Consensus guidelines for enhanced recovery after gastrectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Application of evidence-based perioperative care protocols reduces complication rates, accelerates recovery and shortens hospital stay. Presently, there are no comprehensive guidelines for perioperative care for gastrectomy. METHODS: An international working group within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society assembled an evidence-based comprehensive framework for optimal perioperative care for patients undergoing gastrectomy. Data were retrieved from standard databases and personal archives. Evidence and recommendations were classified according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system and were discussed until consensus was reached within the group. The quality of evidence was rated 'high', 'moderate', 'low' or 'very low'. Recommendations were graded as 'strong' or 'weak'. RESULTS: The available evidence has been summarized and recommendations are given for 25 items, eight of which contain procedure-specific evidence. The quality of evidence varies substantially and further research is needed for many issues to improve the strength of evidence and grade of recommendations. CONCLUSION: The present evidence-based framework provides comprehensive advice on optimal perioperative care for the patient undergoing gastrectomy and facilitates multi-institutional prospective cohort registries and adequately powered randomized trials for further research.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colonic Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) Society Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: This review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colonic surgery and to provide graded recommendations for items for an evidenced-based enhanced perioperative protocol. METHODS: Studies were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined, reviewed and graded. A consensus recommendation was reached after critical appraisal of the literature by the group. RESULTS: For most of the protocol items, recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials (quality of evidence and recommendations according to the GRADE system). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence available for each item of the multimodal perioperative care pathway, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) present a comprehensive evidence-based consensus review of perioperative care for colonic surgery.

Guidelines for perioperative care after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) society recommendations.

PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have significantly reduced complications and length of hospital stay after colorectal procedures. This multimodal concept could probably be partially applied to major urological surgery. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to systematically assess the evidence of ERAS single items and protocols applied to cystectomy patients. The secondary objective was to address a grade of recommendation to each item, based on the evidence and, if lacking, on consensus opinion from our ERAS Society working group. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature review was performed on ERAS for cystectomy by searching EMBASE and Medline. Relevant articles were selected and quality-assessed by two independent reviewers using the GRADE approach. If no study specific to cystectomy was available for any of the 22 given items, the authors evaluated whether colorectal guidelines could be extrapolated. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, 804 articles were retrieved from electronic databases. Fifteen articles were included in the present systematic review and 7 of 22 ERAS items were studied. Bowel preparation did not improve outcomes. Early nasogastric tube removal reduced morbidity, bowel recovery time and length of hospital stay. Doppler-guided fluid administration allowed for reduced morbidity. A quicker bowel recovery was observed with a multimodal prevention of ileus, including gum chewing, prevention of PONV and minimally invasive surgery. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS has not yet been widely implemented in urology and evidence for individual interventions is limited or unavailable. The experience in other surgical disciplines encourages the development of an ERAS protocol for cystectomy.

Enhanced recovery after surgery: are we ready, and can we afford not to implement these pathways for patients undergoing radical cystectomy?

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for radical cystectomy seems logical, but our study has shown a paucity in the level of clinical evidence. As part of the ERAS Society, we welcome global collaboration to collect evidence that will improve patient outcomes.

Guidelines for perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Protocols for enhanced recovery provide comprehensive and evidence-based guidelines for best perioperative care. Protocol implementation may reduce complication rates and enhance functional recovery and, as a result of this, also reduce length-of-stay in hospital. There is no comprehensive framework available for pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: An international working group constructed within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society constructed a comprehensive and evidence-based framework for best perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy patients. Data were retrieved from standard databases and personal archives. Evidence and recommendations were classified according to the GRADE system and reached through consensus in the group. The quality of evidence was rated "high", "moderate", "low" or "very low". Recommendations were graded as "strong" or "weak". RESULTS: Comprehensive guidelines are presented. Available evidence is summarised and recommendations given for 27 care items. The quality of evidence varies substantially and further research is needed for many issues to improve the strength of evidence and grade of recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The present evidence-based guidelines provide the necessary platform upon which to base a unified protocol for perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy. A unified protocol allows for comparison between centres and across national borders. It facilitates multi-institutional prospective cohort registries and adequately powered randomised trials.

Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colonic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations.

BACKGROUND: This review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colonic surgery and to provide graded recommendations for items for an evidenced-based enhanced perioperative protocol. METHODS: Studies were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined, reviewed and graded. A consensus recommendation was reached after critical appraisal of the literature by the group. RESULTS: For most of the protocol items, recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials (quality of evidence and recommendations according to the GRADE system). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence available for each item of the multimodal perioperative-care pathway, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) present a comprehensive evidence-based consensus review of perioperative care for colonic surgery.

Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in colorectal surgery is highly cost-effective

Objective: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) clinical pathways in¦colorectal surgery are known to reduce postoperative complications leading¦to shortened hospital stay. However, the implementation of such an ERAS¦pathway requires time and financial investment. This study evaluates whether¦the savings related to the reduction in the length of stay (LOS) outweigh the¦costs of implementing an ERAS pathway.¦Methods: An ERAS pathway was implemented in our institution for colorectal¦surgery. The first 50 consecutive patients subjected to this ERAS pathway¦(ERAS group) were compared to 50 consecutive patients that were operated one¦year before its introduction (control group). Primary LOS, readmission within¦30 days, and total costs based on costs per day were compared. The mean costs¦per day were: 3,263 CHF for intensive care, 1,152 CHF for intermediate care,¦and 728 CHF for basic care.¦Results: Primary LOS was shorter in the ERAS group than in the control¦group: median 7 (interquartile range 5-12·25) versus 10 (7-18) days (P =¦0·0025). The readmission within 30 postoperative days was similar in both¦groups (2 patients each). In the ERAS group, the added primary LOS was¦485 days (379 in basic care, 99 in intermediate care, 7 in intensive care) compared¦to 706 days in the control group (533 in basic care, 146 in intermediate care,¦27 in intensive care). The total costs were significantly lower for the 50 ERAS¦patients compared to the control group: 412,801 CHF versus 644,317 CHF (P <¦0·01). Investments required for the 50 first ERAS patients were approximately¦83,544 CHF, including 348 working hours as well a full-time ERAS dedicated¦nurse. The overall cost saving was approximately 2,959 CHF per patient.¦Conclusion: Implementation of an ERAS pathway significantly reduced LOS¦after colorectal surgery. The financial investment to introduce and maintain¦such a pathway is clearly inferior to the cost-saving of reduced hospital stay.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) Society Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Protocols for enhanced recovery provide comprehensive and evidence-based guidelines for best perioperative care. Protocol implementation may reduce complication rates and enhance functional recovery and, as a result of this, also reduce length-of-stay in hospital. There is no comprehensive framework available for pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: An international working group constructed within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(®)) Society constructed a comprehensive and evidence-based framework for best perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy patients. Data were retrieved from standard databases and personal archives. Evidence and recommendations were classified according to the GRADE system and reached through consensus in the group. The quality of evidence was rated "high", "moderate", "low" or "very low". Recommendations were graded as "strong" or "weak". RESULTS: Comprehensive guidelines are presented. Available evidence is summarised and recommendations given for 27 care items. The quality of evidence varies substantially and further research is needed for many issues to improve the strength of evidence and grade of recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The present evidence-based guidelines provide the necessary platform upon which to base a unified protocol for perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy. A unified protocol allows for comparison between centres and across national borders. It facilitates multi-institutional prospective cohort registries and adequately powered randomised trials.

Rétablissement postopératoire optimisé, applique aux patients après cystectomie [Enhanced recovery after surgery applied to cystectomy patients].

