -0.78; 95% CI, -0.88~-0.68; P < 0.00001), tumor necrosis factor-α (pg/ml) (MD, -79.69; 95% CI, -99.90~-59.49; P < 0.00001), and interleukin-6 (pg/ml) (MD, -46.29; 95% CI, -50.24~-42.34; P < 0.00001); and higher levels of immunoglobulin A (g/L) (MD, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14~0.35; P < 0.00001), immunoglobulin G (g/L) (MD, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.22~1.82; P < 0.00001), and immunoglobulin M (g/L) (MD, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.05~0.20; P = 0.0007) in the EEIN group than in the enteral or parenteral nutrition (EN/PN) groups.

CONCLUSION

Enteral ecoimmunonutrition support in patients undergoing hepatectomy may effectively protect liver function, reduce serum endotoxin levels and inflammatory factors, improve the immune function of patients, and promote the recovery of postoperative gastrointestinal function, which is worthy of clinical application.

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.

Effect of rectus sheath block vs. spinal anaesthesia on time-to-readiness for hospital discharge after trans-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: A randomised trial

BACKGROUND

The role of spinal anaesthesia in patients having a transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in an enhanced recovery setting has never been investigated.

OBJECTIVE

We explored whether substituting a rectus sheath block (RSB) with spinal anaesthesia, as an adjunct to a general anaesthetic technique, influenced time-to-readiness for discharge in patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

DESIGN

Prospective randomised open blinded end-point (PROBE) study with two parallel groups.

SETTING

Tertiary University Hospital.

PATIENTS

Ninety-seven patients undergoing a trans-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

INTERVENTION

Patients (n=52) were randomly assigned to receive a general anaesthetic and a surgical RSB with 2 mg kg-1 of levobupivacaine at the time of surgical closure or a spinal anaesthetic with hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg and diamorphine 0.5 mg (n=45) before general anaesthesia.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

The primary outcome was the time-to-readiness for discharge following surgery.

RESULTS

Median [IQR] times-to-readiness for discharge were 75 [56 to 83] and 79 [67 to 101] h for RSB and spinal anaesthesia and there was no significant difference in times-to-readiness for discharge (median difference 4 (95% CI, 0 to 20h; P  = 0.07)). There were no significant differences in pain scores at rest (P  = 0.91) or on movement (P = 0.66). Median 24-h oxycodone consumptions were similar (P  = 0.80). Nausea and vomiting scores were similar (P = 0.57) and urinary retention occurred in one vs. four patients with RSB and spinal anaesthesia, respectively (P  = 0.077).

CONCLUSION

Substitution of RSB with spinal anaesthesia using 12.5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine and 0.5 mg diamorphine, together with a general anaesthetic failed to confer any benefit on time-to-discharge readiness following transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. RSB provided similar analgesia in the immediate postoperative period with a low frequency of side-effects in this cohort.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT02700217.

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.

The Safety and Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Bilateral Dual Transversus Abdominis Plane (BD-TAP) Block in ERAS Program of Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Blinded, Clinical Study

Purpose

Postoperative pain management for patients undergoing hepatic resection is still a challenge due to the risk of perioperative liver dysfunction. The transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is a promising regional analgesic technique. However, the correct guidelines regarding the dose and regimen of local anesthetics in patients undergoing hepatic resection have yet to be established completely. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided BD-TAP block with a large dose of ropivacaine in laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Patients and Methods

This prospective, blinded, randomized, controlled study was conducted with 50 patients who were scheduled for selective laparoscopic hepatectomy. Patients who received a BD-TAP block (3 mg/kg of ropivacaine diluted to 60 mL) with general anesthesia were categorized into the BD-TAP block group (n = 25), and those who received general anesthesia were categorized into the control group (n = 25). The primary outcomes were consumption of sufentanil within 48 hours post-operation and plasma ropivacaine concentration. The secondary outcomes were the severity of pain (at rest and upon coughing), nausea and/or vomiting, and quality of recovery.

