Project description:The present interdisciplinary consensus review proposes clinical considerations and recommendations for anaesthetic practice in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery with an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) programme.Studies were selected with particular attention being paid to meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials and large prospective cohort studies. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined and reviewed. The group reached a consensus recommendation after critical appraisal of the literature.This consensus statement demonstrates that anaesthesiologists control several preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative ERAS elements. Further research is needed to verify the strength of these recommendations.Based on the evidence available for each element of perioperative care pathways, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society presents a comprehensive consensus review, clinical considerations and recommendations for anaesthesia care in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery within an ERAS programme. This unified protocol facilitates involvement of anaesthesiologists in the implementation of the ERAS programmes and allows for comparison between centres and it eventually might facilitate the design of multi-institutional prospective and adequately powered randomized trials.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs are associated with reduced hospital morbidity and mortality. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the introduction of ERAS care improved the adverse events in colorectal surgery. In a cohort study, mortality, morbidity, and length of stay were compared between ERAS patients and carefully matched historical controls. METHODS: Patients were matched for their type of disease, the type of surgery, P-Possum (Portsmouth-Possum), CR-Possum (Colorectal-Possum) Physiological and Operative Score for Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity (POSSUM), gender, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade. The primary outcome measures of this study were mortality and morbidity. Secondary outcome measures were fluid intake, length of hospital stay, the number of relaparotomies, and the number of readmissions within 30 days. Data on the ERAS patients were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients treated according to the ERAS program were compared with 122 patients who received conventional postoperative care. The two groups were comparable with respect to age, ASA grade, P-Possum (Portsmouth-Possum), CR-Possum (Colorectal-Possum) score, type of surgery, stoma formation, type of disease, and gender. Morbidity was lower in the ERAS group compared to the control group (14.8% versus 33.6% respectively; P = <0.01). Patients in the ERAS group received significantly less fluid and spent fewer days in the hospital (median 6 days, range 3-50 vs. median 9 days, range 3-138; P = 0.032). There was no difference between the ERAS and the control group for mortality (0% vs. 1.6%; P = 0.55) and readmission rate (3.3% vs. 1.6%; P = 0.60). CONCLUSION: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program reduces morbidity and the length of hospital stay for patients undergoing elective colonic or rectal surgery.
Project description:This review evaluates the current and future role of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in the context of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs.There is substantial literature confirming the relationship between physical fitness and perioperative outcome in general. The few small studies in patients undergoing surgery within an ERAS program describe less fit individuals having a greater incidence of morbidity and mortality. There is evidence of increasing adoption of perioperative CPET, particularly in the UK. Although CPET-derived variables have been used to guide clinical decisions about choice of surgical procedure and level of perioperative care as well as to screen for uncommon comorbidities, the ability of CPET-derived variables to guide therapy and thereby improve outcome remains uncertain. Recent studies have reported a reduction in CPET-defined physical fitness following neoadjuvant therapies (chemo- and radio-therapy) prior to surgery. Preliminary data suggest that this effect may be associated with an adverse effect on clinical outcomes in less fit patients. Early reports suggest that CPET-derived variables can be used to guide the prescription of exercise training interventions and thereby improve physical fitness in patients prior to surgery (i.e., prehabilitation). The impact of such interventions on clinical outcomes remains uncertain.Perioperative CPET is finding an increasing spectrum of roles, including risk evaluation, collaborative decision-making, personalized care, monitoring interventions, and guiding prescription of prehabilitation. These indications are potentially of importance to patients having surgery within an ERAS program, but there are currently few publications specific to CPET in the context of ERAS programs.
Project description:ObjectiveEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have demonstrated improvements in outcomes following benign gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery. However, there is limited data reporting the benefit of ERAS from the patient's perspective. This study aimed to explore patient knowledge of and experience with ERAS-guided surgery.MethodsThis interpretive descriptive study included participants who had undergone ERAS-guided gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery in Alberta, Canada using convenience sampling. Semi-structured interviews explored patient knowledge of ERAS, overall experience with surgery and recommended changes for surgical care. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted.ResultsEight females aged 26-76 years old participated in the study who had gynecologic (n = 4) and gynecologic oncology (n = 4) surgery. Six themes central to participant experience of ERAS-guided surgery were identified: patient expectations, individual motivation, values and support, healthcare provider communication, trust in healthcare providers, COVID-19 and care co-ordination. Overall, specific knowledge of ERAS was low. Expectations were set by previous experience of healthcare (previous surgery or occupation), as well as information provided by healthcare professionals. Participants whose expectations aligned with physical experience of ERAS provided favourable perspectives. Participants recommended improving the quality, relevance and availability of information and establishing accessible follow up strategies.ConclusionBased on the finding that knowledge about ERAS was minimal, we advocate for improved education pertaining to ERAS recommendations. Acknowledging patients' expertise and motivation to engage in their care maybe one strategy to improve compliance with ERAS guidelines and improve outcomes for both patients and the healthcare system.