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal concept combining pre, intra and postoperative evidence-based care elements to reduce surgical stress. ERAS pathways have been shown to significantly reduce morbidity, length of hospital stay and total costs when applied to colorectal surgery. It is therefore considered standard of care in this specialty. There can be no doubt that ERAS principles can be applied also in other major surgeries. However, uncritical application of the guidelines issued from colonic procedures seems inappropriate as the surgical procedures in pelvic cancer surgery differ considerably. This article reports on the first steps of an ERAS project and his introduction in urology.

Réhabilitation améliorée après chirurgie--L'ere de la prise en charge optimale du patient chirurgical [Enhanced Recovery After Surgery--optimal management of the surgical patient].

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal, standardized and evidence-based perioperative care pathway. With ERAS, postoperative complications are significantly lowered, and, as a secondary effect, length of hospital stay and health cost are reduced. The patient recovers better and faster allowing to reduce in addition the workload of healthcare providers. Despite the hospital discharge occurs sooner, there is no increased charge of the outpatient care. ERAS can be safely applied to any patient by a tailored approach. The general practitioner plays an essential role in ERAS by assuring the continuity of the information and the follow-up of the patient.

Randomized clinical trial on epidural versus patient-controlled analgesia for laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery pathway.

OBJECTIVE: To compare epidural analgesia (EDA) to patient-controlled opioid-based analgesia (PCA) in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. BACKGROUND: EDA is mainstay of multimodal pain management within enhanced recovery pathways [enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)]. For laparoscopic colorectal resections, the benefit of epidurals remains debated. Some consider EDA as useful, whereas others perceive epidurals as unnecessary or even deleterious. METHODS: A total of 128 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resections were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial comparing EDA versus PCA. Primary end point was medical recovery. Overall complications, hospital stay, perioperative vasopressor requirements, and postoperative pain scores were secondary outcome measures. Analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Final analysis included 65 EDA patients and 57 PCA patients. Both groups were similar regarding baseline characteristics. Medical recovery required a median of 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3-7.5 days) in EDA patients and 4 days (IQR, 3-6 days) in the PCA group (P = 0.082). PCA patients had significantly less overall complications [19 (33%) vs 35 (54%); P = 0.029] but a similar hospital stay [5 days (IQR, 4-8 days) vs 7 days (IQR, 4.5-12 days); P = 0.434]. Significantly more EDA patients needed vasopressor treatment perioperatively (90% vs 74%, P = 0.018), the day of surgery (27% vs 4%, P < 0.001), and on postoperative day 1 (29% vs 4%, P < 0.001), whereas no difference in postoperative pain scores was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Epidurals seem to slow down recovery after laparoscopic colorectal resections without adding obvious benefits. EDA can therefore not be recommended as part of ERAS pathways in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Laparoscopy in the era of enhanced recovery.

Laparoscopy is one of the cornerstones in the surgical revolution and transformed outcome and recovery for various surgical procedures. Even if these changes were widely accepted for basic interventions, like appendectomies and cholecystectomies, laparoscopy still remains challenged for more advanced operations in many aspects. Despite these discussion, there is an overwhelming acceptance in the surgical community that laparoscopy did transform the recovery for several abdominal procedures. The importance of improved peri-operative patient management and its influence on outcome started to become a focus of attention 20 years ago and is now increasingly spreading, as shown by the incoming volume of data on this topic. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concept incorporates simple measures of general management, and requires multidisciplinary collaboration from hospital staff as well as the patient and the relatives. Several studies have demonstrated a significant decrease in postoperative complication rate, length of hospital stay and reduced overall cost. The key elements of success are fluid restriction, a functioning epidural and preoperative carbohydrate intake. With the expansion of laparoscopic techniques, ERAS increasingly incorporates laparoscopic patients, especially in colorectal surgery. However, the precise impact of laparoscopy on ERAS is still not clearly defined. Increasing evidence suggests that laparoscopy itself is an additional ERAS item that should be considered as routine where feasible in order to obtain the best surgical outcomes.