Results

Compared with the control group, the patients in BD-TAP block group had a significant reduction of postoperative sufentanil consumption at 2 hours (P = 0.019), 24 hours (P = 0.001), and 48 hours (P = 0.001), and the visual analog scale (VAS) scores on coughing were significantly lower at postoperative 2 hours (P = 0.004). There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative nausea and/or vomiting, flatus, catheter removal, off-bed activity, liver function, or postoperative hospital stay. The mean peak total ropivacaine concentration was 1,067.85 ng/mL, which occurred 1 hour after administering the block, and mean free ropivacaine concentration was 52.32 ng/mL. The highest individual peak plasma concentration was 2,360.90 ng/mL at 45 min postinjection, and the free ropivacaine concentration was 139.29 ng/mL.

Conclusion

Ultrasound-guided BD-TAP block provides effective postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic hepatectomy. This study also confirms that ultrasound-guided BD-TAP blocks with 3 mg/kg ropivacaine during laparoscopic hepatectomy almost never results in the plasma ropivacaine concentrations associated with neurotoxicity.

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 (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.

Multicomponent hospital-led interventions to reduce hospital stay for older adults following elective surgery: a systematic review

Background

Elective older adult inpatient admissions are increasingly common. Older adults are at an elevated risk of adverse events in hospital, potentially increasing with lengthier hospital stay. Hospital-led organisational strategies may optimise hospital stay for elective older adult inpatients.

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-led multicomponent interventions to reduce hospital stay for older adults undergoing elective hospital admissions.

Data sources

Seven bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Health Management Information Consortium, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database) were searched from inception to date of search (August 2017), alongside carrying out of web searches, citation searching, inspecting relevant reviews, consulting stakeholders and contacting authors. This search was duplicated, with an additional cost-filter, to identify cost-effectiveness evidence.

Review methods

Comparative studies were sought that evaluated the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of relevant interventions in elective inpatients with a mean or median age of ≥ 60 years. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were completed independently by two reviewers. The main outcome was length of stay, but all outcomes were considered. Studies were sorted by procedure, intervention and outcome categories. Where possible, standardised mean differences or odds ratios were calculated. Meta-analysis was performed when multiple randomised controlled trials had the same intervention, treatment procedure, comparator and outcome. Findings were explored using narrative synthesis.

Findings

A total of 218 articles were included, with 80 articles from 73 effectiveness studies (n = 26,365 patients) prioritised for synthesis, including 34 randomised controlled trials conducted outside the UK and 39 studies from the UK, of which 12 were randomised controlled trials. Fifteen studies included cost-effectiveness data. The evidence was dominated by enhanced recovery protocols and prehabilitation, implemented to improve recovery from either colorectal surgery or lower limb arthroplasty. Six other surgical categories and four other intervention types were identified. Meta-analysis found that enhanced recovery protocols were associated with 1.5 days’ reduction in hospital stay among patients undergoing colorectal surgery (Cohen’sd = –0.51, 95% confidence interval –0.78 to –0.24;p < 0.001) and with 5 days’ reduction among those undergoing upper abdominal surgery (Cohen’sd = –1.04, 95% confidence interval –1.55 to –0.53;p < 0.001). Evidence from the UK was not pooled (owing to mixed study designs), but it echoed findings from the international literature. Length of stay usually was reduced with intervention or was no different. Other clinical outcomes also improved or were no worse with intervention. Patient-reported outcomes were not frequently reported. Cost and cost-effectiveness evidence came from 15 highly heterogeneous studies and was less conclusive.

Limitations

Studies were usually of moderate or weak quality. Some intervention or treatment types were under-reported or absent. The reporting of variance data often precluded secondary analysis.

Conclusions

Enhanced recovery and prehabilitation interventions were associated with reduced hospital stay without detriment to other clinical outcomes, particularly for patients undergoing colorectal surgery, lower limb arthroplasty or upper abdominal surgery. The impacts on patient-reported outcomes, health-care costs or additional service use are not well known.