Project description:BackgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have considerably improved postoperative outcomes and are in use for various types of surgery. The prospective audit system (EIAS) could be a powerful tool for large-scale outcome research but its database has not been validated yet.MethodsSwiss ERAS centers were invited to contribute to the validation of the Swiss chapter for colorectal surgery. A monitoring team performed on-site visits by the use of a standardized checklist. Validation criteria were (I) coverage (No. of operated patients within ERAS protocol; target threshold for validation: ≥ 80%), (II) missing data (8 predefined variables; target ≤ 10%), and (III) accuracy (2 predefined variables, target ≥ 80%). These criteria were assessed by comparing EIAS entries with the medical charts of a random sample of patients per center (range 15-20).ResultsOut of 18 Swiss ERAS centers, 15 agreed to have onsite monitoring but 13 granted access to the final dataset. ERAS coverage was available in only 7 centers and varied between 76 and 100%. Overall missing data rate was 5.7% and concerned mainly the variables "urinary catheter removal" (16.4%) and "mobilization on day 1" (16%). Accuracy for the length of hospital stay and complications was overall 84.6%. Overall, 5 over 13 centers failed in the validation process for one or several criteria.ConclusionEIAS was validated in most Swiss ERAS centers. Potential patient selection and missing data remain sources of bias in non-validated centers. Therefore, simplified validation of other centers appears to be mandatory before large-scale use of the EIAS dataset.
Project description:Pancreatic surgery is complex and associated with higher rates of morbidity and mortality compared to other abdominal surgeries. Over the past decade, the introduction of new technologies, such as minimally invasive approaches, improvements in multimodal treatments, advancements in anesthesia and perioperative care, and better management of complications, have collectively improved patient outcomes after pancreatic surgery. In particular, the adoption of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) recommendations has reduced hospital stays and improved recovery times, as well as post-operative outcomes. The aim of this narrative review is to highlight the surgeon's perspective on the ERAS program for pancreatic surgery, with a focus on its potential advantages for perioperative functional recovery outcomes.
Project description:PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Effective acute pain management has evolved considerably in recent years and is a primary area of focus in attempts to defend against the opioid epidemic. Persistent postsurgical pain (PPP) has an incidence of up to 30-50% and has negative outcome of quality of life and negative burden on individuals, family, and society. The 2016 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) guidelines states that enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) forms an integral part of Perioperative Surgical Home (PSH) and is now recommended to use a multimodal opioid-sparing approach for management of postoperative pain. As such, dexmedetomidine is now being used as part of ERAS protocols along with regional nerve blocks and other medications, to create a satisfactory postoperative outcome with reduced opioid consumption in the Post anesthesia care unit (PACU). RECENT FINDINGS:Dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha2 agonist, possesses analgesic effects and has a different mechanism of action when compared with opioids. When dexmedetomidine is initiated at the end of a procedure, it has a better hemodynamic stability and pain response than ropivacaine. Dexmedetomidine can be used as an adjuvant in epidurals with local anesthetic sparing effects. Its use during nerve blocks results in reduced postoperative pain. Also, local infiltration of IV dexmedetomidine is associated with earlier discharge from PACU. Perioperative use of dexmedetomidine has significantly improved postoperative outcomes when used as part of ERAS protocols. An in-depth review of the use of dexmedetomidine in ERAS protocols is presented for clinical anesthesiologists.
Project description:BackgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) interventions aim to improve patient outcomes. Vascular surgery patients have unique requirements and it is unclear which ERAS interventions are supported by an evidence base.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review to identify ERAS randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the biomedical or nursing literature. We assessed interventions for applicability to vascular surgery and differentiated interventions given at preadmission, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative surgery stages. We documented the research in an evidence map.ResultsWe identified 76 relevant RCTs. Interventions were mostly administered in preoperative (23 RCTs; 30%) or intraoperative surgery stages (35 RCTs; 46%). The majority of studies reported mortality outcomes (44 RCTs; 58%), but hospital (27 RCTs; 35%) and intensive care unit (9 RCTs; 12%) length of stay outcomes were less consistently described.ConclusionThe ERAS evidence base is growing but contains gaps. Research on preadmission interventions and more consistent reporting of key outcomes is needed.
Project description:ContextThe enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is a multidisciplinary approach aimed at improving surgical outcomes, reducing complications, minimizing hospital stays, and lowering healthcare costs.ObjectivesThis study assesses the impact of the ERAS protocol on elective craniotomies, a routine procedure in neurosurgery.MethodsA comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science identified 562 articles. Following strict screening criteria, 54 studies were reviewed, and ultimately 10 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were selected for detailed analysis.ResultsThe review encompassed ten studies [one prospective, one systematic review, and eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs)] published between 2016 and 2023. Key components of the ERAS protocol included preoperative counseling, high-protein intestinal nutrition, preoperative fasting while avoiding carbohydrate intake within 2 hours of surgery, standardized anesthetic and analgesic regimens, and early postoperative initiation of enteral feeding. Postoperative outcomes showed fewer complications, early mobilization, and notably shorter hospital stays, all of which contributed to improved patient recovery.ConclusionsThis review demonstrates that the ERAS protocol, when applied to elective craniotomies, is effective in enhancing postoperative recovery, improving functional outcomes, and reducing hospitalization duration.
Project description:Strong implementation strategies are critical to the success of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS®) guidelines, though little documentation exists on effective strategies, especially in complex clinical situations and unfamiliar contexts. This study outlines the process taken to adopt a novel neonatal ERAS® guideline. The implementation strategy was approached in a multi-pronged, concurrent but asynchronous fashion. Between September 2019 and January 2020, healthcare providers from various disciplines and different specialties as well as parents participated in the strategy. Multidisciplinary teams were created to consider existing literature and local contexts including potential facilitators and/or barriers. Task forces worked collaboratively to develop new care pathways. An audit system was developed to record outcomes and elicit feedback for revision. 32 healthcare providers representing 9 disciplines and 5 specialties as well as 8 parents participated. Care pathways and resources were created. Elements recommended for a successful implementation strategy included identification of champions, multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement, consideration of local contexts and insights, patient/family engagement, education, and creation of an audit system. A multidisciplinary and structured process following principles of implementation science was used to develop an effective implementation strategy for initiating ERAS® guidelines.