Cost-benefit analysis of an enhanced recovery protocol for pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been shown to decrease complications and hospital stay. The cost-effectiveness of such programmes has been demonstrated for colorectal surgery. This study aimed to assess the economic outcomes of a standard ERAS programme for pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: ERAS for pancreaticoduodenectomy was implemented in October 2012. All consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy until October 2014 were recorded. This group was compared in terms of costs with a cohort of consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2010 and October 2012, before ERAS implementation. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative real costs were collected for each patient via the hospital administration. A bootstrap independent t test was used for comparison. ERAS-specific costs were integrated into the model. RESULTS: The groups were well matched in terms of demographic and surgical details. The overall complication rate was 68 per cent (50 of 74 patients) and 82 per cent (71 of 87 patients) in the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups respectively (P = 0·046). Median hospital stay was lower in the ERAS group (15 versus 19 days; P = 0·029). ERAS-specific costs were euro922 per patient. Mean total costs were euro56 083 per patient in the ERAS group and euro63 821 per patient in the pre-ERAS group (P = 0·273). The mean intensive care unit (ICU) and intermediate care costs were euro9139 and euro13 793 per patient for the ERAS and pre-ERAS groups respectively (P = 0·151). CONCLUSION: ERAS implementation for pancreaticoduodenectomy did not increase the costs in this cohort. Savings were noted in anaesthesia/operating room, medication and laboratory costs. Fewer patients in the ERAS group required an ICU stay.

Cost-effectiveness of the implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol for colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery protocols may reduce postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. However, the implementation of these protocols requires time and financial investment. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery implementation. METHODS: The first 50 consecutive patients treated during implementation of an enhanced recovery programme were compared with 50 consecutive patients treated in the year before its introduction. The enhanced recovery protocol principally implemented preoperative counselling, reduced preoperative fasting, preoperative carbohydrate loading, avoidance of premedication, optimized fluid balance, standardized postoperative analgesia, use of a no-drain policy, as well as early nutrition and mobilization. Length of stay, readmissions and complications within 30 days were compared. A cost-minimization analysis was performed. RESULTS: Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the enhanced recovery group: median 7 (interquartile range 5-12) versus 10 (7-18) days (P = 0·003); two patients were readmitted in each group. The rate of severe complications was lower in the enhanced recovery group (12 versus 20 per cent), but there was no difference in overall morbidity. The mean saving per patient in the enhanced recovery group was euro1651. CONCLUSION: Enhanced recovery is cost-effective, with savings evident even in the initial implementation period.

Intrathecal analgesia and restrictive perioperative fluid management within enhanced recovery pathway: hemodynamic implications.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal analgesia and avoidance of perioperative fluid overload are key items within enhanced recovery pathways. Potential side effects include hypotension and renal dysfunction. STUDY DESIGN: From January 2010 until May 2010, all patients undergoing colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery pathways were included in this retrospective cohort study and were analyzed by intrathecal analgesia (IT) vs none (noIT). Primary outcomes measures were systolic and diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, and heart rate for 48 hours after surgery. Renal function was assessed by urine output and creatinine values. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-three consecutive colorectal patients (127 IT and 36 noIT) were included in the analysis. Both patient groups showed low blood pressure values within the first 4 to 12 hours and a steady increase thereafter before return to baseline values after about 24 hours. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure were significantly lower until 16 hours after surgery in patients having IT compared with the noIT group. Low urine output (<0.5 mL/kg/h) was reported in 11% vs 29% (IT vs noIT; p = 0.010) intraoperatively, 20% vs 11% (p = 0.387), 33% vs 22% (p = 0.304), and 31% vs 21% (p = 0.478) for postanesthesia care unit and postoperative days 1 and 2, respectively. Only 3 of 127 (2.4%) IT and 1 of 36 (2.8%) noIT patients had a transitory creatinine increase >50%; no patients required dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative hypotension affects approximately 10% of patients within an enhanced recovery pathway and is slightly more pronounced in patients with IT. Hemodynamic depression persists for <20 hours after surgery; it has no measurable negative impact and therefore cannot justify detrimental postoperative fluid overload.