Future work

Further studies evaluating of the effectiveness of new enhanced recovery pathways are not required in colorectal surgery or lower limb arthroplasty. However, the applicability of these pathways to other procedures is uncertain. Future studies should evaluate the implementation of interventions to reduce service variation, in-hospital patient-reported outcomes, impacts on health and social care service use, and longer-term patient-reported outcomes.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017080637.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Propensity-matched analysis of the influence of perioperative statin therapy on outcomes after liver resection

Background

Perioperative use of statins is reported to improve postoperative outcomes after cardiac and non‐cardiovascular surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of statins on postoperative outcomes including complications of grade IIIa and above, posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), and 90‐day mortality rates after liver resection.

Methods

Patients who underwent hepatectomy between 2013 and 2017 were reviewed to identify statin users and non‐users (controls). Propensity matching was conducted for age, BMI, type of surgery and preoperative co‐morbidities to compare subgroups. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed for the following outcomes: 90‐day mortality, significant postoperative complications and PHLF.

Results

Of 890 patients who had liver resection during the study period, 162 (18·2 per cent) were taking perioperative statins. Propensity analysis selected two matched groups, each comprising 154 patients. Overall, 81 patients (9·1 per cent) developed complications of grade IIIa or above, and the 90‐day mortality rate was 3·4 per cent (30 patients), with no statistically significant difference when the groups were compared before and after matching. The rate of PHLF was significantly lower in patients on perioperative statins than in those not taking statins (10·5 versus 17·3 per cent respectively; P = 0·033); similar results were found after propensity matching (10·4 versus 20·8 per cent respectively; P = 0·026).

Conclusion

The rate of PHLF was significantly lower in patients taking perioperative statins, but there was no statistically significant difference in severe complications and mortality rates.

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.

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.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Program in Liver Surgery

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown to ease the postoperative recovery and improve clinical outcomes for various surgery types. ERAS cost-effectiveness was demonstrated for colorectal surgery but not for liver surgery. The present study aim was to analyze the implementation costs and benefits of a specific ERAS program in liver surgery.

METHODS

A dedicated ERAS protocol for liver surgery was implemented in our department in July 2013. The subsequent year all consecutive patients undergoing liver surgery were treated according to this protocol (ERAS group). They were compared in terms of real in-hospital costs with a patient series before ERAS implementation (pre-ERAS group). Mean costs per patient were compared with a bootstrap T test. A cost-minimization analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Seventy-four ERAS patients were compared with 100 pre-ERAS patients. There were no significant pre- and intraoperative differences between the two groups, except for the laparoscopy number (n = 18 ERAS, n = 9 pre-ERAS, p = 0.010). Overall postoperative complications were observed in 36 (49 %) and 64 patients (64 %) in the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups, respectively (p = 0.046). The median length of stay was significantly shorter for the ERAS group (8 vs. 10 days, p = 0.006). The total mean costs per patient were €38,726 and €42,356 for ERAS and pre-ERAS (p = 0.467). The cost-minimization analysis showed a total mean cost reduction of €3080 per patient after ERAS implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS implementation for liver surgery induced a non-significant decrease in cost compared to standard care. Significant decreased complication rate and hospital stay were observed in the ERAS group.

Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols on postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing routine hepatectomy: review of the current evidence

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery protocols are widely used in many areas of general surgery but had a limited penetration in perioperative management of patients undergoing liver resection. Recently, multiple publications described application of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program to hepatectomy patients but their definitive role is not established or accepted by hepatobiliary surgeons.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review of published series in English language medical sources detailing ERAS program application for hepatectomy for the period of 2006-2016 is performed.

RESULTS

ERAS protocols are feasible and safe. They reduce length of stay in patients undergoing routine hepatectomy without negative impact on morbidity and mortality. There is potential for reduction of Clavien grade I-II complications, while major and surgical complications are similar to traditional care management group.

CONCLUSIONS

Application of ERAS program to patient undergoing hepatectomy reduces length of hospital stay without affecting perioperative morbidity or mortality and may represent a new standard of care for patients undergoing routine liver resection.

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.

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.

