Enhanced recovery programmes versus conventional care in bariatric surgery: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Patient and operative factors influence delayed discharge following bariatric surgery in an enhanced recovery setting

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs have been widely adopted in bariatric surgery. However, not all patients are successfully managed in the ERAS setting and there is currently little way of predicting the patients who will deviate from the program. Early identification of these patients could allow for more tailored protocols to be implemented preoperatively to address the issues, thereby improving patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to elucidate the factors which preclude discharge by comparing patients who were successfully discharged by the end of the first postoperative day (POD 0/1) to those who stayed longer, including revisional surgery in this analysis.

SETTING

A tertiary, high-volume Bariatric Centre, United Kingdom.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients undergoing bariatric surgery in a single centre in 1 year. Multivariate analyses compared patient and operative variables between patients who were discharged on POD 0/1 and those who stayed longer.

RESULTS

A total of 288 bariatric operations were performed: 78% of operations performed were laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; 22% laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Of these cases, 13% were revisional operations. Four patients returned to theatre on the index admission. 81% of patients were discharged by POD 0/1. A re-presentation within 30 days was seen in 6% of patients. There was no significant difference in length of stay for the type of operation performed (P = .86). Patients who had a revisional procedure were not more likely to stay longer. Length of stay was also independent of age, BMI, and comorbidities. Caucasian patients were more likely to be discharged on POD 0/1 than those of other ethnicities (90% versus 78%; P = .02). Operations performed by trainee surgeons, under consultant supervision, were significantly more likely to be discharged on POD 0/1 (P = .03). However, a logistic regression analysis was unable to predict patients who had a prolonged stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient length of stay is independent of BMI, operation, and comorbidities and these factors do not need special consideration in ERAS pathways. Patients undergoing revisional procedures can be managed in the same way as those having primary procedures, with a routine POD 0/1 discharge. However, the impact of individual patient factors, and their interaction, is complex and cannot predict overstay.

Perioperative optimization and profitability (POP) in a high-volume bariatric surgery center

BACKGROUND

Currently, bariatric surgery is the most effective long-term treatment of obesity. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) are the primary types of bariatric surgery performed worldwide. To minimize the risks of surgical complications and optimize cost-effectiveness, it is essential to develop fast-track protocols and patient logistics. At Aleris Hospitals in Denmark, a fast-track methodology in bariatric surgery has been implemented and continuously optimized over the last 15 years. The main objective was to demonstrate timelines recorded during one consecutive year in a fast-track, high-volume bariatric surgery setting after logistic optimization.

METHODS

This study included 949 consecutive patients who had undergone primary bariatric surgery in 2021. The primary outcomes were length of hospital stay and perioperative timeline recordings that were prospectively collected. The secondary outcomes were mortality, complication rates, and weight loss data.

RESULTS

The vast majority of our patients (99.1%) were discharged from the hospital within the day after surgery. The median total surgery time was 30 min, after 12 min of patient preparation and with a turnover time between patients of seven min. The median knife-to-knife time in one operating room was 56 min. Mortality was zero, 30-day reoperation rate was 1.2%, and 30-day readmission rate was 0.8%. SG and RYGB patients had an excess weight loss after four months of 45.6% and 57.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of fast-track principles in the clinical practice of bariatric surgery allows for an optimized, cost-effective surgical organization supporting the quality of procedures and patient safety.

Textbook Outcome in Bariatric Surgery: Evolution During 15 Years in a Referral Center

BACKGROUND

Textbook outcome (TO) is a multidimensional measure used to assess the quality of care. It is the "ideal" surgical result, based on a series of established indicators. In the field of bariatric surgery (BS), only one publication on TO is available.

OBJECTIVES

To determine TO in our BS unit and identify the factors linked to TO.

SETTING

University public hospital in Alicante (Spain).

METHODS

Retrospective observational study of all primary BS was performed. TO for BS was defined in relation to the following features: no major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo >II), hospital stay <75th percentile, and no mortality or readmissions within 30 days of surgery. Comparative analysis of the characteristics of the TO and non-TO groups was performed, as well as univariate and multivariate logistic regressions, to identify the independent factors associated with obtaining TO.

RESULTS

In 970 patients, TO was achieved in 71.5%. The hospital stay was the one that most affected achievement of TO. Analysis according to the type of procedure (sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass) did not reveal any differences between both procedures in terms of obtaining TO (71.5 vs 71.26%). Logistic regression identified smoking, heart disease, operative time, and upper gastrointestinal bleeding as independent factors associated with obtaining TO (p<0.05). Analysis of the annual evolution of TO reveals a progressive increase in its achievement (7.7-86.4%).

CONCLUSION

In our series, TO was obtained in 71.5% of patients. The standardization of the technique and the experience gained over the years has improved our TO results.

Efficacy and safety of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol on minimally invasive bariatric surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), a multidisciplinary and multimodal perioperative care protocol, has been widely used in several surgical fields. However, the effect of this care protocol on patients receiving minimally invasive bariatric surgery remains unclear. This meta-analysis compared the clinical outcomes of the ERAS protocol and standard care (SC) in patients who underwent minimally invasive bariatric surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were systematically searched to identify literature reporting the effects of the ERAS protocol on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive bariatric surgery. All the articles published until 01 October 2022, were searched, followed by data extraction of the included literature and independent quality assessment. Then, pooled mean difference (MD) and odds ratio with a 95% CI were calculated by either a random-effects or fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, 21 studies involving 10 764 patients were included in the final analysis. With the ERAS protocol, the length of hospitalization (MD: -1.02, 95% CI: -1.41 to -0.64, P <0.00001), hospitalization costs (MD: -678.50, 95% CI: -1196.39 to -160.60, P =0.01), and the incidence of 30-day readmission (odds ratio =0.78, 95% CI: 0.63-0.97, P =0.02) were significantly reduced. The incidences of overall complications, major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3), postoperative nausea and vomiting, intra-abdominal bleeding, anastomotic leak, incisional infection, reoperation, and mortality did not differ significantly between the ERAS and SC groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The current meta-analysis indicated that the ERAS protocol could be safely and feasibly implemented in the perioperative management of patients receiving minimally invasive bariatric surgery. Compared with SC, this protocol leads to significantly shorter hospitalization lengths, lower 30-day readmission rate, and hospitalization costs. However, no differences were observed in postoperative complications and mortality.