Systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of deviations from a clinical pathway on outcomes following pancreatoduodenectomy

Use and impact of clinical pathways across various healthcare settings: A protocol for an umbrella review of global evidence

AIM

The proposed umbrella review aims to assess the use and impact of clinical pathways on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of hospital stay, hospital costs, patient satisfaction, and hospital staff satisfaction through a synthesis of existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

METHODS

Following PRIOR guidelines, a systematic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses, from inception till March 2024. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, with a third resolving any disagreements. Full-text articles considered potentially relevant will be assessed for eligibility by the same process. The data extraction form will cover information about the review methods, characteristics of the included primary studies, the types of interventions evaluated, and the reported outcomes. This standardized data extraction form will be piloted by the review team on five to ten articles to ensure all relevant information is recorded. The quality of included systematic reviews and meta-analyses will be evaluated using AMSTAR 2. PROSPERO registration number is CRD42024529371.

RESULTS

The study will present a narrative synthesis of the findings, addressing the clinical and methodological heterogeneity and assessing the impact of clinical pathways on various healthcare outcomes.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

This umbrella review will provide evidence-based insights into the effectiveness, challenges, and best practices of clinical pathways, guiding healthcare decision-making and identifying areas for future research. Results will be disseminated widely to inform policy and improve healthcare service delivery.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution, as this paper is a protocol of an umbrella review.

Can we "prehabilitate" pancreatic cancer patients prior to surgery? A critical appraisal of the literature

BACKGROUND

Enhancing a patient's functional capacity to withstand the surgical stress by means of multimodal (combined exercise, nutrition and psychological interventions) prehabilitation may potentially lead to improved outcomes in pancreatic cancer surgery.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review was undertaken searching PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library databases, exploring the impact of prehabilitation in pancreatic surgery. Outcomes of interest were adherence to the prehabilitation, functional capacity, overall complications and post-operative length of stay. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twelve studies comprising of 1497 patients were included in the review. Most of the studies seem to lack a multimodal approach. Less than 50 % of the studies reported adherence, which ranged between 27 and 100 %. Functional capacity, in terms of 6-min walk test, showed improvement with prehabilitation. Among the post-operative outcomes, prehabilitation was associated with significant improvement in pulmonary complications (2.4 % versus 6.7 %, RR 0.36, CI 0.17-0.74, p = 0.01, I2 = 28%). Prehabilitation was not effective in terms of length of stay or readmission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger studies with multimodal prehabilitation approaches may demonstrate more consistent and clinically meaningful benefits, which would lead to a firm appreciation of its role the management of pancreatic cancer patients undergoing surgery.

The Role of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery in Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare the safety and short-term outcomes of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) with standard care for patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) based on literature published following the first publication of ERAS guidelines for PD.

METHODS

Five medical databases were searched for studies that compared ERAS to standard care in adults undergoing PD. Data on postoperative complications, length of hospitalization, readmissions, and time to chemotherapy were analyzed using either a fixed- or random-effects model meta-analysis. Meta-regressions were conducted to investigate the role of operative technique, study origin, and study design.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 22 studies involving 4,043 patients. ERAS was associated with fewer complications (relative risk [RR]: 0.83; 0.75-0.91), particularly Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade 1 and 2 complications (RR: 0.82; 0.72-0.92), delayed gastric emptying (RR: 0.69; 0.52-0.93), and postoperative fistula (POPF) (RR: 0.76; 0.66-0.89), and a shorter time to chemotherapy (standardized mean difference [SMD]: -0.68; 95% CI: -0.88 to -0.48). ERAS did not affect the risk for CD grade 3 and 4 complications (RR: 1.00; 0.72-1.38), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (RR: 0.88; 0.67-1.14), length of stay (SMD: -0.56; 95% CI: -1.12 to 0.01), readmission (RR: 1.01; 0.84-1.21), and mortality (RR: 0.81; 0.54-1.22). The continent of origin was an effect moderator in the role of ERAS in CD grade 1 and 2 complications (p = 0.047) and POPF (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Implementing ERAS principles in PD improves surgical outcomes without compromising safety. ERAS may also accelerate time to chemotherapy, an essential issue for future research.

Global Perceptions on ERAS® in Pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Uptake of ERAS® pathways for pancreatic surgery have been slow and impacted by low compliance.

OBJECTIVE

To explore global awareness, perceptions and practice of ERAS® peri-pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

A structured, web-based survey (EPSILON) was administered through the ERAS® society and IHPBA membership.

RESULTS

The 140 respondents included predominantly males (86.4%), from Europe (45%), practicing surgery (95%) at academic/teaching hospitals (63.6%) over a period of 10-20 years (38.6%). Most respondents identified themselves as general surgeons (68.6%) with 40.7% reporting an annual PD volume of 20-50 cases, practicing post-PD clinical pathways (37.9%), with 31.4% of respondents auditing their outcomes annually. Reduced medical complications, cost and hospital length of stay, and improved patient satisfaction were perceived benefits of compliance to enhancing-recovery. Multidisciplinary co-ordination was considered the most important factor in the implementation and sustainability of peri-PD ERAS® pathways, while reluctance to change among health care practitioners, difficulties in data collection and audit, lack of administrative support, and recruitment of an ERAS® dedicated nurse were reported to be important barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

The EPSILON survey highlighted global clinician perceptions regarding the benefits of compliance to peri-PD ERAS®, the importance of individual components, perceived facilitators and barriers, to the implementation and sustainability of these pathways.

Enhancing the cost-effectiveness of surgical care in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and cost meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical pathways (CP) based on Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) are increasingly utilised in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). This systematic review aimed to compare the impact of CPs versus conventional care (CC) on peri-PD costs.

METHODS

A systematic review of major reference databases was undertaken. Quality assessment was performed using the CHEERS checklist. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated as part of the cost-effectiveness analysis. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models and Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to assess the precision and conclusiveness of the results.

RESULTS

14 studies meeting inclusion criteria were included for full qualitative synthesis. All studies reported a reduction in overall costs, length of stay and overall complication rates for CPs when compared to CC. Meta-analysis performed on nine studies demonstrated significantly reduced costs in the CP group, with considerable heterogeneity (Pooled mean difference of $ 4.28 × 10³, p < 0.01, I² = 95%). Cost-effectiveness analysis in relation to complications demonstrated dominance of CPs over CC in being cheaper as well as more effective. TSA supported the cost benefit of enhanced-recovery CPs, displaying minimal type 1 error.

CONCLUSION

Peri-PD CPs result in significant cost-reduction in comparison to CC.