Implementation of Enhanced Recovery (ERAS) in Colorectal Surgery Has a Positive Impact on Non-ERAS Liver Surgery Patients

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) reduces complications and hospital stay in colorectal surgery. Thereafter, ERAS principles were extended to liver surgery. Previous implementation of an ERAS program in colorectal surgery may influence patients undergoing liver surgery in a non-ERAS setting, on the same ward. This study aimed to test this hypothesis.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis based on prospective data of the adherence to the institutional ERAS-liver protocol (compliance) in three cohorts of consecutive patients undergoing elective liver surgery, between June 2010 and July 2014: before any ERAS implementation (pre-ERAS n = 50), after implementation of ERAS in colorectal (intermediate n = 50), and after implementation of ERAS in liver surgery (ERAS-liver n = 74). Outcomes were functional recovery, postoperative complications, hospital stay, and readmissions.

RESULTS

The three groups were comparable for demographics; laparoscopy was more frequent in ERAS-liver (p = 0.009). Compliance with the enhanced recovery protocol increased along the three periods (pre-ERAS, intermediate, and ERAS-liver), regardless of the perioperative phase (pre-, intra-, or postoperative). ERAS-liver group displayed the highest overall compliance rate with 73.8 %, compared to 39.9 and 57.4 % for pre-ERAS and intermediate groups (p = 0.072/0.056). Overall complications were unchanged (p = 0.185), whereas intermediate and ERAS-liver groups showed decreased major complications (p = 0.034). Consistently, hospital stay was reduced by 2 days (p = 0.005) without increased readmissions (p = 0.158).

CONCLUSIONS

The previous implementation of an ERAS protocol in colorectal surgery may induce a positive impact on patients undergoing non-ERAS-liver surgery on the same ward. These results suggest that ERAS is safely applicable in liver surgery and associated with benefits.

Adherence to early mobilisation: Key for successful enhanced recovery after liver resection

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) has been proven effective in liver surgery. Adherence to the ERAS pathway is variable. This study seeks to evaluate adherence to key components of an ERAS protocol in liver resection, and identify the components associated with successful clinical outcomes.

METHOD

All patients undergoing liver resections for two consecutive years were included in our ERAS pathway. Six key components of ERAS included preoperative assessment, nutrition and gastrointestinal function, postoperative analgesia, mobilisation and discharges. Successful accomplishment of ERAS was defined as hospital discharge by postop day (POD) 6. Adherences of these elements were compared between the successful and un-successful groups.

RESULTS

During the studied period, 223 patients underwent liver resections, among which 103 had major hepatectomies. N = 147 patients (66%) were discharged within our ERAS protocol target (6 days). On multivariable analysis, sitting out of bed by POD 1 (p < 0.03), walking by POD 3 (p = 0.03), removal of urinary catheter by POD 3 (p < 0.01), and avoiding major complications (p < 0.01) were factors associated with successful completion to our ERAS protocol; whereas advanced age (p = 0.34) and discontinuation of PCA/epidural by POD 3 (p = 0.50) were not significant parameters. There was a significant difference in the length of stay (p < 0.01) following major and minor liver resection, of which the indications for surgery also varied significantly. There was no difference in hospital re-admission rate, and morbidity and mortality between major and minor liver resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Facilitating early mobilisation and reducing postoperative complications are keys to successful outcomes of ERAS in liver resection.

Present and future role of surgery in metastatic gastrointestinal malignancies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Metastases from gastrointestinal malignancies are systemic or abdominal disseminations of cancer cells. From a biological perspective surgical resections are questionable but case series show that for some tumour types, surgery influences survival outcome. This review focuses on management and indications for surgery in recent literature of these metastatic gastrointestinal malignancies.

RECENT FINDINGS

A few gastrointestinal malignancies have emerged to be candidates for surgery in case of metastatic disease. Surgery can be considered in selected cases with liver metastases or abdominal dissemination of colorectal cancer, metastases from gastrointestinal stromal tumours or neuroendocrine tumours. On the contrary, recent publications do not support surgery for metastatic disease of any other gastrointestinal origin. The literature has ample examples of small series and anecdotal cases of successful surgical interventions for most tumour types but no new evidence has been presented to support broader indications for surgery.

SUMMARY

The evidence base for surgery of different metastatic gastrointestinal malignancies is unchanged. There are some clarifications when to perform surgery and the timing of surgery in regard to combined treatments. No new tumour types are added to potential candidates for surgery.